All these things happen because you let them. If you stay around, if you simp her, if you do stupid shit you wouldn't do otherwise just so that she says "awww you're such a gentleman" or stuff like that then of course she's going to abuse you. They know you do it for approval. They let you do that because it feeds their ego; men do that as well. After all, they never forced you to do anything; you offered yourself as a doormat, they played along and walked over you.
What value would she have for you if you didn't like her? If she suddenly grew a beard? If you knew she doesn't like you? If you knew you're not going to sleep with her? Would you still talk to her and do the things you do to keep her entertained?
If she plays hard to get, get another one. If she causes a scene, don't pay any attention. If she complains about you not being a gentleman, tell her she's not a lady. If she throws a fir and wants to lecture you, remember you don't owe her anything. You don't have to explain yourself to her.
Once you realize that she's not unique, and the sweetness, beauty, sex and everything you like about her can be obtained from other women who are actually nicer and more pleasant, she has no leverage over you. If she's a bitch, she's dumb, uninteresting and has nothing to say... Why are you talking to her? Because you like her physically and are putting up with her nonsense to get in her pants, get her approval or have a romantic relationship with her. That's the only thing you're after because you are a man. You can have better conversations with other men who share your interests.
One of the reasons why feminism exists is because women know the true power of men and how much of an act they are.
Girls face no shame from masturbation? This might be true today post-sexual liberation, but was that true in the environment she's describing with sexual inhibition? I thought girls were heavily shamed for masturbating as an extension of shaming them for being sluts. Sluts break the system where there's a net deficit of pussy.
Most men also benefit from a monogamous mating strategy. In a polygamous mating scenario hypersexual chads will have the greatest reproductive success, whereas regular men will have to pay the bill. This is the scenario we currently have with the growth of welfarism. In a monogamous mating environment hypersexual males are bound to one woman and their offspring are not subsidised by the labour of normal men.
I agree the feminist legal atmosphere generally swings things in women's favour though.
Also, another factor not covered, a population pyramid with a narrow base greatly favours women: Men want partners their age or younger, women want partners their age or older. With a narrow base there is a surplus of older men competeing for a deficit of younger women. So those men must become very focussed on the desires of women to succeed.
With a fat base to the pyramid the opposite is true and the social atmosphere will focus on men's wishes and desires.
When was the last time we saw a massive deficit of men in the west? Early 20th century due to WW1 and WW2, also the baby boom. These correlated with a hyper-male society in the succeeding two decades.
"Esther Margareta Vilar (born Esther Margareta Katzen, September 16, 1935 in Buenos Aires, Argentina)" "Vilar's parents were German-Jewish emigrants." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Vilar
Here's the thing, when it comes to certain subjects (like mathematics, sociology, economics etc.) Jews dominate. This means that there's going to be a lot of Jewish BS but also that useful discoveries are going to be credited to Jews. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Sure, along with Ireland, France and a few others, but nonetheless if you go into certain fields there's going to be mountains of jews and if you assume it's all wrong because a jew wrote it you're going to be getting rid of useful concepts.
[ + ] Skeptic5000
[ - ] Skeptic5000 0 points 2.9 yearsJun 3, 2021 22:31:15 ago (+0/-0)
What value would she have for you if you didn't like her? If she suddenly grew a beard? If you knew she doesn't like you? If you knew you're not going to sleep with her? Would you still talk to her and do the things you do to keep her entertained?
If she plays hard to get, get another one. If she causes a scene, don't pay any attention. If she complains about you not being a gentleman, tell her she's not a lady. If she throws a fir and wants to lecture you, remember you don't owe her anything. You don't have to explain yourself to her.
Once you realize that she's not unique, and the sweetness, beauty, sex and everything you like about her can be obtained from other women who are actually nicer and more pleasant, she has no leverage over you. If she's a bitch, she's dumb, uninteresting and has nothing to say... Why are you talking to her? Because you like her physically and are putting up with her nonsense to get in her pants, get her approval or have a romantic relationship with her. That's the only thing you're after because you are a man. You can have better conversations with other men who share your interests.
One of the reasons why feminism exists is because women know the true power of men and how much of an act they are.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 5 points 2.9 yearsMay 27, 2021 14:27:50 ago (+5/-0)
Girls face no shame from masturbation? This might be true today post-sexual liberation, but was that true in the environment she's describing with sexual inhibition? I thought girls were heavily shamed for masturbating as an extension of shaming them for being sluts. Sluts break the system where there's a net deficit of pussy.
Most men also benefit from a monogamous mating strategy. In a polygamous mating scenario hypersexual chads will have the greatest reproductive success, whereas regular men will have to pay the bill. This is the scenario we currently have with the growth of welfarism. In a monogamous mating environment hypersexual males are bound to one woman and their offspring are not subsidised by the labour of normal men.
I agree the feminist legal atmosphere generally swings things in women's favour though.
Also, another factor not covered, a population pyramid with a narrow base greatly favours women: Men want partners their age or younger, women want partners their age or older. With a narrow base there is a surplus of older men competeing for a deficit of younger women. So those men must become very focussed on the desires of women to succeed.
With a fat base to the pyramid the opposite is true and the social atmosphere will focus on men's wishes and desires.
When was the last time we saw a massive deficit of men in the west? Early 20th century due to WW1 and WW2, also the baby boom. These correlated with a hyper-male society in the succeeding two decades.
[ + ] Aze
[ - ] Aze 0 points 2.9 yearsMay 27, 2021 16:44:05 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] bewaryofbug
[ - ] bewaryofbug 4 points 2.9 yearsMay 27, 2021 14:19:03 ago (+5/-1)
"Vilar's parents were German-Jewish emigrants."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Vilar
[ + ] fightknightHERO
[ - ] fightknightHERO 5 points 2.9 yearsMay 27, 2021 17:30:04 ago (+6/-1)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 1 point 2.9 yearsMay 27, 2021 18:16:36 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] account deleted by user
[ - ] account deleted by user 1 point 2.9 yearsMay 28, 2021 01:13:06 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 2.9 yearsMay 28, 2021 07:09:06 ago (+0/-0)