Young men giving up on marriage: ‘Women aren’t women anymore’

What are you waiting for then?

I have been married for 33 plus years and I am very happy as life goes . . .no children. . . Not our choice. . . was hard to accept but because of that we may be closer. . . .

I think it comes down to unconditional love. . . You give it and if it is returned you have the right match. . . If not the relationship will eventually fail. . . .

Being a guy I see many young men not living for anything but themselves. . . or are too afraid to risk anything which could make them uncomfortable or possibly fail. . . video games, porn, alcohol and drugs are crutches that numb them into accepting third place in life. . . .

Seems guys are much more likely to suffer the "failure to launch syndrome" than women (my theory is video games at too early an age has something to do with this . . .women seem more immune to it or simply are not interested). . . I saw this as men became less and less represented in many professional schools including law and medicine . . .

It is easier to never risk than to try and fail. . . we have a real problem with the future unless half of us don't step up and accept responsibility . . . I am afraid that is where we are headed. . . .many women are alone . . . I hope they can succeed without the support of most men. . . .

You of course. After that I will wait just fine.

If women are the social networkers and nexus, and they gravitate towards a few types of males and pursue them, then yes, that means they are guilty of ostracizing the other men who by default do not have the connections of said women.

Moron.

I disagree.
Just depends on what kind of man or woman you are...and your story.

very true.

but we should accept the fact that men are not men anymore.

I thought men were more the ones who endured the social "trends" (i.e. social engineering) way better than women do.

Now I pass by a male hairdressers and the signboard goes:

waxing, pedicure, manicure, facial care :D

doesn't sound too manly to me.

In the USA, if you dress like you have enough money to own a TV (Not completely broke), yet do not ACT like the men on TV, you are called gay. It is very deeply programmed into society. And it is very strange.

Now, if you dress like you own a TV station, you are probably considered quite the stud, although chances of you actually being gay are probably near a good %80 or higher.

A society that denies straight males dignity, because they don't know enough about gaydom to avoid certain faux paus will allow the shitbag who promotes the gaydom on TV to lead a double life with a wife who is just for show and constant homos in the background...

They are both long dead. They were an old man and woman. Some younger woman showed an interest and all of her hard work went down the drain. Try getting a job at 53 with no work experience.

Women are trusting souls to not have their independence and more often than not, they will learn a hard lesson for it one day.

I suppose not too many of you at this late date think very many of those "men" on TV are non-homosexual themselves...

you should check out celtic rebel.

the "gray" character on fifty shades of gray is a gay guy.

the man who women lust after.

Men are still men:

[link to m.youtube.com]

the actor I mean..

I haven't read the book and don't intend to but for the main character, the readers should decide for themselves :)

These are the future men, and you think WOMEN have changed.

Lol

I would exclaim: "That's suprising!".

But it isn't.

Yes I have seen many women obese and dominant and I have seen the same of men. These are individuals with poor diet and exercise regimens. Even if they are active then their diet lends to them being dominant and abusive if not physically.

Again, this is for both genders.

Oops...not future men, current men.

Yep, men havent changed at all, they always liked little girl shows.

I herd that men have an outie, and women have an innie.

strange times we're in..

If the universe were a TV station, we are at that 4am static chaos with the annoying interference in the audio.

So all this mess is a result of what we eat, only?

I've lived in Canuckistan too. You were never free from women and thus should thank your queen and politely fuck off. If I wanted comeback from a Canadian bitch, I would go find my ex wife and punch her in the gut.

Dismissed.

There is no way to justify the Old ways logically, rationally in the light of the standards that were "legitimized" by the system at the current times.

It goes back to religion entrenched costumes/culture/standards.

Man is the leader of the family unit because God said so, kind of thing.

So if you do not believe in God, then you wont understand or accept the fact that man work in a certain way: they will never see themselves as inferior, or subordinate to woman.

And thats one of the many Design Walls we have.

It doesnt matter at this point whether you believe in God or not, you simply know that its a metaphysical law of human beings that "woman get old, sterile, less attractive" over time.

Whatever you believe, you cannot deny the Design you are subordinate too. Such as "everyone is made different".


So once you figure out the design limitations of human beings you can see that there is no way you can social engineer, or endocrinate, educate, constrain, convince, etc man, to be woman.

That simply will not work. Why is that so exactly in "scientific" terms I cannot explain. The only explanation I have is that "The Creator made man that way".

Thats why woman trying to be man, or relegating man to a role of woman, other than the man they are, does not work.

And the way I see, its a fact as absolute as a law of nature.

Thats why relationships where woman cross that "design line" does not stand.
Women have to let men be men, or they wont have any man at all. They will remain alone.

Now, the only thing that mitigates this, is men attraction to women. Both designs are not contradictory, but complementary.

Men need women, every day, since puberty. Its part of our design. Not something cultural.

Watching porn and masturbating or going around lying around with man as if they were woman is cultural.

But male sexual drive is by design.

The male sexual drive is more of a constant, then the female attractiveness over time.

Due to the Design nature of male sexuai drive
females indepedence/insubordination/disobedience are mitigated by their youth/beauty/attractiveness.

Thats the only reason why women could temporarily cross the "design line" that stablish that man will not comply/be subordinate to woman.

Because they get old, ugly, stop being attractive AND LOSE THEIR NATURAL LEVERAGE. So thats the Woman Design again limiting their attempts to be/behave in a way that they were NOT DESIGNED to behave.

If Woman were Designed to have the upper hand on the relationship, they would not stop being attractive.




You asked how does it work when someone is a mix of "Old" and "Modern". It goes back to design: There are some things that are changeable/mutable and some things that are not.

One would have to create human beings again from the begining with a different set of rules to bypass these inherent limitations: male inherent feeling of dominion and woman ephemeral nature of beauty.

Our current society was engineered to mitigate both, so that woman could have a more lasting beauty and so that man would be less dominating.

You can push the limits a bit, but at some point it simply falls apart, woman either become intolerant the inherent male preponderance or male deems woman not worth of constraint.

The way this works gets clear as woman gets past their 30's.
And its clear as well when woman is within their lower 20's.

Thats again, due to the Design of male sex drive.


Another thing is the nature of Love.
It can be bilateral and both sides can love intensely and mutualy. It can be continuous after it starts. It can last a whole life even.
Love can be balanced, but it never is seamless, it never start in both sides with the same intensity at the same time.

One side always fall in love first. One side always submits first and then the other side follows through or not. Like investing chips in a poker game.

One put the chips, then the other calls, raises or folds.

"The Old" stereotype of Man and Woman, people invested all their chips, either male or female first.

The way it is now with "Modern" women, INDEPENDENT/REBELIOUS/INSUBORDINATE woman never really invest all their chips. Even if the male invest all his chips on them first.

These women always keep some chips on their table.

And thats where the design of the inate male sex drive for women and female temporary beauty/youth DECEIVES THEM.

Males will stick with women, despite them having not invested all their chips on them, ONLY and ONLY FOR THE DURATION of the women's beauty/youth.

After a while the man will reevaluate the situation and see that his woman investment on their side of the table is not there.

If one side has 50 love and another side has 100 love, it doesnt matter WHEN BOTH SIDES GIVE EVERYTHING THEY HAVE, even if its very little.

Thats why the "Old" mans kept married with their old wifes despite them getting old and unattractive. It was not cultural, that was the nature of love that existed and could be seen back then.

woman independence is antagonic to love, because its the equivalent of not giving everything you have to your man, investing ALL YOUR CHIPS.

People up to their 30's are not really aware of this, so they keep playing games and bluffing and hiding chips, like a poker game, without really going ALL IN.

Thats why the relationships fail.

Man cant find woman who will go all in anymore, so they dont go all in either. They give just enough to keep playing the game inside their panties.

Its a game woman cant win and that they can only really play up to their 30's and even then at that point, even if they do "change" wich is very hard, and become willing to go "all in", they will be unable to compete with all the new batch of young attractive woman and if they find a man, everything the woman over 30's will have to offer at that point will be so little so as to even convince the man to give his "All In", so more often than not they are going to get something really really bad at wich point it will be them who will find it not worthy.

So thats why you end up with a lot of divorced people, unstable, destabilized families.

Its a game that only man or young woman can play.


But its not the real thing. They wont likely find their "soul mate" unless BOTH GO ALL IN. And for the man, it means him being the Flag bearer and woman, his support. Thus no 50-50.

Don't forget the barbie zombie "trend" or the zomb barb, I don't know the exact name really..

It took me months to convince my nephew -- who thinks he's the man, to drop the belieber hair style.

and this is not LA, this is Istanbul.

I lived in a big town 1.5 million+ people and I live in small towns.

Its everything different.

Small Towns higher % concentration of "Old Woman" and "Old Man" per capita

Big Towns higher % concentration of "Modern Woman" and "Modern Man" per capita.

In one you get an environment of promiscuity, in another you get an environment to raise your kids on.

Its a no brainer, such are the social distinctions between big vs small towns. At least here in Brazil.

mainly because the external influences penetration in small towns are much inferior than in big towns. so people copy catting stereotypes from "culture creators" dont occur. If you get one girl who happens to have access to internet and who happens to have fallen to "wants to be like Lady Gaga" and the like, she gets cast out/excluded/shun in the medium where she is immersed.

Its very interesting to notice.

you're so fucked in the head, you need therapy dude.

don't hurt anybody please.

Counterculture is perpetually en vogue, save in absence of the initiating prerequisite.

I gave ten million shrinks carpal tunnel trying to keep the DSM updated.