Men here and in the manosphere in general love to pile on women who struggled to get the love/commitment that they desired. A very common statement is something along the lines of “Should’ve gone for a less desirable/attractive man.” While that IS logical (more desirable= more options and vice versa), I don’t see how one can be aware of the implications of that statement and expect women to happily accept.

When you tell a woman that, you’re essentially telling her to go for men who simply cannot do any better than committing to her. We all know that a man’s imperative is to have multiple women and casual sex is what most men deeply desire. According to many dudes (here especially), committing is just a way for men to ensure a steady sex supply- something they’d struggle to get single. With all of this in mind, how can you expect a woman to take that advice in stride? How can you expect her to respect a man who is essentially with her by necessity? To love a man who, deep down in his bones, wishes he didn’t have to be with her? Bluntly put: a man who failed to fulfill his main imperative?

Men are repulsed by the idea of being BetaBux. Why? They understand that in this case, the woman is only with them out of necessity. She failed to fulfill her imperative (locking down a valuable man) and she’s now doing what she “has” to do. They see it as an awful deal and rightfully so. I find it interesting that this situation isn’t viewed in a similar light.