The future of Men and Families
We should try to turn back the clock
10.4% (8)
10.4% (8)
We should not turn back the clock
63.6% (49)
63.6% (49)
Other
26% (20)
26% (20)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: The Manosphere and the future of Men and Families

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

RunsWithBears:

PainInTheAssInternet:

RunsWithBears:
You, just like the other person I quoted, seem to be projecting your own anger on my opinions. You accuse me of not giving you things to respond to, but here you are entering a discussion with an animosity that is based on what you fear my opinions are. You'd do well to look in the mirror sometime.

They've got a point. That link is the most substantial position you've provided. It's not unreasonable to assume you share the result of that poll and thus the opinions those who participated.

The position I have taken in my first post is that I believe current male/female relationships to be unhealthy and potentially damaging to society. Before any further elaboration could take place people already started assuming all sorts of things about my position which makes discussion impossible.

Unhealthy...With a poll placing the blame on feminism. Nice try though. But please do elaborate. Instead of continually saying you cannot possibly elaborate.

RunsWithBears:

Saelune:
You are clearly expressing your opinions and they are potentially harmful ones. People arent robots and are allowed to have emotions about things. If you think your opinions are right, defend them properly, dont just get mad that people are mad at your maddening views.

Besides the opinion that I find current male/female relationships unhealthy I have expressed nothing.
It isn't me who is bringing animosity into this conversation, but you.

Do I really need to teach you how debate works? If you arent going to express an opinion, even though you already started, then do not get involved in a discussion and debate on opinion. And people are allowed to have emotions about said opinions. We arent robots, and these opinions arent nothing. Our opinions and how we treat them and use them effect eachother. If you are just going to be offended everytime because people strongly disagree with you, you may not wish to get involved in intense debates that Religion and Politics create.

If you think the people who disagree with you are wrong, fine. Prove it. Dont just use "I have expressed nothing, dont get mad" as a defense to pull away from actually defending your point.

Saelune:

RunsWithBears:

Saelune:
You are clearly expressing your opinions and they are potentially harmful ones. People arent robots and are allowed to have emotions about things. If you think your opinions are right, defend them properly, dont just get mad that people are mad at your maddening views.

Besides the opinion that I find current male/female relationships unhealthy I have expressed nothing.
It isn't me who is bringing animosity into this conversation, but you.

Do I really need to teach you how debate works? If you arent going to express an opinion, even though you already started, then do not get involved in a discussion and debate on opinion. And people are allowed to have emotions about said opinions. We arent robots, and these opinions arent nothing. Our opinions and how we treat them and use them effect eachother. If you are just going to be offended everytime because people strongly disagree with you, you may not wish to get involved in intense debates that Religion and Politics create.

If you think the people who disagree with you are wrong, fine. Prove it. Dont just use "I have expressed nothing, dont get mad" as a defense to pull away from actually defending your point.

I would defend my position if people were to quit projecting their own anger on me. Again, I am not offended or I don't think people who disagree are wrong. That is you projecting your own situation on me. Why would I want to discuss anything with people who just spew vitriol. In fact, it's those people who rob me of the time to respond to people who are interested in actual discussion.

RunsWithBears:

Saelune:

RunsWithBears:

Besides the opinion that I find current male/female relationships unhealthy I have expressed nothing.
It isn't me who is bringing animosity into this conversation, but you.

Do I really need to teach you how debate works? If you arent going to express an opinion, even though you already started, then do not get involved in a discussion and debate on opinion. And people are allowed to have emotions about said opinions. We arent robots, and these opinions arent nothing. Our opinions and how we treat them and use them effect eachother. If you are just going to be offended everytime because people strongly disagree with you, you may not wish to get involved in intense debates that Religion and Politics create.

If you think the people who disagree with you are wrong, fine. Prove it. Dont just use "I have expressed nothing, dont get mad" as a defense to pull away from actually defending your point.

I would defend my position if people were to quit projecting their own anger on me. Again, I am not offended or I don't think people who disagree are wrong. That is you projecting your own situation on me. Why would I want to discuss anything with people who just spew vitriol. In fact, it's those people who rob me of the time to respond to people who are interested in actual discussion.

You wont get far with that attitude. If you cant bare the "vitriol" then apparently your opinions arent that important to you. I personally spend more time arguing with people who intensely disagree, since well, they intensely disagree. I dont really seek to just jerk off my own views. How can they bare to stand if they fall to disagreement? You must test them against the vitriol, rather than hide from it.

Alot of people here will not merely respect an opinion for existing. If you are going to say or express your own vitriolic opinions, then people will respond negatively. It is up to you to prove them wrong if you believe them to be wrong.

I am genuinely trying to advise you here. Take it or dont, but dont act surprised if things dont go your way.

RunsWithBears:

erttheking:

So are you going to post an argument on your own, or are you just going to post a link to a single website? Because a single poll does not prove you right. How about you actually take a firm stance on this and directly talk about why YOU think it's true. FFS, the comments who say it has do everything from saying women shouldn't have jobs to slut shamming. These are people with hang ups over women not having to take their shit.

And your line of reasoning is an utter non-sequitur. There's nothing to respond to.

You, just like the other person I quoted, seem to be projecting your own anger on my opinions. You accuse me of not giving you things to respond to, but here you are entering a discussion with an animosity that is based on what you fear my opinions are. You'd do well to look in the mirror sometime.

You're being very hypocritical right now. A few posts ago you chastised someone for not engaging in conversation, and now you're doing the same thing. I'm not going to apologize for finding it frustrating. Also you posted a link that talked about how women were sluts now and should only be housewives. You do that that and then refuse to give your own opinion (Although while still stating that it would be for the best if the clock turned back.) What the hell did you think I was going to take away from that?

Chewster:

Bars or internet dating. Internet dating is 99% fake women and spam trying to sell cam sites, so that's out.

I don't think you've ever actually made any serious attempt at Internet dating because it can be shit but not for that reason. Or rather, for more reasons other than that (I don't recall any camgirls on OK Cupid, but I haven't used it in a while).

I used to get lots of camgirls on OKCupid, nowadays it seems like ads for other internet dating sites are more common. Either way for most guys ads are going to be a large majority of messages you get where you didn't start the conversation.

Chewster:

I try to initiate romantic contact with women, and get treated as badly as is socially acceptable for any human to treat another human being without sparking social retribution.

What kind of histrionic nonsense is this? What bars have you been going to?

I don't think I've ever read anything quite so ridiculous.

I mean, most of what he's written is generally stuff that could happen, but it's really an extremely pessimistic view of dating women that are terrible people. Either he's had the absolute worst luck with women, or he's heard a lot of guy's stories of their individual worst experiences with women and taken it as an average rather than a terribly comprehensive view of the bottom.

@9tailedflame: Seriously man, your view here is like someone pointing out that literally almost everything you could do in a day, including just rising from bed, is capable of being lethal in the right (if terribly rare) circumstances. You've got a very comprehensive view of the worst case scenarios, you just need to realize that it's the worst case, not the average. Also, fuck media for getting an idea of how romantic and sexual interactions are "supposed" to work, media depictions are poison (in general, weirdly I expect a lot of people to agree with me about this who also believe that toy advertising keeps women out of STEM).

Chewster:

The way men looking for relations with women are treated is so fucked up in American society. There's fake numbers for radio shows to humiliate men just looking for human contact, there's the "is this guy bugging you" guys, to add the threat of physical violence to the mix,

No idea what you're on about with the radio shows but never once in the fifteen or so years of my life going to bars have I ever encountered anyone like that. If you're not being a creepy asshole, there is no reason for anyone to do that.

You've never had someone give you a fake phone number? I haven't either (to be fair, these days usually one gives their number and the other immediately texts), but I've known a few guys that has happened to.

Chewster:

more so anyway than a woman attacking me for daring to talk to her, aka the cheeky slap, along with just nasty women who think it's funny to put down and hurt men looking for human connection.

What the fuck bars are you going to where it's OK for people to assault one another?

It's cute that you read a woman hitting a man (especially a single open handed strike) as assault. Most people won't in the moment, unless it's pretty serious. Then they typically just assume it's his own fault.

Chewster:

So assuming that i get through this sea of financial, emotional, and potentially physical misery, and i find someone who seems decent and isn't horrible to me, then there's dating, which involves me prostrating myself to keep her happy, slowly dissolving away anything in my life that made me happy to become a better personal manservant, which is what is expected of me by society as a boyfriend.

Maybe if you're dating a shitty person.

Most of what he wrote assumes he'd be dating exclusively really shitty people.

Chewster:

If you're dating a normal person, chances are they'll be fine splitting the bill at dinner.

...and some percentage of those are doing it as a test -- they offer to split the bill but will look down on it if you accept (especially on the first date). Because shitty people play shitty games like this. Actually have some experience with this specific example.

Also, the more traditionalist ladies in your area are, the less likely they are to accept sharing the costs of dating in any sense. My last serious gf and I alternated who paid because it was simpler than splitting bills, but she was unusual in that respect for the area.

Chewster:

Find someone not shitty and this will never be an issue.

This is the answer to most dating problems. It's also one of the hardest things to actually solve, because you usually don't know until it's too late.

Chewster:

Oh, and of course if i'm in a relationship, i can't masturbate to porn, because as a boyfreind, my sexuality is expected to be owned by my girlfriend, who from what i've heard, will generally just lock it in a box, throw it in the closet, and forget about it, so that's real fucking neato.

Dude, you gotta stop with this. You've never had a relationship yet the worst case scenario is definitely going to happen? Lighten the fuck up.

Lightening the fuck up would certainly do him some good.

Chewster:

Then of course, there's the rare sex itself, where consent is pretty much impossible to determine without fucking the whole thing up, because civility is apparently a huge turn off, and despite rape rightly universally hated, it's also apparently necessary to be aggressive in order to turn women on, which for a passive person like myself, who would much rather sift through suitors myself rather than go out and find someone, is a bizarre and fucked up world of half-consents and mood reading that scares and confuses me.

Consent is actually pretty easy for most people, I think. If you don't know if someone wants to have sex with you or not, then probably just ask. I usually make a point of say to someone new I don't want to make them uncomfortable so just speak up if I do something they're not feeling. Seems to have worked so far.

He's got a tiny point with part of that. There are a lot of women who are responsive to men being aggressive and there's a fine line there. Unfortunately, actually sorting out and establishing boundaries so that nobody oversteps a line tends also to be a huge turn-off for those same women so the end result is that you need to sort that shit out *well* before anyone is taking anyone's clothes off so that you can do the kind of spontaneous aggression that she's into without crossing any serious lines. Again, personal experience.

Speaking of aggression, could you ladies realize that if you're into your guy biting you that there is no point where we can bite as hard as you'd like but where it's also not going to leave a mark? It's only fair to demand one of those things.

Chewster:

If it were up to me, people would just walk up to each other and go "you want to fuck?" and the person would go "yes" or "no" and that would be that. I hate and am frustrated by the stupid bullshit social games required for courtship in western society. Even assuming most women are well-meaning and out for the same reason i am, the fact that they hold that proverbial gun just adds such a level of stress to the whole thing.

Except nobody holds any gun to anyone's head. The fact that you view sex and dating and relationships in such adversarial terms is like, deeply fucked up man.

Eh, the metaphorical gun is always there, even if few recognize that they have it and even fewer would actually use it.

Yeah, only profoundly shitty people ever would, but the profoundly shitty get a disproportionate amount of attention for said shittiness.

9tailedflame:

So why would i even start? Why would i try to establish a romantic relationship, or a family? What exactly is there to be gained? From my admittedly inexperienced point of view, it seems like the better option is to just chill at home playing video games, watching tv, and masturbating in a small, affordable apartment with lots of free time and disposable income. Is that not the objectively better way to live life? Am i missing something here?

What you described is not a good relationship. When you have a good relationship, it's basically everything that you enjoy doing, but there's someone there to enjoy it with you (or at least accepting of the fact that you enjoy these things). There's very little "work" involved, there's "effort", but it's out of genuine care for the well being of another (that goes for all partners involved).

Unfortunately, finding a good relationship requires a certain amount of vulnerability and willingness to trust others. Getting burned is a risk that must be taken and if you don't think the prospect of having a good relationship is worth the risk, that's your prerogative. If you do want a life partner though, it would be a good start to re-evaluate what you think constitutes all relationships, because going into a first date with your current outlook will be counter productive at best.

Eclipse Dragon:

9tailedflame:

So why would i even start? Why would i try to establish a romantic relationship, or a family? What exactly is there to be gained? From my admittedly inexperienced point of view, it seems like the better option is to just chill at home playing video games, watching tv, and masturbating in a small, affordable apartment with lots of free time and disposable income. Is that not the objectively better way to live life? Am i missing something here?

What you described is not a good relationship. When you have a good relationship, it's basically everything that you enjoy doing, but there's someone there to enjoy it with you (or at least accepting of the fact that you enjoy these things). There's very little "work" involved, there's "effort", but it's out of genuine care for the well being of another (that goes for all partners involved).

Unfortunately, finding a good relationship requires a certain amount of vulnerability and willingness to trust others. Getting burned is a risk that must be taken and if you don't think the prospect of having a good relationship is worth the risk, that's your prerogative. If you do want a life partner though, it would be a good start to re-evaluate what you think constitutes all relationships, because going into a first date with your current outlook will be counter productive at best.

Aaaand that's the nicest way I've seen it put in this thread so far.

Schadrach:
I used to get lots of camgirls on OKCupid, nowadays it seems like ads for other internet dating sites are more common. Either way for most guys ads are going to be a large majority of messages you get where you didn't start the conversation.

My (admittedly somewhat limited) experience was sort of the opposite. Women tend to get inundated with a lot of messages from guys casting a wide net with bland DMs who haven't actually read any of the profiles and so the genuine guys end up getting drown out in a sea of mediocrity (and sometimes dick pics). The occasional negative reactions the aforementioned guys tend to have when ignored don't help much.

It's basically shit for everyone.

That being said, there has been a lot of that kind of spam popping up on my Instagram lately. And I have known a few people who met the love of their lives online. Just gotta be patient and honest, I suppose.

Schadrach:
You've never had someone give you a fake phone number? I haven't either (to be fair, these days usually one gives their number and the other immediately texts), but I've known a few guys that has happened to.

I don't think I've ever been given a fake number but then again, I don't go to pubs or bars with the intention of getting digits. Guys who brag about that are generally the most dull humans on Earth. If that is all you're focused on, you're probably not that interesting. And these days, like you said, it's basically impossible to give fake numbers now and it seems like younger people are more willing. I have probably two dozen people in my Kakao that I don't even remember meeting. Apparently we were friends enough to exchange numbers though.

I wasn't aware that giving out fake numbers had become a radio thing though.

Schadrach:
It's cute that you read a woman hitting a man (especially a single open handed strike) as assault. Most people won't in the moment, unless it's pretty serious. Then they typically just assume it's his own fault.

Maybe assault was a bit strong but I still have yet to see that kind of behavior put up with in bars. The only incident that comes to mind was when I once drunkenly asked an ex to slap me because I'd never been slapped before and it seemed like something everyone should experience once. It wasn't pleasant, so don't slap people.

Besides, even if a woman did do that, if there was no actual physical harm done, who the fuck cares? So your ego is hurt. Big deal. It's not nice but if someone were willing to do that to someone else for innocuous behavior, chances are you don't want them to be a part of your life anyway.

Schadrach:
...and some percentage of those are doing it as a test -- they offer to split the bill but will look down on it if you accept (especially on the first date). Because shitty people play shitty games like this. Actually have some experience with this specific example.

Also, the more traditionalist ladies in your area are, the less likely they are to accept sharing the costs of dating in any sense. My last serious gf and I alternated who paid because it was simpler than splitting bills, but she was unusual in that respect for the area.

I suppose but I live in a country where gender roles are pretty traditional and many women still seem all right with splitting the bill most of the time. If you go out on a date with a woman (or anyone, really) and they expect you to pay the whole thing, I'd take that as a pretty big red flag, especially if it's a first date and you're not even to the point of negotiating relationship roles.

The only reason I really insist on paying isn't because of some sense of chivalry but mostly because I don't really value money that much and I'd rather see that everyone is having a good time. I'm usually the first to offer to buy the first round.

Schadrach:
He's got a tiny point with part of that. There are a lot of women who are responsive to men being aggressive and there's a fine line there. Unfortunately, actually sorting out and establishing boundaries so that nobody oversteps a line tends also to be a huge turn-off for those same women so the end result is that you need to sort that shit out *well* before anyone is taking anyone's clothes off so that you can do the kind of spontaneous aggression that she's into without crossing any serious lines. Again, personal experience.

Speaking of aggression, could you ladies realize that if you're into your guy biting you that there is no point where we can bite as hard as you'd like but where it's also not going to leave a mark? It's only fair to demand one of those things.

I feel like dating and sex are less complicated than people make out to be. I mean, I get that if you're an introvert, it can be hard to read social cues and know when to be aggressive and whatnot but learning to deal with this and to know what works and what is inappropriate and when is just a part of being an adult. I've had women act incredibly aggressively in one night stands (I was the bitee on one occasion that I recall) and others that were a bit more reserved, and so you play it by ear and just be as communicative as possible. If that's a turn off for them, tough luck because I have no desire to ruin someone's life.

And yeah, I would hope that any partner who is into heavy aggression (whatever that entails) is forward about it. If not, you can end up in situations like this.

Incidentally, his reaction is basically what I would have done too. If someone is giving you signals to stop, then stop. Just be aware of what you're doing. It shouldn't be that complicated.

Schadrach:
Eh, the metaphorical gun is always there, even if few recognize that they have it and even fewer would actually use it.

Yeah, only profoundly shitty people ever would, but the profoundly shitty get a disproportionate amount of attention for said shittiness.

That seems like a rather pessimistically fatalistic view of the world. I mean, we're all just on borrowed time anyway, so why bother doing anything?

I can't imagine what it's like to live like that.

erttheking:
These are people with hang ups over women not having to take their shit..

Quite literally. Every single one of their arguments basically falls back to women not having to stay in bad marriages as glorified maids and nannys any more.

In their mind, any guy should be able to walk up to a woman, marry her, and then treat her like a caretaker until they die.

If there's a problem with today's society it's that men have to actually try now. And clearly some aren't making the cut

undeadsuitor:
Snip

"Women want yachts and Ferraris and gold-plated toilets!"

Well, who doesn't? Apart from the toilet. More seriously, people in the west tend to be material. If the dude is materialistic to a fault, how can he possibly expect to attract someone who isn't also materialistic to a fault?

Alternatively, what he's doing is going for extreme hyperbole over her desire to be something more than his wife.

Chewster:

Schadrach:
...and some percentage of those are doing it as a test -- they offer to split the bill but will look down on it if you accept (especially on the first date). Because shitty people play shitty games like this. Actually have some experience with this specific example.

Also, the more traditionalist ladies in your area are, the less likely they are to accept sharing the costs of dating in any sense. My last serious gf and I alternated who paid because it was simpler than splitting bills, but she was unusual in that respect for the area.

I suppose but I live in a country where gender roles are pretty traditional and many women still seem all right with splitting the bill most of the time. If you go out on a date with a woman (or anyone, really) and they expect you to pay the whole thing, I'd take that as a pretty big red flag, especially if it's a first date and you're not even to the point of negotiating relationship roles.

The only reason I really insist on paying isn't because of some sense of chivalry but mostly because I don't really value money that much and I'd rather see that everyone is having a good time. I'm usually the first to offer to buy the first round.

The basic rule of asking someone to join you in an outing is whoever asks the other person to join them is who pays (regardless of it is just friends or a romantic interest). If the female asks, she pays for her planned activities, if the male asks he pays for his planned activities. If the male asks her over to his place for dinner, that means he is cooking, and if the female asks the male over to her place that means she is cooking. Regardless of the planned events, concert, movies, amusement park, dinner.. it doesn't matter. Whoever does the asking ALSO pays for the event, otherwise, instead of asking someone to join you for whatever it is you would like to enjoy, you are imposing a financial burden upon them and that should be seen as rude. If they are unable to pay for the person they should let that be known at the time of asking rather than let them enjoy whatever event and then find out they may or may not be able to afford such an outing. The reality is many people have different financial situations and may not be able to afford such an outing at the time and it is rude to impose that upon them rather than it being a genuine invitation to spend time with the person.

I have had friends from many different backgrounds and in many different financial situations and I would would never think of asking them somewhere only to impose upon them a financial obligation they may or may not have been prepared for. I would not do this to friends or dates and see that as terribly rude. The ONLY time I have offered to split a bill with a guy who asked me out was when I was clearly not interested in him and did not want to give him the idea that since he paid for dinner that I was obligated to him in any way, which he came across as that type of person once I got to know him better during dinner. If a girl offers to split the bill, it very well may be a sign that she is not interested in the guy.

It is odd you would describe an expected obligation of an invitation as a red flag. It would be stranger if people actually expected their guests to pay for accepting an invitation. That is strange to say the least. I also find the idea of " negotiating roles" as a strange concept as there has never been any need to negotiate roles or anything else weird like that in any relationship I have ever had. That seems to be overthinking the situation rather than just have both parties do whatever needs to be done when it needs to be done as happens in most relationships.

Lil devils x:

Chewster:

Schadrach:
...and some percentage of those are doing it as a test -- they offer to split the bill but will look down on it if you accept (especially on the first date). Because shitty people play shitty games like this. Actually have some experience with this specific example.

Also, the more traditionalist ladies in your area are, the less likely they are to accept sharing the costs of dating in any sense. My last serious gf and I alternated who paid because it was simpler than splitting bills, but she was unusual in that respect for the area.

I suppose but I live in a country where gender roles are pretty traditional and many women still seem all right with splitting the bill most of the time. If you go out on a date with a woman (or anyone, really) and they expect you to pay the whole thing, I'd take that as a pretty big red flag, especially if it's a first date and you're not even to the point of negotiating relationship roles.

The only reason I really insist on paying isn't because of some sense of chivalry but mostly because I don't really value money that much and I'd rather see that everyone is having a good time. I'm usually the first to offer to buy the first round.

The basic rule of asking someone to join you in an outing is whoever asks the other person to join them is who pays (regardless of it is just friends or a romantic interest). If the female asks, she pays for her planned activities, if the male asks he pays for his planned activities. If the male asks her over to his place for dinner, that means he is cooking, and if the female asks the male over to her place that means she is cooking. Regardless of the planned events, concert, movies, amusement park, dinner.. it doesn't matter. Whoever does the asking ALSO pays for the event, otherwise, instead of asking someone to join you for whatever it is you would like to enjoy, you are imposing a financial burden upon them and that should be seen as rude. If they are unable to pay for the person they should let that be known at the time of asking rather than let them enjoy whatever event and then find out they may or may not be able to afford such an outing. The reality is many people have different financial situations and may not be able to afford such an outing at the time and it is rude to impose that upon them rather than it being a genuine invitation to spend time with the person.

I have had friends from many different backgrounds and in many different financial situations and I would would never think of asking them somewhere only to impose upon them a financial obligation they may or may not have been prepared for. I would not do this to friends or dates and see that as terribly rude. The ONLY time I have offered to split a bill with a guy who asked me out was when I was clearly not interested in him and did not want to give him the idea that since he paid for dinner that I was obligated to him in any way, which he came across as that type of person once I got to know him better during dinner. If a girl offers to split the bill, it very well may be a sign that she is not interested in the guy.

It is odd you would describe an expected obligation of an invitation as a red flag. It would be stranger if people actually expected their guests to pay for accepting an invitation. That is strange to say the least. I also find the idea of " negotiating roles" as a strange concept as there has never been any need to negotiate roles or anything else weird like that in any relationship I have ever had. That seems to be overthinking the situation rather than just have both parties do whatever needs to be done when it needs to be done as happens in most relationships.

Just want to throw it out there that, when it comes to friends at the very least, my group has always gone by the splitting the bill approach...at least when it comes to eating out. There's a pizza place near my house that we pretty much always go to when my friends come over, and we have a tendency to split the bill. The few times I payed for the meal entirely, the friend I was covering insisted on paying me back. Heck, even when I just grabbed fast food with a co-worker the first time, we split the bill. Though the person who plays host does tend to buy snack food/bake, so even then you're onto something, and I would consider taking a different approach if it was a date. Granted I'd probably ask how she would want to handle the bill regardless of which one of us brought it up, if only because I'm a bit of a Nervous Nelly when it comes to that.

Lil devils x:
*snip*

Pretty much this. There's a line between "would you like you go out with me?" and "I'm going to get a bite, care to join?" Even then, a friendly, up-front, "I'm running short, can you get yourself?" for the second isn't a bad question.

I'm thinking that this guy's priorities are effected by social mores but they are what they are: he is now what he is based on all inputes including environment and biology...

Gorfias:
Snip

Is that a parody of the song by Ed Sheeran? The title is really bad advice. She's crazy, she's your ex. Do not do it!

Gorfias:
I'm thinking that this guy's priorities are effected by social mores but they are what they are: he is now what he is based on all inputes including environment and biology...

That is equally true of everyone else who has ever lived.

Chewster:

Schadrach:
I used to get lots of camgirls on OKCupid, nowadays it seems like ads for other internet dating sites are more common. Either way for most guys ads are going to be a large majority of messages you get where you didn't start the conversation.

My (admittedly somewhat limited) experience was sort of the opposite. Women tend to get inundated with a lot of messages from guys casting a wide net with bland DMs who haven't actually read any of the profiles and so the genuine guys end up getting drown out in a sea of mediocrity (and sometimes dick pics). The occasional negative reactions the aforementioned guys tend to have when ignored don't help much.

It's a chicken and egg problem, because guys who cast a wide net do so because response rates are so low, but the guys doing that are a big part of why they're that low.

Out of the last 20 messages on OKC I received, 2 were responses from women I had originally contacted, 7 were the same camgirl spam from various accounts, one was a different camgirl spam (this one started with a question that sounded like something a legit account might ask, and then advertised if you responded), and the rest were ads for a different dating site.

Chewster:

Schadrach:
Eh, the metaphorical gun is always there, even if few recognize that they have it and even fewer would actually use it.

Yeah, only profoundly shitty people ever would, but the profoundly shitty get a disproportionate amount of attention for said shittiness.

That seems like a rather pessimistically fatalistic view of the world. I mean, we're all just on borrowed time anyway, so why bother doing anything?

I can't imagine what it's like to live like that.

It's only that if you want to assume the average case is anywhere near the worst case. I mean the guy this whole conversation started from essentially suffers from mean world syndrome with respect to women and sex.

Long story short -- some people are shitty. Women are people too, therefore some women are shitty, and if you are a straight man they have unique abilities to ruin your day in ways others simply can't, often with social or institutional support. Most people (by a large margin) are not shitty. Accordingly, it makes no sense to assume the the worst case, but it does make sense to watch out for red flags.

The last time there was a red flag dangling brightly in front of me I had gone on one date with a woman, it had gone lukewarm but OK, and she called her ex and told him we were engaged.

altnameJag:

Lil devils x:
*snip*

Pretty much this. There's a line between "would you like you go out with me?" and "I'm going to get a bite, care to join?" Even then, a friendly, up-front, "I'm running short, can you get yourself?" for the second isn't a bad question.

I think it is important that people understand who will be paying at the time of asking because for some, they may have to decline if they cannot afford to do so. It is better for them to decline than receive the check and not be able to pay for it, or to pay for it but then not be able to pay for their books for school or make their rent that month. People often take for granted that although their financial situation may allow for an outing, not everyone can afford to do so at the time of the asking. They may be able to return the favor later, but being put on the spot may be something they were not expecting. The best way I see to avoid them being put on the spot and forced to decline due to financial strain is to just go by the rule that if I make the plans, I also am planning on paying for it. Often those with financial strain themselves can invite someone over for dinner or a picnic or any number of low cost activities to spend time with someone if they are interested in doing so as well, it is just a matter of planning.


Although I am sure there are some females comfortable with using an online dating site, as a female, I could never see myself doing so. From my perspective, It just comes across as creepy and rather desperate. I am hit on in person everywhere I go as it is, whether it is to the grocery store or the post office, the idea of all these guys just judging whether or not they want to date someone by a picture/ video and whatever BS they put with it is just off putting to me. I would rather be interacting with someone in person so you can get a better idea of if your chemistry is compatible and be able to better read body language. I am sure the fact that it is an online dating site would greatly limit it to only personality types that are willing to use such a site and drastically reduce the options available.

PainInTheAssInternet:

undeadsuitor:
Snip

"Women want yachts and Ferraris and gold-plated toilets!"

Well, who doesn't? Apart from the toilet. More seriously, people in the west tend to be material. If the dude is materialistic to a fault, how can he possibly expect to attract someone who isn't also materialistic to a fault?

Alternatively, what he's doing is going for extreme hyperbole over her desire to be something more than his wife.

My favorite part is where he says feminism causes men to become abusive, needy, and controlling

Yet THE BENEFITS he lists as a "pre feminism" life is just ways men were abusive needy and controlling???

Like he literally just said it's a bad thing that women don't give up all their power to their husbands, That's controlling? Complaining that women want to lead a fulfilled happy life instead of serving her husband? Needy.

Men aren't waylayed by feminism, they're just called out on their negative qualities

Gorfias:

1. Because there is a cultural/social/education/religious/political elite that makes such choices the rest of us have to live with. I doubt the desire to drug rambunctious school age boys came from the rank and file.

Actually, it is. ADHD overdiagnosis in boys overwhelmingly starts with the parents and sometimes the teachers, although the teachers are starting to wise up. Doctors and child psychiatrists are begging parents and teachers to be more careful about deciding to medicate.

But you could find all sorts of statistical disparities, including who takes more time off from work to rear children. That has an impact.

The fact that something is generally true in the current contextr does not automatically imply that it is inevitable and part of some inflexible natural order.

Big part of why I oppose ERA. ERA would have let courts decide what those injustices are.

Isn't the entire purpose of courts to decide whether something is just?

[quote]
Would it be a freer, more just society if men were rounded up and put into death camps? Their sperm harvested for procreation and with new technology, maybe not even that? I don?t think so.

Okay, I understand that women's rights as a subjective is kind of emotional and that it forces us to ask difficult questions about society, but let's try to keep our feet on the ground. I don't think that it's reasonable to assume that this is a realistic scenario, nor is there anyone advocating for it.

Actually, that's wrong, I can think of someone who is. It's the creepy white nationalist kind of guys who are always complaining about how women having reproductive freedom and individual rights is eroding society by reducing the birth rates and depleting the pure stock.

So yeah, the people who seriously believe in taking away reproductive rights and reducing half the population to mere breeding stock aren't female radical feminists, they're male white nationalists.

Lil devils x:
The basic rule of asking someone to join you in an outing is whoever asks the other person to join them is who pays (regardless of it is just friends or a romantic interest). If the female asks, she pays for her planned activities, if the male asks he pays for his planned activities. If the male asks her over to his place for dinner, that means he is cooking, and if the female asks the male over to her place that means she is cooking. Regardless of the planned events, concert, movies, amusement park, dinner.. it doesn't matter. Whoever does the asking ALSO pays for the event, otherwise, instead of asking someone to join you for whatever it is you would like to enjoy, you are imposing a financial burden upon them and that should be seen as rude. If they are unable to pay for the person they should let that be known at the time of asking rather than let them enjoy whatever event and then find out they may or may not be able to afford such an outing. The reality is many people have different financial situations and may not be able to afford such an outing at the time and it is rude to impose that upon them rather than it being a genuine invitation to spend time with the person.

I have had friends from many different backgrounds and in many different financial situations and I would would never think of asking them somewhere only to impose upon them a financial obligation they may or may not have been prepared for. I would not do this to friends or dates and see that as terribly rude. The ONLY time I have offered to split a bill with a guy who asked me out was when I was clearly not interested in him and did not want to give him the idea that since he paid for dinner that I was obligated to him in any way, which he came across as that type of person once I got to know him better during dinner. If a girl offers to split the bill, it very well may be a sign that she is not interested in the guy.

It is odd you would describe an expected obligation of an invitation as a red flag. It would be stranger if people actually expected their guests to pay for accepting an invitation. That is strange to say the least. I also find the idea of " negotiating roles" as a strange concept as there has never been any need to negotiate roles or anything else weird like that in any relationship I have ever had. That seems to be overthinking the situation rather than just have both parties do whatever needs to be done when it needs to be done as happens in most relationships.

Well, I was referring to going on a romantic date. If I, as a straight guy, were on a date with a woman and she automatically expected me to pay for everything, that's going to signal to me she potentially subscribes to traditional gender roles which is not something I'm really interested in being a part of. I'd probably still feel her out and if it went well, maybe go on another date but it's just generally something I watch out for.

And I don't mean negotiating necessarily in a literal sense but in every relationship, people take on different roles depending on the situation and their partner's abilities and financial situation and the like. My current girlfriend, for example, doesn't make as much as me so I don't mind paying for dinner more often or lending her money if she needs it, not because the guy should but just because I don't give a damn about money and because I care about her. What you've described, "doing what needs to be done" is basically the same idea, though maybe less explicit.

And if I ask my friends if they want to go to the bar or if they invite me out to some event or something, it's always expected that you would just pay for yourself unless stated otherwise. Why wouldn't you? We're all adults. If I didn't want to spend money on whatever it was I was invited to, I'd politely decline and on the few occasions that's happened, friends were understanding.

Obviously being invited over for dinner is a bit different but even then, I'd probably ask if there was anything I could bring and still bring a bottle of wine at least because that's just general courtesy.

Different strokes, though.

renegade7:
snip

This is the sort of thing I worry about with courts:

http://www.trueactivist.com/u-s-federal-court-rules-women-can-publicly-bare-breasts-in-this-colorado-town/

Guess what? Even if I believe we should free the nipple, I also believe in representative government. We, as a society, can decide this sort of thing without lawlessness and abuse of power. I really do not want to hear from some judge about what s/he thinks is right or fair as you suggest.

ITMT: It's the end of the world.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-more-americans-18-34-now-live-parents-spouse

Chewster:

Lil devils x:
The basic rule of asking someone to join you in an outing is whoever asks the other person to join them is who pays (regardless of it is just friends or a romantic interest). If the female asks, she pays for her planned activities, if the male asks he pays for his planned activities. If the male asks her over to his place for dinner, that means he is cooking, and if the female asks the male over to her place that means she is cooking. Regardless of the planned events, concert, movies, amusement park, dinner.. it doesn't matter. Whoever does the asking ALSO pays for the event, otherwise, instead of asking someone to join you for whatever it is you would like to enjoy, you are imposing a financial burden upon them and that should be seen as rude. If they are unable to pay for the person they should let that be known at the time of asking rather than let them enjoy whatever event and then find out they may or may not be able to afford such an outing. The reality is many people have different financial situations and may not be able to afford such an outing at the time and it is rude to impose that upon them rather than it being a genuine invitation to spend time with the person.

I have had friends from many different backgrounds and in many different financial situations and I would would never think of asking them somewhere only to impose upon them a financial obligation they may or may not have been prepared for. I would not do this to friends or dates and see that as terribly rude. The ONLY time I have offered to split a bill with a guy who asked me out was when I was clearly not interested in him and did not want to give him the idea that since he paid for dinner that I was obligated to him in any way, which he came across as that type of person once I got to know him better during dinner. If a girl offers to split the bill, it very well may be a sign that she is not interested in the guy.

It is odd you would describe an expected obligation of an invitation as a red flag. It would be stranger if people actually expected their guests to pay for accepting an invitation. That is strange to say the least. I also find the idea of " negotiating roles" as a strange concept as there has never been any need to negotiate roles or anything else weird like that in any relationship I have ever had. That seems to be overthinking the situation rather than just have both parties do whatever needs to be done when it needs to be done as happens in most relationships.

Well, I was referring to going on a romantic date. If I, as a straight guy, were on a date with a woman and she automatically expected me to pay for everything, that's going to signal to me she potentially subscribes to traditional gender roles which is not something I'm really interested in being a part of. I'd probably still feel her out and if it went well, maybe go on another date but it's just generally something I watch out for.

And I don't mean negotiating necessarily in a literal sense but in every relationship, people take on different roles depending on the situation and their partner's abilities and financial situation and the like. My current girlfriend, for example, doesn't make as much as me so I don't mind paying for dinner more often or lending her money if she needs it, not because the guy should but just because I don't give a damn about money and because I care about her. What you've described, "doing what needs to be done" is basically the same idea, though maybe less explicit.

And if I ask my friends if they want to go to the bar or if they invite me out to some event or something, it's always expected that you would just pay for yourself unless stated otherwise. Why wouldn't you? We're all adults. If I didn't want to spend money on whatever it was I was invited to, I'd politely decline and on the few occasions that's happened, friends were understanding.

Obviously being invited over for dinner is a bit different but even then, I'd probably ask if there was anything I could bring and still bring a bottle of wine at least because that's just general courtesy.

Different strokes, though.

Considering I live in an extremely wealthy region, I would not expect all of my friends to be prepared for the same costs involved with say "going out for a meal" in many of the restaurants here vs some of the more affordable areas, and I surely would not expect my friends still in college to be able to afford such things, as I do remember being a broke college student myself so I am always prepared to pay for whatever it is I planned so they would not be put in a position to have to decline or be embarrassed due to inability to afford such things. Of Course there have been times we made arrangements as a group where each couple had their own checks, but that is decided as a group ahead of time and no one is put on the spot at the time of the event itself. Though when I rented 6 cabins with volleyball tourneys, full bar and jet skis I did not expect my guests to be financially burdened due to me wanting to have a fun weekend with friends so of course I paid for that as well. I have never felt my friends owed me anything though when something is my idea, it is also my treat.

As for going to clubs/ bars, I rarely have had to pay for anything ever, not because I am not willing to, but because I usually have more drinks sent to me than I could possibly drink so I tell the staff to thank them and just write it down and send me my drinks as usual and anything I do not drink by the end of the night goes to their tip. I have never paid a cover charge, and usually have enough drinks bought for me it covers my drinks as well as for those accompanying me. Sometimes guys get all uptight about other guys sending drinks, but for the most part they just go along with it and are not bothered, instead they find it funny.

I think in a relationship people just do for each other because they care for them, not due to any sense of role or duty, but because they love the person and want to work together as a team rather than worry about petty things like who does what.

Lil devils x:

Considering I live in an extremely wealthy region, I would not expect all of my friends to be prepared for the same costs involved with say "going out for a meal" in many of the restaurants here vs some of the more affordable areas, and I surely would not expect my friends still in college to be able to afford such things, as I do remember being a broke college student myself so I am always prepared to pay for whatever it is I planned so they would not be put in a position to have to decline or be embarrassed due to inability to afford such things. Of Course there have been times we made arrangements as a group where each couple had their own checks, but that is decided as a group ahead of time and no one is put on the spot at the time of the event itself. Though when I rented 6 cabins with volleyball tourneys, full bar and jet skis I did not expect my guests to be financially burdened due to me wanting to have a fun weekend with friends so of course I paid for that as well. I have never felt my friends owed me anything though when something is my idea, it is also my treat.

See, you're also neglecting to point out that not everyone considers that fun.

I hate gauche displays of money. If people are going to spend ridiculous volumes of money on me, part of me is screaming; "Can you just give me the cash instead? AGL stock has room for continued growth and I have to wait till ex-div to buy more as it is." I'm independently wealthy, but at best it's like an lower middle class lifestyle thatit pays for. I'm okay with that, allows me to concentrate on my real love... academia. Still my goal of have 7+ degrees.

IO want to be a partof the fleeting tradition of the Renaissance type ... the polymath ...

But I still hate gauche displays of money. The way I see it, if you're flashing so much money and you're still working for other people ... you're a fool.

Massive turn off for me. I see people like that buying a new car every two years. But do you know what Iconsider sexy? Someone who knows howto repair a motorcycle and someone I can go riding with. Because I know regardless of what happes, we can have a self-sufficient exploration of the deserts of Australia. Someone willing to go on a cheap as chips hiking tour of Thailand with me over a month. Someone who doesn't put themselves in debt buying a nice property in Sydney, and instead uses that money to start a new business and work for themselves.

Call it stereotypiclly Aussie, but I like gamblers.

Keep your cabins, I managed to survive on bugs the last time I hitchhiked through SE Asia. And I want someone streetsmart enough that their money hasn't made them soft and wanting in spirit.

I've been around enough rich people to know that they don't live in this world, and that's a shame because this world is so fucking incredible if you're willing to get dirty and risk life and limb to see it. Places where you can see coups unfold. Dictators rise to power. Ancient structures carved by hand into living rock, and multibillion year old extinct volcanoes, and 4 month long monsoons.... where in a day of hard rain the deserts bursts to life underneath your boots, swarming and biting... and where blistering sandy plains are transformed into crocodile filled playgrounds of waist deep waterthe size of Arizona.

You give me someone willing to experience that with me. Then it's romantic. And you don't needa lot of money to do that sort of stuff. For the price of those four cabins and jetskis you can explore Borneo with a backpack and enough provisions.

So gauche displays of money is a serious put offfor me. Call it prejudiced (because it is) ... but someone flashing money on a cabin and jetskis for me just comes of as boorish and disinteresting. They have lived too well to be interesting.

Gorfias:

renegade7:
snip

This is the sort of thing I worry about with courts:

http://www.trueactivist.com/u-s-federal-court-rules-women-can-publicly-bare-breasts-in-this-colorado-town/

Why does that bother you? So women can go topless outside. I just don't see a scenario in which that actually leads to any harm coming to society.

Guess what? Even if I believe we should free the nipple, I also believe in representative government. We, as a society, can decide this sort of thing without lawlessness and abuse of power. I really do not want to hear from some judge about what s/he thinks is right or fair as you suggest.

This paragraph is self-contradictory. A judge is an elected official, or at least is appointed by elected officials, whose job is to interpret laws that were created by elected officials or make a judgment (hence why the job is called "judge") that a law is unjust. We, as a society did decide on this by putting that person on that judicial bench to represent the electorate in the court and electing representatives to make the laws that he's judging on. This isn't lawlessness or abuse of power, it's the system functioning exactly as it should.

ITMT: It's the end of the world.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-more-americans-18-34-now-live-parents-spouse

How exactly is that the end of the world? Sounds like a good thing: people are waiting until they're in a good place in terms of their finances and careers before making major life commitments, or at the very least exercising their freedom to decide what kind of lives they want. Again: sounds like the system functioning exactly as it should.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
So gauche displays of money is a serious put offfor me. Call it prejudiced (because it is) ... but someone flashing money on a cabin and jetskis for me just comes of as boorish and disinteresting. They have lived too well to be interesting.

I can understand that POV but personally, being excessively cheap is just as bad IMHO. There is a type of ex-pat that sweeps through the community now and then who end up being some of the cheapest fucks you'll ever meet. Beer in Asia is cheap as hell and yet you can't afford a tall boy for $2.50 even though you suggested we go to the shop for some cans? Get the hell out of here. I don't mind spotting someone once in a while but after the second time or third time, once it becomes apparent that you're perpetually broke, my patience is gone. I'm a generous guy, but we all make roughly the same and all get paid around the same time. Go try that garbage with someone else. Nine times out of ten, once you stop paying, they stop texting and try to find someone else to sponsor their bad habits. I don't care about money that much but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to take care of themselves most of the time.

Similarly, this summer I was back in Canada visiting friends. I brought a twelve pack over to a friend's apartment and burned through maybe seven or eight of them. The next morning, my friend suggested I take the rest home. I refused. To me, that's also gauche. If I bring booze or food or something over to a friend's place, they can keep the leftovers as payment for hosting me.

I guess what I'm saying is that garish displays of affluence are obnoxious but so too are those who are excessively cheap all the time.

I like your enthusiasm for the world, by the way. Too many friends stateside seem to have lost that enthusiasm after graduation, which was made very apparent this summer while I was visiting. It's all work, work, work and seemingly not much to show for it. I could never live that way, I don't think.

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Lil devils x:

Considering I live in an extremely wealthy region, I would not expect all of my friends to be prepared for the same costs involved with say "going out for a meal" in many of the restaurants here vs some of the more affordable areas, and I surely would not expect my friends still in college to be able to afford such things, as I do remember being a broke college student myself so I am always prepared to pay for whatever it is I planned so they would not be put in a position to have to decline or be embarrassed due to inability to afford such things. Of Course there have been times we made arrangements as a group where each couple had their own checks, but that is decided as a group ahead of time and no one is put on the spot at the time of the event itself. Though when I rented 6 cabins with volleyball tourneys, full bar and jet skis I did not expect my guests to be financially burdened due to me wanting to have a fun weekend with friends so of course I paid for that as well. I have never felt my friends owed me anything though when something is my idea, it is also my treat.

See, you're also neglecting to point out that not everyone considers that fun.

I hate gauche displays of money. If people are going to spend ridiculous volumes of money on me, part of me is screaming; "Can you just give me the cash instead? AGL stock has room for continued growth and I have to wait till ex-div to buy more as it is." I'm independently wealthy, but at best it's like an lower middle class lifestyle thatit pays for. I'm okay with that, allows me to concentrate on my real love... academia. Still my goal of have 7+ degrees.

IO want to be a partof the fleeting tradition of the Renaissance type ... the polymath ...

But I still hate gauche displays of money. The way I see it, if you're flashing so much money and you're still working for other people ... you're a fool.

Massive turn off for me. I see people like that buying a new car every two years. But do you know what Iconsider sexy? Someone who knows howto repair a motorcycle and someone I can go riding with. Because I know regardless of what happes, we can have a self-sufficient exploration of the deserts of Australia. Someone willing to go on a cheap as chips hiking tour of Thailand with me over a month. Someone who doesn't put themselves in debt buying a nice property in Sydney, and instead uses that money to start a new business and work for themselves.

Call it stereotypiclly Aussie, but I like gamblers.

Keep your cabins, I managed to survive on bugs the last time I hitchhiked through SE Asia. And I want someone streetsmart enough that their money hasn't made them soft and wanting in spirit.

I've been around enough rich people to know that they don't live in this world, and that's a shame because this world is so fucking incredible if you're willing to get dirty and risk life and limb to see it. Places where you can see coups unfold. Dictators rise to power. Ancient structures carved by hand into living rock, and multibillion year old extinct volcanoes, and 4 month long monsoons.... where in a day of hard rain the deserts bursts to life underneath your boots, swarming and biting... and where blistering sandy plains are transformed into crocodile filled playgrounds of waist deep waterthe size of Arizona.

You give me someone willing to experience that with me. Then it's romantic. And you don't needa lot of money to do that sort of stuff. For the price of those four cabins and jetskis you can explore Borneo with a backpack and enough provisions.

So gauche displays of money is a serious put offfor me. Call it prejudiced (because it is) ... but someone flashing money on a cabin and jetskis for me just comes of as boorish and disinteresting. They have lived too well to be interesting.

See now you have drawn quite a few conclusions there. First, The cabins and jet ski weekend was to celebrate mine and my classmates graduation and working 3 jobs while obtaining my 2 degrees I was able to save up quite a bit of money since I had no time to spend it. Unlike many of my friends who graduated penniless, I had a bit to start with because I taught Gymnastics, Bartended and was a lifeguard so at least I was not flat broke like my friends at the time. I was able to obtain a great deal on the cabins due to the owner being a long time family friend. We were able to party as much as we like and not have to worry about anyone having to drive anywhere so they were all safe for the weekend. I have been able to do quite well for myself since, so I have no regrets on having a memorable weekend with friends.

I think you make too many assumptions about people, as people are people regardless of how much they have earned in their life, or if they want to treat their friends to a great memory. Like my father, he also worked 3 jobs he was a racer, engineer and pyrotechnician who had his own fireworks stand as well. My father designed, built and raced Pro stock cars and was famous on the local circuits so I was rebuilding carburetors as a kid and turning old manifolds into lamps. He built microchips and made robots, gocarts and planes that parachuted our lunches to us and also had the best fireworks display in town. He could design it, build it race it and blow it up. My grandfather was a master carpenter and I learned all there is to know about how each type of wood expands and contracts to be able to design a master inlay. I spent the vast majority of my childhood making and building things rather than shopping. I went from living on the reservation, to living in absolute hell (aka "Da grove") prior to arriving at what I consider my hometown now. Of course there are wealthy people that is all they know, but there are also those who have managed to get there on their own as well. Simply because someone is well off now does not mean they have always been, nor does it mean they do not spend their money and time wisely or not aware of the world they live in. Sometimes the world is overly harsh and you need to get out and blow off some steam and remember to have fun as well. Whether it was my time with Medecins Sans Frontieres last year, at the shelter or in the ER at Parkland, that is not how I spend the whole of my life and how I spend my time blowing off steam does not in any way take away from the rest of my life's work. I don't think you have been around enough rich people to realize they are just as varied as everyone else you may encounter in your life.

Odd that you bring up gamblers, funny enough I do not care much for gamblers. I see it as a terrible waste of time, money and sadly so many throw away their lives for nothing. Seems like such a waste to me, but to each their own. Everyone has their own path to make in life, it is not up to me to decide for them. I am content with my 2 degrees, and have no need for more as I do not wish to get to the end of my life and only have a bunch of degrees on my wall to show for it. Funny enough you bring up the desert and Arizona, as that is precisely where I was born! I have lived in the desert and have no desire to do so again. I have experienced it and do not consider it to be as great as you are making it out to be. It is harsh, cruel and inhospitable, for me, not where I care to spend the short time I have here. I do visit from time to time to visit relatives and family reunions, but do not wish to linger too long.

EDIT: BTW, I am sure there are plenty of people who can make repairs on their own cars, but how many of them know how to bore out some heads? LOL

Lil devils x:

See now you have drawn quite a few conclusions there. First, The cabins and jet ski weekend was to celebrate mine and my classmates graduation and working 3 jobs while obtaining my 2 degrees I was able to save up quite a bit of money since I had no time to spend it. Unlike many of my friends who graduated penniless, I had a bit to start with because I taught Gymnastics, Bartended and was a lifeguard so at least I was not flat broke like my friends at the time. I was able to obtain a great deal on the cabins due to the owner being a long time family friend. We were able to party as much as we like and not have to worry about anyone having to drive anywhere so they were all safe for the weekend. I have been able to do quite well for myself since, so I have no regrets on having a memorable weekend with friends.

I think you make too many assumptions about people, as people are people regardless of how much they have earned in their life, or if they want to treat their friends to a great memory. Like my father, he also worked 3 jobs he was a racer, engineer and pyrotechnician who had his own fireworks stand as well. My father designed, built and raced Pro stock cars and was famous on the local circuits so I was rebuilding carburetors as a kid and turning old manifolds into lamps. He built microchips and made robots, gocarts and planes that parachuted our lunches to us and also had the best fireworks display in town. He could design it, build it race it and blow it up. My grandfather was a master carpenter and I learned all there is to know about how each type of wood expands and contracts to be able to design a master inlay. I spent the vast majority of my childhood making and building things rather than shopping. I went from living on the reservation, to living in absolute hell (aka "Da grove") prior to arriving at what I consider my hometown now. Of course there are wealthy people that is all they know, but there are also those who have managed to get there on their own as well. Simply because someone is well off now does not mean they have always been, nor does it mean they do not spend their money and time wisely or not aware of the world they live in. Sometimes the world is overly harsh and you need to get out and blow off some steam and remember to have fun as well. Whether it was my time with Medecins Sans Frontieres last year, at the shelter or in the ER at Parkland, that is not how I spend the whole of my life and how I spend my time blowing off steam does not in any way take away from the rest of my life's work. I don't think you have been around enough rich people to realize they are just as varied as everyone else you may encounter in your life.

Odd that you bring up gamblers, funny enough I do not care much for gamblers. I see it as a terrible waste of time, money and sadly so many throw away their lives for nothing. Seems like such a waste to me, but to each their own. Everyone has their own path to make in life, it is not up to me to decide for them. I am content with my 2 degrees, and have no need for more as I do not wish to get to the end of my life and only have a bunch of degrees on my wall to show for it. Funny enough you bring up the desert and Arizona, as that is precisely where I was born! I have lived in the desert and have no desire to do so again. I have experienced it and do not consider it to be as great as you are making it out to be. It is harsh, cruel and inhospitable, for me, not where I care to spend the short time I have here. I do visit from time to time to visit relatives and family reunions, but do not wish to linger too long.

EDIT: BTW, I am sure there are plenty of people who can make repairs on their own cars, but how many of them know how to bore out some heads? LOL

See, I get that idea of making it. As I have written before on the subject. I was homeless at 16. The military provided an out for me. And part of my fondness for the wilderness is because that was part of my job during further training. To be fair, the reason why I have it so hood I don't need to work for a living is because I have done very well originally in business and the market.

My family is well off, but I never enjoyed that money.

And frankly all the familial problems I have experienced has been because of being trans, and because of money. I know this well enough. Money is in general unhealthy. Let me say it more plainly... I don't think you're a bad person. And one time thing isn't a bad thing. But more so angled at the people who live off daddy's backpocket.

And while, yeah, the rich are varied... the grand majotity went to the same schools, the grand majority of them haven't the stories of thr poor who live ever closer to the necessities of the earth. The rich do not know that world. The rich do not know what it means to live in a train service access tunnel. Thry do not know what it means that the only way to pull yourself up from the gutter was to enlist during a time of the potentiality of war. A life without the desperation of simple wants means in general an easy life. And the thing is it makes people soft, narcissistic and utterly lacking in knowing just how bad things can get. And in my condition, the only way I can experience that is through srlf-elective hardship. I'm getting older, so I don't spend nearly as much time in mud, and going through boots every month.

Looking at my family, I know the rich are disproportionately divorced from reality. Hell, all of my millions come from purely immaterial ideas of the marketplace. That's how I make most of my money. And I enf up spending 11 months of the year with my head consumed in esoteric studies in neuroscience and the ASX... I refuse to use my money for excessive creature comforts for that reason. Because I can make more money on the money I don't spend.

So in love with money I live as I do to maximise my available liquidity that if recycled back into the marketplace. That's not reality, however. That world is entirely artificial to the grand msjority of people living on this planet. It's built on a falsity of existence. Like abstract art it captures only an absurd aspect of yhr world transformed into an artigicially dimensioned facade of living.

Also, when I say 'gamblers', I mean people willing to takr risks. Willing to run their own business. Willing to risk life and limb to see and experience something new.

Chewster:

I can understand that POV but personally, being excessively cheap is just as bad IMHO. There is a type of ex-pat that sweeps through the community now and then who end up being some of the cheapest fucks you'll ever meet. Beer in Asia is cheap as hell and yet you can't afford a tall boy for $2.50 even though you suggested we go to the shop for some cans? Get the hell out of here. I don't mind spotting someone once in a while but after the second time or third time, once it becomes apparent that you're perpetually broke, my patience is gone. I'm a generous guy, but we all make roughly the same and all get paid around the same time. Go try that garbage with someone else. Nine times out of ten, once you stop paying, they stop texting and try to find someone else to sponsor their bad habits. I don't care about money that much but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to take care of themselves most of the time.

Similarly, this summer I was back in Canada visiting friends. I brought a twelve pack over to a friend's apartment and burned through maybe seven or eight of them. The next morning, my friend suggested I take the rest home. I refused. To me, that's also gauche. If I bring booze or food or something over to a friend's place, they can keep the leftovers as payment for hosting me.

I guess what I'm saying is that garish displays of affluence are obnoxious but so too are those who are excessively cheap all the time.

I like your enthusiasm for the world, by the way. Too many friends stateside seem to have lost that enthusiasm after graduation, which was made very apparent this summer while I was visiting. It's all work, work, work and seemingly not much to show for it. I could never live that way, I don't think.

Yeah... being too cheap is bad, too. I end up giving $100 bottle of wine to celebrate a friend's birthday, I personally scoff down some bargain bin plonk. That being said, I like other girls like me who iare willing to spend a week fixing a motorcycle than just taking it to the mechanic. It's one thing being so 'cheap' as to refuse to pay for a decent meal, and the personal vindication you get from spearfishing your own barramundi because you want to see if you can be self-sufficient. There is something about it.

Say what you like, nothing tastes better than something that was still alive 45 minutes ago.

And the idea of studying simply to work is arse backwards. I don't like communism... but ond thing I agree with wholeheartedly is thr idea that work should better a person. That work shouldn't merely afford you the money to live, it should offer you the chance to learn. It should feed the mind as well as thr pocket.

The only way to experience that now is by running your own business.

Update: I never actually read Red pill or return of kings, assuming (correctly) that they contain nothing but spiteful bile and pickup artistry. It turns out, i've been giving them the benefit of the doubt by not reading it. TRP in particular has on several occasions actively encouraged men to ruin or break their marriages.

CyanCat47:
Update: I never actually read Red pill or return of kings, assuming (correctly) that they contain nothing but spiteful bile and pickup artistry. It turns out, i've been giving them the benefit of the doubt by not reading it. TRP in particular has on several occasions actively encouraged men to ruin or break their marriages.

That was my experience as well. I had heard Red Pill was bad but I had no idea it was blatantly misogynistic.
Those dudes shouldn't be in relationships with women.

Hmm maybe the place isn't as bad anymore, let me check-
The first thread:
"At the beginning of the dating process, the first time you have the opportunity to punish her, do it hard. Even if you doubt the motive"
"Even if she's in the right, if she can't prove it you have to punish her. If not she will know that you're willing to accept her explanations, or just the uncertainty of her guilt, over facts. She has to know that all things being equal, your frame prevails over hers"

IDK how representative this is of 'manosphere' but these guys should stay far away from women.

Lieju:

CyanCat47:
Update: I never actually read Red pill or return of kings, assuming (correctly) that they contain nothing but spiteful bile and pickup artistry. It turns out, i've been giving them the benefit of the doubt by not reading it. TRP in particular has on several occasions actively encouraged men to ruin or break their marriages.

That was my experience as well. I had heard Red Pill was bad but I had no idea it was blatantly misogynistic.
Those dudes shouldn't be in relationships with women.

Hmm maybe the place isn't as bad anymore, let me check-
The first thread:
"At the beginning of the dating process, the first time you have the opportunity to punish her, do it hard. Even if you doubt the motive"
"Even if she?s in the right, if she can?t prove it you have to punish her. If not she will know that you?re willing to accept her explanations, or just the uncertainty of her guilt, over facts. She has to know that all things being equal, your frame prevails over hers"

IDK how representative this is of 'manosphere' but these guys should stay far away from women.

They should stay far away from EVERYONE! On a side note though, these people feel rejected by women? I'm starting to see why. It's depressing really. There's a lot of bile and hatred towards women online, and stuff like this makes me feel like it's because some men are bitter that they have to treat women as equals. This guys are right wingers right? Why do they have a problem with radical Muslims if they both treat women the same way?

Lieju:

IDK how representative this is of 'manosphere' but these guys should stay far away from women.

Oh son, you havent' even begun to see the worst of it. "Resisting the 21st Century Holocaust", Tomato Bubble, Chateau Heartiste, or god help you Vox day...

Smithnikov:

Lieju:

IDK how representative this is of 'manosphere' but these guys should stay far away from women.

Oh son, you havent' even begun to see the worst of it. "Resisting the 21st Century Holocaust", Tomato Bubble, Chateau Heartiste, or god help you Vox day...

Yes, I've seen some pretty horrible shit. My hesitation was, however, over making generalizations about a 'manosphere' since I'm not sure how well-defined it is as a term.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here