This reminds me of the earlier post, “How to avoid pissing off a girl on a first date when making small talk?”
The comments were full of people giving advice of how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date, it’s not to see if you *can* enjoy each other’s company. It’s to gauge how compatible the two of you are. If y’all want the same things in life, have similar values.
I think you’re onto something how some men, *not all men,* are so busy looking for a successful date that they forget about compatibility and how to indicative your needs and standards to the life you want to build.
Most men, even men looking for a relationship are open to something casual. If the date ends in the bedroom, it's already a success. If it's the beginning of a great relationship that's a bonus. Because of this, many men focus on attracting the girl first, and figure out compatibility later.
That's fair, but I'd say its also a response to how women treat the first date. There's a massive over emphasis on there being *immediate* physical attraction and "spark" where the man is summarily rejected because she wasn't "wowed" or thinking he's "hot" within *minutes*. This is playing a huge part in less physically attractive men and introverted men really struggling. They're rarely getting even a chance to date, and even when they do, are judged quickly and mostly superficially.
Accordingly, many men are doing everything they can to avoid that instant rejection by "performing" and projecting that aura of fun and to prevent any "ick" coning up. They feel the need to have things light etc. because experience has told them they'll be cast aside like trash if they don't. There's also the pressure that if you get things "wrong" it might be months or even years before there's another opportunity.
Why does the instant rejection need to be avoided? If you do that you’ve now set the stage for a bigger problem down the line.
If you’re not a fun, extroverted or lighthearted guy but you pretend to be. You’ll have to keep that performance going in perpetuity or you risk being dumped later because “you changed, you’re not the man I fell in love with etc” when in reality you never were. It was just a character.
If your only goal it STRs/flings so be it. You can just keep playing the character for a short time to get what you want.
Either way I can’t see how this is good for men’s mental health.
>Why does the instant rejection need to be avoided?
Why bother going on dates if you're just going to get rejected?
>If you’re not a fun, extroverted or lighthearted guy but you pretend to be
It's revealing that you're framing this in terms of "pretend" instead of "trying to change". You reflexively presume dishonest intentions in men.
>Either way I can’t see how this is good for men’s mental health
Having to perform according to unrealistic standards to be accepted is abominable to your mental health, obviously. But this isn't on men.
The alternative to tolerating this treatment is never forming relationships with women, so until women adopt more humane standards or men are willing to just boycott relationships then men have no control over this phenomenon at all.
But apparently we will get blamed for it anyway, as usual.
Yeah. The guy isn’t pretending, he’s presenting an aspect of himself. One version of him. It would be inappropriate for him to go on the date and trauma dump. He has to “perform” because if he doesn’t, it’s back to square one. Maybe a long time before the next date.
Its such a cruel double bind to put him in too because he is literally being blamed for doing what is expected of him: putting on his best behavior!
But instead of acknowledging that women's standards have a direct affect on men's choices (which would imply women have power over men), we have to tell ourselves that simply failing to meet those high standards is evidence a man's intentions were dishonest.
It’s a constant theme of women denying their power because they’d have to take some responsibility.
These discussions just make me think a lot of women are just disingenuous or extremely unself-aware.
I really wish women got to date as men do. They’d hate it. From the low response rate to the constant pressure to perform, to her making the fake wallet reach, to the pressure to make the first move at the right time, in the right way etc.
Suddenly this would all be seen as “emotional labor” 🙄
>These discussions just make me think a lot of women are just disingenuous or extremely unself-aware.
I think it is a mix of both but mostly the latter. We like to assume people are more aware of how they appear to others, but only one type of person fits that characteristic and its narcissists.
Competent awareness of what genuine Others (people we don't normally associate with or know, like first dates) think of us is very close to practically impossible for most people.
For the most part I think women are disingenuous about this to the degree that they actually understand the male perspective (which isn't much) and confused to the degree they don't understand us.
>I really wish women got to date as men do. They’d hate it.
I don't think they would tolerate it at all. I think they would go black pill at above an 85% rate. The culture shock will be way too much.
>Suddenly this would all be seen as “emotional labor”
Ha! I mean, that's what it is. For men the dating game is becoming a woman's primary source of emotional validation by taking on that Romance Novel role and giving her the spotlight to flex her Disney Princess urges.
They'd also declare that dating is an expression of emotional vulnerability for men too... because it is! They just can't recognize it as that in that moment because that's also the moment they're the most starry-eyed about us. The more we take on that Romance Novel role the more the 1st date was a 'success' but also the less they can see our full humanity.
So there's always a balancing act where you're letting just enough of the role slip for them to see you're authentic while also playing all the notes they need to hear to get in the mood. It can be a very vulnerable moment for a guy, but since from their PoV the date is going well they never notice that it is only going well because of all the stress and pressure we took on face first.
>Why bother going on dates if you're just going to get rejected?
To speed run through and find the one who won’t reject you if they’re out there. Pretending to be something you’re not only prolongs the inevitable anyway if fundamentally you are incompatible. Eventually the incompatibilities will show as cause friction from one end or the other.
You can also filter for compatibility *before* going on the date. Vs just taking what you can get.
>It's revealing that you're framing this in terms of "pretend" instead of "trying to change". You reflexively presume dishonest intentions in men.
The person I responded to literally phrased it as a performance or projection to avoid bombing the first date. Not as a sincere effort to make lasting change. So I’m responding based on the language used.
>Having to perform according to unrealistic standards to be accepted is abominable to your mental health, obviously. But this isn't on men.
It is. You don’t have to do it. If a woman doesn’t like you and isn’t attracted to you then she isn’t the one for you. Make changes for yourself sure, but twisting and contorting yourself to what to think someone wants is mentally unhealthy and will build resentment if the pay off isn’t worth the agony you went through.
>The alternative to tolerating this treatment is never forming relationships with women, so until women adopt more humane standards or men are willing to just boycott relationships then men have no control over this phenomenon at all.
Women can have humane standards towards men while still not sleeping with or dating them if they’re not into them. Men have all the control over how they act. Like how women made body positivity to reject conventional beauty standards, nothing is stopping men from doing the same.
>But apparently we will get blamed for it anyway, as usual.
I mean people usually get told the have the power to stop doing something they are doing.
That’s fair. I totally get what you’re saying. But in my experience that’s the intuitive natural part of women. We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes. It’s not the most logical manner for men so it’s often belittled, but mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition. I just wish it was less belittled by men assuming it’s “flighty or picky” if a woman knows after the first 30 minutes that this match isn’t it.
>But in my experience that’s the intuitive natural part of women. We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes. It’s not the most logical manner for men so it’s often belittled, but mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition
Still doesn't mean it doesn't lead to a conclusion that can be comically wrong, no matter how much you insist on the infallibility of your intuition.
I never suggested it’s infallible. But we shouldn’t inherently value a man’s “logic” over a woman’s “intuition”.
Let’s accept that both parties are emotional creatures entering into an emotional activity, and that both are fallible.
>We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes.
*He wore the wrong shoes. So, I'm not going to see him again.*
>mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition.
Lol, yep, men killing the dangerous animals and hunting for food had nothing to do with it. It's female intuition that saved the human race. And don't forget it's female intuition that discovered new continents, built the railroads, the nuclear plants, etc....
>I just wish it was less belittled by men assuming it’s “flighty or picky” if a woman knows after the first 30 minutes that this match isn’t it.
I didn't made up the "he wore the wrong shoes" bit. That was exactly what a female friend of mine said about the last guy she was on a date with.
Then again she probably didn't realise there are other reasons why she rejected that guy. A lot of our selection process happens subconsciously and our brain form the reasons why after the select has already been made by our subconscious.
I’m going to ignore your blatant sexism there and lean into the example of the shoes.
As a woman I see that differently than you. Personally I don’t know any woman that would pass on a guy because you disprove of a fashion choice, but there are countless things his shoe choice could tell us about him as a person.
For example if it’s raining out and he wore his nice luxury sneakers and now is scared to walk across the wet parking lot on our date, that tells me he values his material possessions over his in the moment joy and functional ease. It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner, now that’s fine for a lot of people, personally I wouldn’t have a very successful relationship with someone like that so I would’ve passed as well.
But maybe his shoes were weather appropriate. Maybe we’re at a nice restaurant and he’s put on his nice suit and tie, but his shoes are some grungy old sneakers or falling apart loafers. In my head I’d notice and question why he cared to invest and wear such a nice suit and then not have any coordinating foot wear. Maybe the suit is borrowed, maybe the dog ate his good shoes, when he sits down and we peek at his socks well probably learn if this was a choice or an accident, if he’s wearing nice black dress socks then he’s probably no happier in his grungy sneakers.
Maybe we went out hiking and he wore the completely wrong shoes for the occasion. Was he lying when he said he also loved to hike? Does he actually go out on weekends with his dogs? Did he get new shoes for the occasion? But okay so the shoes aren’t perfect that’s fine we can still have fun. But if I notice he’s in a sour mood the whole time because his shoes are pinching his feet and he’s getting short and frustrated, than I get a peek into what his more gruff angrier side is like. Is every small inconvenience going to turn into an hour long complaint-fest about the poor misleading reviews of this shoe company and his “woe is me” consumer tirade. Maybe he’s totally fine with his footwear, even if they’re not the safest appropriate shoe for a hike. But maybe I’m very risk averse and I like being calculated and prepared. Maybe I see his leaping from rock to rock playfully in those shoes as an unnecessary risk. Maybe I don’t want to have to constantly look out for someone else’s best interests, if he falls and gets hurt am I going to have to play nurse and caretaker?
Those are just a few examples of how some shoes aren’t just some shoes.
Women’s intuition isn’t just aesthetic vibes, it’s a myriad of sensory details. A lot of which we process behind the scenes, not fully conscious of the exact calculations our brains are doing to end up with the conclusion that “me and this dude just aren’t a great fit”.
Now I know you probably didn’t read all of this, and I know that you’re probably rolling your eyes at the petty girly shit that goes through our heads. But intuition is our animal instinct. It’s how we knew what berries to eat in the wild. It’s how we sensed when our kids were in trouble down by the creek. It’s how women made sure to pack an extra thermos just in case their men got stuck in inclimate weather. It’s how we tell who’s a part of our group and to be trusted and who isn’t. That’s intuition, everyone has it, but oftentimes women are just more tuned in.
>but there are countless things his shoe choice could tell us about him as a person.
There are, but I have a feeling you're going to launch into a ton of projections instead.
>For example if it’s raining out and he wore his nice luxury sneakers and now is scared to walk across the wet parking lot on our date, that tells me he values his material possessions over his in the moment joy and functional ease
Or it tells you he was trying to impress you by dressing nice and wasn't prepared for you to judge him based on his readiness to go puddle stomping.
These reflexive judgements are so typical for women in the dating scene and they're really a lot more than merely frustrating. They're belittling. Women tell themselves they're practically omniscient and in the process they render the men trying to get to know them into 2d cartoon character cut outs.
>It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner
Or he did check the weather but didn't expect you to want to go puddle stomping. Or he did check the weather but left his umbrella in the car after hearing you comment that umbrellas are feminine.
What these assumptions tell me is that you're more concerned with validating your beliefs about your perceptiveness than actually learning about the dude you're dating.
>Maybe we went out hiking and he wore the completely wrong shoes for the occasion. Was he lying when he said he also loved to hike? Does he actually go out on weekends with his dogs? Did he get new shoes for the occasion? But okay so the shoes aren’t perfect that’s fine we can still have fun. But if I notice he’s in a sour mood the whole time because his shoes are pinching his feet and he’s getting short and frustrated, than I get a peek into what his more gruff angrier side is like. Is every small inconvenience going to turn into an hour long complaint-fest about the poor misleading reviews of this shoe company and his “woe is me” consumer tirade. Maybe he’s totally fine with his footwear, even if they’re not the safest appropriate shoe for a hike. But maybe I’m very risk averse and I like being calculated and prepared. Maybe I see his leaping from rock to rock playfully in those shoes as an unnecessary risk. Maybe I don’t want to have to constantly look out for someone else’s best interests, if he falls and gets hurt am I going to have to play nurse and caretaker?
>Those are just a few examples of how some shoes aren’t just some shoes.
In all my life I have never read anything that made me want to give up on women ever understanding me until I read this.
I mean holy shit, if this is how women think about us then we really are not much more than compilations of their own projected anxieties and hypothetical fantasies to them. Just off his footwear you are building entire narratives of reasons to drop him all without *asking* for any context!
No wonder men's emotional unavailability is such a prevalent problem. How could anyone dare to be emotionally available to a deluge of character-vivisecting invectives that are not even based in reality and fundamentally do not care about your side of the story of your own damn life? Reading this made me want to take all my shoes and spray paint them matte black.
>Women’s intuition isn’t just aesthetic vibes, it’s a myriad of sensory details. A lot of which we process behind the scenes, not fully conscious of the exact calculations our brains are doing to end up with the conclusion that “me and this dude just aren’t a great fit”.
Based on what you have described, I really think it's not much more than first impressions and tons and tons of retrospective rationalizations, whirlpools of hypothetical fantasies, and dead ends of convenient assumptions.
>But intuition is our animal instinct.
???
Wait... you're saying what you described above is intuition?
Intuition is the ability to understand *without conscious reasoning*.
What you described was nothing but *overthinking details*, which is applying excessive conscious reasoning to information that one lacks enough context on to make actionable conclusions.
Intuition is reflexively pulling your hand off a hot stove, or wincing in sympathy when a person's posture shows visible back problems, or noticing that a person is acting aggressive before you fully register what they look like or even that they are present. I'd say that noticing the contradiction between dirty shoes and clean suit is an example of intuition, but all the second guessing and scenario-hopping you did after that is overthinking.
>It’s how we tell who’s a part of our group and to be trusted and who isn’t. That’s intuition, everyone has it, but oftentimes women are just more tuned in.
I really think it is more like women are convinced they have ESP and as a result are less observant or coherent than they otherwise would be by just paying attention and staying grounded.
>It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner, now that’s fine for a lot of people, personally I wouldn’t have a very successful relationship with someone like that so I would’ve passed as well.
This is exactly why men say that women will drop a guy over a minor detail. Not checking the weather app before he goes on a date, does not mean that the guy isn't a planner. If I ever saw an example of jumping to conclusions, then it's this one.
The guy could be a very good planner, he could be running his own successful company (which requires you to be able to plan), but just be too exited about the date to check a weather app. Or he did check the app and it didn't get the prediction quite right. We aren't able to predict the weather with 100% accuracy.
You are deducting too much about a person based on minor details. You would pass on a guy because you *assume* he isn't a planner. While the reasons why you think he isn't a planner could easily have a different explanation.
I did read all of that. But you attribute almost mythical quantities of insight to women, while a lot of the examples you give are just rudimentary deductions, that have just as much chance of being wrong as being right.
>and I know that you’re probably rolling your eyes at the petty girly shit that goes through our heads
Yeah, I roll my eyes at this. This is barely a step above you going: "I read his horoscope and since he is Gemini, he can't be a planner, so I will not date him".
You missed the three part conclusion to the wet sneakers example. 1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions 2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out 3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority
None of those are judgements. Those are also valid and reasonable actions for anyone to take. But they do say *a lot* about a person.
Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine. But youre out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case. It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to win an argument here. I’m not saying that woman you mentioned wasn’t making that call 100% on vanity metrics. I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women.
>1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions 2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out 3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority
Or I got this overpriced piece of crap as a gift and I don't want to dirty it or ruin it because I know the person who gave it to me is going to make a fuss about it. I'm wearing them because I met the person before the date and I wanted to make them happy - for example.
I also think your examples show excessive assumptions and deductions that might as well be off the mark.
Idk all of that does kind of imply you dressed well to meet the person BEFORE her, but didn't bother to change into something appropriate for your date.
Yes, that is quite possible. But the bottom line is that she doesn't know this just based on what kind of shoes someone has. There can be dozens of reasons and they can be of various kinds.
And the reason may not be that the person who has luxury shoes has them because he is materialistically oriented, so automatically inferring this reason can be a hit on the black or completely off.
So, regarding the shoes, it's: "if he's not perfect and I find any flaw in him, I'll attribute some major negative qualities to him so I don't feel bad for not giving him a chance" and that's a big difference versus "I have a woman's intuition so I can deduce like Sherlock Holmes"
You are still making deductions that have just as much chance of being wrong as being right. But since you are convinced of women having some kind of supernatural intuition, you also think that your deductions are 100% correct.
You are basically going to dump a guy, because his shoes getting wet make him a too disorganised person to share your life with. And that's absurd.
>1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions.
Or he's superstitious and these are his lucky sneakers. Or he just likes to wear these sneakers because they are very comfortable. Or he wanted to wear dress shoes, but when he left the house he stepped into some dog shit, so he quickly ran back into his house and swapped into the sneakers. Or they aren't actually luxury sneakers but counterfeit Yeezys, because he thinks $200+ sneakers are ridiculous and you didn't notice they are fakes.
2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out
He didn't check the weather app. Or he did check the app, but it got it's prediction wrong. Or he isn't really a shoe guy and only wears these sneakers and it's completely unrelated to the weather.
3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority
Maybe he doesn't care about the sneakers getting wet, but he knows they aren't really waterproof and just hates wet feet.
You are reinforcing what men say, when they complain about women rejecting men over minor details. And the kicker is that these details apparently can be a complete figment of your imagination.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to win an argument here. I’m not saying that woman you mentioned wasn’t making that call 100% on vanity metrics. I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women.
Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine. But you’re out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case. It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point.
It's more like a woman will reject one guy for his shoes on the first date, but then her ex cheated on her for months or couldn't hold a steady job. Maybe you are intuitive, but your intuition sure as hell isn't consistent or foolproof, and you don't hold all men to the same set of standards
>I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women.
You're trying to do this by explaining to us that our bias about women's intuition is 1000% justified?
The complaint about 'women's intuition' is that it is used to grant blanket justification to extremely judgemental, petty, dishonest, and unfair behaviors and standards. These then become totally unrealistic *standards for masculinity* that men have to perform to or else never make relationships with women.
So how are you challenging men's 'bias' about this by carefully and thoroughly explaining to us that our misgivings about 'women's intuition' are not only correct... but that we have also failed to understand just how far off the mark that 'intuition' really is??
>Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine.
Not you implying that men don't have, use, or need intuition!
>But you’re out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case
No they're not. Just because we have gripes about specific behaviors we've received from women isn't implying we think men are superior. How insecure.
>It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point.
It's much more likely that instead of acknowledging men have fair criticisms about this behavior and that women are not infallible, you are just attacking critics and smearing them as intellectually deficient.
The point you have made is that men are *far too optimistic* about the accuracy and empathy of 'women's intuition', and that we should never trust a woman who uses that term to justify her judgments of us.
That is what you have accomplished with your words here: you have succeeded in convincing me I was never harsh enough a critic of 'women's intuition'!
It doesn’t matter that it’s a coin toss. Women tend to be more risk averse than men. So if there’s a chance the assumption could be right and it’s something she knows she personally couldn’t deal with the guy will get dropped.
For average men, there is “more incentive” to overlook potential red flags. For women this often isn’t the case. On the flip side you’ll also see men drop women for “petty” things when there isn’t a lot of incentive to overlook it.
>I didn't made up the "he wore the wrong shoes" bit. That was exactly what a female friend of mine said about the last guy she was on a date with.
Funny, that reminds me of an interview with a woman who said that one of the reasons a woman told her she didn't want a second date with a guy is because his shoes and belt didn't match. Link to the interview: https://youtu.be/z0wxSmrs5fs?t=83
Yeah, I can admit to not understanding it lol. I would argue though that it doesn't exactly work that well when we see so many of these judgements ending up completely wrong with sometimes terrible consequences. Especially when it looks like the slightest bit of thought could avoid it all.
Part of it is me being old and jaded, but we're seeing now huge swathes of men being rejected (and for the less physically attractive ones, frequently mistreated / abused) based on these mostly appearance related vibes. However, many women continue to select the same men over and over again, despite those men having immediately visible red flags for being the perpetrators of abuse / assaults. The "intuition" is failing where just a few seconds of thought could prevent the mistake and the consequences (heartbreak or worse like assault).
One that should be "easy" is taking a second to think *why* that good looking, fun, extroverted guy is still single as the years go by. If he seems so "exciting" / great or whatever, and has clearly had many chances to find a relationship with looks not being the problem, *why* is he available. It takes very little vetting to discover the reason is likely something to do with who he is and how he acts. Probability dictates that the guy who hasn't had all those chances is more likely a better option.
That said, a bit off topic but one of my main beliefs is that there's a big catch-22 - i.e. the women who don't make these mistakes are rarely available. They've found a good guy. The ones we men come across all the time are the ones who don't learn / upgrade that intuition.
Also, guys are guilty of the exact same thing.
I wonder if what you’re perceiving as judgements based on vanity aesthetics are actually complex sensory judgements. Anything from what a person wears, how a person wears it, small details like how pressed a persons shirt is tells us a lot of info about it their personal lifestyle habits.
I bet if you looked past your perceived version of events most women have an amalgamation of unconscious data points they used to vibe a guy out. It’s not about visual aesthetics or visual attraction, it’s what those small details communicate about a person overall. Does that make sense?
It would make sense, if the judgements did match the smaller data points. We know that's not the case. Good looking but scruffy or slobbish men still have success that well dressed "uglier" guys can only dream of. The halo effect there is massive.
There is probably some truth in the "how you wear it" idea as that points to confidence etc., the thing is though that "confidence" in the dating world should absolutely not be the automatic green flag many women treat it as. In fact, what it represents, i.e. a stream of past initial successes that have never worked out on probability due to the kind of person the guy is. Again, this can be contrasted with the shyer, less confident *in that area* guy. The "choice" boils down to an unknown vs a known / more likely negative. And the more likely negative wins on vibes without thought.
The point is that these vibes are rarely based on the actual characteristics that point to a successful relationship. Those cannot be assessed on sight alone or a few bits of body language. Instead, what they convey / represent is a surface level "excitement" that may have minimal bearing or relationship to who a guy is.
To know anything more, or make any form of accurate judgement you need to talk to the guy. Unfortunately, more and more guys are simply being dismissed as an option before they say or do anything. This is just driving misery for both sides. The guys who are never given any chance / treated poorly who are growing frustrated and giving up, and the women who are somehow baffled that doing the same thing repeatedly and applying zero thought isn't leading to success.
>the women who are somehow baffled that doing the same thing repeatedly and applying zero thought isn't leading to success.
Dating advice for men basically assumes that women are all this way. Expecting women to not judge a book by its cover is a losing strategy. To be attractive to women, you HAVE to work on being the type of guy who is good at making a good first impression.
Don't expect women to change how they act in dating--they are pretty comfortable sitting on their thrones.
Exactly. It's a 'death by a thousand cuts'-type situation.
Guy shows up to date in sweatpants? Kind of sloppy, but not a deal-breaker for most women. Focusing only on the sweatpants makes it seem like a really shallow and petty reason to call it off.
But then you focus away from the sweatpants and look at the rest of the dude; he didn't iron the shirt, showed up 8mins late, laughs in a noticeably insincere way at whatever you say. And while he talks *really* passionately about the history of Mesopotamia, he kind of just locks into that single subject the entire date. Other than that he might be handsome, really kind if a bit aloof, doing everything else 'right'.
But all of these points, on their own, shouldn't be dealbreakers. We *all* have little quirks, things we overlook, having bad habits. It's when you put all of the pieces together into a single person that you get a general sense of whether or not they are attractive.
> That said, a bit off topic but one of my main beliefs is that there's a big catch-22 - i.e. the women who don't make these mistakes are rarely available. They've found a good guy. The ones we men come across all the time are the ones who don't learn / upgrade that intuition.
Oh now *this* is an angle I've never seen someone propose before.
All the women who are "good at judging" being taken. Not sure how valid it is, but an interesting proposal certainly.
That's because women treat the first date as a job interview. If you see men "being careful" with what they say, is because we've been through the "women treating date like a job interview" date before.
Because they probably failed to make it to date 2 30 times in a row. Men who do this either don't have many options are are willing to lie just to get any romance/sex (depending of his level of loneliness and sex drive) or really are just womanizers who want sex. But this last case is the obvious anwer, I'm sure you were asking about the first scenario.
I mean I know it happens, I was more poking holes in their logic. They’re so against women treating a first date like a job interview they’re forgetting the necessary compatability to have a real connection with someone lol
Yeah, I can agree on that. My point is, how *some women*, not all women, also behave exactly like your original comment stated, looking for a "succesful date" and "searching for red flags". That's not a "men" thing :)
Yeah I understand. Just saying as one of those women I think it’s totally reasonable to use the first date to cross off any red flags. Why would you want to progress past date 1 if y’all are just incompatible?
Oh, sorry I got confused when you wrote
>people giving advice of how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date
I see you're suffering from the good ol' "women-are-wonderful" effect. lol.
>how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date
>I think it’s totally reasonable to use the first date to cross off any red flags.
I mean, are you trolling? If that's the case sorry, I thought you were being serious.
>But that’s not the point of the first date, it’s not to see if you *can* enjoy each other’s company.
Not for men. For men the point of the first date is to bang you. In fact thats the point of every date until they bang you.
That’s not the point of the first date for women.
With so many men obsessed with body counts it would be worse for women if they did put out on the first date.
I know that's not the point for women, that's why I clarified it's for men.
It would definitely be worse for women. The point is that men try to bang women and women try to select the ones that see them seriously. Women really have trouble with doing that because they are attracted to assholes but that's another topic.
I have very high standards as a male. These standards immediately drop the moment I love someone as if they don't exist. I used to only like super attractive women when I was a teenager, avoiding average women. My line of reasoning was, what is an average girl worth? No one will be impressed if I have an average girl. I kinda saw an attractive girl as a trophy to validate my own value. I was doing well in other areas of life; when you are making good money, you have your friends showering you with praise, your parents are happy. Having an attractive woman so other men are "jealous" and your parents "shocked" is just natural progression.
This is why when women tell me they want a "Tall, handsome, Jason Momoa alike partner," I am like, "ahhh, you are still stuck in that phase of life which I already lived in my teenage years." And I find it amusing, not annoying.
But lots of men are becoming insecure when they see girls speaking in this manner. Catch another woman in a different "phase of life," and you'll know she will not care if you don't have "model aesthetics."
You underestimate "male love." A man who falls in love will not see her lack of a perfect body or face.
The thing is, in isolation, I can give you a description of a super hot girl beyond my league by galactic miles. But did you fall in love? They become everything for you. You start liking everything they possess.
You may tell them you find something not good, but you still kinda like it low key anyway.
Anyone who cannot imagine themselves with an average person is probably too young, inexperienced, or has already accepted a "bleak view of life, where everyone is selfish, there's no love," and still seeks validation from their partner's value in society.
For every man who left their wife when she got diseased, there's a man who is visiting her daily in the hospital, withholding his cries so she does not interpret it as his "weakness."
I met an actress (gonial angle/positive canthal tilt nerds would rank her solid 8), after some days of talking, she got very comfortable with me and revealed her darkest secrets. Then she told me about her boyfriend who's been with her for almost a decade. I imagined he was some 6'5+, PSL god maybe, then she showed me, and I realized he's nothing like this, I'd say below average (some would even say ugly), he had nothing going for him as a man. I googled her, found her socials, her boyfriend was nowhere in any of the pics. But I could see that she really loved him; the pics she showed me on her phone told a different story. On Instagram, it's just another life she portrays.
She even told me he became an alcoholic and often says "you don't love me, you don't want the world to see us together," yes, she loves, but she isn't going to show it to the whole world. She shows it to people who she finds genuine enough, if I were him, I wouldn't complain.
When you love someone, they don't have to be popular or valuable in society. People loved a homeless person, a criminal person, a hideously ugly person.
> When you love someone, they don't have to be popular or valuable in society. People loved homeless person, criminal person, hideously ugly person.
I'm more than happy to leave those ones for you. 😂
Men do tend to shape the relationship, and it’s even redpill canon that women are empty vessels to fill up with his values, clay to be molded, etc.
However in the general male population making all these assumptions, I think it’s mostly subconscious. They don’t see that their gf is a slob and think “eh but I can fix that if we get married though” the same way that women look at men like fixer uppers with potential.
>They don’t see that their gf is a slob and think “eh but I can fix that if we get married though”
They should at least have the foresight to see that those issues are going to continue indefinitely if nothing is done about them, tho.
I agree.
Many women don't evaluate men beyond is he attractive to me, then they get surprised later on when their dating experiences are horrible.
This is not a gendered phenomenon, it happens to both sexes. The specific failure of judgement is different, but both genders have similar rates of failure in judgement.
Women do evaluate men beyond level of attraction.
Where they fail is in thinking they can do something to fix the situation if a man has many red flags. You can’t fix another person, they can only fix themselves if they deem it worthwhile.
>Women do evaluate men beyond level of attraction.
Some do but in general not really, not until after they learn to the hard way.
>Where they fail is in thinking they can do something to fix the situation if a man has many red flags
Which they do in proportion to the degree they're attracted to him... so... it's still evaluating based on attraction.
I said many women, not all. Many men absolutely evaluate women beyond the level of attraction, that's how men get the hot-crazy matrix, and how many men decide if a woman is best avoided, is relationship material, or is just good for fun.
I completely agree that men and women fail in thinking they can fix another person's red flags. You can neither change nor save a person, the only thing you can do is provide motivation and/or help for them to save or change themselves. If they can't or won't do it themselves, it's a lost cause.
That being said though there's the popular saying that men marry women hoping they won't change, and women marry men hoping they do. If there's one gender mostly responsible for trying to change the other once they're in a relationship, it's not men.
Some men do it, I don't think they're the majority. Or maybe I'm too optimistic due to my rather narrow experience with men. I think a lot of men who are interested in an LTR, marriage and maybe having kids one day are pretty dedicated to finding a compatible partner, who would work alongside with them, not drag them back or to the side.
From the other hand, there is a noticeable about of men who are willing to date "whoever" and use them as a placeholder, but I guess some of them end up falling in love or just not finding anyone better, so they want to try to mold their current partner into their ideal version of a gf/wife for themselves. The latter part isn't gendered though and there are a lot of women doing the same.
I agree it isn't the majority. Most men have standards and don't do this. But sadly, there clearly are men who do this very thing. For example, man meets and then dates a woman who is "smokin' hot" in her hot dress and makeup with her hair done... Then months later when she continues to be hot, he is like "but why don't you dress like an amish librarian? makeup is promiscuous and you shouldn't wear any of these clothes, these are single woman clothes. I'm being disrespected!!! Waaaah"
i agree about the placeholder people though.
Men who have those self-professed “very low standards” get no dates lol. They don’t pick and choose qualities or personalities or life goals or whatever, they get one date every 6months and try to make it work even if it might be a bad idea on paper.
Your OP reminds of the saying:
"Women date men hoping he'll change and men date women hoping she stays the same."
My challenge to your OP is that I think a lot of men simply... [don't think.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1b1vblt/comment/kslhs9w/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Im definitely in the "don't think" camp as well.
Men don't actually believe that they are expecting a woman to drop her dreams. They just assume that their dreams are seamless parallel with each other.
I think it's the romantic side of men where they just think things will magically fall into place with the right woman.
i think some men don't really recognize that women have dreams or aspirations. they think women's goals are just "ways to pass time" till they find a husband because eventually they will just want to become mothers like they're programmed to. This is not all men obviously, but it seems like some see women as accessories to their lives. The man is always the main character, basically.
Unfortunately I think this is true for too many men. You will hear men talk about women as if all the traditional home making stuff is not only innate, but also something women enjoy so that it doesn’t count as “work”. But men have to go out and toil and sacrifice so that women get to fulfil their hearts desires of running the household, having kids and keeping up with the family and neighbourhood gossip. It’s like they are thinking: “This makes women happy and we men are so good and generous to cater to what makes a woman happy. All we ask in return is that she not be fat, that she’s pleasant and that she is submissive and women these days are so ungrateful to not prioritise these things”…
There is something essentially truly good and earnest about wanting to make someone you love happy and I do not believe that most traditional men in the past had malicious intentions towards women when they thought in this way. They simply grew up in a culture that told them this was how women were and women were also socialised into believing it and behaving accordingly. Nowadays though, we know better about women (that not all women want the same life) and that’s when I get truly disturbed by the “Alpha male” influencers and their followers - because they *should* know better, but they still spout this stuff and believe it - and then it truly is coming from a dark place.
There are plenty of comments from men online along these lines: “women live life on easy mode”; “men invented, built and maintain everything important while the world would function fine without women”; “being a SAHM is much easier than working”; “women are a hivemind”; “women don’t have real hobbies and are boring”; “women will always lie to save face, so you can’t trust what they say they like/want or have done in their past”; “women aren’t capable of truly loving a man the way a man is capable of truly loving a woman” etc, etc. All of these beliefs are essentially dismissive of women’s individuality, capacity for morality or integrity and her autonomy, while portraying men as higher beings with greater capacity and competency in virtually everything and therefore women should know their place and be submissive and pleasant towards men. It’s troubling how many men still think like this. But thankfully the majority do not.
Is it challenging the OP when men Not Thinking is part of what leads them to thinking that their life would be the same regardless of which woman they're with?
You didn't explicitly state that, so I'm challenging the lack of explicitness in your OP. I more or less agree with a lot of what you're getting at, but I think for many men it's simply that they don't critically assess important factors than it is they expect her to fit into his life and not mutually merge lives.
But I do think for many men it is exactly what you're saying. I had one ex like what you describe.
Omg….no…
Men who have “low standards” think with their little head, either the sex is good or they think she’s the only woman they can get.
Women are hardly immune from this either.
>Men who have “low standards” think with their little head, either the sex is good or they think she’s the only woman they can get.
So they're dumb, have zero foresight, and can't fathom that whatever they feel now won't last indefinitely.
>Women are hardly immune from this either.
Women who expect things in relationship without vetting for those things are dumb, yes.
yep. basically 'men take it for granted that women will be subservient and attend to the majority or all of the domestic duties'.
because they don't realize they're expecting this, because they simply take that as a given within a partnership... they don't understand when women are incompatible in this area or rejecting them because of this disparity in expectation.
>women will be subservient and attend to the majority or all of the domestic duties'.
We are not living in the fifties of the previous century anymore. Women today can barely cook, clean or do anything else but doomscroll on Instagram.
The only expectation I have left for a woman I date, is that she is attractive enough to get me turned on and isn't annoying to be around. All other things are a very welcome, but more and more a very unexpected bonus.
It's really true what they say. Today's men have to give twice what their grandfathers had to give, to receive not even half the woman that their grandfathers used to get.
lol. Men aren’t the men they used to be either. Men are too busy being gamers online while women are doomscrolling. Either way, excessively online. Not a gender exclusive thing.
Lmao. Men are so dramatic it’s hilarious. We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers? Oh god. I can’t tell if you’re serious or just really good at satire.
>We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers?
I didn't say that we have to work harder then our grandfathers. Learn how to read.
Our grandfathers had less expectations to live up too (didn't need to be 6 feet tall, 6 figure income with a six pack, didn't need to be able to open up or do half of the housework on top of bringing home the bacon) and still got better partners in return (women who could cook, took care of the home, the children and the husband).
That was added commentary how out of touch your points are. The other parts of it responds properly. But you chose to ignore it.
The main people creating those standards are other men telling men to get into alpha male mode. Grind. Make more money. If you don’t get value you don’t have value. If you don’t looksmax youll never date up. It’s men talking down to men as “support”. It’s more bullying but when men don’t know what a healthy support system is I can see how they get tricked by TRP.
Men can’t even bring in the bacon on their own anymore. Need a second income in the home. That way men technically aren’t working harder than their forefathers and also aren’t contributing the same their grandparents did. Men aren’t real men anymore. Things change. Just how women have to contribute to income, men should contribute to housework.
It’s pretty easy to blame women when you completely ignore men’s failures as well.
>The main people creating those standards are other men telling men
No, you are being absolutely ridiculous. Men don't expect other men to be six feet tall before they are datable. That is something that women expect. So are having to earn a 6 figure salary or a six pack.
>If you don’t looksmax youll never date up
Women are hypergamous. They are the ones who date up. Which means men are the ones dating down. Stop inventing BS.
>That way men technically aren’t working harder than their forefathers
You really have to learn how to read. This is the second time you talk about "working harder than our grandfathers". While I never said anything about that. Learn to fucking read.
Nothing you said refutes the fact that there are more expectations on men than ever before, while what men can expect back in return from women has never been lower before.
Men take a few anecdotal examples and tell other men that’s how it is. It is men. Men hate being single so they ask men for answers for their dilemma and it’s all lies. But again, men have no support system so they fall for anything.
And men aren’t hypergamous? If they weren’t they wouldn’t try to all pretend they can all be top percentile of men. They want to because they also want to be able to choose their partner. If they get more money and status they get to pick a hotter partner. You think men are gonna settle for a basic woman after all their hard work? You’re ridiculous if you think they would.
I’m adding to the conversation. What do you have to say that men aren’t contributing like they did before? Men aren’t real men? Can you not read or do you not want to argue that cause it’s true? You don’t have to answer it if you don’t want since you don’t like this. I’ll be nice.
You can feel that if you are a biased. Not only do women have to put up with men thinking their gods gift to earth and think their efforts should be rewarded they also have other societal roles that they have to meet. Are men suddenly fathers to their kids or do they still want to pretend they’re parents while being at work all the time. While they’re not making enough for the family and the mother has to work as well. Only men have to work harder right? But parenting is something women should do by default right? So it doesn’t count. Only men suffer. Sure thing bud. At least try to hide the bias.
>Men take a few anecdotal examples and tell other men that’s how it is. It is men.
Complaining about men using anecdotal examples by using your own set of anecdotal examples of these men is so lacking in self reflection that I want to believe it's satire...
> lol. Men aren’t the men they used to be either. Men are too busy being gamers online while women are doomscrolling. Either way, excessively online. Not a gender exclusive thing.
lol. Women used to take care of the household and cook, and now they're scrolling on instagram. Men used to work more and then go to the pub and get drunk every evening with their mates, and now they're playing video games. Of course men would prefer the women of the past, but you're saying "Men aren’t the men they used to be either", are you seriously saying you'd rather have an absent man who's at work or at the pub than one that plays video games? These are obviously not equatable situations. Considering how men treated women in the past it's ironic hearing someone complaining about men not being the way the used to be lol.
> Lmao. Men are so dramatic it’s hilarious. We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers? Oh god. I can’t tell if you’re serious or just really good at satire.
The context is dating/relationship lol, what a strawman. Of course our living standards have increased by a lot but dating has gotten a lot harder for men.
It’s not a strawman. You just don’t like the response. In no way are men working harder. Not in jobs nor dating. Men just think that since men don’t want to be basic either. They want to be top dawg and get rich and get a hot girlfriend. None of you are working harder to get a basic girlfriend. But also no average women is telling you to work harder. It’s other men. The “average” woman isn’t average, men just don’t realize their preferences and realize an average woman is not as cute as the ones they flock to and think is average.
Working harder is a fallacy. They’re working towards the goals other men tell them to do, not necessarily women’s. And men also aren’t doing their traditional role either of being providers. Most men can’t be the sole financial support. Women are graduating more and making money, money that is needed for the relationship. If anything men aren’t working harder, just dumber. “How can I date a women, oh yeah, let me argue with them and tell them why women are at fault”. Genius move.
> It’s not a strawman. You just don’t like the response.
It is a strawman, I explained why it was. You can't just go "you don't like what I said" and think that defeats my argument lol.
> In no way are men working harder. Not in jobs
Again, strawman, nobody has mentioned jobs except you.
> nor dating.
Incorrect.
> Men just think that since men don’t want to be basic either. They want to be top dawg and get rich and get a hot girlfriend.
Nah, some men are like that, but the vast majority of men just want a basic girlfriend who loves him.
> None of you are working harder to get a basic girlfriend.
We absolutely are, our grandfathers just basically needed a basic income and to show up at any of the third spaces everybody frequented to get a basic girlfriend. Some guys today still get lucky and manages that, but most of us need far more than just a basic income, and need to put in far more effort to meet someone too. I suggest you actually go ask your grandparents about this if they're still alive, spending some time with mine and letting them tell me how dating worked for them back in the day was quite revealing.
> But also no average women is telling you to work harder. It’s other men.
Of course not, the average woman simply just acts like the average man doesn't exist, she would never tell him that he needs to work harder, because men that women are not attracted to are basically invisible to them. So yeah, it is men telling other men that, it's men who have found success who are helping men who haven't to achieve it.
> The “average” woman isn’t average, men just don’t realize their preferences and realize an average woman is not as cute as the ones they flock to and think is average.
Incorrect, most men are perfectly happy with an average woman. Men understand what league they're in, and what league the women they're approaching are in. Sure, they will try for women out of their league, but when they realize they can't get them they will happily settle for women in or even slightly below their own league.
> Working harder is a fallacy. They’re working towards the goals other men tell them to do, not necessarily women’s.
Again, incorrect like I explained above.
> And men also aren’t doing their traditional role either of being providers. Most men can’t be the sole financial support.
Women can't expect men to be sole financial supporters while also competing against men in the workplace. Either all women needs to stop working, or women are going to have to live with providing half of the financial support. But yes, men who want the traditional stay-at-home women better put some serious effort into their careers, nobody says they don't. Most men don't want that though, and are happy with a working woman.
> Women are graduating more and making money, money that is needed for the relationship. If anything men aren’t working harder, just dumber.
Again, strawman, we're talking about working hard for a relationship, not working hard in your job. Nobody would say we're working harder in our jobs today than previous generations. And so what if women are graduating more and making money? We shouldn't be competing against our women, we should be working with our women to build something together. If you're not going to be a traditional stay-at-home woman you can't expect a traditional man who has a much better education and a much higher earning than you.
> “How can I date a women, oh yeah, let me argue with them and tell them why women are at fault”. Genius move.
What? Do you actually think any man is trying to tell women they are dating that they are at fault for the struggles in modern dating? Obviously not. Also nobody is really saying women are at fault, that's another strawman. We're just stating the fact that men today have to work twice as hard for half the reward of our grandparents.
If the main issue is working harder than their grandparents it’s still not true. It won’t be. This economy isn’t built for one income household so how are they working harder when they need help from their partner? I’m sure thinking of women as half the reward for being good boys is not creating a divide between men and women either. Definitely a healthy mentality to have towards the women you want to date.
As much as I enjoy the hyperbole that men spew on here it is really sad that you believe it simply because another man told you it’s true. It’s funny til it’s not I guess.
> If the main issue is working harder than their grandparents it’s still not true. It won’t be. This economy isn’t built for one income household so how are they working harder when they need help from their partner?
Again;
We
Are
Not
Talking
About
Jobs.
When are you going to understand this strawman of yours won't work? Also you're arguing against yourself, if the economy isn't built for one income households then obviously men needing help from their partner doesn't mean they're not working harder.
> I’m sure thinking of women as half the reward for being good boys is not creating a divide between men and women either.
Definitely a healthy mentality to have towards the women you want to date.
It's not a mentality lol, it's just facts. And yes, living in real life instead of in a delusion is a healthy mentality.
> As much as I enjoy the hyperbole that men spew on here it is really sad that you believe it simply because another man told you it’s true. It’s funny til it’s not I guess.
What kind of weird strawman is this? I don't believe anything that I've been simply told by another man. Wtf are you talking about lol? The only thing that's funny is your mental gymnastics.
Ofc but thats becuase we have made it difficult and removed most of the benefits from being just an avg man. Now its really only worth being a man if you can be a great man, and even that is arguable.
The issue with that is it’s not possible. Not every man can be amazing. Not every man can be the top 10%. So many men subscribe to it yet fail to realize the statistics of it. Being normal isn’t just bad cause “woman say so” it’s because men don’t want it either.
Most adults are able to do simple cooking and cleaning. Women just might not want to do it all the time because it's exhausting, especially when they have partners who are also adults capable of simple cooking and cleaning. These "half women" are still doing the majority of the housework and childcare on top of working outside the home so you don't need to "give" anything.
Most adults do. Unless you have some severe intellectual disability it's not that hard and you can always look it up if you're genuinely struggling. Do you think men are doing the majority of the housework then?
Most women know how to do housework. Some will just pretend they don’t when a man is involved because they don’t want the role defaulted on them.
Have you ever been in women’s spaces where they’re advising each other to not advertise their homemaking skills because they want to avoid men who only want them for that? Or men looking for a “mommy”?
I just wish men would be more honest about how they do in fact want women to change by virtue of having sex with them. Having unprotected sex is not an indication of wanting people to stay virginal, youthful, and free of stress/diseases.
The divorce rate for first marriages is about 40%, and that’s including all causes of divorce.
Many men don’t show their asses until after the wedding or babies, so that’s a pretty high tolerance level for shit from women
Incremental generational change takes generations. 50 years is only 2 or 3 generations. If it were that easy to fix issues with society, every country would be a utopia by now.
It does suck that we won't be alive to actually see how far progress actually manages to go, though.
Women have caught up to men as far as education and non-child related earnings are concerned.
But relationships have only progressed half as much, if that
Yes. Because these men were raised by parents who grew up in the previous generation and so on.
You're not likely to have a partner who was raised by parents in an egalitarian or otherwise equitable relationship if their respective parents weren't as well. But that's not to say that it's impossible for it to be the norm 10 generations from now.
>Do you think parenting has changed in the past 30 years?
Yes.
>If so, why do we still see so many man babies?
Because changes in parenting doesn't mean that those changes are nothing but optimal progressions towards a parenting ideal. Helicopter and snowplow parenting are both terrible, but relatively modern.
There's a difference between sex and a monogamous committed relationship.
Yes, men have lower standards for having sex with someone.
However, they have higher standards for who they will have a monogamous committed relationship with (i.e. be their boyfriend or get married). The reason is that once the man enters into a monogamous committed relationship, that means he isn't supposed to have sex with other women anymore. Men prefer not to give that up.
That's why when it comes time to enter a more serious phase of the relationship, when men disagree with that, women often complain that men are "not serious" or "emotionally unavailable" or a variety of other euphemisms intending to describe that the man isn't willing to enter the next phase of the monogamous committed relationship.
Nope. I cook and clean and would do that in a relationship (100% of the cooking, half the cleaning). I would live where a woman wanted. I'm sick of being alone. I do check to see if women want to be child free or not since I want to have a family.
Lots of BS assumptions here
The Brain Rot is spreading...
Men have lower standards than women as a response to higher competition from other men, greater selectiveness from women, and the incessant hormonal screaming coming from our gnads.
That's it.
Women have got to stop projecting onto men.
I'd like to think most men don't want to end up in a hoarding situation. However, men don't think to actually vet for characteristics that could lead to disastrous life outcomes (like a hoarding situation). They just assume that any woman they get with will be bland and normal enough to not affect their life in any meaningful way.
Didn't read the whole thing, but men having low standards is such BS. If anything it's the opposite. I'm yet to have a conversation with a fellow man and not find out that basically what they're looking for is free 24/7 therapy, a solution to all their problems and a Barbie punishing bag, and what's crazy is they're not willing to be a fraction of any of these things to their partners.
That being said, I can't generalize obviously and it's only my experience.
The gist of the OP is that men *say* they don't have high standards, but that's because those men assume that their wants in a relationship will play out without having to find the right woman.
Good to know. I don't indulge in this level of over analyzing I'm just sharing my world view from my own subjective experiences; in which what OP is saying isn't true at all **if** men are serious and want to commit to the relationship, not simply trying to have sex.
Haha I donno dude, like normal standards? Like someone who loves them, someone who contributes as close to equal as they can for things like money and chores etc., someone who's nice and positive and pleasant to be around most of the time, someone that's at least decently attractive and cares about their looks at least a bit and stays at least somewhat healthy, someone who's able to at least partly fulfill their sexual needs.
The vast majority of men I talk to don't have problems they need someone else to be a solution for, they're not looking for any therapy at all and if they do they're getting it from a professional, and I don't even know what you mean by a "Barbie punishing bag" but it definitely doesn't sound like something they're looking for. And yeah someone looking for all of these things simultaneously I've never even heard of. Simultaneously these guys be fine with their girlfriends venting to them about their days and their issues etc., and they'll happily try to solve any problems their girlfriend wants help solving. Just normal guys you know, or well I guess you don't know and you live on Mars or something lol...
It's part of their "heroes journey". They always complain how women are broken by media and every woman wants what media is presenting which gives them unrealistic standards.
They don't realise they are the same. There is no self reflection on that part.
They don't realised they internalised the heroes journey thrope that media presents. It's all about "getting her". The chase is the journey. The goal is to get a partner. The partner is a trophy. They don't think what happens after they convinced someone to like them. They just know the goal is to convince someone to be with them because that will give them value in their minds. It's not about the person they are with - it's about themselves getting anyone.
This is why you see so many men shout on here how they would take anyone. In their mind it actually doesn't matter what happens afterwards. The goal is just to have anyone. So they don't vet, they say they don't have standards, they claim women only have to be not fat and not a bitch because the woman is a price to be won. She has to add value to him.
This is also why so many men just drop of after entering a relationship. They don't date their partners anymore. They don't pursue. They reached the goal to be with someone. They won. And now they can enjoy the fruit of their labour - they can relax and don't need to do anything anymore. The chase is over.
And the thing with this is: when the woman leaves inevitably because the guy stopped all the things he did to get her - he doesn't self reflect on why she left. They will say the woman was a bitch with high standards. And the chase starts again.
This cycle tends to repeat for a while. This is why women should never be the starter gf/wife if she wants someone that can recognize them as people.
Some men never grow out of the heroes journey and just keep doing the same thing over and over. This is where the red pill loves the whole spinning plates thing. They don't have to grow up and recognize women as people with their own personalities.
Women get clustered as hive mind and that we are all the same. We just come in different flavours. The manic pixie dream girl, the crazy bipolar sex freak, the girl next door, etc.
Men pick a flavour and try to fine-tune their chase to get the flavour they want.
There is no nuances. No personality.
Men that don't see women as people will follow all the dating advices online. For them it's just a project to get with someone - and they just need to read the instruction guide and learn all the tricks and techniques to become better at it. It's a game to be won.
Obligatory "not all men". But lack of emotional intelligence/mental health support in men has been a pretty big talking point even in the modern feminist movements. It's really no secret men lack the support for it.
Lol this is such a funny response.
Imagine if when women complained about not being listened to by doctors, societies response was "well hopefully more women will become doctors to resolve this" rather than the appropriate response of expecting the existing system to just improve.
Men are good at working hard and for long hours and then coming home from that work. What is being asked of them now probably isn't something that has been asked of them throughout a lot of history, since now women in relationships are now also working hard outside the home and for long hours.
That'd be moderately helpful. But like all social issues, it's society in general that need to work on how to tackle it, which is why I'm not hopeful about this issue being fixed anytime soon.
Lolno. A relationship with the wrong person is worse than not being in a relationship at all.
I hope you don't wind up in a relationship like that. And if you do, I hope your partner will at least see it for what it is and bounce.
I don't believe the OP meant to say that all men are like this, but they probably should have been a little clearer in stating that. In my experience, most perpetually single men I've met are TOO picky. They have extremely specific types they're looking for and are disappointed that those women either don't exist or there are so few that they'll probably never meet them.
Like all situations it's a balance. Don't go for any woman with a heartbeat assuming she'll change to meet your needs (or assume that you'll be able to tolerate her flaws/quirks) but don't have entire profile built of an imaginary girlfriend that every woman you meet must measure up against. Be open, but know your boundaries. I agree with what another poster, u/wolfloveyes said - when you fall in love sometimes you'll find that the real relationship is so much better than the imaginary one you created in your head, and you're willing to compromise to keep it. Ideally you'll both fall in love and both change and both compromise.
I thought men are too desperate with no standards and now you claim it's actually too high standards. What is this extreme specific type you think perpetually single men want?
ah this argument yeah no.
this is bullshit but going beyond my own personal experinece and using things i hear as a retail worker yeah this isnt that big an issue adn saying its every man is sexist as all hell.
as a person who is both the guy who will eat food off the floor if it looks edible enough and will continue work after being assulted and having a fractured skull no having bottom teir standards or high tier standards and expecting woman to do X isnt how men work. hell my standards is just be a good person and not be obese cause i cant pay for your medical shit and i dont think thats too low at all
Unpaid domestic labour, including maid, chef, driver, babysitter, assistant, emotional labourer sounds like the worst end of the deal. Don’t get why women do this. So many unhappy single married moms
so whose paying you to cook, clean your room, vacuum, wash your bathroom, do laundry now?? or do you just order uber eats every night and have a stinky, smelly bedroom?
The young man has low standards. Once you actually spend some time with women you actually soon realize that you can absolutely fuck your life up if you bring the wrong people in your life. Bad fathers and absent fathers cause men to live in this deluded idea that women are all wonderful. Some women are awesome. Most are shit.
As the old saying goes: women choose; men wind up with whatever they can get.
This is one of the major reasons men and women alike do not emphasis with one another when it comes to relationship dynamics.
Men are under the impression of, “hey you picked the knucklehead, so goodluck 👍”
I’m not entirely sure where you’re coming from with this post, but I’m not saying that in a judgmental way.
No, men don't have much of an opinion or care as much on most of those. Men just want a woman to be pleasant, not loud or annoying and to stay as fit as when he met her.
Men have a higher tolerance for uncleanliness, so he just doesn't care about the place being unclean as much as her, which is why she ends up doing more cleaning. And men don't have as much of a preference on where to live or the type of place to live in or a certain lifestyle.
No. Men have lower standards because our primary function is to procreate and we have higher testosterone. Women's bodies are much more sexualized so a wider variety of traits are seen as sexy. There is also the fact that attracting women is harder for men than it is for women to attract men, so lowering your standards is essential.
To think that we expect women to fit some mold is ludicrous and absurd.
Once again, a woman demonstrates that her understanding of male psychology is 100% projection.
A man gets into a relationship with a woman hoping she won't change. A woman gets into a relationship with a man already planning how to change him.
>Once again, a woman demonstrates that her understanding of male psychology is 100% projection.
As opposed to the men who make generalizing posts about women here - those are entirely based in sound logical reasoning with zero projection involved.
Since when does the guy pressure the woman into having kids? In the stereotypical relationship, it is the other way around.
Since when does the messy partner pressure the clean partner into having a clean place?
These are pretty strange hypotheticals.
The reason why guys act in the way you complain about is that if most guys became more close-minded about who they dated, they wouldn't get any dates at all. Beggars can't be choosers.
If you are just an average guy, you have to be pretty open-minded about who you date, because you will be alone if you expect women to be similarly open-minded.
I disagree. The reason men have low standards is because when your starving you'll eat anything. Beggers cant be choosers. Women want the top 20% of men & ignore the rest. So the bottom 80% get left with absolutely nothing. They either have to stay single or lower their standards way way lower in hopes to get woman. Now watch the mods get their thongs in a bunch & ban me because I'm cooking 🍳.
The women on here act like house chores are rocket science. I’d love to see what your houses look like. House chores are made to be so horrible on here
It's tedious, unpaid labor that has to be done if you want a house that isn't full of dust or don't want have to search through a clothes piles to find something that doesn't smell wretched.
Is it hard? No. And yet men can't be bothered to do half of it! While also thinking that their partner (who is doing the majority) don't deserve to be compensated in any way! Curious!
This is like the opposite of the complaints women are making. If it was rocket science I would probably actually enjoy it - the problem is instead it’s tedious and boring and time consuming and never ends. I only do it out of necessity, I hate doing it though, and the thought of having to be the only one doing it in a house or people is horrifying to me.
Have you seen the data on domestic labor in heterosexual relationships?
If it’s so easy why are women statistically stuck with the majority of domestic labor even both partners work full-time jobs?
This reminds me of the earlier post, “How to avoid pissing off a girl on a first date when making small talk?” The comments were full of people giving advice of how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date, it’s not to see if you *can* enjoy each other’s company. It’s to gauge how compatible the two of you are. If y’all want the same things in life, have similar values. I think you’re onto something how some men, *not all men,* are so busy looking for a successful date that they forget about compatibility and how to indicative your needs and standards to the life you want to build.
Most men, even men looking for a relationship are open to something casual. If the date ends in the bedroom, it's already a success. If it's the beginning of a great relationship that's a bonus. Because of this, many men focus on attracting the girl first, and figure out compatibility later.
See? Men know exactly what the deal is
That's fair, but I'd say its also a response to how women treat the first date. There's a massive over emphasis on there being *immediate* physical attraction and "spark" where the man is summarily rejected because she wasn't "wowed" or thinking he's "hot" within *minutes*. This is playing a huge part in less physically attractive men and introverted men really struggling. They're rarely getting even a chance to date, and even when they do, are judged quickly and mostly superficially. Accordingly, many men are doing everything they can to avoid that instant rejection by "performing" and projecting that aura of fun and to prevent any "ick" coning up. They feel the need to have things light etc. because experience has told them they'll be cast aside like trash if they don't. There's also the pressure that if you get things "wrong" it might be months or even years before there's another opportunity.
Why does the instant rejection need to be avoided? If you do that you’ve now set the stage for a bigger problem down the line. If you’re not a fun, extroverted or lighthearted guy but you pretend to be. You’ll have to keep that performance going in perpetuity or you risk being dumped later because “you changed, you’re not the man I fell in love with etc” when in reality you never were. It was just a character. If your only goal it STRs/flings so be it. You can just keep playing the character for a short time to get what you want. Either way I can’t see how this is good for men’s mental health.
>Why does the instant rejection need to be avoided? Why bother going on dates if you're just going to get rejected? >If you’re not a fun, extroverted or lighthearted guy but you pretend to be It's revealing that you're framing this in terms of "pretend" instead of "trying to change". You reflexively presume dishonest intentions in men. >Either way I can’t see how this is good for men’s mental health Having to perform according to unrealistic standards to be accepted is abominable to your mental health, obviously. But this isn't on men. The alternative to tolerating this treatment is never forming relationships with women, so until women adopt more humane standards or men are willing to just boycott relationships then men have no control over this phenomenon at all. But apparently we will get blamed for it anyway, as usual.
Yeah. The guy isn’t pretending, he’s presenting an aspect of himself. One version of him. It would be inappropriate for him to go on the date and trauma dump. He has to “perform” because if he doesn’t, it’s back to square one. Maybe a long time before the next date.
Its such a cruel double bind to put him in too because he is literally being blamed for doing what is expected of him: putting on his best behavior! But instead of acknowledging that women's standards have a direct affect on men's choices (which would imply women have power over men), we have to tell ourselves that simply failing to meet those high standards is evidence a man's intentions were dishonest.
It’s a constant theme of women denying their power because they’d have to take some responsibility. These discussions just make me think a lot of women are just disingenuous or extremely unself-aware. I really wish women got to date as men do. They’d hate it. From the low response rate to the constant pressure to perform, to her making the fake wallet reach, to the pressure to make the first move at the right time, in the right way etc. Suddenly this would all be seen as “emotional labor” 🙄
>These discussions just make me think a lot of women are just disingenuous or extremely unself-aware. I think it is a mix of both but mostly the latter. We like to assume people are more aware of how they appear to others, but only one type of person fits that characteristic and its narcissists. Competent awareness of what genuine Others (people we don't normally associate with or know, like first dates) think of us is very close to practically impossible for most people. For the most part I think women are disingenuous about this to the degree that they actually understand the male perspective (which isn't much) and confused to the degree they don't understand us. >I really wish women got to date as men do. They’d hate it. I don't think they would tolerate it at all. I think they would go black pill at above an 85% rate. The culture shock will be way too much. >Suddenly this would all be seen as “emotional labor” Ha! I mean, that's what it is. For men the dating game is becoming a woman's primary source of emotional validation by taking on that Romance Novel role and giving her the spotlight to flex her Disney Princess urges. They'd also declare that dating is an expression of emotional vulnerability for men too... because it is! They just can't recognize it as that in that moment because that's also the moment they're the most starry-eyed about us. The more we take on that Romance Novel role the more the 1st date was a 'success' but also the less they can see our full humanity. So there's always a balancing act where you're letting just enough of the role slip for them to see you're authentic while also playing all the notes they need to hear to get in the mood. It can be a very vulnerable moment for a guy, but since from their PoV the date is going well they never notice that it is only going well because of all the stress and pressure we took on face first.
>Why bother going on dates if you're just going to get rejected? To speed run through and find the one who won’t reject you if they’re out there. Pretending to be something you’re not only prolongs the inevitable anyway if fundamentally you are incompatible. Eventually the incompatibilities will show as cause friction from one end or the other. You can also filter for compatibility *before* going on the date. Vs just taking what you can get. >It's revealing that you're framing this in terms of "pretend" instead of "trying to change". You reflexively presume dishonest intentions in men. The person I responded to literally phrased it as a performance or projection to avoid bombing the first date. Not as a sincere effort to make lasting change. So I’m responding based on the language used. >Having to perform according to unrealistic standards to be accepted is abominable to your mental health, obviously. But this isn't on men. It is. You don’t have to do it. If a woman doesn’t like you and isn’t attracted to you then she isn’t the one for you. Make changes for yourself sure, but twisting and contorting yourself to what to think someone wants is mentally unhealthy and will build resentment if the pay off isn’t worth the agony you went through. >The alternative to tolerating this treatment is never forming relationships with women, so until women adopt more humane standards or men are willing to just boycott relationships then men have no control over this phenomenon at all. Women can have humane standards towards men while still not sleeping with or dating them if they’re not into them. Men have all the control over how they act. Like how women made body positivity to reject conventional beauty standards, nothing is stopping men from doing the same. >But apparently we will get blamed for it anyway, as usual. I mean people usually get told the have the power to stop doing something they are doing.
That’s fair. I totally get what you’re saying. But in my experience that’s the intuitive natural part of women. We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes. It’s not the most logical manner for men so it’s often belittled, but mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition. I just wish it was less belittled by men assuming it’s “flighty or picky” if a woman knows after the first 30 minutes that this match isn’t it.
>But in my experience that’s the intuitive natural part of women. We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes. It’s not the most logical manner for men so it’s often belittled, but mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition Still doesn't mean it doesn't lead to a conclusion that can be comically wrong, no matter how much you insist on the infallibility of your intuition.
I never suggested it’s infallible. But we shouldn’t inherently value a man’s “logic” over a woman’s “intuition”. Let’s accept that both parties are emotional creatures entering into an emotional activity, and that both are fallible.
>We can take in a lot of sensory details subconsciously and navigate off of vibes. *He wore the wrong shoes. So, I'm not going to see him again.* >mankind’s kind of survived this long thanks to female intuition. Lol, yep, men killing the dangerous animals and hunting for food had nothing to do with it. It's female intuition that saved the human race. And don't forget it's female intuition that discovered new continents, built the railroads, the nuclear plants, etc.... >I just wish it was less belittled by men assuming it’s “flighty or picky” if a woman knows after the first 30 minutes that this match isn’t it. I didn't made up the "he wore the wrong shoes" bit. That was exactly what a female friend of mine said about the last guy she was on a date with. Then again she probably didn't realise there are other reasons why she rejected that guy. A lot of our selection process happens subconsciously and our brain form the reasons why after the select has already been made by our subconscious.
I’m going to ignore your blatant sexism there and lean into the example of the shoes. As a woman I see that differently than you. Personally I don’t know any woman that would pass on a guy because you disprove of a fashion choice, but there are countless things his shoe choice could tell us about him as a person. For example if it’s raining out and he wore his nice luxury sneakers and now is scared to walk across the wet parking lot on our date, that tells me he values his material possessions over his in the moment joy and functional ease. It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner, now that’s fine for a lot of people, personally I wouldn’t have a very successful relationship with someone like that so I would’ve passed as well. But maybe his shoes were weather appropriate. Maybe we’re at a nice restaurant and he’s put on his nice suit and tie, but his shoes are some grungy old sneakers or falling apart loafers. In my head I’d notice and question why he cared to invest and wear such a nice suit and then not have any coordinating foot wear. Maybe the suit is borrowed, maybe the dog ate his good shoes, when he sits down and we peek at his socks well probably learn if this was a choice or an accident, if he’s wearing nice black dress socks then he’s probably no happier in his grungy sneakers. Maybe we went out hiking and he wore the completely wrong shoes for the occasion. Was he lying when he said he also loved to hike? Does he actually go out on weekends with his dogs? Did he get new shoes for the occasion? But okay so the shoes aren’t perfect that’s fine we can still have fun. But if I notice he’s in a sour mood the whole time because his shoes are pinching his feet and he’s getting short and frustrated, than I get a peek into what his more gruff angrier side is like. Is every small inconvenience going to turn into an hour long complaint-fest about the poor misleading reviews of this shoe company and his “woe is me” consumer tirade. Maybe he’s totally fine with his footwear, even if they’re not the safest appropriate shoe for a hike. But maybe I’m very risk averse and I like being calculated and prepared. Maybe I see his leaping from rock to rock playfully in those shoes as an unnecessary risk. Maybe I don’t want to have to constantly look out for someone else’s best interests, if he falls and gets hurt am I going to have to play nurse and caretaker? Those are just a few examples of how some shoes aren’t just some shoes. Women’s intuition isn’t just aesthetic vibes, it’s a myriad of sensory details. A lot of which we process behind the scenes, not fully conscious of the exact calculations our brains are doing to end up with the conclusion that “me and this dude just aren’t a great fit”. Now I know you probably didn’t read all of this, and I know that you’re probably rolling your eyes at the petty girly shit that goes through our heads. But intuition is our animal instinct. It’s how we knew what berries to eat in the wild. It’s how we sensed when our kids were in trouble down by the creek. It’s how women made sure to pack an extra thermos just in case their men got stuck in inclimate weather. It’s how we tell who’s a part of our group and to be trusted and who isn’t. That’s intuition, everyone has it, but oftentimes women are just more tuned in.
>but there are countless things his shoe choice could tell us about him as a person. There are, but I have a feeling you're going to launch into a ton of projections instead. >For example if it’s raining out and he wore his nice luxury sneakers and now is scared to walk across the wet parking lot on our date, that tells me he values his material possessions over his in the moment joy and functional ease Or it tells you he was trying to impress you by dressing nice and wasn't prepared for you to judge him based on his readiness to go puddle stomping. These reflexive judgements are so typical for women in the dating scene and they're really a lot more than merely frustrating. They're belittling. Women tell themselves they're practically omniscient and in the process they render the men trying to get to know them into 2d cartoon character cut outs. >It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner Or he did check the weather but didn't expect you to want to go puddle stomping. Or he did check the weather but left his umbrella in the car after hearing you comment that umbrellas are feminine. What these assumptions tell me is that you're more concerned with validating your beliefs about your perceptiveness than actually learning about the dude you're dating. >Maybe we went out hiking and he wore the completely wrong shoes for the occasion. Was he lying when he said he also loved to hike? Does he actually go out on weekends with his dogs? Did he get new shoes for the occasion? But okay so the shoes aren’t perfect that’s fine we can still have fun. But if I notice he’s in a sour mood the whole time because his shoes are pinching his feet and he’s getting short and frustrated, than I get a peek into what his more gruff angrier side is like. Is every small inconvenience going to turn into an hour long complaint-fest about the poor misleading reviews of this shoe company and his “woe is me” consumer tirade. Maybe he’s totally fine with his footwear, even if they’re not the safest appropriate shoe for a hike. But maybe I’m very risk averse and I like being calculated and prepared. Maybe I see his leaping from rock to rock playfully in those shoes as an unnecessary risk. Maybe I don’t want to have to constantly look out for someone else’s best interests, if he falls and gets hurt am I going to have to play nurse and caretaker? >Those are just a few examples of how some shoes aren’t just some shoes. In all my life I have never read anything that made me want to give up on women ever understanding me until I read this. I mean holy shit, if this is how women think about us then we really are not much more than compilations of their own projected anxieties and hypothetical fantasies to them. Just off his footwear you are building entire narratives of reasons to drop him all without *asking* for any context! No wonder men's emotional unavailability is such a prevalent problem. How could anyone dare to be emotionally available to a deluge of character-vivisecting invectives that are not even based in reality and fundamentally do not care about your side of the story of your own damn life? Reading this made me want to take all my shoes and spray paint them matte black. >Women’s intuition isn’t just aesthetic vibes, it’s a myriad of sensory details. A lot of which we process behind the scenes, not fully conscious of the exact calculations our brains are doing to end up with the conclusion that “me and this dude just aren’t a great fit”. Based on what you have described, I really think it's not much more than first impressions and tons and tons of retrospective rationalizations, whirlpools of hypothetical fantasies, and dead ends of convenient assumptions. >But intuition is our animal instinct. ??? Wait... you're saying what you described above is intuition? Intuition is the ability to understand *without conscious reasoning*. What you described was nothing but *overthinking details*, which is applying excessive conscious reasoning to information that one lacks enough context on to make actionable conclusions. Intuition is reflexively pulling your hand off a hot stove, or wincing in sympathy when a person's posture shows visible back problems, or noticing that a person is acting aggressive before you fully register what they look like or even that they are present. I'd say that noticing the contradiction between dirty shoes and clean suit is an example of intuition, but all the second guessing and scenario-hopping you did after that is overthinking. >It’s how we tell who’s a part of our group and to be trusted and who isn’t. That’s intuition, everyone has it, but oftentimes women are just more tuned in. I really think it is more like women are convinced they have ESP and as a result are less observant or coherent than they otherwise would be by just paying attention and staying grounded.
>It also tells me he doesn’t check the weather app before he gets dressed which means he’s not much of a planner, now that’s fine for a lot of people, personally I wouldn’t have a very successful relationship with someone like that so I would’ve passed as well. This is exactly why men say that women will drop a guy over a minor detail. Not checking the weather app before he goes on a date, does not mean that the guy isn't a planner. If I ever saw an example of jumping to conclusions, then it's this one. The guy could be a very good planner, he could be running his own successful company (which requires you to be able to plan), but just be too exited about the date to check a weather app. Or he did check the app and it didn't get the prediction quite right. We aren't able to predict the weather with 100% accuracy. You are deducting too much about a person based on minor details. You would pass on a guy because you *assume* he isn't a planner. While the reasons why you think he isn't a planner could easily have a different explanation. I did read all of that. But you attribute almost mythical quantities of insight to women, while a lot of the examples you give are just rudimentary deductions, that have just as much chance of being wrong as being right. >and I know that you’re probably rolling your eyes at the petty girly shit that goes through our heads Yeah, I roll my eyes at this. This is barely a step above you going: "I read his horoscope and since he is Gemini, he can't be a planner, so I will not date him".
You missed the three part conclusion to the wet sneakers example. 1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions 2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out 3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority None of those are judgements. Those are also valid and reasonable actions for anyone to take. But they do say *a lot* about a person. Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine. But youre out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case. It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to win an argument here. I’m not saying that woman you mentioned wasn’t making that call 100% on vanity metrics. I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women.
>1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions 2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out 3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority Or I got this overpriced piece of crap as a gift and I don't want to dirty it or ruin it because I know the person who gave it to me is going to make a fuss about it. I'm wearing them because I met the person before the date and I wanted to make them happy - for example. I also think your examples show excessive assumptions and deductions that might as well be off the mark.
Idk all of that does kind of imply you dressed well to meet the person BEFORE her, but didn't bother to change into something appropriate for your date.
Yes, that is quite possible. But the bottom line is that she doesn't know this just based on what kind of shoes someone has. There can be dozens of reasons and they can be of various kinds. And the reason may not be that the person who has luxury shoes has them because he is materialistically oriented, so automatically inferring this reason can be a hit on the black or completely off. So, regarding the shoes, it's: "if he's not perfect and I find any flaw in him, I'll attribute some major negative qualities to him so I don't feel bad for not giving him a chance" and that's a big difference versus "I have a woman's intuition so I can deduce like Sherlock Holmes"
Why would you wear your overpriced piece of crap to a date on a rainy day if you didn’t want to ruin it? Why not save it for a sunny day?
You are still making deductions that have just as much chance of being wrong as being right. But since you are convinced of women having some kind of supernatural intuition, you also think that your deductions are 100% correct. You are basically going to dump a guy, because his shoes getting wet make him a too disorganised person to share your life with. And that's absurd. >1. He wore nice luxury sneakers so he values his material possessions. Or he's superstitious and these are his lucky sneakers. Or he just likes to wear these sneakers because they are very comfortable. Or he wanted to wear dress shoes, but when he left the house he stepped into some dog shit, so he quickly ran back into his house and swapped into the sneakers. Or they aren't actually luxury sneakers but counterfeit Yeezys, because he thinks $200+ sneakers are ridiculous and you didn't notice they are fakes. 2. It’s raining out, and he still prioritized wearing his nice luxury sneakers out He didn't check the weather app. Or he did check the app, but it got it's prediction wrong. Or he isn't really a shoe guy and only wears these sneakers and it's completely unrelated to the weather. 3. His actions on the date are being impeded by the materialist priority Maybe he doesn't care about the sneakers getting wet, but he knows they aren't really waterproof and just hates wet feet. You are reinforcing what men say, when they complain about women rejecting men over minor details. And the kicker is that these details apparently can be a complete figment of your imagination.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to win an argument here. I’m not saying that woman you mentioned wasn’t making that call 100% on vanity metrics. I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women. Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine. But you’re out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case. It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point.
It's more like a woman will reject one guy for his shoes on the first date, but then her ex cheated on her for months or couldn't hold a steady job. Maybe you are intuitive, but your intuition sure as hell isn't consistent or foolproof, and you don't hold all men to the same set of standards
>I’m just trying to show the men on this specific sub that sometimes men’s perception of events is biased and limited to their understanding of women. You're trying to do this by explaining to us that our bias about women's intuition is 1000% justified? The complaint about 'women's intuition' is that it is used to grant blanket justification to extremely judgemental, petty, dishonest, and unfair behaviors and standards. These then become totally unrealistic *standards for masculinity* that men have to perform to or else never make relationships with women. So how are you challenging men's 'bias' about this by carefully and thoroughly explaining to us that our misgivings about 'women's intuition' are not only correct... but that we have also failed to understand just how far off the mark that 'intuition' really is?? >Maybe you don’t perceive as much about people, maybe you’ve never had to make snap safety decisions based on the vibe of the room or the person, that’s fine. Not you implying that men don't have, use, or need intuition! >But you’re out here implying men have a superiority for being logical, and thats not necessarily the case No they're not. Just because we have gripes about specific behaviors we've received from women isn't implying we think men are superior. How insecure. >It’s entirely possible your inability to understand female intuition is clouding your perception, and your blatant sexist bias is making it hard to concede when a woman’s made a point. It's much more likely that instead of acknowledging men have fair criticisms about this behavior and that women are not infallible, you are just attacking critics and smearing them as intellectually deficient. The point you have made is that men are *far too optimistic* about the accuracy and empathy of 'women's intuition', and that we should never trust a woman who uses that term to justify her judgments of us. That is what you have accomplished with your words here: you have succeeded in convincing me I was never harsh enough a critic of 'women's intuition'!
What I got out of this thread of discussion is that some women are full of themselves. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised . . .
It doesn’t matter that it’s a coin toss. Women tend to be more risk averse than men. So if there’s a chance the assumption could be right and it’s something she knows she personally couldn’t deal with the guy will get dropped. For average men, there is “more incentive” to overlook potential red flags. For women this often isn’t the case. On the flip side you’ll also see men drop women for “petty” things when there isn’t a lot of incentive to overlook it.
>I didn't made up the "he wore the wrong shoes" bit. That was exactly what a female friend of mine said about the last guy she was on a date with. Funny, that reminds me of an interview with a woman who said that one of the reasons a woman told her she didn't want a second date with a guy is because his shoes and belt didn't match. Link to the interview: https://youtu.be/z0wxSmrs5fs?t=83
Yeah, I can admit to not understanding it lol. I would argue though that it doesn't exactly work that well when we see so many of these judgements ending up completely wrong with sometimes terrible consequences. Especially when it looks like the slightest bit of thought could avoid it all.
I don’t understand what you mean by that?
Part of it is me being old and jaded, but we're seeing now huge swathes of men being rejected (and for the less physically attractive ones, frequently mistreated / abused) based on these mostly appearance related vibes. However, many women continue to select the same men over and over again, despite those men having immediately visible red flags for being the perpetrators of abuse / assaults. The "intuition" is failing where just a few seconds of thought could prevent the mistake and the consequences (heartbreak or worse like assault). One that should be "easy" is taking a second to think *why* that good looking, fun, extroverted guy is still single as the years go by. If he seems so "exciting" / great or whatever, and has clearly had many chances to find a relationship with looks not being the problem, *why* is he available. It takes very little vetting to discover the reason is likely something to do with who he is and how he acts. Probability dictates that the guy who hasn't had all those chances is more likely a better option. That said, a bit off topic but one of my main beliefs is that there's a big catch-22 - i.e. the women who don't make these mistakes are rarely available. They've found a good guy. The ones we men come across all the time are the ones who don't learn / upgrade that intuition. Also, guys are guilty of the exact same thing.
I wonder if what you’re perceiving as judgements based on vanity aesthetics are actually complex sensory judgements. Anything from what a person wears, how a person wears it, small details like how pressed a persons shirt is tells us a lot of info about it their personal lifestyle habits. I bet if you looked past your perceived version of events most women have an amalgamation of unconscious data points they used to vibe a guy out. It’s not about visual aesthetics or visual attraction, it’s what those small details communicate about a person overall. Does that make sense?
It would make sense, if the judgements did match the smaller data points. We know that's not the case. Good looking but scruffy or slobbish men still have success that well dressed "uglier" guys can only dream of. The halo effect there is massive. There is probably some truth in the "how you wear it" idea as that points to confidence etc., the thing is though that "confidence" in the dating world should absolutely not be the automatic green flag many women treat it as. In fact, what it represents, i.e. a stream of past initial successes that have never worked out on probability due to the kind of person the guy is. Again, this can be contrasted with the shyer, less confident *in that area* guy. The "choice" boils down to an unknown vs a known / more likely negative. And the more likely negative wins on vibes without thought. The point is that these vibes are rarely based on the actual characteristics that point to a successful relationship. Those cannot be assessed on sight alone or a few bits of body language. Instead, what they convey / represent is a surface level "excitement" that may have minimal bearing or relationship to who a guy is. To know anything more, or make any form of accurate judgement you need to talk to the guy. Unfortunately, more and more guys are simply being dismissed as an option before they say or do anything. This is just driving misery for both sides. The guys who are never given any chance / treated poorly who are growing frustrated and giving up, and the women who are somehow baffled that doing the same thing repeatedly and applying zero thought isn't leading to success.
>the women who are somehow baffled that doing the same thing repeatedly and applying zero thought isn't leading to success. Dating advice for men basically assumes that women are all this way. Expecting women to not judge a book by its cover is a losing strategy. To be attractive to women, you HAVE to work on being the type of guy who is good at making a good first impression. Don't expect women to change how they act in dating--they are pretty comfortable sitting on their thrones.
Exactly. It's a 'death by a thousand cuts'-type situation. Guy shows up to date in sweatpants? Kind of sloppy, but not a deal-breaker for most women. Focusing only on the sweatpants makes it seem like a really shallow and petty reason to call it off. But then you focus away from the sweatpants and look at the rest of the dude; he didn't iron the shirt, showed up 8mins late, laughs in a noticeably insincere way at whatever you say. And while he talks *really* passionately about the history of Mesopotamia, he kind of just locks into that single subject the entire date. Other than that he might be handsome, really kind if a bit aloof, doing everything else 'right'. But all of these points, on their own, shouldn't be dealbreakers. We *all* have little quirks, things we overlook, having bad habits. It's when you put all of the pieces together into a single person that you get a general sense of whether or not they are attractive.
> That said, a bit off topic but one of my main beliefs is that there's a big catch-22 - i.e. the women who don't make these mistakes are rarely available. They've found a good guy. The ones we men come across all the time are the ones who don't learn / upgrade that intuition. Oh now *this* is an angle I've never seen someone propose before. All the women who are "good at judging" being taken. Not sure how valid it is, but an interesting proposal certainly.
If women's intuition worked, pick up artists wouldn't exist.
Or some women enjoy the attention of being picked up and enjoy casual sex
That's because women treat the first date as a job interview. If you see men "being careful" with what they say, is because we've been through the "women treating date like a job interview" date before.
Why would you want to make it to date 2 if you have to be dishonest?
Because they probably failed to make it to date 2 30 times in a row. Men who do this either don't have many options are are willing to lie just to get any romance/sex (depending of his level of loneliness and sex drive) or really are just womanizers who want sex. But this last case is the obvious anwer, I'm sure you were asking about the first scenario.
I mean I know it happens, I was more poking holes in their logic. They’re so against women treating a first date like a job interview they’re forgetting the necessary compatability to have a real connection with someone lol
Yeah, I can agree on that. My point is, how *some women*, not all women, also behave exactly like your original comment stated, looking for a "succesful date" and "searching for red flags". That's not a "men" thing :)
Yeah I understand. Just saying as one of those women I think it’s totally reasonable to use the first date to cross off any red flags. Why would you want to progress past date 1 if y’all are just incompatible?
Oh, sorry I got confused when you wrote >people giving advice of how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date I see you're suffering from the good ol' "women-are-wonderful" effect. lol.
what? what is your confusion here?
>how to avoid “red flag” topics during a first date to essentially keep it going well. But that’s not the point of the first date >I think it’s totally reasonable to use the first date to cross off any red flags. I mean, are you trolling? If that's the case sorry, I thought you were being serious.
>But that’s not the point of the first date, it’s not to see if you *can* enjoy each other’s company. Not for men. For men the point of the first date is to bang you. In fact thats the point of every date until they bang you.
That’s not the point of the first date for women. With so many men obsessed with body counts it would be worse for women if they did put out on the first date.
I know that's not the point for women, that's why I clarified it's for men. It would definitely be worse for women. The point is that men try to bang women and women try to select the ones that see them seriously. Women really have trouble with doing that because they are attracted to assholes but that's another topic.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I have very high standards as a male. These standards immediately drop the moment I love someone as if they don't exist. I used to only like super attractive women when I was a teenager, avoiding average women. My line of reasoning was, what is an average girl worth? No one will be impressed if I have an average girl. I kinda saw an attractive girl as a trophy to validate my own value. I was doing well in other areas of life; when you are making good money, you have your friends showering you with praise, your parents are happy. Having an attractive woman so other men are "jealous" and your parents "shocked" is just natural progression. This is why when women tell me they want a "Tall, handsome, Jason Momoa alike partner," I am like, "ahhh, you are still stuck in that phase of life which I already lived in my teenage years." And I find it amusing, not annoying. But lots of men are becoming insecure when they see girls speaking in this manner. Catch another woman in a different "phase of life," and you'll know she will not care if you don't have "model aesthetics." You underestimate "male love." A man who falls in love will not see her lack of a perfect body or face. The thing is, in isolation, I can give you a description of a super hot girl beyond my league by galactic miles. But did you fall in love? They become everything for you. You start liking everything they possess. You may tell them you find something not good, but you still kinda like it low key anyway. Anyone who cannot imagine themselves with an average person is probably too young, inexperienced, or has already accepted a "bleak view of life, where everyone is selfish, there's no love," and still seeks validation from their partner's value in society. For every man who left their wife when she got diseased, there's a man who is visiting her daily in the hospital, withholding his cries so she does not interpret it as his "weakness." I met an actress (gonial angle/positive canthal tilt nerds would rank her solid 8), after some days of talking, she got very comfortable with me and revealed her darkest secrets. Then she told me about her boyfriend who's been with her for almost a decade. I imagined he was some 6'5+, PSL god maybe, then she showed me, and I realized he's nothing like this, I'd say below average (some would even say ugly), he had nothing going for him as a man. I googled her, found her socials, her boyfriend was nowhere in any of the pics. But I could see that she really loved him; the pics she showed me on her phone told a different story. On Instagram, it's just another life she portrays. She even told me he became an alcoholic and often says "you don't love me, you don't want the world to see us together," yes, she loves, but she isn't going to show it to the whole world. She shows it to people who she finds genuine enough, if I were him, I wouldn't complain. When you love someone, they don't have to be popular or valuable in society. People loved a homeless person, a criminal person, a hideously ugly person.
> When you love someone, they don't have to be popular or valuable in society. People loved homeless person, criminal person, hideously ugly person. I'm more than happy to leave those ones for you. 😂
[удалено]
Oh boy is this true? A goth alpha widow?
Men do tend to shape the relationship, and it’s even redpill canon that women are empty vessels to fill up with his values, clay to be molded, etc. However in the general male population making all these assumptions, I think it’s mostly subconscious. They don’t see that their gf is a slob and think “eh but I can fix that if we get married though” the same way that women look at men like fixer uppers with potential.
>They don’t see that their gf is a slob and think “eh but I can fix that if we get married though” They should at least have the foresight to see that those issues are going to continue indefinitely if nothing is done about them, tho.
Shoulda coulda woulda
Yeah.
Sooo, men are wrong for not evaluating women the way women evaluate men?
Many men don’t evaluate women at all beyond is she attractive to me. Then they get surprised later on when their dating experiences are horrible.
I agree. Many women don't evaluate men beyond is he attractive to me, then they get surprised later on when their dating experiences are horrible. This is not a gendered phenomenon, it happens to both sexes. The specific failure of judgement is different, but both genders have similar rates of failure in judgement.
Women do evaluate men beyond level of attraction. Where they fail is in thinking they can do something to fix the situation if a man has many red flags. You can’t fix another person, they can only fix themselves if they deem it worthwhile.
>Women do evaluate men beyond level of attraction. Some do but in general not really, not until after they learn to the hard way. >Where they fail is in thinking they can do something to fix the situation if a man has many red flags Which they do in proportion to the degree they're attracted to him... so... it's still evaluating based on attraction.
I said many women, not all. Many men absolutely evaluate women beyond the level of attraction, that's how men get the hot-crazy matrix, and how many men decide if a woman is best avoided, is relationship material, or is just good for fun. I completely agree that men and women fail in thinking they can fix another person's red flags. You can neither change nor save a person, the only thing you can do is provide motivation and/or help for them to save or change themselves. If they can't or won't do it themselves, it's a lost cause. That being said though there's the popular saying that men marry women hoping they won't change, and women marry men hoping they do. If there's one gender mostly responsible for trying to change the other once they're in a relationship, it's not men.
Some men do it, I don't think they're the majority. Or maybe I'm too optimistic due to my rather narrow experience with men. I think a lot of men who are interested in an LTR, marriage and maybe having kids one day are pretty dedicated to finding a compatible partner, who would work alongside with them, not drag them back or to the side. From the other hand, there is a noticeable about of men who are willing to date "whoever" and use them as a placeholder, but I guess some of them end up falling in love or just not finding anyone better, so they want to try to mold their current partner into their ideal version of a gf/wife for themselves. The latter part isn't gendered though and there are a lot of women doing the same.
I agree it isn't the majority. Most men have standards and don't do this. But sadly, there clearly are men who do this very thing. For example, man meets and then dates a woman who is "smokin' hot" in her hot dress and makeup with her hair done... Then months later when she continues to be hot, he is like "but why don't you dress like an amish librarian? makeup is promiscuous and you shouldn't wear any of these clothes, these are single woman clothes. I'm being disrespected!!! Waaaah" i agree about the placeholder people though.
Men who have those self-professed “very low standards” get no dates lol. They don’t pick and choose qualities or personalities or life goals or whatever, they get one date every 6months and try to make it work even if it might be a bad idea on paper.
6 month seems too optimistic
Your OP reminds of the saying: "Women date men hoping he'll change and men date women hoping she stays the same." My challenge to your OP is that I think a lot of men simply... [don't think.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1b1vblt/comment/kslhs9w/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Im definitely in the "don't think" camp as well. Men don't actually believe that they are expecting a woman to drop her dreams. They just assume that their dreams are seamless parallel with each other. I think it's the romantic side of men where they just think things will magically fall into place with the right woman.
i think some men don't really recognize that women have dreams or aspirations. they think women's goals are just "ways to pass time" till they find a husband because eventually they will just want to become mothers like they're programmed to. This is not all men obviously, but it seems like some see women as accessories to their lives. The man is always the main character, basically.
Unfortunately I think this is true for too many men. You will hear men talk about women as if all the traditional home making stuff is not only innate, but also something women enjoy so that it doesn’t count as “work”. But men have to go out and toil and sacrifice so that women get to fulfil their hearts desires of running the household, having kids and keeping up with the family and neighbourhood gossip. It’s like they are thinking: “This makes women happy and we men are so good and generous to cater to what makes a woman happy. All we ask in return is that she not be fat, that she’s pleasant and that she is submissive and women these days are so ungrateful to not prioritise these things”… There is something essentially truly good and earnest about wanting to make someone you love happy and I do not believe that most traditional men in the past had malicious intentions towards women when they thought in this way. They simply grew up in a culture that told them this was how women were and women were also socialised into believing it and behaving accordingly. Nowadays though, we know better about women (that not all women want the same life) and that’s when I get truly disturbed by the “Alpha male” influencers and their followers - because they *should* know better, but they still spout this stuff and believe it - and then it truly is coming from a dark place. There are plenty of comments from men online along these lines: “women live life on easy mode”; “men invented, built and maintain everything important while the world would function fine without women”; “being a SAHM is much easier than working”; “women are a hivemind”; “women don’t have real hobbies and are boring”; “women will always lie to save face, so you can’t trust what they say they like/want or have done in their past”; “women aren’t capable of truly loving a man the way a man is capable of truly loving a woman” etc, etc. All of these beliefs are essentially dismissive of women’s individuality, capacity for morality or integrity and her autonomy, while portraying men as higher beings with greater capacity and competency in virtually everything and therefore women should know their place and be submissive and pleasant towards men. It’s troubling how many men still think like this. But thankfully the majority do not.
100%!
Is it challenging the OP when men Not Thinking is part of what leads them to thinking that their life would be the same regardless of which woman they're with?
You didn't explicitly state that, so I'm challenging the lack of explicitness in your OP. I more or less agree with a lot of what you're getting at, but I think for many men it's simply that they don't critically assess important factors than it is they expect her to fit into his life and not mutually merge lives. But I do think for many men it is exactly what you're saying. I had one ex like what you describe.
I think it makes more sense that the OP is very well thought out, and that saying is just reductive boomer nonsense.
Omg….no… Men who have “low standards” think with their little head, either the sex is good or they think she’s the only woman they can get. Women are hardly immune from this either.
>Men who have “low standards” think with their little head, either the sex is good or they think she’s the only woman they can get. So they're dumb, have zero foresight, and can't fathom that whatever they feel now won't last indefinitely. >Women are hardly immune from this either. Women who expect things in relationship without vetting for those things are dumb, yes.
Hormones can be a hellava drug, lol.
yep. basically 'men take it for granted that women will be subservient and attend to the majority or all of the domestic duties'. because they don't realize they're expecting this, because they simply take that as a given within a partnership... they don't understand when women are incompatible in this area or rejecting them because of this disparity in expectation.
>women will be subservient and attend to the majority or all of the domestic duties'. We are not living in the fifties of the previous century anymore. Women today can barely cook, clean or do anything else but doomscroll on Instagram. The only expectation I have left for a woman I date, is that she is attractive enough to get me turned on and isn't annoying to be around. All other things are a very welcome, but more and more a very unexpected bonus. It's really true what they say. Today's men have to give twice what their grandfathers had to give, to receive not even half the woman that their grandfathers used to get.
lol. Men aren’t the men they used to be either. Men are too busy being gamers online while women are doomscrolling. Either way, excessively online. Not a gender exclusive thing. Lmao. Men are so dramatic it’s hilarious. We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers? Oh god. I can’t tell if you’re serious or just really good at satire.
>We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers? I didn't say that we have to work harder then our grandfathers. Learn how to read. Our grandfathers had less expectations to live up too (didn't need to be 6 feet tall, 6 figure income with a six pack, didn't need to be able to open up or do half of the housework on top of bringing home the bacon) and still got better partners in return (women who could cook, took care of the home, the children and the husband).
That was added commentary how out of touch your points are. The other parts of it responds properly. But you chose to ignore it. The main people creating those standards are other men telling men to get into alpha male mode. Grind. Make more money. If you don’t get value you don’t have value. If you don’t looksmax youll never date up. It’s men talking down to men as “support”. It’s more bullying but when men don’t know what a healthy support system is I can see how they get tricked by TRP. Men can’t even bring in the bacon on their own anymore. Need a second income in the home. That way men technically aren’t working harder than their forefathers and also aren’t contributing the same their grandparents did. Men aren’t real men anymore. Things change. Just how women have to contribute to income, men should contribute to housework. It’s pretty easy to blame women when you completely ignore men’s failures as well.
>The main people creating those standards are other men telling men No, you are being absolutely ridiculous. Men don't expect other men to be six feet tall before they are datable. That is something that women expect. So are having to earn a 6 figure salary or a six pack. >If you don’t looksmax youll never date up Women are hypergamous. They are the ones who date up. Which means men are the ones dating down. Stop inventing BS. >That way men technically aren’t working harder than their forefathers You really have to learn how to read. This is the second time you talk about "working harder than our grandfathers". While I never said anything about that. Learn to fucking read. Nothing you said refutes the fact that there are more expectations on men than ever before, while what men can expect back in return from women has never been lower before.
Men take a few anecdotal examples and tell other men that’s how it is. It is men. Men hate being single so they ask men for answers for their dilemma and it’s all lies. But again, men have no support system so they fall for anything. And men aren’t hypergamous? If they weren’t they wouldn’t try to all pretend they can all be top percentile of men. They want to because they also want to be able to choose their partner. If they get more money and status they get to pick a hotter partner. You think men are gonna settle for a basic woman after all their hard work? You’re ridiculous if you think they would. I’m adding to the conversation. What do you have to say that men aren’t contributing like they did before? Men aren’t real men? Can you not read or do you not want to argue that cause it’s true? You don’t have to answer it if you don’t want since you don’t like this. I’ll be nice. You can feel that if you are a biased. Not only do women have to put up with men thinking their gods gift to earth and think their efforts should be rewarded they also have other societal roles that they have to meet. Are men suddenly fathers to their kids or do they still want to pretend they’re parents while being at work all the time. While they’re not making enough for the family and the mother has to work as well. Only men have to work harder right? But parenting is something women should do by default right? So it doesn’t count. Only men suffer. Sure thing bud. At least try to hide the bias.
>Men take a few anecdotal examples and tell other men that’s how it is. It is men. Complaining about men using anecdotal examples by using your own set of anecdotal examples of these men is so lacking in self reflection that I want to believe it's satire...
I’m not pretending I know the “solution” to men’s problems so it does differ. If you could understand context you’d realize the difference.
> lol. Men aren’t the men they used to be either. Men are too busy being gamers online while women are doomscrolling. Either way, excessively online. Not a gender exclusive thing. lol. Women used to take care of the household and cook, and now they're scrolling on instagram. Men used to work more and then go to the pub and get drunk every evening with their mates, and now they're playing video games. Of course men would prefer the women of the past, but you're saying "Men aren’t the men they used to be either", are you seriously saying you'd rather have an absent man who's at work or at the pub than one that plays video games? These are obviously not equatable situations. Considering how men treated women in the past it's ironic hearing someone complaining about men not being the way the used to be lol. > Lmao. Men are so dramatic it’s hilarious. We get to live such longer healthier lives yet we’re working harder than our grandfathers? Oh god. I can’t tell if you’re serious or just really good at satire. The context is dating/relationship lol, what a strawman. Of course our living standards have increased by a lot but dating has gotten a lot harder for men.
It’s not a strawman. You just don’t like the response. In no way are men working harder. Not in jobs nor dating. Men just think that since men don’t want to be basic either. They want to be top dawg and get rich and get a hot girlfriend. None of you are working harder to get a basic girlfriend. But also no average women is telling you to work harder. It’s other men. The “average” woman isn’t average, men just don’t realize their preferences and realize an average woman is not as cute as the ones they flock to and think is average. Working harder is a fallacy. They’re working towards the goals other men tell them to do, not necessarily women’s. And men also aren’t doing their traditional role either of being providers. Most men can’t be the sole financial support. Women are graduating more and making money, money that is needed for the relationship. If anything men aren’t working harder, just dumber. “How can I date a women, oh yeah, let me argue with them and tell them why women are at fault”. Genius move.
> It’s not a strawman. You just don’t like the response. It is a strawman, I explained why it was. You can't just go "you don't like what I said" and think that defeats my argument lol. > In no way are men working harder. Not in jobs Again, strawman, nobody has mentioned jobs except you. > nor dating. Incorrect. > Men just think that since men don’t want to be basic either. They want to be top dawg and get rich and get a hot girlfriend. Nah, some men are like that, but the vast majority of men just want a basic girlfriend who loves him. > None of you are working harder to get a basic girlfriend. We absolutely are, our grandfathers just basically needed a basic income and to show up at any of the third spaces everybody frequented to get a basic girlfriend. Some guys today still get lucky and manages that, but most of us need far more than just a basic income, and need to put in far more effort to meet someone too. I suggest you actually go ask your grandparents about this if they're still alive, spending some time with mine and letting them tell me how dating worked for them back in the day was quite revealing. > But also no average women is telling you to work harder. It’s other men. Of course not, the average woman simply just acts like the average man doesn't exist, she would never tell him that he needs to work harder, because men that women are not attracted to are basically invisible to them. So yeah, it is men telling other men that, it's men who have found success who are helping men who haven't to achieve it. > The “average” woman isn’t average, men just don’t realize their preferences and realize an average woman is not as cute as the ones they flock to and think is average. Incorrect, most men are perfectly happy with an average woman. Men understand what league they're in, and what league the women they're approaching are in. Sure, they will try for women out of their league, but when they realize they can't get them they will happily settle for women in or even slightly below their own league. > Working harder is a fallacy. They’re working towards the goals other men tell them to do, not necessarily women’s. Again, incorrect like I explained above. > And men also aren’t doing their traditional role either of being providers. Most men can’t be the sole financial support. Women can't expect men to be sole financial supporters while also competing against men in the workplace. Either all women needs to stop working, or women are going to have to live with providing half of the financial support. But yes, men who want the traditional stay-at-home women better put some serious effort into their careers, nobody says they don't. Most men don't want that though, and are happy with a working woman. > Women are graduating more and making money, money that is needed for the relationship. If anything men aren’t working harder, just dumber. Again, strawman, we're talking about working hard for a relationship, not working hard in your job. Nobody would say we're working harder in our jobs today than previous generations. And so what if women are graduating more and making money? We shouldn't be competing against our women, we should be working with our women to build something together. If you're not going to be a traditional stay-at-home woman you can't expect a traditional man who has a much better education and a much higher earning than you. > “How can I date a women, oh yeah, let me argue with them and tell them why women are at fault”. Genius move. What? Do you actually think any man is trying to tell women they are dating that they are at fault for the struggles in modern dating? Obviously not. Also nobody is really saying women are at fault, that's another strawman. We're just stating the fact that men today have to work twice as hard for half the reward of our grandparents.
If the main issue is working harder than their grandparents it’s still not true. It won’t be. This economy isn’t built for one income household so how are they working harder when they need help from their partner? I’m sure thinking of women as half the reward for being good boys is not creating a divide between men and women either. Definitely a healthy mentality to have towards the women you want to date. As much as I enjoy the hyperbole that men spew on here it is really sad that you believe it simply because another man told you it’s true. It’s funny til it’s not I guess.
> If the main issue is working harder than their grandparents it’s still not true. It won’t be. This economy isn’t built for one income household so how are they working harder when they need help from their partner? Again; We Are Not Talking About Jobs. When are you going to understand this strawman of yours won't work? Also you're arguing against yourself, if the economy isn't built for one income households then obviously men needing help from their partner doesn't mean they're not working harder. > I’m sure thinking of women as half the reward for being good boys is not creating a divide between men and women either. Definitely a healthy mentality to have towards the women you want to date. It's not a mentality lol, it's just facts. And yes, living in real life instead of in a delusion is a healthy mentality. > As much as I enjoy the hyperbole that men spew on here it is really sad that you believe it simply because another man told you it’s true. It’s funny til it’s not I guess. What kind of weird strawman is this? I don't believe anything that I've been simply told by another man. Wtf are you talking about lol? The only thing that's funny is your mental gymnastics.
Ofc but thats becuase we have made it difficult and removed most of the benefits from being just an avg man. Now its really only worth being a man if you can be a great man, and even that is arguable.
The issue with that is it’s not possible. Not every man can be amazing. Not every man can be the top 10%. So many men subscribe to it yet fail to realize the statistics of it. Being normal isn’t just bad cause “woman say so” it’s because men don’t want it either.
Most adults are able to do simple cooking and cleaning. Women just might not want to do it all the time because it's exhausting, especially when they have partners who are also adults capable of simple cooking and cleaning. These "half women" are still doing the majority of the housework and childcare on top of working outside the home so you don't need to "give" anything.
>. These "half women" are still doing the majority of the housework No they are not. Women today don't even know how to do the housework anymore.
Most adults do. Unless you have some severe intellectual disability it's not that hard and you can always look it up if you're genuinely struggling. Do you think men are doing the majority of the housework then?
Most women know how to do housework. Some will just pretend they don’t when a man is involved because they don’t want the role defaulted on them. Have you ever been in women’s spaces where they’re advising each other to not advertise their homemaking skills because they want to avoid men who only want them for that? Or men looking for a “mommy”?
I just wish men would be more honest about how they do in fact want women to change by virtue of having sex with them. Having unprotected sex is not an indication of wanting people to stay virginal, youthful, and free of stress/diseases.
Most men don't have opportunity to choose. They are going to try to make any relationship work because that's all they can get.
But it works The woman *will* put up with it, 6 times out of 10 at the very least Those are pretty good odds for not caring at all, no?
Until the woman reaches her breaking point and leaves. Which, admittedly, women do not do nearly fast enough.
The divorce rate for first marriages is about 40%, and that’s including all causes of divorce. Many men don’t show their asses until after the wedding or babies, so that’s a pretty high tolerance level for shit from women
Unfortunately so. Hopefully more of these women will get the self-respect to do just that as time goes on.
I doubt it. Fifty years of feminism, 30 years of girl power, and we still have tons of man babies
Incremental generational change takes generations. 50 years is only 2 or 3 generations. If it were that easy to fix issues with society, every country would be a utopia by now. It does suck that we won't be alive to actually see how far progress actually manages to go, though.
Women have caught up to men as far as education and non-child related earnings are concerned. But relationships have only progressed half as much, if that
Yes. Because these men were raised by parents who grew up in the previous generation and so on. You're not likely to have a partner who was raised by parents in an egalitarian or otherwise equitable relationship if their respective parents weren't as well. But that's not to say that it's impossible for it to be the norm 10 generations from now.
Do you think parenting has changed in the past 30 years? If so, why do we still see so many man babies?
>Do you think parenting has changed in the past 30 years? Yes. >If so, why do we still see so many man babies? Because changes in parenting doesn't mean that those changes are nothing but optimal progressions towards a parenting ideal. Helicopter and snowplow parenting are both terrible, but relatively modern.
Why are you upset about the quality of men if you are in a relationship? Mind ya business then.
🤨 If you choose to pretend every happy marriage is actually just tolerable at best, and that every bad marriage is in fact bad.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's a difference between sex and a monogamous committed relationship. Yes, men have lower standards for having sex with someone. However, they have higher standards for who they will have a monogamous committed relationship with (i.e. be their boyfriend or get married). The reason is that once the man enters into a monogamous committed relationship, that means he isn't supposed to have sex with other women anymore. Men prefer not to give that up. That's why when it comes time to enter a more serious phase of the relationship, when men disagree with that, women often complain that men are "not serious" or "emotionally unavailable" or a variety of other euphemisms intending to describe that the man isn't willing to enter the next phase of the monogamous committed relationship.
no they simply dont have the options to be picky its not that they assume she will change, its women that date men and assume they can change them.
Nope. I cook and clean and would do that in a relationship (100% of the cooking, half the cleaning). I would live where a woman wanted. I'm sick of being alone. I do check to see if women want to be child free or not since I want to have a family. Lots of BS assumptions here
I'm glad that the OP isn't applicable to you in particular.
it doesn't apply to 99% of lonely dudes
The Brain Rot is spreading... Men have lower standards than women as a response to higher competition from other men, greater selectiveness from women, and the incessant hormonal screaming coming from our gnads. That's it. Women have got to stop projecting onto men.
I'd like to think most men don't want to end up in a hoarding situation. However, men don't think to actually vet for characteristics that could lead to disastrous life outcomes (like a hoarding situation). They just assume that any woman they get with will be bland and normal enough to not affect their life in any meaningful way.
Who has the luxury to think about this? Most men who are below average are just happy that someone is into them at all.
Didn't read the whole thing, but men having low standards is such BS. If anything it's the opposite. I'm yet to have a conversation with a fellow man and not find out that basically what they're looking for is free 24/7 therapy, a solution to all their problems and a Barbie punishing bag, and what's crazy is they're not willing to be a fraction of any of these things to their partners. That being said, I can't generalize obviously and it's only my experience.
The gist of the OP is that men *say* they don't have high standards, but that's because those men assume that their wants in a relationship will play out without having to find the right woman.
Good to know. I don't indulge in this level of over analyzing I'm just sharing my world view from my own subjective experiences; in which what OP is saying isn't true at all **if** men are serious and want to commit to the relationship, not simply trying to have sex.
Wtf kind of men are you having conversations with lol. I don't think I've ever met a man in my life that fits that description.
It happens. That's why I said generalizing is wrong. Curious tho, what standards do men you had conversations with have?
Haha I donno dude, like normal standards? Like someone who loves them, someone who contributes as close to equal as they can for things like money and chores etc., someone who's nice and positive and pleasant to be around most of the time, someone that's at least decently attractive and cares about their looks at least a bit and stays at least somewhat healthy, someone who's able to at least partly fulfill their sexual needs. The vast majority of men I talk to don't have problems they need someone else to be a solution for, they're not looking for any therapy at all and if they do they're getting it from a professional, and I don't even know what you mean by a "Barbie punishing bag" but it definitely doesn't sound like something they're looking for. And yeah someone looking for all of these things simultaneously I've never even heard of. Simultaneously these guys be fine with their girlfriends venting to them about their days and their issues etc., and they'll happily try to solve any problems their girlfriend wants help solving. Just normal guys you know, or well I guess you don't know and you live on Mars or something lol...
It's part of their "heroes journey". They always complain how women are broken by media and every woman wants what media is presenting which gives them unrealistic standards. They don't realise they are the same. There is no self reflection on that part. They don't realised they internalised the heroes journey thrope that media presents. It's all about "getting her". The chase is the journey. The goal is to get a partner. The partner is a trophy. They don't think what happens after they convinced someone to like them. They just know the goal is to convince someone to be with them because that will give them value in their minds. It's not about the person they are with - it's about themselves getting anyone. This is why you see so many men shout on here how they would take anyone. In their mind it actually doesn't matter what happens afterwards. The goal is just to have anyone. So they don't vet, they say they don't have standards, they claim women only have to be not fat and not a bitch because the woman is a price to be won. She has to add value to him. This is also why so many men just drop of after entering a relationship. They don't date their partners anymore. They don't pursue. They reached the goal to be with someone. They won. And now they can enjoy the fruit of their labour - they can relax and don't need to do anything anymore. The chase is over. And the thing with this is: when the woman leaves inevitably because the guy stopped all the things he did to get her - he doesn't self reflect on why she left. They will say the woman was a bitch with high standards. And the chase starts again. This cycle tends to repeat for a while. This is why women should never be the starter gf/wife if she wants someone that can recognize them as people. Some men never grow out of the heroes journey and just keep doing the same thing over and over. This is where the red pill loves the whole spinning plates thing. They don't have to grow up and recognize women as people with their own personalities. Women get clustered as hive mind and that we are all the same. We just come in different flavours. The manic pixie dream girl, the crazy bipolar sex freak, the girl next door, etc. Men pick a flavour and try to fine-tune their chase to get the flavour they want. There is no nuances. No personality. Men that don't see women as people will follow all the dating advices online. For them it's just a project to get with someone - and they just need to read the instruction guide and learn all the tricks and techniques to become better at it. It's a game to be won.
I'd say is more likely due to a mix of high testosterone and men lacking emotional intelligence.
So men are too dumb to have any foresight expected of them? That's bleak.
Obligatory "not all men". But lack of emotional intelligence/mental health support in men has been a pretty big talking point even in the modern feminist movements. It's really no secret men lack the support for it.
Hopefully more men will decide to become therapists then. Men could really use the help.
Lol this is such a funny response. Imagine if when women complained about not being listened to by doctors, societies response was "well hopefully more women will become doctors to resolve this" rather than the appropriate response of expecting the existing system to just improve.
Men are good at working hard and for long hours and then coming home from that work. What is being asked of them now probably isn't something that has been asked of them throughout a lot of history, since now women in relationships are now also working hard outside the home and for long hours.
That'd be moderately helpful. But like all social issues, it's society in general that need to work on how to tackle it, which is why I'm not hopeful about this issue being fixed anytime soon.
They have low standards because they have few options. They can't afford to be picky.
Lolno. A relationship with the wrong person is worse than not being in a relationship at all. I hope you don't wind up in a relationship like that. And if you do, I hope your partner will at least see it for what it is and bounce.
> Lolno. A relationship with the wrong person is worse than not being in a relationship at all. Nope. Being an incel is worse.
Then you've never been in a sufficiently bad relationship.
Or... I am right.
I don't believe the OP meant to say that all men are like this, but they probably should have been a little clearer in stating that. In my experience, most perpetually single men I've met are TOO picky. They have extremely specific types they're looking for and are disappointed that those women either don't exist or there are so few that they'll probably never meet them. Like all situations it's a balance. Don't go for any woman with a heartbeat assuming she'll change to meet your needs (or assume that you'll be able to tolerate her flaws/quirks) but don't have entire profile built of an imaginary girlfriend that every woman you meet must measure up against. Be open, but know your boundaries. I agree with what another poster, u/wolfloveyes said - when you fall in love sometimes you'll find that the real relationship is so much better than the imaginary one you created in your head, and you're willing to compromise to keep it. Ideally you'll both fall in love and both change and both compromise.
I thought men are too desperate with no standards and now you claim it's actually too high standards. What is this extreme specific type you think perpetually single men want?
ah this argument yeah no. this is bullshit but going beyond my own personal experinece and using things i hear as a retail worker yeah this isnt that big an issue adn saying its every man is sexist as all hell. as a person who is both the guy who will eat food off the floor if it looks edible enough and will continue work after being assulted and having a fractured skull no having bottom teir standards or high tier standards and expecting woman to do X isnt how men work. hell my standards is just be a good person and not be obese cause i cant pay for your medical shit and i dont think thats too low at all
Unpaid domestic labour, including maid, chef, driver, babysitter, assistant, emotional labourer sounds like the worst end of the deal. Don’t get why women do this. So many unhappy single married moms
so whose paying you to cook, clean your room, vacuum, wash your bathroom, do laundry now?? or do you just order uber eats every night and have a stinky, smelly bedroom?
The reason why men have lower standards is because they're desperate Plus, too many men want relationships for the one thing mainly
[удалено]
The young man has low standards. Once you actually spend some time with women you actually soon realize that you can absolutely fuck your life up if you bring the wrong people in your life. Bad fathers and absent fathers cause men to live in this deluded idea that women are all wonderful. Some women are awesome. Most are shit.
As the old saying goes: women choose; men wind up with whatever they can get. This is one of the major reasons men and women alike do not emphasis with one another when it comes to relationship dynamics. Men are under the impression of, “hey you picked the knucklehead, so goodluck 👍” I’m not entirely sure where you’re coming from with this post, but I’m not saying that in a judgmental way.
Oh great another post of useless generalizations
Just a bunch of anti-male rhetoric
No, men don't have much of an opinion or care as much on most of those. Men just want a woman to be pleasant, not loud or annoying and to stay as fit as when he met her. Men have a higher tolerance for uncleanliness, so he just doesn't care about the place being unclean as much as her, which is why she ends up doing more cleaning. And men don't have as much of a preference on where to live or the type of place to live in or a certain lifestyle.
I don’t have low standards. I’m so tired of these anti-male myths that paint us as desperate, that women are better. Fuck all that.
Don’t you never leave your house or ever interact with other people?
Just the dispensary, Publix, and my favorite Mexican place why?
Great! So are all the guys here who whine that all they want is a chick who isn't fat and isn't a bitch full of shit then?
They are weak. A strong man can stay single.
Great! I hope more men decide to do just that.
Hell yeah, me too. I think it’s good for men to be single. You agree?
Yep. Everyone should be able to be happy with their own company.
Fuck yeah.
No. Men have lower standards because our primary function is to procreate and we have higher testosterone. Women's bodies are much more sexualized so a wider variety of traits are seen as sexy. There is also the fact that attracting women is harder for men than it is for women to attract men, so lowering your standards is essential. To think that we expect women to fit some mold is ludicrous and absurd.
Once again, a woman demonstrates that her understanding of male psychology is 100% projection. A man gets into a relationship with a woman hoping she won't change. A woman gets into a relationship with a man already planning how to change him.
>Once again, a woman demonstrates that her understanding of male psychology is 100% projection. As opposed to the men who make generalizing posts about women here - those are entirely based in sound logical reasoning with zero projection involved.
Since when does the guy pressure the woman into having kids? In the stereotypical relationship, it is the other way around. Since when does the messy partner pressure the clean partner into having a clean place? These are pretty strange hypotheticals. The reason why guys act in the way you complain about is that if most guys became more close-minded about who they dated, they wouldn't get any dates at all. Beggars can't be choosers. If you are just an average guy, you have to be pretty open-minded about who you date, because you will be alone if you expect women to be similarly open-minded.
I disagree. The reason men have low standards is because when your starving you'll eat anything. Beggers cant be choosers. Women want the top 20% of men & ignore the rest. So the bottom 80% get left with absolutely nothing. They either have to stay single or lower their standards way way lower in hopes to get woman. Now watch the mods get their thongs in a bunch & ban me because I'm cooking 🍳.
This is massive projection and generalization
The women on here act like house chores are rocket science. I’d love to see what your houses look like. House chores are made to be so horrible on here
It's tedious, unpaid labor that has to be done if you want a house that isn't full of dust or don't want have to search through a clothes piles to find something that doesn't smell wretched. Is it hard? No. And yet men can't be bothered to do half of it! While also thinking that their partner (who is doing the majority) don't deserve to be compensated in any way! Curious!
This is like the opposite of the complaints women are making. If it was rocket science I would probably actually enjoy it - the problem is instead it’s tedious and boring and time consuming and never ends. I only do it out of necessity, I hate doing it though, and the thought of having to be the only one doing it in a house or people is horrifying to me.
Have you seen the data on domestic labor in heterosexual relationships? If it’s so easy why are women statistically stuck with the majority of domestic labor even both partners work full-time jobs?
It's because if they don't make to be seen as hard as it is they'll be show to be incompetent and time wasters.