John Gottman, PhD and marriage guru, says that couples generally don’t resolve their primary conflicts, and that’s okay, it’s the way you argue and the quality of the marriage overall that determines the health of the relationship.
So basically, feed the good dog rather than trying to starve the bad.
I think you missed point.
Oh, okay, can you tell me what it was? I took it as “what makes YOU worthy of this paragon of virtue?”
Don’t we all?
Don’t worry so much about preventing them. Because it’s going to happen to some degree. Focus on how you respond to them, concerning your thought processes, words, and actions.
I think this is the issue with people like greenboy and Molyneux. They want an ideal woman, but blame society that they don’t get one after not bothering to bathe (Molyneux’s “how can you blame a guy for not bathing after all he deals with?”) or learning to control their anger (gb spouting rage in every direction in here).
They want that which they are unwilling to exemplify.
Happy people tend to want people who will work alongside them, whatever that means in practice (traditional setup or something different). They’re not looking for people who’ll put in effort while they sit around feeling victimized. Happy people avoid victimized people, because they’re bloodsuckers.
It might be the case for some people but those who’ve written and spoken about the current male-female dynamic do so generally. Some authors and commenters on the subject are married with families.
Molyneux is married with a kid and ran a tech company before his other ventures if I recall correctly. I think he likely had women. Before his incel video, I only remember his libertarian content from about seven or eight years ago. I think he likely attracted women but was empathizing with womanless men.
I believe he was speaking of lack of motivation resulting from being perpetually womanless, which I think is plausible. As said, some men become increasingly demotivated and strange from being womanless. Angry and embarrassed too. I remember a former friend over two decades ago once saying, “being womanless around other men with women (wedding, beach, party, get-together, etc.) is one of the stupidest feelings!” I never forgot that line. I told it to a friend recently via text in a conversation about Some stuff, and he replied, “Lol! Yeah, depressing AF!”
There are men and women who are alone because of unrealistic expectations and making very bad decisions. As I’ve said, some men not sealing the deal with good women because they thought they had all the time in the world or couldn’t bring themselves to commit and some women in their younger years chasing thrilling scumbags who felt no reason to marry.
As said previously, my retired therapist had 35-plus year old men crying in his office because they didn’t commit to good women, only for no such equal matches to be met later on.
What was on your list, @startingagain?
Those were the big ones. I feel like if someone can satisfy those 3, they’ll satisfy other key things (like being there for you no matter what). Also, you’ll notice that looks weren’t included in the list. I try to keep love and lust as separate as possible. Why?
Also, whenever I tell people that I separate love and lust, they always assume I’m calling my girl ugly. That’s not the case at all. I love her and lust for her. I’m just saying that if a horrible accident occurred and she became hideous beyond any recognition, I’d kiss her and have sex with her no differently.
I think there’s a difference between reasonable expectations and standards and aiming for the moon.
There are some people who have an image of the type of person they want, who actually might exist in some cases, but who likely doesn’t exist, or who they’re unlikely to meet or attract.
I feel like the 3 in my list were reasonable. One issue I’ve noticed is that a lot of people have so many minor, nitpicky things in their lists that shouldn’t matter at all. For example, imagine if I put “Likes to read” as my #4 thing. So if I meet a girl who satisfies the first 3 things but doesn’t like reading, am I not supposed to be with her even if she’ll be with me through thick and thin? It’s crazy that some people have 10+ things on their lists of what a “perfect” spouse should have. Just pick 1 - 3 BIG ones that truly matter (like actually being there for you at your lowest point, never lying to you, etc).
As said previously, my retired therapist had 35-plus year old men crying in his office because they didn’t commit to good women, only for no such equal matches to be met later on.
Before my met my fiancee, my plan was to stay single for the rest of my life, sleep around, and adopt a bunch of kids at age 50. I hated (and still hate) marriage as a legal insitituton, and saw no reason to support 1 girl when I could be sleeping around with 100s. However, when I saw that my fiancee was a genuinly good girl, I knew that I had to take her before I lost the opportunity.
As said, some men become increasingly demotivated and strange from being womanless
I feel like most people don’t understand how true this is. When I was 20, I was an incel without knowing what the word even meant. I had never even kissed a girl and was VERY angry, which showed in my behavior and outlook on life. That said, by 22 I had gotten my shit in order and met my fiancee, so it doesn’t take much to turn things around actually. I’d actually argue that most men overcomplicate “women” way too much, similarly to how most lifters overcomplicate building muscle.
On that note, are you the same poster who made “The Bodybuilding Bible” on here years ago?
Yeah.
My all time greatest move for picking up women- Smile a little and don’t say much. If they like you, they’ll convince them self that you’re awesome.
Not that I’m someone worth listening to on the subject, I just get a kick out of the volumes of jargon and bs from all of the old pua types.
I just get a kick out of the volumes of jargon and bs from all of the old pua types.
As someone who had to do a 180 socially, I can safely say that the PUAs and “masculinity gurus” did much more damage than good for me. Especially with their downright creepy obsession with being “alpha.” If they went through a time machine and met a literal Viking warrior, they’d probably call the Viking a beta because he kissed his wife goodbye before slaughtering an entire Medieval army.
If I liked intelectualizing I could probably connect the dots from the pua gurus misleading and often downright clownish advice to the current incel thing in a plausible and compelling way.
Like how frustrating would it be if one was already unsuccessful, so in desperation they seek guidance from one of those fools, buy their books, act like someone they arent, only to flounder and fail anyways?
After “trying everything” and still failing what’s left? Anger and bitter rationalization. Inceldom.
No one has ever given me a plausible alternative that would take care of children left by a parent with no accountability or punishment, keeping some men from having multiple wives, and issues with assets and property rights.
Granted the current court system has utterly screwed some men and we subsidize many unwed people’s children. But I don’t believe government in itself is bad. I can’t say I like my current government. I lived in NYC for 37 Years. What’s there to like about that city’s government.
Yes, that was my thread. No whining guru ever showed successful bodybuilders do something else.
Perfect!
You’re right, all the other things flow from those. If I’m not going to get bored talking to someone every day, then it follows that we have personality similarities and interests in common.
This is interesting, and I think you’re both right, but it occurs to me that it may not be a function of the things we have or the higher expectations of a spoiled population, but maybe instead the reduction in drinking and smoking. I sometimes boggle that business people used to go to lunch and drink martinis. How did these people get anything done? One martini has me chattering about going someplace with music, and two martinis knock me on my ass. Add to that the much stronger cigarettes of the day, with a fair number of men (my father included) smoking cigars and everyone existing in a cloud of indoor smoke, and you have a population incapable of much more than golf with a cart.
That’s fine, but to treat these strange, smelly men with sympathy while vilifying women and society does them no good, and instead harm. Because adding angry and unwashed to whatever awkwardness they displayed before getting depressed is only going to further disadvantage them. A much better focus would be on their mental health (which I think is the problem in 99% of cases…not necessarily crazy or sick, but distorted in their thinking) and the behavior that follows it. In my work we have what’s called a “behavior chain analysis” that people can use to help make needed changes when they’re reactive and make poor choices as a result. We’ll use an imagined GB scenario, since he made himself a poster boy for women as enemy:
Or we can do me:
The solution lies in managing ME, not blaming society for making it easy for men to dump women (which would be ironic, right, as I’m the one looking at breaking).
All that to say that I see the solutions as being individual, not societal. I’ve worked with both young women and men who had trouble finding someone to date, and they are always frightened and insecure, and the problem is felt from what I can tell by each side.
This supposes that there are no pushes by some seriously powerful and influential forces in entertainment and other media, government, and academia for what some of us see going on. The vast majority of human beings are trained, educated, and above all pressured to behave as they do. Do you actually think that messages in music, movies, talk shows, etc., have no bearing on anyone, when the same messages are repeated over and over and over?!
Or that air-headed parenting has no negative consequences? I hear this nonsense all the time: “don’t be strict with your daughters; they’ll wind up rebelling.” That’s puzzling considering all the men I know and communities I’ve observed with actual family and community standards had no daughter rebelling (promiscuous and hanging out with dirtbags and doing dangerous things) and few sons with social pathologies.
Though I don’t know many, EVERY man I know with a violent past, prison sentences, anti-social behavior, ALL had no dad or a negligent dad.
So I don’t know how some pr much of it isn’t societal.
I believe America’s increasing atomization and obsession with hyper-individuality was bound to result in disenfranchised and womanless men, some of whom are good men who would’ve been great husbands and dads.
But yes, I agree, of course there are men who are unattractive for a variety of reasons that can be corrected.
I also think with the rate of fatherlessness that it is the blind leading the blind with men understanding female sexuality and attraction.
I want to add that I think the perceptions and conclusions of some here are skewed because of the qualities of posters: high IQ, highly disciplined, maybe independent minded, introspective, etc. Most of any population isn’t like that. But with those qualities and resultant successes it might be easy to think, “it’s on the individual”.
Reading this, I feel that many forgetvthat what work for a couple may not work for the other.
My amazing bf and I have a great relation but we are far from the “standard”.
One thing that bugs me about this supposition: All of these single men without women, and by default- women without men, because the population difference isn’t that great- but no big backlash from women. Like, we aren’t talking at all about these poor manless women (and they don’t seem too outspoken about it).
So maybe women are actually more capable of being comfortable without men than men are without women? Or willing to sacrifice some of the comforts that marriage may (not always) provide in lieu of personal autonomy and safety.
I’ve had this ongoing disagreement with a buddy of mine. He’s lifetime single, straight (not a “confirmed bachelor”) likes women and has always had one or two around. But he has never had to share space, decision making, or in any way compromise on how to move forward as a family unit.
So the crux of our disagreement: he believes that for me to be happy I should act unilaterally, be The Man of The House. I disagree. I think I should act with consideration of my wife and give weight to her opinions–Even when I don’t like or agree with it.
I finally broke down and blurted out “That’s why all of our friends are divorced. They act unilaterally and with force. They move without consideration for their whole family, then come crying that they lost everything in the divorce from ‘that bitch’. They’re self centered morons that never learned how to share, and they destroy their own families for the sake of their ego. If you don’t act with force, you won’t be met with force, like divorce decrees, court orders, shared custody, and kids that hate them.”.
So, yeah, other side of this equation is women. And more often than not, the only time they seem unhappy is when they’re legally bound to certain men.
A lot of guys remind me of old Yosemite Sam. Guns blazing pointing out at the world, never realizing that they’re the ones starting the shit.
That’s can’t be it. I’d imagine it’s because women don’t have a voice in our patriarchal society and their voices are being repressed…clearly they can’t be happy without a man to make decisions for them
hmm… I should probably take that advice into heart. Does the gym thing count as “nitpicky” though given it’s such a big part of my life?
Haven’t you ever seen Sex and the City?
They’re all drinking appletinis and showing of their big fancy vaginas!