Women Are Not Capable of Love

[RoadKing_Rabbit]

Right.

Black pill misery and cope.

In some MGTOW cases, “Don’t marry!” Means “I have no woman to marry”.

Who is to say which is which? I think a lot of parroted things are cope, although Tom Leykis is just one example of a man with no shortage of women who'd marry the guy. I'm fairly certain I could propose to quite a few people and they'd say yes. Administratively, it is way too easy to get married in my opinion.

If I'm trying to stay on topic though, women aren't incapable of love. They are just too often expected to love us the same way we would love them. They can't do that. Perhaps that's the hang up? Just like I'm not going to be able to be a "chatty Cathy" about Silly Sally and how she Dilly Dallys over Bent Brent and how he's a Soy Boy.

 

[Manure Spherian]

f I'm trying to stay on topic though, women aren't incapable of love. They are just too often expected to love us the same way we would love them. They can't do that. Perhaps that's the hang up? Just like I'm not going to be able to be a "chatty Cathy" about Silly Sally and how she Dilly Dallys over Bent Brent and how he's a Soy Boy.

“Women can’t love,” is cope for “no woman loves

Who is to say which is which? I think a lot of parroted things are cope, although Tom Leykis is just one example of a man with no shortage of women who'd marry the guy. I'm fairly certain I could propose to quite a few people and they'd say yes. Administratively, it is way too easy to get married in my opinion.

Yes, you and Tom Leykis, not men who can’t even get dates!

 

[RoadKing_Rabbit]

I didn't disagree with the whole coping nonsense people cling to. I'm saying there is a common expectation for women to love men the way men love women and vice versa.

Eh, I'm standing on that hill. Comparable to the case that the most adamant and evangelical nonsmokers are former smokers, I argue that the most likely to advise others not to marry are those who have been married and became statistics of divorce. Doesn't mean no women WANT to marry a given MGTOW man in question.

Some women are even outwardly disgusted with men they wish would marry them after hearing them declaring they're a part of MGTOW or that they're becoming a "Passport Bro." I watched a buddy show an HB7 a picture of his "GF" (Poor dude. You could likely guess that outcome. lol) and she went from "WOW!" to "Gross." As soon as he said she lived in the Philippines.

I mean, good on a man if he never has these issues. I'm totally happy for a man if he marries his highschool sweetheart and they live happily ever after. He doesn't need to listen to any of this and is likely not even aware of SS or anything related to 'mens spaces.' "Can't even get dates" is another can of worms. I'm not even in the same tier as Leykis. The only thing I've in common with the guy is more than one marriage that went wrong that wasn't solely our foul up.

 

[intricate design]

When I’ve been “in love”

Id have sex with her like 10 times per day. We were addicted to the buzz of sex with each other. We couldn’t even hold jobs. We couldn’t be separated very long.

it’s like a sex fest and constantly connecting with eachother and constantly enjoying someone’s company and their viewpoints. Everything about her you cannot get enough of eachother

it doesn’t mean exclusivity so much you’re just swamped on the great feelings the two of you share. And people around you notice it and appreciate it and others get jealous

being in love is like the funnest experience humans can have

 

[Manure Spherian]

expectation for women to love men the way men love women

Can you please explain the difference?

 

[Doctor Europeo]

Can you please explain the difference?

I tried sharing a link but it wont copy_paste correctly. Im gonna copy-Paste the text instead. Probably written by Rollo

"
Today’s pull quote comes from Xpat Ranting’s blog. The discourse there is brief, but insightful:

I really, really, really hope the myth that girls are the hopeless romantics gets kicked to the curb ASAP. Everyone needs to realize that men are the “romantics pretending to be realists” and women; vice versa

I found this particularly thought provoking — Men are the romantics forced to be the realists, while women are the realists using romanticisms to effect their imperatives (hypergamy). This is a heaping mouthful of cruel reality to swallow, and dovetails nicely into the sixth Iron Rule of Tomassi:

Iron Rule of Tomassi #6
Women are utterly incapable of loving a man in the way that a man expects to be loved."


In its simplicity this speaks volumes about about the condition of Men. It accurately expresses a pervasive nihilism that Men must either confront and accept, or be driven insane in denial for the rest of their lives when they fail to come to terms with the disillusionment.

Women are incapable of loving men in a way that a man idealizes is possible, in a way he thinks she should be capable of.

In the same respect that women cannot appreciate the sacrifices men are expected to make in order to facilitate their imperatives, women can’t actualize how a man would have himself loved by her. It is not the natural state of women, and the moment he attempts to explain his ideal love, that’s the point at which his idealization becomes her obligation. Our girlfriends, our wives, daughters and even our mothers are all incapable of this idealized love. As nice as it would be to relax, trust and be vulnerable, upfront, rational and open, the great abyss is still the lack of an ability for women to love Men as Men would like them to.

For the plugged-in Beta man, this Red Pill awareness, this aspect of ‘awakening’ is very difficult to confront. Even in the face of constant, often traumatic, controversions of what a man hopes will be his reward for living up to qualifying for a woman’s love and intimacy, he’ll still hold onto that Disneyesque ideal.

It’s very important to understand that this love archetype is an artifact from our earliest feminized conditioning. It’s much healthier to accept that it isn’t possible and live within that framework. If she’s there, she’s there, if not, oh well.

She’s not incapable of love in the way she defines it, she’s incapable of love as you, a man, would have it. She doesn’t lack the capacity for connection and emotional investment, she lacks the capacity for the connection you think would ideally suit you.

The resulting love that defines a long-term couple’s relationship is the result of coming into an understanding of this impossibility and re-imagining what it should be for men. Men have been, and should be, the more dominant gender, not because of some imagined divine right or physical prowess, but because on a rudimentary psychological level we ought to have realized that a woman’s love is contingent upon our capacity to maintain that love in spite of a woman’s Hypergamous nature. By order of degrees, Hypergamy will define who a woman loves and who she will not, depending upon her own opportunities and capacity to attract it. "

 

[RoadKing_Rabbit]

I tried sharing a link but it wont copy_paste correctly. Im gonna copy-Paste the text instead. Probably written by Rollo

Thanks kindly! I probably would have tried to "essay" that out. That's pretty much exactly what I was getting at.

 

[jhonny9546]

I don't even care if she loves me or not. All that matters is whether she thinks I'm the best. Because when she thinks I'm the best, she will do everything in her power to keep me happy and the relationship flows smoothly.

It's when they start to think they can get someone better that problems arise.

This was everything we need to hear, but also what we don't want to hear.

As men, always being the best also means having to eat other people's cake, because otherwise others would become better than us.

Forget altruism. You see it a bit like lion fights. The winner gets the advantage.

Bullying, manipulation, whatever makes you the best, women don't care.

Women after 30, if they find a rich man, don't let him go.
And as soon as the man loses that advantage (wealth), she will set him aside.

This process, and behavior, is much more pronounced in borderline and narcissistic women.

But most men today are absolutely desperate to find evidence that it's not their fault (it's the women's fault) they can't get into a happy relationship.

Men are looking for that because they've discovered the true face of women.
Not because they're stupid or anything.
So this is already making them work, asking "Why?"
If people are curious, then they're working on it.

I'm talking about women who refuse to let you go, women who are stunned when they meet you, etc.

Sometimes they're simply borderline women who have nothing in particular for you. It's just their illness.

“No one cares about you!”

Translation: “No one cares about ME!”

Black pill misery and cope.

I work in healthcare and witness everything proving the opposite for men who are loved and cared about.

Some scum of the earth are loved and cared for, and dead ones have had huge turnouts for their funerals.

In some MGTOW cases, “Don’t marry!” means “I have no woman to marry.”

Can you explain this better to the OP?
He's looking for an answer to his question, not something that creates even more doubt.

I think if OP isn't loved, it's because he's missing something to be loved.
If OP wants to know what that is, and is willing to work on it, then it might be time to help him.

 

[RoadKing_Rabbit]

Right.


In *some*(I MISSED THIS!) MGTOW cases, “Don’t marry!” Means “I have no woman to marry”.

Totally missed the word "some." I rescind my remarks. lol

 

[jhonny9546]

As a "beta" man, after taking the "red pill" and understanding what "love" really is (and that it's no longer the relationship you have with a woman like your mother), this is the most certain thing you could ever feel.

But because on a rudimentary psychological level we ought to have realized that a woman's love is contingent upon our ability to maintain that love in spite of a woman's hypergamous nature.

And so you ask yourself: after this realization, besides having to rationalize all this, why should I also "work hard" to get a woman if I already know she won't love me the way I want, in that way?


This is why men look for other things to pour that love of their life into... could it be art? Music? Work?

It's not exactly like realizing that that concept of love can disappear from your life.
As a man, you still have that love inside you, and you'll use it for other things, while the hard part is being able to "switch off" when it comes to loving your woman and your interactions with her.

You know what I mean? It's really a lot of work, but once you've figured it out... is it really worth it?

 

[jhonny9546]

Relationships aren’t work.

Familiarity does in fact breed contempt,..and mediocrity, and routine, and banality, and commonness,.. which is why so many marriages end up in the **** can. Men and women give up on themselves.

The “Relationships are work” meme is a Social Convention. How often do you hear men say these words? This has filtered into popular consciousness even with men now. For the LTR men who subscribe to this I’d also speculate that many of them are in relationships where THEY are “doing the work” for the women who are giving them the ‘grade’ so to speak. And of the single men who subscribe to this mythology, each had to be conditioned to believe this is the case in LTRs by women. This is rooted in the mistaken belief that men’s actions and sacrifices can ever be appreciated by women.

What would the best method be to get a man to live up to the idealizations a woman has as her perfect mate (however twisted and convoluted this may have been defined for her)? Women love the ‘fixer upper’. “He’d be such a great guy if only he would, _____” or she’ll say “I’m working on him.” It’s when the conditioning goes from “I’m working on him” to “We’re working on our relationship” that he has now internalized her frame control. This is where the mythology of Relationships-as-Work is derived from. How often is it the woman who needs the ‘work’ in the relationship? And if it is her, the terminology of the relationship and the associations change. ‘Work’ implies a man better conforming his identity to her ideal relationship, to better fit the feminine-centric reality. And what better way to initiate this than to psychologically condition him to want to embody her ideal – even before he’s ever met a woman or been involved in a relationship?

I just read that article, but what does Rollo means when it says that text in bold?
Is that actually referring to the fact that a woman have an "ideal" man in her mind, and want her "real" man to be like that, so she will start saying things to him like "You need to go to the gym", or "You need to get a new job with higher salary", actually to change him, to respect "her" ideal man, and actually, when the man aknowledge He really needs to go to the gym or change the job, and He will do it, He is actually fked because He accepter her frame, even tho, what she says is actually making him higher value?

 

[Doctor Europeo]

And so you ask yourself: after this realization, besides having to rationalize all this, why should I also "work hard" to get a woman if I already know she won't love me the way I want, in that way?

You dont work hard to get some p00zy. You work hard to build a cool Life for yourself; getting some quality p00zy is just a byproduct of that (@tksniper just made a thread about this)

 

[Rainman4707]

Article below

-----------------------------

Women are Not Capable of Love

https://medium.com/@ekeminidaniel76/women-are-not-capable-of-love-de3e8beb793e

For the longest time, we have been told that women are more emotional in relationships. While this is true, it has blinded us to another truth— one that many women like to dismiss because it exposes them for the fraud that they truly are. I use the word “fraud” because women have managed to trick the world into believing they’re the best at something they are not even capable of.

While this appears to be an attack on women, I think it is important that I stress that the goal of this article is to establish an understanding that men love women far more differently than women love men. Hence, men love women idealistically, while women tend to love men more from an opportunistic stand point.

When a woman falls in love with a man, she’s most likely doing so because the man is valuable to her. In other words, in a woman’s world, unconditional love for a man is nonexistent. Emphasising this in one of his shows, Chris rock said “the man is loved only on the condition that he provides or gives something.” This suggests that if a man isn’t offering “something” or is projected to be unable to offer it in the nearest future, he’s unworthy of love. Interestingly, “something” in this context refers to whatever the woman values. This raises the question: what do women value?? With MONEY being the most common answer, it comes as no surprise that many women today openly declare that they can’t date broke men. This implies that as a man, absence of funds typically equals absence of love and affection for you.

Apart from money, there are those who value LOOKS, INTELLIGENCE, SECURITY and finally, ATTENTION. So therefore, every man who desires to be loved must have the capacity to provide any one or a combination of all of these things in the present or the nearest future (cos if the future too far, them go shenk you). With this, it’s safe to assert that love is a transaction for every woman.

With transactional love masquerading as true love, it’s no coincidence that the divorce and breakup rate for men who lose their jobs or earning power is significantly higher. According to one Havard study that analysed data from 6,300 couples, married men with no jobs were more likely to get divorced than those with secure jobs. The study went further to emphasise that men with less stable income or part-time jobs experience greater marital strife, and their conjugal life is far from sweet. More recently, Keldenich and Luecke (2020) in attempts to establish links between a husband’s job loss and marital stability found a 74% increased chance of marriage dissolution when the man loses his source of income. These empirical evidences support my earlier claim that unconditional love is nonexistent in a woman’s world. This is also the reason many women keep different men to satisfy their various needs. They identify quickly who has what they want, and transact their time, and quite often their bodies in exchange for these wants.

Explaining why women may be transactional in love, evolutionary psychology argues that individuals with desirable traits are more likely to attract a mate and reproduce. In this context, men often offer resources and support to women in exchange for sexual access, which can help them demonstrate their abilities to provide for a potential mate and their offspring. From a female perspective, choosing a partner who can offer resources and support may increase the chances of survival and reproductive success for her and her offspring. Similarly, comparative psychology argues that among many animal species, females often use selective mate choice to ensure that they mate only with high-quality males.

In humans, social and cultural factors also play a critical role in predicting how transactional women are with love, often posing strong influences on the degree to which women prioritise factors such as physical attractiveness, wealth, or status in a potential partner. These factors may be more or less important depending on the individual and the cultural context.

Ultimately, I think that boys and men must accept the unfortunate reality that they may never fully be loved for who they are. I, for one, have given up on finding true love.

------------------

Thoughts?

Is that not just the same as a man leaving a woman because she got to fat? I feel hypocritical calling women for leaving for another man with more money, when i would most likely leave someone if they got very overweight.

I was reading somewhere that you just have to take a gamble.

I have'nt been married. I was reading somewhere that you just have to take a gamble.

Lets imagine a scenario. I know mystery said that a woman is'nt just going to leave a man she has invested in. To be fair, i don't think i would leave a steady partner who i have lots in common with, get on great with, it's defo a risk to start something with someone new.

My main point is this though, how can we call women for leaving for a guy with more money, if we would leave her because she got fat. Or lost a boob.

 

[Rainman4707]

When a woman has sex with a guy she definitely can fall in love with him, especially if they spend a lot of time having sex together and bonding. She will remember a guy forever

her addiction increases with the more drama, disaster and abuse you dish out on her too. like if she gets a love bite on her skin and you caused it, she will remember you better than all the other guys who were with her and did not bruise her at all

women put on these lifelong performances of lies. But they tell the truth too. When women say stuff politically incorrect and against the female narrative she’s supposed to follow, she may be telling a vicious truth

Depends what you define as love, but to me; what you write about is infactuation.

 

[jhonny9546]

You dont work hard to get some p00zy. You work hard to build a cool Life for yourself; getting some quality p00zy is just a byproduct of that (@tksniper just made a thread about this)

Exactly what I mean!
Link the post so other might follow

 

[jhonny9546]

Is that not just the same as a man leaving a woman because she got to fat? I feel hypocritical calling women for leaving for another man with more money, when i would most likely leave someone if they got very overweight.

I was reading somewhere that you just have to take a gamble.

I have'nt been married. I was reading somewhere that you just have to take a gamble.

Lets imagine a scenario. I know mystery said that a woman is'nt just going to leave a man she has invested in. To be fair, i don't think i would leave a steady partner who i have lots in common with, get on great with, it's defo a risk to start something with someone new.

My main point is this though, how can we call women for leaving for a guy with more money, if we would leave her because she got fat. Or lost a boob.

My POV is that for men it's harder because you love her.
For her, it's easier because they don't love, but it will be harder to forget, if you're "the man", because she will remember that emotional intensity she felt, and compare that with another guy.
That is what man don't do