Beyond the marginal monetary gain, “free” rides or “free” food, women really do not benefit much from the patriarchy. Men hold onto the power that the patriarchy gives them because losing it will slowly start to pull the wool out of people’s eyes and reveal the truth - that most men really do not possess inherent value. So by maintaining this artificial air of superiority, they are able to fool billions of people and assign themselves privileges that they should not have.
If you live in a patriarchal culture, which lets be honest, a lot of us do. And yes, this includes even women living in the western world. Basically, if you live in the world as a woman, always feel free to use men and their resources to the best of your advantage.
A woman’s strategy in the dating world should always be focused on what brings her the most benefit. You should never come out of an interaction with a male and feel like you lost out. Whether it’s money, free trips, free rides, resources, access to high scale networking that can upgrade your position in the corporate world, relationships, marriages…do not be afraid to take what you want. Because these men sure as hell don’t care who they affect in the process of using you for their own benefit. They have historically done it for centuries and based on the variety of “pill” movements, seem to want to continue to do it.
This isn’t some Kumbaya type shit. We’re not here to play around. Babygirl, you either get what you want or you get out. If you’re caught up acting the fool, they will take you for a fool and disrespect you accordingly.
The reason why a lot of men nowadays struggle in the dating world is because beyond money, many of them simply don’t have anything to offer. And now that women are able to make their own money, the true uselessness of men is being revealed. So if it’s money he’s offering, or equivalent benefits, take it. And when there’s opportunity to take more, even from multiple men, go ahead and indulge. And you’ll find that once you’ve striped past all the layers and facade of their resources, there’s nothing left there but an empty, decaying barrel. Feel free to leave that for the birds to pick at. Your work there is done.
[–]wtknightGen X Slacker[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children) | Copy Link
Removed. No direct links to other subs allowed.
[–]ChibsFilipTelforddSpergnation Conflagration 9 points10 points11 points (6 children) | Copy Link
The commenter who said "the reason a lot of men struggle in dating nowadays is because a lot of men have nothing other than money to offer" is not wrong lol. Ofc, she ignores the flip side of that, which I'm sure she'd freak out if she actually internalized the fact that women today often have nothing to offer another beyond sex
That's why most relationships fail, because trading money for sex in a quasiprostitution transaction is retarded and just kind of sickening. And the woman loses attraction quick, and the man feels used quick.
It's NOT ok for a woman to use a man for money, nor is it ok for a man to use the dangling of a relationship for sex.
[–]mackenzie013_02 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
High quality comment! You’d think it wouldn’t need to be said… yet here we are.. 😅
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I like dis.
[–]just_a_place 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
My ears are burning... I was the one who said that. 😎
Also, women can offer a whole lot more than just sex. Most women want commitment but don't know what men consider worth committing to. If I am going to stay loyal to a girl for the long haul she has to bring more to the table than just sex, I want her presence, as in, mind and soul as well. Women can offer their own loyalty, commitment, service, confidence, and trust in return. On top of that she can bring her own skills and unique world view and her own set of eyes to add to our world. Now it's not just me roaming the world, now it's the two of us and it feels extremely nice being able to share things with a girl and there is a special kind of joy in working on something with the intent of making her happy and taking care of her. When a girl is well cared for they become very adorable, loyal and endearing as hell, makes me want to eat her with a spoon.
[–]ChibsFilipTelforddSpergnation Conflagration 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Na it was an fdser lol but yea
[–]just_a_place 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh... it's kinda trippy that I basically said the same thing a few days ago in another threat.
[–]ChibsFilipTelforddSpergnation Conflagration 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Well it's the correct opinion so no wonder ;)
[–]kissmetilyouredrunk{<Rope Bunny>} 18 points19 points20 points
(8 children) | Copy Link
This would hit harder if “It’s ok to use girls for sex” wasn’t posted on PPD 4 times a week
[–]CrazyBaby8891NAMALT/NAWALT 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, those ideas are two sides of the same coin. Both wrong.
[–]DrBobyRed Pill dad 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
It's just not politically correct.
[–]CrazyBaby8891NAMALT/NAWALT 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's not correct, period. Anyone in a healthy, loving, respectful relationship knows that.
[–]AquaChip 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly, do they expect us to care when 40% of the posts on here are, “Har har, it’s okay to manipulate women for sex!”
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Banned_BY_SOYMEN 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I don’t necessarily agree with it, but if you truthfully enjoyed the night for what it was — how is it comparable?
[–]StuDentMyCar 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
because in both cases the other person probably wasn’t in the relationship to get used ??
[–]Banned_BY_SOYMEN 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Lmao that femcel was an active PPD user too. Looks like she has a bad break up so she’s going into fem rage mode in her return back to Twitter.
[–]funlightmandarin 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Low hanging fruit to cross post from FDS.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I will bow my head in shame then
[–]lidythemann 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
oooahaha this will get the dudes triggered on here! Where's my popcorn
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I was convulsing but slammed a Mountain Dew to return to homeostasis lol
[–]SnooSprouts1580 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
A true "HVM" has options and doesn't need to put up with "FDS" women.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I’m clearly a LVM so I’m stuck in this lane.
[–]thatguyfromrichmondPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
“Women”
[–]RiseSignificant9499Red Pill Beast AKA dog-shit AKA Sniveling Rat AKA nut-job AKA 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Thats the thing lol. Once a man builds up his value, its too late to “capture” him and if you got him before his value spike, you have to worry he doesn’t change.
Ive said it before and I’ll say it again, a man with real power is not loyal to their wife/gf. Time and time again, I see it in my personal life and you can see it with celebrities.
So, FDS women are looking for weak men to boss around like their little bitch.
[–]Jaylen-Gads 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
FDS women are not interested in having a meaningful healthy relationship they want revenge.
https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/p01xdn/theres_absolutely_nothing_wrong_with_using_a_man/h83s475/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
[–]Teflon08191 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Oof.
Little do they realize that this "race to the bottom" they're so keen on instigating can only end very badly for them.
If nothing else, the "win conditions" under these circumstances for men are vastly easier to accomplish than women's.
[–]Super-Peoplez-S0Lt 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
That comment was pretty sad revenge fantasy fuel.
[–]thatguyfromrichmondPurple Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This is painfully obvious to anyone with any sort of brain capacity. I don’t understand why they wanna punish current men who had nothing to do with oppression (plus none of these women are oppressed)
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 6 points7 points8 points
2 (42 children) | Copy Link
Every other post on this is sub is about how women are worthless and only good for sex. Am I supposed to be mad about this woman who wants to fleece you? If all women are good for is sex all men are good for is money. Sounds fair.
There’s thousands of guys here and on TRP doing far worse than her. I think FDS has a long ways to go to catch up to men on in terms of horrible shit. So please find more fucked up posts for me my man, please. Bring them in the name of equality.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
I would prefer we elevate each other rather than all of us being shit but I see your point.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Men can go first, since they are the leaders.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
That sounds spiteful but yeah men should go first
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
They don’t have to be the leaders if they don’t want to be. But I thought they wanted to be
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Some do and some don’t. I’m cool with team dynamics but there still is some form of hierarchy within it whether it’s stated or not. I like true collaborations but I do understand that some people can’t sacrifice their ego even a little. Some people are “just playing the game” and I’m here thinking how I can transcend that bullshit even though I probably can’t lol
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 2 points3 points4 points (11 children) | Copy Link
Every man and every woman is an individual. Just because you see posts here about men saying women are only good for sex doesn’t mean every man agrees with that, likewise I would be an idiot to assume every woman thinks a man is only useful for money.
You shouldn’t agree with something that generalises a viewpoint to the population and then treat that population according to the generalisation you made.
There’s going to be innocent men who never agreed with using women for sex getting screwed by women fleecing them for money while the men just wanted a genuine relationship.
There’s going to be innocent women who never believed in fleecing men of their money getting screwed by men using them for sex while the women wanted a genuine relationship.
I know this is long winded but my point is that everyone should think about what they’re actually fighting for and who comes out on top in the end. This mentality wins for absolutely no one.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (10 children) | Copy Link
Maybe you missed my point. Ok …. Here’s another one for you.
Hey gentlemen. Don’t throw stones in glass houses.
Or yes innocent people will get hurt. But until y’all stop hurting us, or at least police your own, I’m just gonna keep my mouth shut.
You don’t have the high moral ground
“This mentality wins for absolutely no one.”
It wins for those that take advantage of others
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 2 points3 points4 points (9 children) | Copy Link
You’re going to have to elaborate your point because I don’t understand. Look, I don’t want you to see me as an enemy. I’m not trying to claim any moral high ground. Simply trying to have a discussion about why I as an individual see this mentality as wrong.
Assuming that men want women only for sex and women only want men for money doesn’t help anyone, even the ones that take advantage of others because their relationships typically turn to be utter garbage. In the end it’s a waste of time for them. I’m not concerned about them anyway. I’m concerned about the innocent men and women that get caught up in relationships with people that believe in this sort of stuff.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (8 children) | Copy Link
If you care so much about the innocent beings hurt by bad people then tell bad men to stop using innocent women. That will ease your conscience right? No you are instead here talking to me…. Because I said “Meh whatever” if one woman uses men because thousands of men use women? Weird. Why is that? 🤔 Strange.
No it’s not the innocent you care about it’s the money that’s your issue. That’s why you mentioned that before women being used for sex. You’re one of those guys that wax poetic to make yourself sound like you’re not “one of those guys” but I just don’t feel it. It’s just words. Empty hallow words.
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
I do tell bad men to stop using innocent women. I despise men that go around using women just for sex. I try to stay consistent with my beliefs. You might not see that because I only just recently found this subreddit and found the level headed discussions from different sides interesting.
I’m not concerned about the one women vs thousands of men. I’m concerned about the precedent this sets. It’s bad enough so many men don’t care about women beyond their physical qualities, I don’t want women to fall into the same ground but rather for everyone to criticise bad men and bad women.
You’re looking at my comment way too deeply. Seriously. You think because I mentioned the money first I care more about it? It just happened to be mentioned first. If you have a problem with it I’d be glad to change it. Although I myself can’t find where exactly I said it so point it out for me. There’s other occasions in my comments where I mentioned the innocent women first. Why do you ignore that?
Like I said at the start, not every man follows the same line of thinking. Please don’t come into a genuine discussion with a preconceived belief of what the other person is thinking because then there’s no way for any person you’re talking to to have a proper discussion.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Yeah it’s really bad that this one woman is setting a precedent. It’s bad enough that men treat women so horrible we don’t want women to do the same to men. So women make sure to keep your moral integrity and don’t get angry about how you and other women are treated by bad men. That’s right. Cool I’ll do that. And I’ll make sure to check my fellow women and make sure we stay on the straight and arrow lol yeah right lol
Also I’ve seen no other comments where you mention the innocent woman first. I don’t peg you by a group or whatever I’m talking to you as I see you. I’m judging you as an individual and by the vibe you are giving off to me
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
You're right that's my mistake, I've had a quick look through my replies and none of them mention the innocent woman first. I still don't see why that matters. I've mentioned both men and women equally. If it's so much of a problem to you do you want me to change it? I really don't mind, I don't see this as much merit to the discussion but if it pleases you that's fine by me.
First of all, you should stop strawmanning my argument. Never did I say that women can't get angry about how innocent women are treated by bad men. In fact I'm glad they speak out verifiably against bad men.
Second of all have you heard the saying "two wrongs don't make a right?". I can do my best to criticise bad men but what else do you expect I do when it continues? I'll continue to criticise it and when women start doing something wrong I'll also criticise it.
Third of all, this whole vibe thing you're going off of is what I'm saying isn't helping any valuable discussion. You have a preconceived vibe you've gotten off me which has no basis beyond where I've put women and men in the same sentence. This preconceived vibe makes you go into this discussion assuming that I only care about innocent men being hurt (despite me mentioning both men and women and being completely open to restructure my placements of the words to suit you) and don't want women to speak out against bad men (despite me not saying anywhere that I'm against women speaking out about bad men).
I'm not an enemy to you and I never was. Not all men think the same.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
First of all, I was never the one that grouped men or women. I was specifically talking about ONE woman and men that talk badly about women: You commented on my post with long winded essays for some reason telling me not to group all men when I wasn’t doing that in the first place. Why? I don’t know.
Second. You then preceded to tell me this not all men think the same stuff over and over when I already knew that and never said they did.
I told you if you cared so much about the innocent you could tell men to not take advantage of women. But you seemed to only care about women’s morals and not mens. I told you that’s how it appeared to me. That’s how you were coming off. At this point I was getting a bit annoyed and was ready to end the conversation but was still trying to be polite.
I then explained again I did not judge you as the group because that’s what you claimed which is insulting to my intelligence. I stated that I judged you by the vibe you gave off to me and as an individual. And at that point I was done with the conversation so my response was sarcastic.
Hope that helps explain things. Thank you have a good day.
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I went off of this comment you made. The FDS post was saying it was alright to fleece all men while you were justifying it with posts made on this subreddit only. That's why I replied. Based off the FDS post, you're agreeing that all men deserved to get fleeced due to viewpoints held by some men on this sub.
On your second point, as I said above, your original comment did do that and the further discussion with you pointed out your preconceived assumptions about me as a man despite me never saying anything you believed. This further pushed the idea that you were grouping all men together.
Third point. Why were you getting annoyed? Because I was mentioning men first? I was fine with changing it so what's the big problem? I mentioned men and women both equally and I also said I criticise bad men. What more could you possibly want for me?
If I didn't believe you were intelligent, I would have no reason to continue this discussion. There's no benefit of any external viewpoints and reasoning from someone else if they're dumb. The fact that I've continued this conversation is because I know you're intelligent.
Regardless, I appreciate the discussion. You were very polite and I appreciate that as well as your viewpoint. I wish we could've talked more without the sarcasm to properly understand each other's viewpoints but if you don't want to continue, I understand. Thanks anyway.
[–]spinsterchachkies2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
I see what you mean and why you got that impression. Let me explain.
IF all women are good for is sex all men are good for is money.
Now I put the “IF” there to make a statement about how men on the PPD and TRP subs shouldnt be hypocritical. Since they regularly post about how women are only good for sex. I do not agree with either viewpoints. It was a statement that both are wrong, but they can’t point fingers while they are committing a wrong deed.
[–]FudgeSlapp1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Ohhhhhh I see. Absolutely my mistake then I apologise. This whole discussion was off my wrongful presupposition that you were saying all men want sex and all women want money.
I completely agree. Any man that believes that all women are good for is sex, he should also believe all men are good for is money.
I should’ve clarified exactly what your position was as well as my own. I apologise.
[–]spinsterchachkies2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
No problem, glad we could clear it up. Misunderstandings happen on the internet all the time
[–]ToughAnswers 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Agreed
Gentlemen, full speed ahead on using for sex
[–]just_a_place 0 points1 point2 points (21 children) | Copy Link
I thought every other post in this sub is someone with zero real world experience trying to rationalize women from an autistic point of view.
Just because a bunch of incels are doing worse than her it doesn't excuse her blatant hatred of men or her advocating that men should be cheated and exploited just because of her idiotic opinion. That's like saying the KKK is kinda alright only because the Nazis took it to the extreme. Both are shit and both should eat shit. FDS and Incels may be two distinct fabrics but they were both cut out with the same nihilistic/cynical scissors.
This woman is literally trying to start a gender war. Does that at all sound like a good idea? Going to war with the gender, and apex predator, that literally invented it? I can handle myself if women decide to incite a gender war, no big deal after defending myself from the threats of other men for my entire life, but my biggest concern is all the women I care about.
How are they going to fare against an army of angry men who are now in some ideological cause to get them. I do not want my sisters receiving the brunt of a ruthless retaliatory strategy from men that she interacts with or a guy that strings her along only to satisfy an internal thirst for revenge for an imagined slight that got injected into his head by toxic ass women such as this one.
Also my biggest worry is men's tendency to escalate and solve conflict through violence. Those shooting rampages we keep hearing about are only sporadic incidents from a few dudes that lost it. What the hell is going to happen when men in real power get as fed up as those incels? When men as a collective decide to retaliate? That is the shit that scares me because I can only think of my sisters and my girl friends who I care about.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (20 children) | Copy Link
Why are you bringing up the KKK and Nazis?
[–]just_a_place -1 points0 points1 point (19 children) | Copy Link
Godwin's Law.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 2 points3 points4 points (18 children) | Copy Link
Yeah I stopped reading after that.
[–]just_a_place 2 points3 points4 points (17 children) | Copy Link
TL;DR - Hate is not excused with more hate.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 2 points3 points4 points (16 children) | Copy Link
I just read that end part and find it funny that you described men as monsters….
(But let’s not hate men or they will literally kill you)
Hahaha men hating women is no excuse for women hating men hahaha omg I love this post now
[–]just_a_place 0 points1 point2 points (15 children) | Copy Link
Men can be monsters. Ever hear of war, genocide, bio-weapons? Yeah, that's all us.
But you know what? We are also the ones who created hospitals, medical science, charities, the rule of law, ethics, and moral codes of conduct that attempt to maximize what is good and minimize what is evil.
Man is both Good AND Evil. All I am telling you is that it is a mistake to believe we are only one without the other. We have the capacity to do both. This is our nature and it is foolish to deny it.
Hating men is one thing, instigating them is another. This is also true of anything that can kill you. You can hate a bear because it can maul you, but going out and instigating it is never a good idea. This is just common sense!
Are you actually attempting to argue that it is? 😐
You really don't see the insidious feedback loop that this causes where it will only lead to further escalation until something (or someone) snaps?
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 2 points3 points4 points (14 children) | Copy Link
Please keep telling me how men are going to annihilate all the women, like they need a reason.
[–]just_a_place 1 point2 points3 points (13 children) | Copy Link
Hope you realize that you are talking to a man right now, and I have expressed to you over and over again that I don't want that. When I tell women to be careful it's because I give a damn! It's not some "patriarchy" bullshit trying to control you or whatever else they've filled your head with. It is genuine concern for your safety. There are some crazy motherfuckers out there and I do not want to see innocent women getting hurt, I just told you I think of my sisters when I hear about shit like that. I do not want my sisters or you or any other innocent woman bearing the brunt of some dysfunctional asshole's rage just because some other woman decided it would be funny to instigate him and push him over the edge.
Also, how long before we actually start hearing of women killing men out of some ideological reason? What is going to happen then when it finally does happen and all the men who were sitting on the fence on this now feel compelled to pick a side and act? What's to stop those who are just waiting for an excuse? This is the type of shit that nightmares are made out of. Men trying to come after women that I care about while someone is insidiously injecting ideas into them that I am their enemy?
My sister went off the deep end reading all the garbage she came across on the manosphere she even started to act suspicious and fearful of me and it is a terrible fucking feeling when someone you love looks at you with fear and mistrust and starts to distance herself because she thinks you're her enemy. Feels like a stab to the chest.
If you just can't relate at all to anything of what I'm saying here well then there is nothing more I can say. Just be careful and do not instigate evil people, that should include women since apparently women doing violence against other women is a growing trend now.
[–]spinsterchachkies2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
“There are some crazy motherfuckers out there”
Really???? 🙄
“dysfunctional asshole's rage just because some other woman decided it would be funny to instigate him and push him over the edge.”
This is your problem here. They don’t need a reason. Why did men kill before FDS? Where there no rapes or murders of women before 2020? Nope. They always happened and they always will.
“men who were sitting on the fence on this now feel compelled to pick a side and act?”
Men are not on the fence what are you talking about here? Men will always put themselves first. Even you put yourself and men before your own sisters.
Here you are blaming women for “insidiously injecting” ideas into men. Are men stupid? Are their brains mush? Or is it your sisters that are being brainwashed? So your sisters are stupid? What? Or is it the manosphere that’s brainwashing them? What’s going on here? There’s a lot of coping.
“Men trying to come after women that I care about while someone is insidiously injecting ideas into them that I am their enemy?”
So you’re upset that your sisters fear made her isolated from you and that hurts YOUR feelings. The truth is men are coming after the women that you care about. That’s the fucking truth but you don’t want to admit that no cause that means men are predators. Noooooooo not men bad.
“My sister went off the deep end reading all the garbage she came across on the manosphere she even started to act suspicious and fearful of me and it is a terrible fucking feeling when someone you love looks at you with fear and mistrust and starts to distance herself because she thinks you're her enemy. Feels like a stab to the chest.”
Yeah because that shit is scary. Men are fucking scary as a group. They don’t need to BE instigated. Predators come after the most venerable and defenseless. Not the loudest most offensive ones
“Just be careful and do not instigate evil people”
And how do you know they are evil? They look like normal people. They can be your neighbor, your family, your friend. They are everywhere. So do you live your life not instigating everyone? And what is instigating exactly? Every evil person is different and their victims are going to be different. But most will go after the weak, submissive and quiet because they are easier to murder or rape. Ex women and children. If the women you love want to survive unmolested they should be strong and offensive. Trust me
[–]toiletTesticles1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Sounds like you’ve had a traumatic experience and not really telling how you really feel. All my immediate family consists of women/girls and I would definitely sacrifice my life for their safety/wellbeing without hesitation it’s innate/instinctual. It sucks that there are girls who experienced anything less of feeling safe but your troubles have caused you to assume some pretty wild stuff about people on Reddit that you don’t even know.
[–]spinsterchachkies1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Most women have pretty traumatic experiences with men it’s not that big of a deal to me tbh. Just normal. That and I read the crap on Reddit that men say about women and girls. Women need to be strong.
[–]toiletTesticles1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Well that sucks. Everyone has their own traumatic experiences but to normalize this one is taking a few steps backwards to me. I agree women should be strong, but if there isn’t any positive male influence in their lives, when are they gonna know what a good man is?
[–]spinsterchachkies2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
My dad is a good man. My uncle is. My grandfather is. My great grandfather is
Edit it doesn’t matter if we have good examples btw. Doesn’t change the men around you
[–]toiletTesticles1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Some parents will show/tell you directly and indirectly on what a good partner should be like. Maybe just bad luck for you then. I on the other hand attract trash bags but realize I’m the common denominator so I know I have to do some self improvements. By the time I find out what improvements I need to make I’ll be an old meat bag but it is what it is for me.
[–]spinsterchachkies1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
No not bad luck for me. Just normal female experience
[–]toiletTesticles1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Well idk then. I guess we all roll the dice.
[–]just_a_place1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Men will always put those whom we love first - Protector instincts, remember?
We are talking here about a class of men who have nothing to fight for and therefore nothing to live for other than themselves. So in a way you are right but you are completely disregarding the majority of men who have loved ones whose security and happiness comes first.
YES! Because I love her and it breaks my fucking heart to see any harm come to her. She matters to me. Why do I even have to explain this? Do you understand what it feels like to value the welfare of another human being over your own? Do you comprehend how love works?
The worst thing to happen to anyone you love is when they are isolated from you and you see them suffering alone. I did not abandon my sister I figured out what was wrong and I helped her get past her paranoia of men by hanging out with her more together with my dad. When we went out I talked to her and put everything into context, I pointed out all the men we came across and had her think about them and see that the shit she read about online was not real, just the deranged and super concentrated toxicity of incels. She had it in her head that my love for her was not genuine that I only saw her as an object or that i only wanted to use her and didn't actually care about her. The fact that she doubted me and started to question all of my intentions shows just how fucking insidious these online ideologies are. They get inside your head and do some serious re-programming in the background of your mind.
It's how propaganda works. Intelligence is not a defense against it because it works by exploiting your innermost fears and warping your sense of reality in such a manner than you don't even realize it.
That is exactly the idea that was put into my sister's head. For a crazy minute she actually believed that I did not actually love her that I just saw her as a possession and that one day I could just snap and kill her. Now that she's alright I have asked her how could she ever even think such a thing and she tells me it was just a really deep feeling of fear and she felt like I was betraying her and usually when she is feeling down she comes to me to hang out or to help her but since that incident drove a wedge between us she felt extremely vulnerable to the point where I could just see it in her face, she didn't look sad, she looked scared and frightened. For a while I suspected some asshole probably did something to her or possibly rape her and finally with my mom's help we got her to talk about what was really going on. I was already entertaining ideas about what I was going to do when I found out who hurt her when it turns out it was not one guy but a whole group of idiots online.
I' not going to get into specifics about what she read or the content she watched because it's extreme and it is not the kind of shit I want to ever see the light of day. Suffice it to say it frightened the hell out of my sister to where she started to think I don't love her and question all my intentions.
Therein lies the seed of insidiousness. The moment you start to lose sight of who is benevolent and who is malevolent, when you just can't tell the difference anymore and you feel frightened of all men. That is exactly what happened to my sister. She says it's a very dark and crushing feeling that made her feel numb with fear and sadness. Like something was taken away from her and she felt despair that she could never get it back.
The moment you think that anyone can be your enemy is the moment when you actually start seeing everyone as your enemy. Incels have the same mentality, they believe all women laugh at them when they aren't looking. Their neighbor, their families, their friends etc.
Being strong and offensive does not work because men are strong and offensive and we are the ones who get killed all the time. If anything it makes you a bigger target to those who have a chip on their shoulder. The only ones that target the weak and vulnerable are those who are themselves weak and vulnerable. So all a woman has to do is project invulnerability and strength rather than offense. Being offensive wins you no friends. Being strong will at least keep the weasels away.
[–]spinsterchachkies1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Lol Whatever helps man 👍🏻
[–]just_a_place1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
lol I can tell you're mentally exhausted from this so I will be brief: I wish you to be happy and safe. You have not said anything here that would convince me to stop caring about women, I understand you being upset and all but just know I did listen to you and I would still support you (or any other woman) in whatever way I can. 🙂
[–]spinsterchachkies1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
I’m busy mocking you in a different sub
Disingenuous prick
[–]just_a_place1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Oh no 😱
[–]Banned_BY_SOYMEN 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Literally a complete strawman
[–]Teflon08191 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think you realize how gravely untrue for women that actually is, considering that you'll only find very few TRP men who would object to the above arrangement.
[–]ToughAnswers 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Pic related
[–]TheBookOfSeil2 in the pink-pill, 1 in the stink-pill 2 points3 points4 points (18 children) | Copy Link
If that's valid then there's also nothing wrong with using women for sex. In the end, both are directly included in the transaction.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
I don’t think that’s valid either
[–]TheBookOfSeil2 in the pink-pill, 1 in the stink-pill 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
It's an all or nothing situation. Either both are valid or neither are valid.
[–]Nation_of_Two 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Neither are moral choices. Using and deceiving a human is wrong, especially when you manipulate them into thinking u love them.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Agree to an extent. How is right and wrong not determined by some sort of a moral compass?
[–]TheBookOfSeil2 in the pink-pill, 1 in the stink-pill 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
They don't have to be moral choices to be valid, do they?
[–]Cupcakelover1985 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Men already do that. Which is why the FDS post isn’t causing much outrage.
[–]TheBookOfSeil2 in the pink-pill, 1 in the stink-pill 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Well then.. let the ???-annual Sex-Hunger Games begin! - and may the odds be ever in your favor.
[–]Goodthingstartssmall -3 points-2 points-1 points (10 children) | Copy Link
"Using" women for sex is valid and using men for any resources with the intention to drop him at one point isn't valid. Sex by definition is a mutual two way interaction both parties enjoy. Using men for money is onesided leeching.
If we take it strictly at least.
[–]TheBookOfSeil2 in the pink-pill, 1 in the stink-pill 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Women don't really enjoy sex though since the clitoris is not inside of the vagina. What women are most satisfied with wouldn't be classified as "sex" at all.
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 1 point2 points3 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Neither is valid. The other commenter said sex is one sided since most women are never properly satisfied like men are. Let’s say that women do get the same benefits as a man in sex, when it comes to spending money, a man wouldn’t be spending money unless he’s getting some sort of value.
Whether that value be the time he gets to spend with the girl, the happiness he feels of not being alone etc. If spending was one sided then men wouldn’t do it. My point is that neither is valid because if you’re trading sex for money it’s not a relationship, it’s just prostitution.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
You are right. Relationships are prostitution
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
That’s not the point I was trying to make. Maybe some modern day relationships are just prostitution but a relationship and prostitution aren’t the same and they shouldn’t be the same. There’s more to relationships than just sex and money and the ones that solely focus on that aren’t relationships.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
I don’t think so. I think most traditional heterosexual relationships have been pretty much just about sex and money. That’s why women were bought from their father just to take care of the house, provide sex, and have kids. Sex and money always
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
If life was just about sex and money then they wouldn’t have kids. Kids are a financial drain. You need to care about more than just sex and money if you’re willing to have kids. Kids don’t give you sex (unless you’re truly fucked in the head) and they don’t give you money (unless you turn them into workers). Most first world countries nowadays don’t allow women to be bought from the father. We’re talking about parents in the modern day.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I will quote you;
“MAYBE SOME MODERN DAY RELATIONSHIPS ARE JUST PROSTITUTION”
Pause for dramatic effect
“but a relationship and prostitution aren’t the same”
From your perspective sure
“There’s more to relationships than just sex and money and the ones that solely focus on that aren’t relationships.”
Me:
Most traditional heterosexual relationships have been pretty much just about sex and money.
Women were bought from their father just to take care of the house, provide sex, and have kids.
Sex + money.
Different perspectives
If I’m doing the work of a traditional woman + a modern woman, I need something in exchange. Love is overrated
[–]FudgeSlappNo Pill 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Why are you even bringing traditional relationships into this? Can we stick to just modern day relationships? Some modern day relationships are similar to prostitution. Some modern day relationships are actual relationships that care more about sex and money, like love, partnership, friendship, sharing values, sharing experiences, working together to equalise each other’s weaknesses etc. Those are relationships.
Love may be overrated to you but I refuse to accept women think as a monolith. It’s a matter of opinion. Different women have different preferences and to that I completely understand your take. If you want something more than love because you think it’s overrated then go for it. I’m not against that. Your preferences in a relationship are not what we’re having a discussion about though. Modern day relationships aren’t all prostitution.
[–]spinsterchachkiesPost Wall Stacy 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I brought up traditional relationships to explain to you that it hasn’t changed. Every guy has this fairytale image of how relationships used to be and hates how relationships are now when it’s the same as it’s always been
[–]FudgeSlapp1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
I see. I think I can see where you’re coming from then but I feel you’re too hard on it. I’ll agree there were relationships back in the day that did only care about sex and money but there were plenty of relationships that also cared about all the things I mentioned in a relationship (partnership, sharing of value and experiences etc) that also happen today.
I think it depends what you call traditional because there might be a mismatch in timelines. If you’re talking about the last 100 years or so of relationships as traditional then I’d have to disagree. I don’t believe relationships were based solely off money and sex. Most had pretty loving relationships with children and children would never come into the picture because they restrict sex in relationships and are a financial drain. If you say traditional as further than 100 years ago then I guess I could agree. I’m not really well-informed on how relationships were in the 1800s but I know back like 1000 years ago or so men really did buy women from fathers. They still had children though so I can’t imagine it was purely about sex and money. Birth rates are declining now though so that’s why I feel modern relationships are more focused on sex and money only.
[–]poppy_blu 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Always wondered what happened to rainisthelife
[–]NockerJoePervert Palpatine 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Jesus christ that woman sounds like a psycho. She seems to have forgotten you're supposed to actually like the person you're dating.
[–]thatguyfromrichmondPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Well the problem is she is only capable of liking a top 5% man who wants nothing to do with a fat 35 year old single mother
[–]poppy_blu 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
There are few men on this sub who like women but they all still feel entitled to fuck them and are really angry when they can’t.
[–]MadsMkayFDS Princess💫 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
This is extremely low effort. What exactly are we suppose to discuss from it? Some woman views men as a cash cow...and that matters why?
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
In hindsight my post does seem low effort. Maybe I just needed validation from a neutral sub so I don’t think I’m crazy. Could just be the area I’m in idk.
[–]i-am-not-clamscasino 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
These women are powerless in the dating market and aren't getting rich men to exploit, they are deluding themselves about their realities by running revenge fantasies in their head, who gives a fuck?
Low effort as fuck
[–]nemma8832/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This is why we say FDS is just RP flip.
[–]mxp68 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
I love it when cafe feminists sit back in their comfortable chair with the lights and A/C running and type on their wireless device how men have almost nothing to offer when men literally invented everything they need to not only survive but live well.
If every man took a week off and just sat around, society would collapse quickly.
[–]poppy_blu 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
This shit again….
[–]mxp68 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
as she types on a device invented by a man
[–]poppy_blu 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I feel like a broken record.
A tiny percentage of exceptional (mostly) men invented everything. 99.9% of men haven’t invented shit, including you.
[–]Spittens 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Wifi was invented by actress Hedy Lamarr.
Computer science was built by women.
Radia Perlman developed the algorithm behind Spanning Tree Protocol.
Grace Hopper was instrumental in moving from binary to english standardized computer languages, helped program the Harvard Mark I computer, coined the word 'bug' for an error, and invented the first compiler.
In 1852 Ada Lovelace developed algorithms for computers, which didn't exist yet.
The Long Cycle-Life Nickel-Hydrogen Battery was invented by Olga D Gonzalez-Sanabria.
Do your fucking research before spouting off about things you clearly don't know jack shit about.
Furthermore, your assumption that if men stopped working society would collapse is wrong.
[–]Remove_Ayys -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
The guy talking about women supposedly mooching off of men is definitely an idiot. Both men and women have contributed greatly to our modern society. That being said, I take issue with two of your statements.
While frequency hopping is an important technique for wireless communication I don't think it's fair to equate this with Wi-Fi as it's just one of many components. To me that is comparable to claiming Heinrich Hertz invented all wireless communication.
The analytical engine which Ada Lovelace worked on was unfortunately ahead of its time. Due to an inadequacy in the available technology it fell into obscurity and was unknown to the people that built the first computers in the modern sense. Because of this I don't think she's relevant when talking about contributions to computer science but rather when talking about the history of the field.
[–]TotalTravestyNo Pill Male 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Love too get posts from subreddits I’m not subscribed to.
Exactly what does this accomplish? Are you trying to get us to brigade another sub? Snitch on them to get them in trouble?
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Not the sub but the OP’s view of men. I’ve seen pretty productive and accurate posts on that sub but this takes the cake on perpetuating division between the sexes.
[–]TotalTravestyNo Pill Male 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Well the OP is clearly a kook, but I’m wondering why you introduced their kookery to this, a different sub. If I wanted to read and comment on FDS craziness I’d subscribe to FDS.
This is like me coming to PPD with some troll from r/drama or r/wallstreetbets with no additional context like, ”See? React to this!” Aren’t there enough crazy people on PPD to entertain ourselves with?
BTW, in my opinion, the only division FDS perpetuates is the division between FDS and TRP, which most of Reddit—and almost entirely all of real life—doesn’t care about at all.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Well I hope that’s true. I think certain stuff like this can unfortunately spread like wildfire. Maybe I’m the only one spreading it but just wanted to hear what other people think about this.
[–]TotalTravestyNo Pill Male 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
FDS isn’t even close to one of the most popular subreddits on Reddit. Even if the entirety of your personal world were contained on this weird website, this is jus one well-contained dumpster fire at best.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
But I can smell the shit from a mile away
[–]Teflon08191 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
FDS is discussed here often.
Also, there's a huge overlap between women who post here and women who post in FDS.
[–]Teflon08191 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Something tells me the same woman who posted that would absolutely blow a gasket at the idea that "there's nothing wrong with using a woman for sex".
[–]Super-Peoplez-S0Lt 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
For a subreddit that emphasizes dating, the people on FDS sure do hate men with a boiling passion.
[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Attention!
You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
This seems like the poster views men as an adversary rather than an ally. Yay or nay?
[–]OddChocolate_ 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Pretty sure the lovely ladies here won't disagree much from what I see in terms of gaslighting and such.
[–]Lucian-Salop 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So we can crosspost now?
[–]SebastianSio 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Most men are so emasculated these days anyways, so yeah, there's nothing wrong with that. Just know this is a double edge sword.
[–]superlurkage -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
“There’s nothing wrong with pumping and dumping “
“Boys will be boys”
“We were just having a little fun”
“The child seduced him!”
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Not following the quotes
[–]superlurkage 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
Common excuses for male bad behavior and exploitation of women
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I’m not an advocate for exploiting either sexes though. Like I said I’m not following your train on thought.
[–]mackenzie013_02 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
There’s pretty much daily posts here how it’s ok to use women for sex.. but now some woman decided to post that it’s ok to use men for money, and we all should be outraged?
[–]SnooSprouts1580 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes.
[–]toiletTesticles[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I never said you should feel outraged. Just asking how it makes you feel, maybe men deserve this type of response due to past archetypes ruining it for a somewhat level-headed guy. I think the evolution of this conversation should be for future generations to cherry pick the good stuff and throw away the bad; at least in America we have that option to do such that. Maybe I’m full of shit idk