When I was younger, I would listen to women's sob stories about being dumped by their boyfriends and wonder how heartless men could be.

Women frequently claim they can't find average men attractive and believe they deserve a man who sparks primal, raw desire in them, often phrased as "feeling weak in the knees" or "feeling a spark." When they perceive a man as high-value, they become more feminine and accommodating. If a high-value man says he's not looking for anything serious, they might respond with, "How about friends with benefits?"—a proposition the man gladly accepts.

Woman here hopes, the sex would make him feel attached and "catch feelings" for her. They clearly know the guy may not stay for anything but they'll for sex.

They learned this from their own experience, where they slept with an attractive but disrespectful guy, telling themselves it was just for sex. They later ended up attached to him by catching feelings.

When approached by a man of lesser perceived value, these women often give him a hard time, with comments like "Don't you hate women? Are you a misogynist?" They demand efforts from him, and if pleased, they throw him breadcrumbs of affection.

Men often live in a world where hard work leads to clear results: study hard, and you ace the exam; work out, and you achieve the physique; work odd jobs, and you earn more money. However, the same logic doesn't apply to relationships with women. Women often remember the men who did the least for them.

I know men who bought cars, phones, and paid off university fees for their girlfriends, only to be forgotten by them. Instead, these women remember the man who made them feel worthless and unimportant—the one who did nothing for them and carried on with his life without considering them.

Who ended up in bed faster? Not the man who put efforts but the man who did little.

Statistically, you are more likely to sleep with a woman you met a week ago, than a woman you know for several months.

Women assign more value to a complete stranger than men they already are familiar with.

So, should we feel empathetic towards someone playing a high-stakes game? If they had won, they would flaunt their success and highlight our flaws. But since they lost, they now play the victim and seek to blame someone for their fate. Isn't it fair to say that those who play with fire are solely responsible for getting burned?

We've all seen it: when a guy posts, "I'm skinny and working out two hours a day to increase muscle mass," women often respond with, "I wouldn't want a guy who spends that much time in the gym; my boyfriend is buff without working out".They do the same for other physical traits, dismissing the efforts men put in to improve themselves.

So, why should men feel bad for women who play the high-stakes game of "all or nothing"? Women often say, "You're not competing with other men but her peace," which is just another way to describe an "all or nothing" mindset applied to relationships. If they choose to engage in such a game, they must accept the risks and consequences that come with it.

Competing to be a queen means accepting the risks, and losing the coup does not make you a victim.