Woman | High Standards ONLY

mgtowthrowawayman · 2020-01-20T19:36:26+00:00

In my beta orbiter days I had a female “friend” that confessed to me that she felt empty after dealing with a guy with money . He took her to a expensive restaurant and spent tons of money and she put out that night and he hadn’t called her back . She came to the realization that it meant absolutely nothing to him so she basically prostituted herself not for money in hand but worse for a steak. He didn’t care about her thoughts and opinions nor had any interest in getting to know her . The five star restaurant was not a romantic gesture The money spent meant nothing to him and she won’t be the only one getting expensive meals. I just laugh whenever I see things like this now looking back

TigPlaze · 2020-01-20T19:23:33+00:00

Any woman who babbles "no fat shaming" should be required to date only men who have hardly any money.

DangZagnut · 2020-01-20T19:33:47+00:00

As always, it’s only about money in the end.

If there’s a Chad-meme attached, great, but it’s only money.

daebass6 · 2020-01-20T19:20:07+00:00

Delusional as always. On top why is SHE talking about any type of high value? She looks like the brown friend i just left in my toilet lmao. Not racist. She literally looks like mr. Hanky from south park if you remove the hair

2020-01-20T20:49:21+00:00

It really is just PUA for women. If a woman (A WOMAN) needs a PUA type thing, imagine how horribly unattractive she is.

No wonder they always go "incel! neckbeard!" etc. It was all blatant projection.

pkarlmann · 2020-01-21T01:23:40+00:00

The girly in the youtube video is so ugly I wouldn't do her if she pays me.

Heck, I won't even include the link to youtube so I won't help spread her STDs.

GeneralKinetics89 · 2020-01-20T23:53:03+00:00

She'll end up single for life. Sounds good to me. Weed these broads out through natural selection. No love loss from me. They do it to themselves, just like simps who sign up to take care of another man's kids.

Alexius_von_Meinong · 2020-01-21T00:48:50+00:00

"...there is a rich Chad for everyone."

Now that you mention it, this is the female version of F. Roger Devlin's sexual utopia. For men the equivalent is a harem for every man. Obviously, this impossible. It is equally impossible for every women to have a rich Chad.

On the other hand, rich Chads do have harems, they are the only men with harems, whereas a very attractive woman can have a rich chad, but she runs the risk of being part of a harem in pursing a rich Chad.

Since most men aren't rich Chads, most men do not have harems, and indeed a growing number of men are incels or volcels. Contemporary culture demonizes them either for being undesirable or for walking away.

Most women are not thin and very good looking and sexually interesting, so most women do not have a rich Chad, but there is a growing number of women who think they deserve a rich Chad. Contemporary culture celebrates them, and so we have the tiresome repetitions of, "You go girl" and "Yaas slay queen."

tw-1234a · 2020-01-21T13:57:20+00:00

5 star hotels? Room service?

What is broadening about that? It would be the same experience in your city.

BlackRafale88 · 2020-01-21T15:51:05+00:00

Too many problems with this philosophy.

Women who demand this shit never appreciate the date themselves and might just be using you for free meals.

Also, you spent years riding the cc but now the next guy has to wine and dine her to get her affection? Yeah no, dont entertain this mentality

Plus fake nails, hair, and lashes but yet wants to go on real dates lol

Anonymous-Samurai · 2020-01-21T16:27:24+00:00

I'm impressed how you posted 3 separate pictures. I thought that this was ome picture

Title	Woman \| High Standards ONLY
Author	wormskull_87
Upvotes	19
Comments	16
Date	January 20, 2020 7:16 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/eri06k/woman_high_standards_only/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/woman-high-standards-only.375703 https://theredarchive.com/post/375703

Comments