8 ms·

I think the article is definitely definitely inflammatory. There are good points though. "Womankind has let them down". That's a fairly valid concern. If you

I think the article is definitely definitely inflammatory. There are good points though. "Womankind has let them down". That's a fairly valid concern. If you get married to somebody, you both have to sacrifice certain of your desires to make the relationship better. The guy can't constantly be jetting off to Vegas, for instance, because now he has a mortgage maybe, and to make relationships work you're going to have to spend a lot of time together, even if you don't particularly feel like it. However, these days, a lot of women (Western feminists) don't feel like sacrificing. They're brought up on the thoughts that you can have your cake and eat it too. You can play around when you're younger and make your career your priority. Then when you actually do want to settle down, what do you have? Rather, what do you have to offer? Can you listen, sacrifice your spare time to listen to somebody else's problems, do you mind doing chores for a shared house? Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with a woman's ability to have a career. They're more interested in having a life partner that you can share burdens with, and once you have so much invested in your career, you're not going to give that up. If you lack any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), you're not going to be a good partner, and you shouldn't expect a good partner.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
RangerScience 10y ago
I think you're rather horribly wrong. For one, in the last year or so, the "sex appeal" of financial stability has shot up drastically. Mostly because I'm watching two friends take a year off (and likely more, since another is in the oven) to raise a baby. > "Womankind has let them down". ...No? I mean, I see where they're coming from, but... Privilege is being used to being the target audience. Women don't owe men anything. People can only let you down if you're expecting something from them. > If you get married to somebody, you both have to sacrifice certain of your desires to make the relationship better To be frank, you have shitty role models for marriage. First, doesn't that occur in relationships in general? I want pizza. My buddy wants thai. Second, the better a fit you and someone else are, the less you have to sacrifice. Third, the more you're into that other someone, the less you give a shit about that sacrifice. > They're brought up on the thoughts that you can have your cake and eat it too. You can play around when you're younger and make your career your priority. Yeah, because you can. I mean, that's the expected story for men, right? Means women can do it too. > Can you listen, sacrifice your spare time to listen to somebody else's problems, do you mind doing chores for a shared house? Sounds like having friends and roommates. Also completely compatible with NOT settling down. > They're more interested in having a life partner that you can share burdens with Sounds like everyone. Wouldn't you expect women to be more interested in life partners that you can share burdens with? Isn't this part of the definition of a best friend? Here's a thing you should do. Add gender to each of your sentences: "If a woman lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), she's not going to be a good partner, and she shouldn't expect a good partner." and then invert it: "If a man lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), he's not going to be a good partner, and he shouldn't expect a good partner." and you'll notice what you're horribly wrong about.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > For one, in the last year or so, the "sex appeal" of financial stability has shot up drastically. Yes. And financial stability can be reached in two ways. Either by making more money, or reducing your expenses. It used to cost about 250k to raise a child to 18, not even considering college expenses. Wouldn't your friends be just as financially stable, if not more so, if they didn't have kids? > Here's a thing you should do. Add gender to each of your sentences: "If a woman lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), she's not going to be a good partner, and she shouldn't expect a good partner." and then invert it: "If a man lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), he's not going to be a good partner, and he shouldn't expect a good partner." Completely agree. However, that's what the MGTOW is doing. "Hey, it takes a certain kind of guy to have a good relationship these days, and it's going to require hard work on my end and sacrifice. I'm just going to not do that, and not inflict my crappy self on other people"
tptacek 10y ago
If your comment includes the words "Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with", you should rethink it. Yours is a deeply weird and poorly reasoned comment. I don't know if you meant to, but the sentiment you have managed to convey is that "men prefer women who lack agency".
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > but the sentiment you have managed to convey is that "men prefer women who lack agency". That's an interesting way to twist my statement. I'm saying that most men don't care one way or another. For example most women would rather date Ryan Gosling rather than an accountant that just looks like Ryan Gosling. Most men wouldn't care one way or another if they were dating Jennifer Lawrence or an engineer that just looked that Jennifer Lawrence.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Did you take a survey? Because that sounds unlikely to be true.
Thriptic 10y ago
> Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with a woman's ability to have a career. They're more interested in having a life partner that you can share burdens with. I can't speak for "most men", but personally I find lack of ambition to be a huge turnoff when I'm considering whether I want to try and enter a relationship with a woman. You state that men are more interested in having someone with whom to share their burdens, but how is someone supposed to understand my career ambitions, concerns, and mindset when they have none of their own?
sleepnaught 10y ago
>> Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with a woman's ability to have a career. Women do not have careers to impress men. The argument underlying here in more blunt terms: men bring careers to the relationship and women bring emotional support/cleaning. (and these duties are apparently exclusive - he assumes a women with a career is less likely to be emotionally supportive, so we must assume a man with a career is less likely to be emotionally supportive as well - so we're really dead centre of the 1950s here)

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

RangerScience 10y ago

I think you're rather horribly wrong. For one, in the last year or so, the "sex appeal" of financial stability has shot up drastically. Mostly because I'm watching two friends take a year off (and likely more, since another is in the oven) to raise a baby. > "Womankind has let them down". ...No? I mean, I see where they're coming from, but... Privilege is being used to being the target audience. Women don't owe men anything. People can only let you down if you're expecting something from them. > If you get married to somebody, you both have to sacrifice certain of your desires to make the relationship better To be frank, you have shitty role models for marriage. First, doesn't that occur in relationships in general? I want pizza. My buddy wants thai. Second, the better a fit you and someone else are, the less you have to sacrifice. Third, the more you're into that other someone, the less you give a shit about that sacrifice. > They're brought up on the thoughts that you can have your cake and eat it too. You can play around when you're younger and make your career your priority. Yeah, because you can. I mean, that's the expected story for men, right? Means women can do it too. > Can you listen, sacrifice your spare time to listen to somebody else's problems, do you mind doing chores for a shared house? Sounds like having friends and roommates. Also completely compatible with NOT settling down. > They're more interested in having a life partner that you can share burdens with Sounds like everyone. Wouldn't you expect women to be more interested in life partners that you can share burdens with? Isn't this part of the definition of a best friend? Here's a thing you should do. Add gender to each of your sentences: "If a woman lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), she's not going to be a good partner, and she shouldn't expect a good partner." and then invert it: "If a man lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), he's not going to be a good partner, and he shouldn't expect a good partner." and you'll notice what you're horribly wrong about.

jimmywanger 10y ago
> For one, in the last year or so, the "sex appeal" of financial stability has shot up drastically. Yes. And financial stability can be reached in two ways. Either by making more money, or reducing your expenses. It used to cost about 250k to raise a child to 18, not even considering college expenses. Wouldn't your friends be just as financially stable, if not more so, if they didn't have kids? > Here's a thing you should do. Add gender to each of your sentences: "If a woman lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), she's not going to be a good partner, and she shouldn't expect a good partner." and then invert it: "If a man lacks any of the skills to be good in a relationship (whether from lack of practice or inclination), he's not going to be a good partner, and he shouldn't expect a good partner." Completely agree. However, that's what the MGTOW is doing. "Hey, it takes a certain kind of guy to have a good relationship these days, and it's going to require hard work on my end and sacrifice. I'm just going to not do that, and not inflict my crappy self on other people"

tptacek 10y ago

If your comment includes the words "Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with", you should rethink it. Yours is a deeply weird and poorly reasoned comment. I don't know if you meant to, but the sentiment you have managed to convey is that "men prefer women who lack agency".

jimmywanger 10y ago
> but the sentiment you have managed to convey is that "men prefer women who lack agency". That's an interesting way to twist my statement. I'm saying that most men don't care one way or another. For example most women would rather date Ryan Gosling rather than an accountant that just looks like Ryan Gosling. Most men wouldn't care one way or another if they were dating Jennifer Lawrence or an engineer that just looked that Jennifer Lawrence.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Did you take a survey? Because that sounds unlikely to be true.

Thriptic 10y ago

> Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with a woman's ability to have a career. They're more interested in having a life partner that you can share burdens with. I can't speak for "most men", but personally I find lack of ambition to be a huge turnoff when I'm considering whether I want to try and enter a relationship with a woman. You state that men are more interested in having someone with whom to share their burdens, but how is someone supposed to understand my career ambitions, concerns, and mindset when they have none of their own?

sleepnaught 10y ago

>> Contrary to most belief, most men are not terribly impressed with a woman's ability to have a career. Women do not have careers to impress men. The argument underlying here in more blunt terms: men bring careers to the relationship and women bring emotional support/cleaning. (and these duties are apparently exclusive - he assumes a women with a career is less likely to be emotionally supportive, so we must assume a man with a career is less likely to be emotionally supportive as well - so we're really dead centre of the 1950s here)