“All the points blaming men earlier are valid as it’s certainly a two way street”
In a chicken or egg scenario I’m still going with women. They often go from best foot forward to oversized sweatpants, 20 extra pounds and unwashed hair very quickly after feeling comfortable in a relationship.
Well, actually, not all of them and some men do to.
But men are always slobs and don’t tend to follow the siren song routine as a whole.
I don’t have that information without a search, but I would assume that all markers of wellbeing are poorer for at-risk or impoverished kids.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end, amen.
I only asked because I wonder if all of the girl power, feminism, anti patriarchy, wage gap, rape culture, etc., rhetoric is only focused on those women who have the least amount of risk of being treated unfairly by the system. In other words, any positives for women that result are only manifested among the women with the best advantages or to use woke speak, privileges, and the gap between the have and have nots among women is growing.
I like that were at a point in society where women literally have every single advantage over men, and feminism is still deemed necessary.
Yet the very people who cling to it so dearly happen to understand very little about it.
Women have been able to vote for 100 years, equal in risk regarding sexual promiscuity for 70 years, equal in the workplace for 60 years, and equal in banking rights for 50 years.
Where does the buck stop?
My point in this thread was not to go into feminist bullshit for the 100th time. It was to help revive dead bedrooms, as I’ve done this with my own and have actionable steps a man can take to do this.
Instead, we’re still debating feminism and diminishing the role of men in the household. Again.
I’m going to bail on my own thread. Again.
I only say this because I believe feminism is really an elitist movement and ideology that seeks material benefit and power at the top and doesn’t care about improving the condition of women in general. This desire for material benefit and power has come with a cost, emotionally and psychologically among those women who have embraced this ideology as there is more to life than pursuing material gain. This applies to men and women, and men have already learned this lesson.
This would seem to run counter to the Marxist elements in feminism but that is the vehicle women need in order to get their version of equality. What I mean by that is, true equality is not possible. They love DEI in the corporate world but you don’t see it in something like lumberjacking. True equality would mean half of all lumberjacks are women. That won’t happen unless women are forced to comply as individuals just as corporations are forced to comply. But I doubt many women would be climbing trees with a chainsaw even at gunpoint.
In short, women are pursuing the impossible so it’s no wonder they have issues and that they affect men as well.
Who do you think reads this forum? It’s maybe a dozen posters. This isn’t the place to change the world.
A group of men, which I’m willing to bet contains at least one dead bedroom (considering a third of marriages are sexless).
Re-route it, Andrew. It’s a good thread idea. I won’t talk about the rightness of early feminism anymore.
I like being manliness’d toward the bedroom (I was going to say “manhandled,” but it’s an attitude of “you go there now” rather than any rough play), but I also occasionally make aggressive plays.
If he initiated less I would not be able to vamp it up. I’d be uncertain.
Ok, last thing I’ll say: do you think all MEN belong in lumberjacking?? Again, lol!
Here, some related humor to let the subject end.
Most married men who have dead bedrooms have terrible initiations. I used to for sure.
I know you said “not manhandled” but literal manhandling (playfully/dominantly) works great as well.
All men are not lumberjacks but all lumberjacks are men (or at least an overwhelming majority). If we follow your logic, we can ask, since the fastest woman in the world can beat me in the 100 meters, women should compete against men.
But there aren’t many posters here adding a bunch of different view points and experiences so these threads will invariably meander. But discussing the causes of this particular matter is a way to find solutions.
I think we’re talking about the same thing. At my house, it’s playful.
No. If we follow my logic, people pursue the jobs they are best suited for. I live in a lumberjack-y place, and I can tell you it pays quite well, as does oil work. The men in these fields are being paid for their strong backs, as slender, sexy women are paid well in various ways for their own particular attributes. Lumberjack-looking men won’t be tipped as well at Hooters and would utterly fail as jockeys.
Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
That’s what I’m getting at.
It’s usually the man’s fault. Speaking in generalities, men are dominant and women are submissive. This being the case why would we put the blame on women for dead bedrooms?
Yes, women gatekeep sex.
But men gatekeep (or should) relationships.
There is an unspoken contract here that no one likes to talk about, but it’s true. That’s not an interesting discussion either.
So if men are expected to lead the relationship, shouldn’t they bear the burden of creating a sexually satisfying relationship as well?
As @Njord said, many wives stop putting effort into their looks once married. I’m willing to bet that their husbands are proportionately unattractive, as @EmilyQ said. The only ‘unfairness’ here is that a woman’s primary agency is her looks and fertility (if this is what the husband wants).
An anecdote:
I looked at a 3 year old picture of my wife and i; we were both fat (or at least, more fat than either of us wanted to be). I did a hell of a transformation over the course of about 18 months and started actually looking good. My wife did the same shortly after i started.
We both are significantly better looking now than in that 3 year old picture.
To further provide experiences:
I recently picked up a coach who will help me hit about 6% BF.
My wife started a new gym membership and started training again without me asking her to.
My point is that as a man, you need to lead the relationship in all aspects. If you aren’t getting what you want from your wife, you should lead her there as well. This only works from a “do as I do” approach; desire cannot be negotiated.
That isn’t what feminists want. That’s not how DEI works in practice. First off they only consider the high paying, white collar type jobs. Second, they look at numbers, percentages, with the idea being that women are equally adept at those jobs as men. So you can say women are not suited because of biology to do certain physical jobs, jobs they wouldn’t want regardless, but you can’t say the disproportionate number of women in fields like engineering or in corporate jobs is also due to something sexually or biologically based. You’ll note that women are overrepresented in teaching but there is no push to make the numbers equal since it would mean preferential hiring practices with regard to men.
A bit of a sidebar: And you will have a completely different personality. IMO, you will putting your marriage on the line to achieve 6% body fat. You can start another thread when you start dropping below 10%.
Science/Medicine/Biology/Common Sense/Experience of Millions of Men: “Wrong.”
This is sometimes true, and often mutually fit couples likely entered relationships while already individually engaged in some method of physical fitness so there isn’t always an issue. I think it’s more rare to find out of shape couples who legitimately goal set together, and that you’re an exception.
While risking “well actually” myself, I often see couples who follow a sort of “normal” life path get stuck in a rut later and would consider this more common than couples with mutual fitness bend, either at the onset or developed later.
I would describe the typical couple, at least on a first marriage, as meeting at a fairly young age. Maybe generally in shape even if not lean mass obsessed, or at least in the best shape of their next few decades. They likely go through a phase of being comfortable and letting their mating rituals so to speak die down, and start running in to distractions from career, family et cetera where exercising may have once been a priority but slowly and unintentionally fades out. Hormones come in to play and a cascade of issues build that we’re all aware of on this website. I would suggest this typically happens sooner for women as pregnancies take a toll and hormones seem more volatile in general before a man generally begins to see a slow and steady decline in virility.
I would not agree that a man can or should be the one to lead a woman out. There are tons of couples where men are fit and women aren’t, and won’t make a move to be. As with anybody the change has to come from within. And during this struggle to improve (or not), men begin losing attraction and the rest is history.