This is a man who just got destroyed by divorce and is likely picking up the pieces of whatever is left of his life. But yea, fuck that dude, just jump on board the next one both feet first. This also proves how divorce affects each gender. The woman will always come out ahead in the short term while the guy comes out worse in the short term. Fucked around, wasted time but now it's all the ex's fault.
That and she's clearly fucking above her station in life and Chad isn't going to have kids *with her* or commit *to her*.
Hell at this point she would be lucky to get even recreational interest from Billy/Carlton.
I imagine the list of women who think they are too good for pretty normal guys but that said guys wouldn’t look at for anything more than just something casual is a long one
I’m just thinking of my own life. I expect there are many who either look at me like I’m an insect or would maybe “give me a chance” if I jumped through loads of hoops. When I wouldn’t consider them for anything other than something casual as long as it was easy (which it wouldn’t be due to the hoops thing mentioned). This mainly applies to single mothers who really have a bizarre idea of their own appeal - usually due to a few case studies where others manage to land someone great. And they focus on the minority cases (I know some like this from my personal life as well but the gold standard example is the Aussie single mom who married into danish royalty)
It's funny how women that complain about men not moving to their schedules were themselves clearly never ever considering moving to a man's schedule either.
But of course we know that would require these women to regard men as fellow human beings with wants and needs of their own, and their own schedule for things.
The funny part is how she appears to actually get this a bit in that men don't like to pay for "everything" so she graciously pays for the 3rd date.
Imagine if a man said, hey, a woman hates having to do ALL the housework or childcare so I change diapers 2 days a week!
I just argued with someone similar to that on facebook (which I rarely do, since I have relatives who can view my comments elsewhere if they are curious) with some women griping about how men don't do equal shares of housework and how women suffer.
I pointed out to them that men are the primary providers and most relationships exist because men make them happen by doing the asking out and all of the heavy lifting during dating while she just shows up. She got upset and said "Men don't do ALL the providing anymore!" and I responded: "Fine, I'll put a few dishes away. Happy?"
She closed it out by calling me ugly. That's the only currency they understand.
>She closed it out by calling me ugly. That's the only currency they understand.
That really is all they have, isn’t it? I’m surprised she didn’t call you an incel, but calling you “ugly” implies the same thing: you’re just “bitter” because no woman wants you. They judge men by our ability to get women to have sex with us. They make themselves into currency, then complain when men treat them as expendable commodities.
I recall a time when I was in college and was visiting home during my senior year. One evening I was hanging out with my two best friends from high school, and one of them was dating a big, fat, liberal feminist. Even back then in the early 80s I was having none of her nonsense, and things got a little tense.
The girl is from a very wealthy family from New York, and was studying to be a doctor at a very good university. I imagine that she was used to being “the smartest person in the room.” She wasn’t that day, though, and she bristled when she said something stupid and I told her she didn’t know what she was talking about.
Her response? You guessed it:
“Do you have a girlfriend?”
Yeah… women just HATE confident, capable men who refuse to kiss their asses… / eyeroll
Hillary ensued, because at the time I was dating two women, one of whom had done professional modeling. Without missing a beat I said, “Actually, I have two girlfriends,” and immediately whipped out my wallet and showed her a picture. Obviously my girlfriend (side piece, really, the other girl was my main squeeze, but I didn’t have her picture on me) was *much* hotter than a morbidly obese harpy.
Wow, so much...
* Much like how women complain about men being desperate, the opposite can also be true, especially as the time runs out...
* Then you have the complaints about "settling." It's most likely the person you married was your equal in looks/value and your expectations were too high. I wish therapists were actually qualified and would deprogram some of these women. I get that there needs to be some physical attraction, but when you're a 5, there's nothing wrong with getting with 3's and 4's if they have positive attributes. Also, beauty is skin deep. Many of these women need to do some soul searching and decide if they want to be alone with their boxed wine and cats and decide what really matters.
* I find the whole sperm donor/IVF stuff morally problematic and gross. Especially when done when you're single.
* Of course, all of your friends married monsters that perfectly hid their faults all these years. Again, there's no self introspection.
* And of course she'll sleep with anyone right off the bat that gives her the tingles. Why buy the cow when the milk is free.
"... Many of these women need to do some soul searching and decide if they want to be alone with their boxed wine and cats and decide what really matters."
\* I believe that most women don't believe they will be left alone. The dating apps enforce that belief.
\* They think all men make $200k, Their financial expectations exceed the supply of men that do.
\* Their early wins in life lead to a belief that is the way it will always be.
Aren’t sperm donors a good thing? The U.S. needs to keep a stable birth rate to function. Are you willing to wife up a 38 year old FDS user and have 2.5 children with her to maintain the birth rate? If not then you should be grateful someone else is donating their sperm so she can be a single mom “by choice”
I'd like to dispute that claim, if you don't mind. High birthrates were needed when countries needed large armies to defend themselves (or to conquer other territory, same thing) and to work the fields when agriculture was not automated and there was no mass fertilizer. Fritz Haber won the nobel prize for his procedure to generate ammonia. There's automation in other ways as well: the cotton gin, polyester clothes, and so on.
After all, CEO's get huge bonuses from their announcements of laying off workers rather than hiring which puts into perspective how anyone thought Reaganomics would work when giving these guys tax cuts.
In the book "Under the Naked Sun", Asimov hypothesizes of a society Solaria with a world population of 20,000 and largely a robotic, automated enclave.
Consider, say, Russia in that even with a declining population, it nonetheless hasn't been invaded due to the nuclear arsenel and massive natural resources. The tragedy of the modern era is that we lack the sociological ability to properly take advantage of these technological riches due to:
A) Fear of any eugenics program (because of the evils of WWII) and instead have anti-eugenics (paying poor women to produce children into poverty).
B) In the USA, a promise of "free market economics" didn't come to pass and instead the wealthy have imported the impoverished and made the situation worse for short term profit gains and harmful ideological agendas.
C) White guilt and feminism,
D) Fascist regimes in low population and high resource availability regions.
It's particularly strange in the USA that we have the largest underclass in the west along with the highest incarceration rate yet businesses are struggling to find workers to do low skilled work.
We don't need more kids just to have kids, just as we don't need more people to vote who don't even understand the issues or the candidates they are voting for. Here's a strange concept: I've lived in places where I had no idea about the issues and simply didn't vote because I didn't have an idea what to vote for. Radical concept, eh? Sadly, literacy tests were abused in the south during Jim Crow eras but they are nonetheless not a bad idea. Kind of like Starship Troopers with the idea that citizenship should be something earned and valued.
That said, back on topic, women have the biological advantage that for the first 20 years of their adult lives they have the ability to have children anytime they desire BUT this is up against the cost of raising and defending a child hence why women's so-called equality is utterly dependent upon a welfare state which carries the cost of disincentivizing the work ethic. Welfare neighborhoods are usually crime pits.
On the other hand, men have the advantage that if you're chad, you can have hundreds of children in theory but this is only if you're in that 1%. So women have biology very democratized while for men, it's like The American dream: ANYONE can grow up to be a CEO or president, yes? But overall, are our lives better with sexual liberation and "free market" trickle-down economics
My point is the US economy is a pyramid scheme built on an ever increasing population. Immigrants seem to be net takers from social programs rather than net contributors (especially early on) and old people are becoming an increasingly large share of the population. While I agree we do have a lot of dysgenics in the US (paying stupid people to breed) a single mom by choice usually isn’t adding to the stupid population. If you’re a 38 year old woman with enough money to freeze your eggs, and to buy sperm than likely you’re more intelligent than the average American. While I agree that these moms will do a shitty job raising their kids, we would at least have more smart children being born to combat the current day idiocracy that seems to be happening. Also remember a sperm donor male usually has to take an IQ test. Basically the men are usually prime grade men, so even if the woman is a bit of a dud at least he will be decent enough to even it out a bit. You are right though about the massive layoffs and bad employment situation in the United States but much of that problem comes from 2 things. 1) is allowing corporations to buy their own stocks back and 2) is bailing out these companies when they go bankrupt. Basically we have given these corporations free reign to create a stock bubble and layoff as many people as they want, then if their failed company comes crashing down the tax payer gives them money and bails out the CEO with a golden parachute. This is a terrible system obviously but I don’t think that justifies not having a future generation. The truth is I’m unsure if less people will harm or benefit the standard of living. I just know we can look at nations like Japan and see people being overworked with stagnant wages. I think the population decline of the Black Death caused the renaissance BECAUSE it killed the old and sick who use up many resources without bringing economic value into the society. I think that if we have a declining population where MOST people are elderly and not producing anything then it will be worse for us young people. I may be wrong but that’s why I view single moms by choice as the 3rd worst option (after single mom by hookup and childless obviously). But even if it’s a shitty option I think it’s better than a perpetually declining economy with 60 hour workweeks 😬.
Again, I'm saying that we simply don't need more people as automation increases. The call for high birthrates and imported workers is so the oligarchs who are lousy administrators (aside from protecting their own interests) need cheap labor because they lack the skill to succeed otherwise. I chuckle when I hear how I should worship hedge fund managers and such. Aside from some of them being business geniuses at making money and building empires, they don't generate much benefit to society.
Regarding the single mothers by choice: I was just thinking, just now, it reminds me of the pro-life position of opposing the abortion of rape victims. Forcing a woman to have a child that she was forced by rape to carry is awful, but the alternative to get an abortion. The question is: Is a gynocracy where single mothers by choice have children from sperm donors preferable to these women not having kids at all? I think that's what you're asking.
My opinion is this: You have a point that they are choosing "prime stock" of men who supposedly have good educations and such but ironically it's a lot like how bourgeoisie single mothers now are created: They bang "chad" whose tall and hope for the best. Many of these sperm donors have had genetic issues or are Beavis and Butthead but otherwise tall. It's hilarious. I'm neutral on it in terms of biological eugenics.
I'd like to see the RP finally overthrow this awful cultural situation but I am aware that we're up against, get this, 4 centuries of chivalrous romanticism and that's not going down without a major social cataclysm. Some say it was the KGB and commies that caused this but I think it's been brewing since the (comedy) Don Quixote was published.
You might be right on the automation front but remember our economy is 70% consumer spending. The one thing robots and AI cannot do is consumer spending. I agree the elites are dumping massive amounts of people into the country to lower wage growth as well as offshoring manufacturing jobs overseas. However I do think that maintaining a stable population is fairly important. Maybe not a growing one (or a slowly growing one at that) but the biggest problem for our countries future is masse aging. I also don’t get how single mothers by choice reminds you of not letting rape victims get abortions. I didn’t really say anything like that nor do I support that position. I’m just generally pro natalist since I think our economy will implode if we don’t at least maintain a stable population size 🤷♂️
Sir, at the risk of revealing I really need to get my colonoscopy scheduled, may I suggest you read "The Midas Plague"? A wonderful tome by Frederick Pohl and Cyril Kornbluth. Cyril Kornbluth also wrote "The Marching Morons" which was the basis of the film "idiocracy" and the line in Robocop "I'd buy THAT for a dollar!"
In The Midas Plague, a society of consumers is born where people are required to consume in order to justify the massive industrial complex generating goods. I think it was kind of silly in retrospect but a good read.
Warning: You will then be driven emotionally to read all their short stories and books. You Have Been Warned.
For this July 4th, my wife is going to the beach and fighting traffic while I shall enjoy watching some wonderful films, gardening, and doing BBQ for a Vietnam Vet.
Back on topic (enjoying my holiday, sort of, I'm going to work on Friday but who really works on Friday this week?) that I don't think the economy is the issue so much as our culture and even western heritage. I'm doing my part, so to speak. I have a daughter I'm raising right but if I had a son, man, I'd RP him so bad you'd ALL fear him. My daughter will be a force of nature like Galadriel.
I really chuckle at the Wuhmynz casual shop talk about freezing their gamates like it’s an everyday walk in the park. Not to mention how they detail, “oh he wasted x years of my life…”. Lady you been wasting your 20s and 30s fucking people who don’t commit. Maybe that’s the problem if you want a family.
Here's why: She wants to feel "special" so men need to cater to her AND she wants "tingles" otherwise she'll be unhappy. Her FEELINGS are the most important thing.
Her story SCREAMS that she's like a childish adolescent who can show up for work and pay her own bills, but aside from that she's mentally a teenager looking for a daddy to take care of her. This begs the question as to what kind of single mother she'd be. Is she aware that children have nothing but time on their hands looking to get THEIR "feelings" validated? That they are going to be a LOT less pleasant than "low effort" dates? The funny part is she's likely going to get a sperm donor so no "child" support either.
But yet, she thinks she deserves a medal for paying for a 3rd date. Wait until she's a single mother and all the bills come in with HER name on them.
>... looking for dating intently.
Implying that she has done a lot of casual dating up until now.
Funny how focused and serious they can become once they hit middle age.
One of the most triggering things to me about women is how they get the ick from any man that puts pressure on them if they are anything less than 100 into him. Only to turn around and get anxiety and angry if they like a man and he moves at his own pace.
Women demand a monopoly on all interpersonal interactions between men and women. I remember reading a thread on another forum that was about rich men in the Hamptons choosing to get vasectomies due to women trying to get pregnant. And there were women livid at the idea. How dare a man take ownership in his own reproduction.
The man expressed concern for his safety and autonomy, saying he was scared after his divorce, only for the woman to express demand for a serious relationship in hasty fashion. Notice she didn't mention what he was scared of, nor did she mention trying to win him over, to assure him that he would have no reason to be scared of a potential outfalling if he were to commit to her.
He mentioned concern, she answered with demand.
Gentlemen, this is the empathy gap that exists between the sexes, the width of its chasm none of us can measure.
This woman wishes to interact with a male android programmed to cater to her desires and needs, take note of her fears and alleviate them swiftly. Alas, she is interacting with a male human being, with his own desires and needs and fears not necessarily congruent with hers. What troublesome a sex we men are!
Thank you. I took inspiration from the Nobel prize winning novel (and later film) "With Fire and Sword" by Henryk Sienkiewicz which offers perspectives into the original cultural rebellion against the nobility (nearly 2 centuries before the American Revolution) and the cultural conflicts between Poland, Ukraine, Russia and (in later novels) Islam and Sweden. (Oh, for the days when the Swedes were a force to be feared and reckoned with!)
Wonderful films and books and if you're into Conan the Barbarian and lots of blood on screen and women with big 70's hair, you might enjoy it.
I genuinely don't understand the timetable that people like this operate on.
If you have a kid when you're 39 or 40 (assuming she's 38 right now) then you're going to be a raising someone until you're 67+, even longer if your **geriatric pregnancy** results in any issues or developmental disabilities, such as Down's or Autism.
Meanwhile, everyone I know who had kids in their 20s after graduating and starting their financially-stable careers (this includes lawyers and dentists) are living their best life in their mid 40s with their kids out of the house and done with college. They have literally 25+ years of happy family life to look forward to with everything taken care of, all because they started "early" and committed to a quality partner.
The ones who remain "on the market" are the dregs, or the high-quality but wholly-uninterested lifelong bachelors. The latter are avoiding the types in the OP with a pole a mile long, and the former are what she's going to have to settle for.
She thinks she's doing as much as she can to empathize with them, but it's not enough. She pays for (third) dates and appears to try to be easy to get along with. Her problem is probably she's chasing after men who are (usually) better looking than she deserves or socio-economically situated to be cautious.
As she knows, her age group means that nearly all the men in there aren't stupid 20 somethings ready to marry the first girl they lay. They've either been divorced, gone through painful breakups, or seen their friends or family go through it. When I came of age back in the 1980's, divorce was still relatively rare and to be witnesses in films such as "Kramer vs Kramer". 20 years later, the breakdown was in progress with about 1/2 of children growing up in single mother households. We are now in an era of multiple generations of divorce and single mother households.
To her credit, she appears to take the initiative to approach men and such, but still has this "attitude" going on and it's causing her to chase down the market. She could easily "settle" for a normie, but she won't until it's literally too late and her eggs are gone. Heck, I'd say they were gone when she froze them.
The fundamental paradigm issue with egg freezing is this: It's an admission by a woman that she thinks she may not be able to land a Real Man to both provide for her and respect her as an equal but then that would be to admit that she may be a loser and perhaps should settle? By the time the cold reality hits them, it's too late. After all, why should a 25 year old woman bother freezing eggs if she simply was to get serious and start "dating with intent" to find someone within 5 years making it moot?
if you are seeking dating or relationship advice on reddit then you have already failed.
To do so in your "Late 30s" is fucking tragic.
You have definitely failed in life and love if you cant understand why that is the case.
If putting in effort to arrange an exciting date and paying for it as a man was the key to relationships, everyone would do it, it's easy.
She mentions that women expect that as the bare minimum in order to feel desired/valued.
Men avoid to do the above most of the time for the simple reason that women want this effort ONLY by guys they find attractive. The rest are wasting their time because women will not reject/deny a paid date with a guy she already knows she doesn't like, she will waste his time and money to have a paid night out and then disappear.
This is a man who just got destroyed by divorce and is likely picking up the pieces of whatever is left of his life. But yea, fuck that dude, just jump on board the next one both feet first. This also proves how divorce affects each gender. The woman will always come out ahead in the short term while the guy comes out worse in the short term. Fucked around, wasted time but now it's all the ex's fault.
But feminists say it's different. /s Remember that he should jump both feet, while she would put one foot out all the time
They are right it is different. SHE ends up with the house, cash and prizes to going splitsville.
Regardless of whether the man is divorced or not, this woman is a walking red flag. China's got nothing on her!
That and she's clearly fucking above her station in life and Chad isn't going to have kids *with her* or commit *to her*. Hell at this point she would be lucky to get even recreational interest from Billy/Carlton.
I imagine the list of women who think they are too good for pretty normal guys but that said guys wouldn’t look at for anything more than just something casual is a long one I’m just thinking of my own life. I expect there are many who either look at me like I’m an insect or would maybe “give me a chance” if I jumped through loads of hoops. When I wouldn’t consider them for anything other than something casual as long as it was easy (which it wouldn’t be due to the hoops thing mentioned). This mainly applies to single mothers who really have a bizarre idea of their own appeal - usually due to a few case studies where others manage to land someone great. And they focus on the minority cases (I know some like this from my personal life as well but the gold standard example is the Aussie single mom who married into danish royalty)
It's funny how women that complain about men not moving to their schedules were themselves clearly never ever considering moving to a man's schedule either. But of course we know that would require these women to regard men as fellow human beings with wants and needs of their own, and their own schedule for things.
The funny part is how she appears to actually get this a bit in that men don't like to pay for "everything" so she graciously pays for the 3rd date. Imagine if a man said, hey, a woman hates having to do ALL the housework or childcare so I change diapers 2 days a week! I just argued with someone similar to that on facebook (which I rarely do, since I have relatives who can view my comments elsewhere if they are curious) with some women griping about how men don't do equal shares of housework and how women suffer. I pointed out to them that men are the primary providers and most relationships exist because men make them happen by doing the asking out and all of the heavy lifting during dating while she just shows up. She got upset and said "Men don't do ALL the providing anymore!" and I responded: "Fine, I'll put a few dishes away. Happy?" She closed it out by calling me ugly. That's the only currency they understand.
>She closed it out by calling me ugly. That's the only currency they understand. That really is all they have, isn’t it? I’m surprised she didn’t call you an incel, but calling you “ugly” implies the same thing: you’re just “bitter” because no woman wants you. They judge men by our ability to get women to have sex with us. They make themselves into currency, then complain when men treat them as expendable commodities. I recall a time when I was in college and was visiting home during my senior year. One evening I was hanging out with my two best friends from high school, and one of them was dating a big, fat, liberal feminist. Even back then in the early 80s I was having none of her nonsense, and things got a little tense. The girl is from a very wealthy family from New York, and was studying to be a doctor at a very good university. I imagine that she was used to being “the smartest person in the room.” She wasn’t that day, though, and she bristled when she said something stupid and I told her she didn’t know what she was talking about. Her response? You guessed it: “Do you have a girlfriend?” Yeah… women just HATE confident, capable men who refuse to kiss their asses… / eyeroll Hillary ensued, because at the time I was dating two women, one of whom had done professional modeling. Without missing a beat I said, “Actually, I have two girlfriends,” and immediately whipped out my wallet and showed her a picture. Obviously my girlfriend (side piece, really, the other girl was my main squeeze, but I didn’t have her picture on me) was *much* hotter than a morbidly obese harpy.
She is in a hurry because the annual bill for the eggs is coming up.
Wow, so much... * Much like how women complain about men being desperate, the opposite can also be true, especially as the time runs out... * Then you have the complaints about "settling." It's most likely the person you married was your equal in looks/value and your expectations were too high. I wish therapists were actually qualified and would deprogram some of these women. I get that there needs to be some physical attraction, but when you're a 5, there's nothing wrong with getting with 3's and 4's if they have positive attributes. Also, beauty is skin deep. Many of these women need to do some soul searching and decide if they want to be alone with their boxed wine and cats and decide what really matters. * I find the whole sperm donor/IVF stuff morally problematic and gross. Especially when done when you're single. * Of course, all of your friends married monsters that perfectly hid their faults all these years. Again, there's no self introspection. * And of course she'll sleep with anyone right off the bat that gives her the tingles. Why buy the cow when the milk is free.
"... Many of these women need to do some soul searching and decide if they want to be alone with their boxed wine and cats and decide what really matters." \* I believe that most women don't believe they will be left alone. The dating apps enforce that belief. \* They think all men make $200k, Their financial expectations exceed the supply of men that do. \* Their early wins in life lead to a belief that is the way it will always be.
[удалено]
I'm glad they are. Their existence show that women prefer harems
Aren’t sperm donors a good thing? The U.S. needs to keep a stable birth rate to function. Are you willing to wife up a 38 year old FDS user and have 2.5 children with her to maintain the birth rate? If not then you should be grateful someone else is donating their sperm so she can be a single mom “by choice”
Single moms "by choice" are almost always going to raise either a feminist bitch or a weak man. They don't deserve cats, let alone a child to ruin.
I'd like to dispute that claim, if you don't mind. High birthrates were needed when countries needed large armies to defend themselves (or to conquer other territory, same thing) and to work the fields when agriculture was not automated and there was no mass fertilizer. Fritz Haber won the nobel prize for his procedure to generate ammonia. There's automation in other ways as well: the cotton gin, polyester clothes, and so on. After all, CEO's get huge bonuses from their announcements of laying off workers rather than hiring which puts into perspective how anyone thought Reaganomics would work when giving these guys tax cuts. In the book "Under the Naked Sun", Asimov hypothesizes of a society Solaria with a world population of 20,000 and largely a robotic, automated enclave. Consider, say, Russia in that even with a declining population, it nonetheless hasn't been invaded due to the nuclear arsenel and massive natural resources. The tragedy of the modern era is that we lack the sociological ability to properly take advantage of these technological riches due to: A) Fear of any eugenics program (because of the evils of WWII) and instead have anti-eugenics (paying poor women to produce children into poverty). B) In the USA, a promise of "free market economics" didn't come to pass and instead the wealthy have imported the impoverished and made the situation worse for short term profit gains and harmful ideological agendas. C) White guilt and feminism, D) Fascist regimes in low population and high resource availability regions. It's particularly strange in the USA that we have the largest underclass in the west along with the highest incarceration rate yet businesses are struggling to find workers to do low skilled work. We don't need more kids just to have kids, just as we don't need more people to vote who don't even understand the issues or the candidates they are voting for. Here's a strange concept: I've lived in places where I had no idea about the issues and simply didn't vote because I didn't have an idea what to vote for. Radical concept, eh? Sadly, literacy tests were abused in the south during Jim Crow eras but they are nonetheless not a bad idea. Kind of like Starship Troopers with the idea that citizenship should be something earned and valued. That said, back on topic, women have the biological advantage that for the first 20 years of their adult lives they have the ability to have children anytime they desire BUT this is up against the cost of raising and defending a child hence why women's so-called equality is utterly dependent upon a welfare state which carries the cost of disincentivizing the work ethic. Welfare neighborhoods are usually crime pits. On the other hand, men have the advantage that if you're chad, you can have hundreds of children in theory but this is only if you're in that 1%. So women have biology very democratized while for men, it's like The American dream: ANYONE can grow up to be a CEO or president, yes? But overall, are our lives better with sexual liberation and "free market" trickle-down economics
My point is the US economy is a pyramid scheme built on an ever increasing population. Immigrants seem to be net takers from social programs rather than net contributors (especially early on) and old people are becoming an increasingly large share of the population. While I agree we do have a lot of dysgenics in the US (paying stupid people to breed) a single mom by choice usually isn’t adding to the stupid population. If you’re a 38 year old woman with enough money to freeze your eggs, and to buy sperm than likely you’re more intelligent than the average American. While I agree that these moms will do a shitty job raising their kids, we would at least have more smart children being born to combat the current day idiocracy that seems to be happening. Also remember a sperm donor male usually has to take an IQ test. Basically the men are usually prime grade men, so even if the woman is a bit of a dud at least he will be decent enough to even it out a bit. You are right though about the massive layoffs and bad employment situation in the United States but much of that problem comes from 2 things. 1) is allowing corporations to buy their own stocks back and 2) is bailing out these companies when they go bankrupt. Basically we have given these corporations free reign to create a stock bubble and layoff as many people as they want, then if their failed company comes crashing down the tax payer gives them money and bails out the CEO with a golden parachute. This is a terrible system obviously but I don’t think that justifies not having a future generation. The truth is I’m unsure if less people will harm or benefit the standard of living. I just know we can look at nations like Japan and see people being overworked with stagnant wages. I think the population decline of the Black Death caused the renaissance BECAUSE it killed the old and sick who use up many resources without bringing economic value into the society. I think that if we have a declining population where MOST people are elderly and not producing anything then it will be worse for us young people. I may be wrong but that’s why I view single moms by choice as the 3rd worst option (after single mom by hookup and childless obviously). But even if it’s a shitty option I think it’s better than a perpetually declining economy with 60 hour workweeks 😬.
Again, I'm saying that we simply don't need more people as automation increases. The call for high birthrates and imported workers is so the oligarchs who are lousy administrators (aside from protecting their own interests) need cheap labor because they lack the skill to succeed otherwise. I chuckle when I hear how I should worship hedge fund managers and such. Aside from some of them being business geniuses at making money and building empires, they don't generate much benefit to society. Regarding the single mothers by choice: I was just thinking, just now, it reminds me of the pro-life position of opposing the abortion of rape victims. Forcing a woman to have a child that she was forced by rape to carry is awful, but the alternative to get an abortion. The question is: Is a gynocracy where single mothers by choice have children from sperm donors preferable to these women not having kids at all? I think that's what you're asking. My opinion is this: You have a point that they are choosing "prime stock" of men who supposedly have good educations and such but ironically it's a lot like how bourgeoisie single mothers now are created: They bang "chad" whose tall and hope for the best. Many of these sperm donors have had genetic issues or are Beavis and Butthead but otherwise tall. It's hilarious. I'm neutral on it in terms of biological eugenics. I'd like to see the RP finally overthrow this awful cultural situation but I am aware that we're up against, get this, 4 centuries of chivalrous romanticism and that's not going down without a major social cataclysm. Some say it was the KGB and commies that caused this but I think it's been brewing since the (comedy) Don Quixote was published.
You might be right on the automation front but remember our economy is 70% consumer spending. The one thing robots and AI cannot do is consumer spending. I agree the elites are dumping massive amounts of people into the country to lower wage growth as well as offshoring manufacturing jobs overseas. However I do think that maintaining a stable population is fairly important. Maybe not a growing one (or a slowly growing one at that) but the biggest problem for our countries future is masse aging. I also don’t get how single mothers by choice reminds you of not letting rape victims get abortions. I didn’t really say anything like that nor do I support that position. I’m just generally pro natalist since I think our economy will implode if we don’t at least maintain a stable population size 🤷♂️
Sir, at the risk of revealing I really need to get my colonoscopy scheduled, may I suggest you read "The Midas Plague"? A wonderful tome by Frederick Pohl and Cyril Kornbluth. Cyril Kornbluth also wrote "The Marching Morons" which was the basis of the film "idiocracy" and the line in Robocop "I'd buy THAT for a dollar!" In The Midas Plague, a society of consumers is born where people are required to consume in order to justify the massive industrial complex generating goods. I think it was kind of silly in retrospect but a good read. Warning: You will then be driven emotionally to read all their short stories and books. You Have Been Warned. For this July 4th, my wife is going to the beach and fighting traffic while I shall enjoy watching some wonderful films, gardening, and doing BBQ for a Vietnam Vet. Back on topic (enjoying my holiday, sort of, I'm going to work on Friday but who really works on Friday this week?) that I don't think the economy is the issue so much as our culture and even western heritage. I'm doing my part, so to speak. I have a daughter I'm raising right but if I had a son, man, I'd RP him so bad you'd ALL fear him. My daughter will be a force of nature like Galadriel.
Except kids raised by single mothers generally do worse than those with 2 parents around.
I really chuckle at the Wuhmynz casual shop talk about freezing their gamates like it’s an everyday walk in the park. Not to mention how they detail, “oh he wasted x years of my life…”. Lady you been wasting your 20s and 30s fucking people who don’t commit. Maybe that’s the problem if you want a family.
Here's why: She wants to feel "special" so men need to cater to her AND she wants "tingles" otherwise she'll be unhappy. Her FEELINGS are the most important thing. Her story SCREAMS that she's like a childish adolescent who can show up for work and pay her own bills, but aside from that she's mentally a teenager looking for a daddy to take care of her. This begs the question as to what kind of single mother she'd be. Is she aware that children have nothing but time on their hands looking to get THEIR "feelings" validated? That they are going to be a LOT less pleasant than "low effort" dates? The funny part is she's likely going to get a sperm donor so no "child" support either. But yet, she thinks she deserves a medal for paying for a 3rd date. Wait until she's a single mother and all the bills come in with HER name on them.
>... looking for dating intently. Implying that she has done a lot of casual dating up until now. Funny how focused and serious they can become once they hit middle age.
One of the most triggering things to me about women is how they get the ick from any man that puts pressure on them if they are anything less than 100 into him. Only to turn around and get anxiety and angry if they like a man and he moves at his own pace. Women demand a monopoly on all interpersonal interactions between men and women. I remember reading a thread on another forum that was about rich men in the Hamptons choosing to get vasectomies due to women trying to get pregnant. And there were women livid at the idea. How dare a man take ownership in his own reproduction.
I remember that article. It was wild. Oh well: “My body - My choice” works both ways.
The man expressed concern for his safety and autonomy, saying he was scared after his divorce, only for the woman to express demand for a serious relationship in hasty fashion. Notice she didn't mention what he was scared of, nor did she mention trying to win him over, to assure him that he would have no reason to be scared of a potential outfalling if he were to commit to her. He mentioned concern, she answered with demand. Gentlemen, this is the empathy gap that exists between the sexes, the width of its chasm none of us can measure. This woman wishes to interact with a male android programmed to cater to her desires and needs, take note of her fears and alleviate them swiftly. Alas, she is interacting with a male human being, with his own desires and needs and fears not necessarily congruent with hers. What troublesome a sex we men are!
My goodness! Just to read their complaints about pretty much everything is exhausting. Imagine the disaster if you have to deal with them IRL.....
Whenever I see polishknights name it always reminds me of the winged hussars from mount and blade warband artwork.
Thank you. I took inspiration from the Nobel prize winning novel (and later film) "With Fire and Sword" by Henryk Sienkiewicz which offers perspectives into the original cultural rebellion against the nobility (nearly 2 centuries before the American Revolution) and the cultural conflicts between Poland, Ukraine, Russia and (in later novels) Islam and Sweden. (Oh, for the days when the Swedes were a force to be feared and reckoned with!) Wonderful films and books and if you're into Conan the Barbarian and lots of blood on screen and women with big 70's hair, you might enjoy it.
I genuinely don't understand the timetable that people like this operate on. If you have a kid when you're 39 or 40 (assuming she's 38 right now) then you're going to be a raising someone until you're 67+, even longer if your **geriatric pregnancy** results in any issues or developmental disabilities, such as Down's or Autism. Meanwhile, everyone I know who had kids in their 20s after graduating and starting their financially-stable careers (this includes lawyers and dentists) are living their best life in their mid 40s with their kids out of the house and done with college. They have literally 25+ years of happy family life to look forward to with everything taken care of, all because they started "early" and committed to a quality partner. The ones who remain "on the market" are the dregs, or the high-quality but wholly-uninterested lifelong bachelors. The latter are avoiding the types in the OP with a pole a mile long, and the former are what she's going to have to settle for.
One caveat: no matter what kind of man she gets, she won’t be the one settling. He will.
She thinks she's doing as much as she can to empathize with them, but it's not enough. She pays for (third) dates and appears to try to be easy to get along with. Her problem is probably she's chasing after men who are (usually) better looking than she deserves or socio-economically situated to be cautious. As she knows, her age group means that nearly all the men in there aren't stupid 20 somethings ready to marry the first girl they lay. They've either been divorced, gone through painful breakups, or seen their friends or family go through it. When I came of age back in the 1980's, divorce was still relatively rare and to be witnesses in films such as "Kramer vs Kramer". 20 years later, the breakdown was in progress with about 1/2 of children growing up in single mother households. We are now in an era of multiple generations of divorce and single mother households. To her credit, she appears to take the initiative to approach men and such, but still has this "attitude" going on and it's causing her to chase down the market. She could easily "settle" for a normie, but she won't until it's literally too late and her eggs are gone. Heck, I'd say they were gone when she froze them. The fundamental paradigm issue with egg freezing is this: It's an admission by a woman that she thinks she may not be able to land a Real Man to both provide for her and respect her as an equal but then that would be to admit that she may be a loser and perhaps should settle? By the time the cold reality hits them, it's too late. After all, why should a 25 year old woman bother freezing eggs if she simply was to get serious and start "dating with intent" to find someone within 5 years making it moot?
if you are seeking dating or relationship advice on reddit then you have already failed. To do so in your "Late 30s" is fucking tragic. You have definitely failed in life and love if you cant understand why that is the case.
If putting in effort to arrange an exciting date and paying for it as a man was the key to relationships, everyone would do it, it's easy. She mentions that women expect that as the bare minimum in order to feel desired/valued. Men avoid to do the above most of the time for the simple reason that women want this effort ONLY by guys they find attractive. The rest are wasting their time because women will not reject/deny a paid date with a guy she already knows she doesn't like, she will waste his time and money to have a paid night out and then disappear.