Don't We All Have SOME Responsibility?

[user43770]

Hmm, perhaps. I wonder why the countries that always top the list of happiest on earth are often the ones with more female equality and sexual liberation? I'm not saying it's a causality. But I do think that a lot of men want to think that the pre-revolution times were happier. The same way women like to believe that they were terrible. Probably the truth is somewhere in between.

But your point about suicide and depression I accept. People with top tier conveniences are miserable. Go figure.

Which countries? Sweden and the few other weird, scandavian countries?

 

[zekko]

Hmm, perhaps. I wonder why the countries that always top the list of happiest on earth are often the ones with more female equality and sexual liberation?

What are the women like in Sweden, culturally I mean? If the women are very sexually liberated, wouldn't that imply that they are freely following their sexual imperative? So wouldn't that mean they would be banging the top 20% of guys? What do the other 80% of guys do, are they also so happy?

 

[user43770]

What are the women like in Sweden, culturally I mean? If the women are very sexually liberated, wouldn't that imply that they are freely following their sexual imperative? So wouldn't that mean they would be banging the top 20% of guys? What do the other 80% of guys do, are they also so happy?

I love how you politely troll people.

 

[samspade]

Which countries? Sweden and the few other weird, scandavian countries?

Haha yeah a lot of times it's your Denmarks and Swedens. I'm sure there are a lot of other factors. I believe Sweden at least has a high suicide rate though. And I'd never live in Scandinavia because the weather is not for me.

 

[samspade]

What are the women like in Sweden, culturally I mean? If the women are very sexually liberated, wouldn't that imply that they are freely following their sexual imperative? So wouldn't that mean they would be banging the top 20% of guys? What do the other 80% of guys do, are they also so happy?

I guess the other 80% are on Sosuave.

 

[Spaz]

Which countries? Sweden and the few other weird, scandavian countries?

Generally speaking, emotionally.

Swedish women are more manly.

Swedish men are more feminine.

Why?

Balance.

When men turn more feminine, their women MUST turn more masculine.

 

[metalwater]

Hmm, perhaps. I wonder why the countries that always top the list of happiest on earth are often the ones with more female equality and sexual liberation?

who makes the list, the ones that like it that way.

 

[Desdinova]

It takes only one man to damage a woman. Once she's damaged, you're not going to get commitment nor loyalty out of her. She becomes a cvm dumpster. Use her for her intended purpose and don't bother entering a committed relationship with her.

 

[samspade]

Generally speaking, emotionally.

That's what happiness is, an emotion. It's also a pursuit.

People who don't feel or pursue it are generally miserable.

Which countries? Sweden and the few other weird, scandavian countries?

If a strong patriarchy makes for happier lives, shouldn't places like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan be great places to live? (Of course there are plenty of other factors besides sexual politics.)

Just challenging the conventional wisdom here, not saying it's right or wrong.

 

[samspade]

I would argue that those are examples of extreme paranoia and insecurity, rather than genuine masuline dominance. Masuline dominance attracts submission; whereas, subjugation is a product of fear of inferiority. Being domineering, as opposed to dominant, is probably actually a negative feminine attribute.

Well said.

 

[zekko]

yes, I still use a BlackBerry

I used to have a Blackberry many years ago, and people made fun of me for it then, because it was so outdated.
I really did like the keyboard on it though, where you would use your thumbs on it, better than the virtual keyboards you have now. Well, not you apparently, but most people.

 

[zekko]

I had the previous one for 5 years, and this one is a 2018 model.

They're still making those?

 

[Spaz]

I would argue that those are examples of extreme paranoia and insecurity, rather than genuine masuline dominance. Masuline dominance attracts submission; whereas, subjugation is a product of fear of inferiority. Being domineering, as opposed to dominant, is probably actually a negative feminine attribute.

Exactly.

 

[Desdinova]

This is misguided. It assumes that women have no control over their breeding preferences.

Well, they don't. If they did, all the jerks (and not the nice guys) would be complaining about not being able to get a woman.

your position demonstrates your buy in.

...and I'll never be able to see it any other way.

 

[Desdinova]

So you are saying that from the dawn of time, marriage and relationships are a farce and women have never protected their own viability as valuable (her sexual value) and that a valuable, masculine man can never hold a woman’s loyalty

A bit presumptuous, aren't we?
This has nothing to do with a woman's inability to consciously choose her mate.

I believe marriage can be viable, but only with an undamaged woman. Sure a woman can fall in love, but she has only one shot at it. If the man she falls in love with doesn't stay in her life (for whatever reason), she will NEVER find another man she can be as passionate about. She might feel that at the beginning of a new relationship, but it won't have a lasting effect.

Then why do men want a family and children?

Many men do want that, but they don't want it with a trashy damaged wh0re who is never loyal or respectful toward him.

 

[Man'sThirdEye]

There is no point whatsoever in pondering hypotheticals of how things could have gone or what could have been done.

Hypothetical thinking like this is childish. Thinking that some kind of utopia can be achieved is also childish. There will always be poor people, there will always be domestic violence and there will always be wh0res.

You're not wrong, but you can only work with the way things are and be the best man that you can be. You cannot red pill people who don't want to be red pilled, you'll only get attacked for your efforts because people will fiercely resist having their illusions shattered. I know because I've tried.

Also, you can only make a difference and be heard if you can be compassionate towards others as you try to influence them. Raging and quoting ten billion facts will change the minds of precisely no one.

I came back to this post after thinking on it for a while and I understand that you're right. The Utopia is impossible and it would be foolish to try. The world is the way it is but I was very humbled by what you said so I thank you for your words. You seem to be very reasonable and I needed such a thought when I was being unreasonable.

 

[Man'sThirdEye]

It takes only one man to damage a woman. Once she's damaged, you're not going to get commitment nor loyalty out of her. She becomes a cvm dumpster. Use her for her intended purpose and don't bother entering a committed relationship with her.

This would mean that many women of legal age, I would say 98% of them, are ruined and not for long term relationships or marriage. Is this what you're getting at?

 

[Desdinova]

This would mean that many women of legal age, I would say 98% of them, are ruined and not for long term relationships or marriage. Is this what you're getting at?

Yes, but I would say it's closer to 80% for women age 18. As a woman gets older, it gets much worse. I would say it's 98% by the time she's 24.

 

[Georgepithyou]

This whole problem was created by Communism and the birth pill

 

[gladiator4439]

As far as the past goes, I agree with what has been stated in several of the posts above. You cannot change the past. You, as one individual, cannot change the current culture and climate regarding sex and sexuality for either of the sexes. Women won't listen to you because they have this idea propetuated to them to go have sex with whoever, and c'mon, who wouldn't want society to condone that for them. And SOME guys will listen to you, but lets be real, most won't. Given these facts, people will do what they want regardless, and you will never garner enough support to change these facts, sex is just too powerful a thing for one individual to overcome, no matter how powerful. Culture around sex changes extremely slowly over time, or because of some sort of technological advancement (i.e. birth control, tinder, etc.). You can't worry about what should have been, or what is, it just is. With this being said you decide how you want to live within these confines. If you want to take a sniper approach go ahead, but that's not very successful even if you're considered an "alpha".

As far as "quality women" goes, Rollo Tomassi doesn't call it a myth for no reason. It is a myth. Women will f**k, they will have sex whether you like it or not, and if she's not having sex with you, she'll get it from someone else. And say she is a woman with high moral standards, it might take a lot, but eventually she will give. Very few people wait for marriage to have sex because we get married later than we used to. It's not 1800, people don't get married at 15 anymore. It's very difficult for anyone to go through the peak of their sexual prime without giving in to these natural desires. It's not on us to "create" mythological quality women. We can only hold people we have influence over to a higher moral standard. For your average individual this means you might hold sway over TWO or THREE people TOPS. That's not how you change a culture. Don't go looking for "quality women", don't go looking to make "quality women", it's a useless effort, and the fact that you even bring it up shows that your Blue Pill conditioning is still your default despite the fact that you are trying to override that. We have no moral obligation to keep women from being slvts. Chad's gonna chad and sloots gonna sloot, that's the way of the world.