- Reaction score
- 6,428
if you aren't chaining her up chances are she will cheat on you.
i hear that brother. ever since 50 shades
if you aren't chaining her up chances are she will cheat on you.
lol you know what i mean. ugly guy now, ugly guy in the 50s, its the same thing. the girl wont be turned on by you hahai hear that brother. ever since 50 shades
I do think the value given to a man/woman's looks, the divide, has become much closer in the last 10 years or so due the explosion of online dating, the internet in general, and the waning need for the man to be the "provider" (outdated in 2017 but what a large proportion of relationships would be based on historically). Female hypergamy is real and I've no doubt women can get sex easier than men, I don't think anyone can debate that. However I don't think that automatically translates to "women have it easier than men" unless we're purely talking sex. Not fulfilling, basic human intimacy, just sex.
not many women want just sex from random men...very few.
I have known promiscuous women as a teen and in my 20s and most of them were using sex to either numb out from fucked up sh*t or using it to validate themselves. very very very few it was for pure pleasure. I'm talking random hook ups.
The 6/10 women can get sex from 8/10 men but not relationships, I think that's likely true, I have no qualms believing it.
But they can also easily get relationships for 6/10 men
"
I'm not sure what that has to do with what i wrote.
I think you are not reading what i wrote and absorbing it.
We are talking about two different things.
.
You're right, it's a better follow-up to the general conversation than to the specific post I quoted. It might have been clearer if I had quoted a few posts together rather than assumed the context.
you are talking about this....but i find it hard to believe one gender of a generation has become so selective over the other gender of same generation...I don't really understand why it would be only one gender unless women were in scarcity.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lariss...men-unable-to-find-dateable-men/#c24aa1584867
Well seeing as this is hair loss talk, that's all a balding man cares about - female intimacy, sex.I do think the value given to a man/woman's looks, the divide, has become much closer in the last 10 years or so due the explosion of online dating, the internet in general, and the waning need for the man to be the "provider" (outdated in 2017 but what a large proportion of relationships would be based on historically). Female hypergamy is real and I've no doubt women can get sex easier than men, I don't think anyone can debate that. However I don't think that automatically translates to "women have it easier than men" unless we're purely talking sex. Not fulfilling, basic human intimacy, just sex.
Well seeing as this is hair loss talk, that's all a balding man cares about - female intimacy, sex.
Being a provider is not as valued today as it was during our fathers generation.
I mean money matters, if you make it enough. But what is enough? I would say at minimum 100,000K
If we don't meet that quota, then the act of being a provider is irrelevant.
LOOKS. Invest in your rugs, plugs and surgeries! it's the only way we are going to make it.
Why do you think men should earn more cash?i think men making more than the woman is a good dynamic to have in a relationship.
I think m/f sexual dynamic it's just always good for the woman to respect the man she is with or look up to him a little bit.
if you respect someone your with you are not going to cheat on them
If you don't respect them other men start to look better.
Young girls can say and think a lot of sh*t but deep down that is just nature.
I'm less interested in sex than most because I have a dodgy hip these days that makes sex increasingly difficult (I'm only 31) so sex in the future is going to be off the cards.Well seeing as this is hair loss talk, that's all a balding man cares about - female intimacy, sex.
Being a provider is not as valued today as it was during our fathers generation.
I mean money matters, if you make it enough. But what is enough? I would say at minimum 100,000K
If we don't meet that quota, then the act of being a provider is irrelevant.
LOOKS. Invest in your rugs, plugs and surgeries! it's the only way we are going to make it.
It's hard to argue against.
Men who are smiling and facing the camera are less likely to get responses.
Women either don't like that look or don't like those kinds of men.
not many women want just sex from random men...very few.
I have known promiscuous women as a teen and in my 20s and most of them were using sex to either numb out from fucked up sh*t or using it to validate themselves. very very very few it was for pure pleasure. I'm talking random hook ups.
you are talking about this....but i find it hard to believe one gender of a generation has become so selective over the other gender of same generation...I don't really understand why it would be only one gender unless women were in scarcity.
When will I get laid?
Why do you think men should earn more cash?
I only date at the very least semi successful women - essentially they must have a degree, and be able to not freeload of a man.
For me, a woman that is dependent on a mans wages his not very sexy.
Although I think you'd be surprised. I have mates who meet and f*** girls from tinder and pof every few weeks, both parties having no intentions of going any further. It's not much validation either, seen as it's very easy for them. I think girls get validation from knowing they could date the guy seriously, just-sex is very meaningless for validation when it's easy.
On the other hand I know many girls who I'd be extremely surprised if they did this. Girls who don't even ever meet guys from tinder.
Hypergamy. When you can easily get sex from 8's, as a 6, I can easily understand how you would want/expect a relationship with a 7 or an 8.
I mean there isn't any argument that hypergamy exists, but much less so for relationships. I think when girls hit mid 20's most of them will have gone for looks-matched guys.