Women have been brainwashed to not expect anything from a man except him gracing her with his presence for 3 hours after he gets home from work. She has been brainwashed to believe his 'late work hours' are the truth and nothing but the truth. She has been brainwashed to believe that she must have the home spotless, the children fed and occupied, the food hot out of the oven for him as soon as he steps through the threshold. She has been brainwashed not to get on his nerves because he's had 'a long workday' and merely wants to vegetate in front of a television.

I am not afraid to use the term 'brainwash' and its extreme connotation. I believe it is the perfect word to describe what society, a child of the patriarchy, has instilled (and continues to instil) in women since birth. You may think that the above paragraph is a time of the 1940/50s when a majority of married women were confined to the home and men were the 'breadwinner'. Although women's rights have progressed tremendously, marriage as an institution in and of itself has arguably remained the same in the sense of these roles. Why? Because society is still very much patriarchal, and no man, despite what he says, will ever be a feminist. He will never view marriage through the same lens as does a woman; he creates a union with a power imbalance in mind. Despite modern society, he will want her to assume the subservient housewife role. He yearns for it because he believes he deserves it, as per the patriarchal promise.

Now, Liberal Feminists and red pills/conservative/highly religious women have been manipulated by this aforementioned patriarchal promise, but are not in the receiving end despite the work that goes into conforming to it. Men are always in the receiving end when it comes to the patriarchy. Women are taught to bend and conform to these expectations lest they be deemed a failure. These are the women that choose men over their sisters, engage in pickme behaviour, and most importantly, accept the bare minimum without question. They believe the bare minimum is all they deserve as per societal conditioning, and that there is nothing in life except getting married, having children, and being a housewife. Liberal Feminists are a little slower to come to this conclusion, but with all of their actions based on 'women's empowerment' that directly benefit men leads to this ultimate conclusion. Society tells women that we must please and appease men.

This brings me to my next theory of the pros and cons mindset. The benefits outweighs the costs mindset, if you will. Picture this: you tell your friend about a new man you've been talking to. He seems great in every way. Fast forward not even two weeks, and he's already done something to upset you. You naturally tell your friend, who happens to tell you that kind of treatment is unacceptable. Your gaze goes blank and you stare past her, your thoughts settling on the comfortable determination: "she doesn't know the whole story, the nice treatment, the affection, how much he cares!"

No, your friend doesn't know. But even if she did, how would it detract from the shitty things he just did? Every time you have to say "he's not that bad" you are actively engaging in the pros/cons mindset; dating is not a game of 'this cancels out that'. Dating is about boundaries and dealbreakers, if any of those are broken then it's game over.

Here's an example: "He ignored me for a few days with no explanation (con), but he took me out for a lavish dinner tonight! (pro)".

In this mindset, the pickmeisha would have her proverbial checklist on hand and immediately forgive the quasi-ghosting because she was blinded by the tasty morsel of manipulation that was his 'lavish dinner'. People in this mindset automatically forgive and apply more importance to the present than the past. This is often accompanied by the scarcity mindset, the inherent and sometimes unconscious need to eradicate every con with a pro in fear they will lose the man if executed otherwise.

So I ask: what if this situation was reversed? What if he took her for a nice lavish dinner and then proceeded to ignore her? A reasonable person would say that he is not interested. A pickme might say 'communicate'. The reasonable person is correct, and this logic equally applies to the original scenario: if he treats you poorly 99% of the time but tries to reconcile with grand gestures, HE DOES NOT CARE and is MANIPULATING YOU. You have something he wants, and he's only interested in putting in the absolute bare minimum to keep it. The pickmeisha would find this flattering, so lost in societal conditioning to please men that she loses herself.

"Oh, but he spent $500 on that dinner!" ... I don't care if he blew his life savings on you that night. He's cramming in all those weeks he deprived you of into that one night, and he'll sure as hell do it again. He doesn't value you or your time, you're playing on his terms and any little scrap he gives you is a bribe to keep you in his grimy clutches. There is no benefits outweighing the costs; benefits should only be considered a nice addition in this calculation: it is a measure of costs and how you are thusly impacted.

Finally, the fear of singledom or being an unmarried 'crazy cat lady'. This entire concept was and is perpetuated by men to keep women feeling vulnerable and inadequate. It feeds the patriarchally-induced mindset that a woman is nothing without a man and nothing if she has no children. A woman will reach a certain age and start to see her friends get married and have families, and society condemns her to question her self-worth and question what has prevented her from being in the same position as her friends. She reconnects with an old boyfriend and decides to settle with him and his horrible treatment just to 'fit in' or try to make it work so she can have a 'normal life'.

Yes, we have a biological drive to couple and reproduce. But when you feel like you're 'missing' a piece of you or that your life is 'incomplete' without the above? That is what society has brainwashed you to believe. Marriage is a social construct, and even relationships are to a certain extent. By settling and accepting the bare minimum, you are compromising your values and self-worth to adhere to a mere construct. You are not defined by your partner. You are not defined by your lack of a partner.

You are you. It's your life and you only live ONCE. I have seen too many women hurt, cheated on, abused, abandoned, raped, even murdered chasing this societal construct. Putting up with low effort is beneath every fibre of your body, and if no HVM presents himself in your life, you have to be alright with that. My mother divorced and never remarried. She passed away single, because she would NOT settle for the troves of LVM that chased her and treated her poorly.

And with that, I conclude this mini essay that came to me upon serious introspection. It's nothing great, but I hope it frames the current context we live in and consolidates a few important points. I wrote from a North American perspective, as I do not have firsthand cultural experience elsewhere... feel free to add your own thoughts!