Caporegime
Just go down't pub and buy ye owlde lassie a drink bro.
More women freezing eggs due to "unreliable men"
- Thread starter Narj
- Start date
Just go down't pub and buy ye owlde lassie a drink bro.
Caporegime
This is going back a few posts, apologies. Rob, your need to block men and women into how you think they should be just doesn't work and shows an alarming amount of projection. It's like a pathological driver you have where 'men must be alpha leaders, women must be looked after' and I agree that is true some of the time for some people.
I don't know if you've just never met strong women who are also great people or non-alpha men who are also great people, or you have and you don't find them to your liking, or what is going on but blanket statements of 'this=good, that=bad' is a pretty weird stance to cling to.
I've addressed this at you because you're one of the most consistent and most vocal proponents of this view but it goes for all the other GD 'alphas' (and believe me, I'm chuckling as I type that).
If you went to do a parachute jump and discovered there was only a 40% chance it would open would you still do it?
When kids are asked what they want to be when they grow up boys never say they want to bave kids.
Women can noww retire and be looked after by the state if they get pregnant.
If women can manage to marry a few times they can become rich.
If you are ever approached by a woman do not make eye contact or engage in conversation just walk away.
1700 quid a month for 2 kids in nursery or a different woman every night? You do the math.
Lots of weak men here who I would not want to take to war with me.
Marriage is bad for men - don't do it - be strong.
When kids are asked what they want to be when they grow up boys never say they want to bave kids.
Women can noww retire and be looked after by the state if they get pregnant.
If women can manage to marry a few times they can become rich.
If you are ever approached by a woman do not make eye contact or engage in conversation just walk away.
1700 quid a month for 2 kids in nursery or a different woman every night? You do the math.
Lots of weak men here who I would not want to take to war with me.
Marriage is bad for men - don't do it - be strong.
Name checks out.
Soldato
I think neither sex has yet come to terms with how fast the world has changed.
A hundred years ago, the vast majority of men would have gone out to work in the factory and the vast majority of women would have looked after the house and raised the kids. Neither party had many aspirations above this because the world wasnt like that, opportunities, perhaps more accurately - temptations - werent available. Men were happy down the local for a couple of pints after work on a Friday and housewives socialised with other housewives.
Compare to now. There are a myriad of hobbies we can all choose from which are way more exciting and self fulfilling than going home and looking after kids or doing the chores. The vast majority of us have enough money to take advantage of these temptations, whether its gadgets, tv, sports, gym, holidays or whatever. Personally I mountain bike, which requires me taking a day or sometimes a whole weekend away driving to and riding at the trails. How can kids and family life fit into that, they cant.
But underneath this layer of temptation there is the desire to have kids, and to pair up with the opposite sex so as not to be alone. These are basic human needs. Raising kids should be satisfying, it was enough for people in my grandparents generation.
Some, perhaps many, people are able to sacrifice these temptations for their family at least partially. I did, for many years when I had my young kids at weekends. But I wasnt fully satisfied with life because the temptations have a pull on us all. The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence. This causes resentment, stress, dissatisfaction and potentially depression. One hundred years ago these temptations simply didnt exist. This has the effect of making raising kids not seem satisfying any more, as its seen as giving up the 'freedom' to partake of these temptations at will.
So what happens now? The men and women who have less ambition, fewer aspirations, still have kids because its easy and simple thingto do. So do the ones who somehow are able to genuinely get satisfaction from a family life and make it as fullfilling as they can. However there are a group of men who desire more, probably above their natural station, who ideally would live a bachelor lifestyle if it wasnt for the natural desire not to be alone. When they find a partner it is likely that she wants kids (most women simply aspire to that one thing), and the man feels unsatisfied and trapped.
High flying women, who've postponed having kids are then trying to get men who are probably at a point in their life where they can now afford to try out some new activities and get some excitement in their life, and care a bit less about needing a partner especially if they are finding other ways to occupy their time (i.e not lonely or bored).
A hundred years ago, the vast majority of men would have gone out to work in the factory and the vast majority of women would have looked after the house and raised the kids. Neither party had many aspirations above this because the world wasnt like that, opportunities, perhaps more accurately - temptations - werent available. Men were happy down the local for a couple of pints after work on a Friday and housewives socialised with other housewives.
Compare to now. There are a myriad of hobbies we can all choose from which are way more exciting and self fulfilling than going home and looking after kids or doing the chores. The vast majority of us have enough money to take advantage of these temptations, whether its gadgets, tv, sports, gym, holidays or whatever. Personally I mountain bike, which requires me taking a day or sometimes a whole weekend away driving to and riding at the trails. How can kids and family life fit into that, they cant.
But underneath this layer of temptation there is the desire to have kids, and to pair up with the opposite sex so as not to be alone. These are basic human needs. Raising kids should be satisfying, it was enough for people in my grandparents generation.
Some, perhaps many, people are able to sacrifice these temptations for their family at least partially. I did, for many years when I had my young kids at weekends. But I wasnt fully satisfied with life because the temptations have a pull on us all. The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence. This causes resentment, stress, dissatisfaction and potentially depression. One hundred years ago these temptations simply didnt exist. This has the effect of making raising kids not seem satisfying any more, as its seen as giving up the 'freedom' to partake of these temptations at will.
So what happens now? The men and women who have less ambition, fewer aspirations, still have kids because its easy and simple thingto do. So do the ones who somehow are able to genuinely get satisfaction from a family life and make it as fullfilling as they can. However there are a group of men who desire more, probably above their natural station, who ideally would live a bachelor lifestyle if it wasnt for the natural desire not to be alone. When they find a partner it is likely that she wants kids (most women simply aspire to that one thing), and the man feels unsatisfied and trapped.
High flying women, who've postponed having kids are then trying to get men who are probably at a point in their life where they can now afford to try out some new activities and get some excitement in their life, and care a bit less about needing a partner especially if they are finding other ways to occupy their time (i.e not lonely or bored).
Caporegime
This is the most Brass Eye thing I've read in ages. Well done, you lunatic
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,590
I don't mean it in a bad way either, the pace at which society has changed in last 20 years is staggering...
But it explains why these threads are always a massive mix-up of advice and opinions.
Then she takes to Twitter claiming how buying her a drink was sexual harassment.
Soldato
You've obviously cut and pasted your post from a US source. It's maths, not math.
yikes, this actually is getting into MGTOW territory...just to add some fuel to the fire:
Man of Honour
So many red flags in that first pic!!
That bitcoin one has to be fake (not that I’d put it past someone to do that).
That bitcoin one has to be fake (not that I’d put it past someone to do that).
Caporegime
You can stop reading at her second sentence and know how that one was going to play out.
Man of Honour
So...some (the sample size was 150 - far too small to make reliable extrapolations from) rich women (the process is far from cheap) have reached a high level in the business hierarchy and then, in their mid 30s, decide they want children and don't want a normal relationship. They want a man who is at least at the same level as them in a business hierarchy and who will also fulfill the role traditionally filled by a wife of a man in that position (which is obviously impossible - nobody can do both those things at the same time). They decide to blame men for it.
How is any of that at all surprising? It's a self-selecting sample of people like that.
In addition to that, men don't have anywhere near the same social and legal protections that women have so even if a man in his early 20s was looking to play that role and a woman in this position was looking for a man to play that role (as opposed to the obviously impossible case of anyone playing both traditional high-success roles simultaneously), he'd be taking a far higher risk than a woman would be taking in the same position. At the very least she'd get a payoff and custody if things went bad. He'd get neither.
How is any of that at all surprising? It's a self-selecting sample of people like that.
In addition to that, men don't have anywhere near the same social and legal protections that women have so even if a man in his early 20s was looking to play that role and a woman in this position was looking for a man to play that role (as opposed to the obviously impossible case of anyone playing both traditional high-success roles simultaneously), he'd be taking a far higher risk than a woman would be taking in the same position. At the very least she'd get a payoff and custody if things went bad. He'd get neither.
Man of Honour
Are you serious or trolling? I can't tell, since the position you're claiming is irrationally prejudiced to such an extent that it's possibly insane.
Again, you don't need to worry about me projecting or what my personal circumstances are, if you disagree with my assertion that men should be the dominant partner in a relationship then simply state why you think that. The reason I think that is due to how I know female attraction to work, and 0% of females are attracted to weak men in my experience.
I understand that it's easy for a man to let a woman take charge, you like to think it's healthy and progressive, you were also probably raised by a single mother or with a fairly absent father, it's not healthy for the woman, they're crying out for a leader.
I've met plenty of strong women, my manager at work is great, I bet her husband isn't a push over though.
Not sure why you keep obsessively using the word alpha to try and put me into some group you can mock, I haven't ever used it.
Soldato
Can tell this is in a computer forum, some of the comments on the first two pages (it probably continues but I think I have the gist by that point)
(it probably continues but I think I have the gist by that point)
Last edited:
Caporegime
I think you're wrong that this is always the case.
Both my parents were strong people and neither would expect to be dominated or led by the other. They weren't broken people is what I'm saying here.
It's good that you know of one strong woman who you imagine must have an equally strong man in her life (who you haven't met and know nothing about but reasons ...)
Fair enough, I take that back if you haven't. Do note that your language and preference to 'dominate' and 'lead' and 'protect' is synonomous with the chad alpha numpties though.
Soldato
I'm screwed Then being a class D lol
Didn't expect any less.
MGTOW is the more extreme end of the spectrum but I can empathise with how some guys end up with that attitude. I just have a healthy suspicion of other peoples' motives these days, that's all. I'll admit I was stupid enough to be "that guy" a few years back in a new relationship. It didn't last long. There is definitely such a thing as being "too nice" and it means they will lose respect for you. Good intentions and all that. It's a very fine balance and feels like a game of chess sometimes.
Re: Everyone knowing someone who has ended up in a bad situation, definitely, I know guys who are basically having to start from scratch again at ~50 years old. I definitely don't want to be in that situation myself having worked so hard to be comfortable by 40.
Unfortunately it's difficult to avoid being influenced by your friends' experiences. It colours your own views and appetite for risk/self-protection and it can ostensibly make you seem selfish and bitter.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Re: Everyone knowing someone who has ended up in a bad situation, definitely, I know guys who are basically having to start from scratch again at ~50 years old. I definitely don't want to be in that situation myself having worked so hard to be comfortable by 40. Unfortunately it's difficult to avoid being influenced by your friends' experiences. It colours your own views and appetite for risk/self-protection and it can ostensibly make you seem selfish and bitter.
This scares the **** out of me. My wife and I are in a fantastic situation, Our mortgage is paid off, we have good investments, kids are almost gone.. For the first time we can both actually start to enjoy a different life to that of the last 27 years.. we can both be a little more independent without having to think about the money or the kids. But with that comes change and only our strength and determination will keep use together. There are couples I've known that just lead two separate paths.