Trust me if was removed out of the equation things would definitely look diffrent. I aslo think many guys don't want to date just for the sake of it but rather invest the time on themselves till the right one comes.
Do you find alot of guys dropping out of the dating market?
- Thread starter Lostbox
- Start date
- Status
The problem that men face in a sexually liberal society is this: women who pass a certain attractiveness threshold (let's say 6.5/10 and above) will have sexual interest from a much greater selection than their male counterparts. This leads women to have the sense that they can secure commitment (which is different from sexual interest) from a higher value male that is actually possible in most cases leading her to be unsatisfied or uninterested in men closer to her level. If a man wants to be in a satisfied relationship with a woman he will have to put in much more effort than her to be her perceived best option.
Men have always put much more effort in a relationship in the begining. Men are hunters, predators and therefore meant to pursue women. Historically a man did not just have to impress the woman, but also her family.
Sexual liberation is in fact a huge disadvantage to women. There is a massive difference between sexual interest and commitment. Just because a man will sleep with you and date you for years doesn't mean he'll marry you. Many women are finding this out the hard way. You even have books like 'Act like a lady, think like a man' instructing women' on how to get a man to marry them. They are bestsellers. That's how dire the situation is.
For a lot of men its a case of why buy the milk when you can get it for free. Women are jumping through hoops in order to get 'the ring' and are in 5 yr long relationships doing everything a wife is meant to do without commitment and then getting their heart broken.
Also, take into consideration women have a biological clock and men are now in no rush to marry as they can now get sex without marriage for free. Therefore, whilst before it was in the interest of both to marry, men are now comfortable with having long term girlfriends. No commitment, no proving yourself to her father/family and no dowry and wedding. Also, having kids out of wedlock is now common and now men can shirk responsibilities and don't even have to see their kids. Single mothers are left to struggle.
Furthermore, roles have changed and men do not even have to fully provide. Its completely acceptable for a man to to share financial responsibilities with a woman.
Women were in fact in a more powerful position in the past with regards to getting commitment and marriage. The vast majority of men had to get married in order to have regular sex and had to provide.
Last edited:
I think atheism coupled with this will spill catastrophic for future generations. I came to this conclusion seeing how the west is increasingly becoming more atheistic and the fact atheism doesn't provide a model for how a society should be.
I agree that there is has always been a greater burden of performance on men which is why I'm not complaining. A lot of men either do not understand this or are unaware of it so they resent this fact.
The sexual revolution is a totally novel social situation that both women and men are not being properly prepared for. As you said, time is a greater constraint for women than it is for men but society as a whole is not properly informing young women and is actually misleading them by telling them that their life trajectory should be exactly identical to that of men. An optimal strategy for women would be secure the highest-value partner they can while they are still in their 20s and discuss long-term expectations to avoid wasting their prime years. A string of relationships that go nowhere that leave the women in a worse overall position is the risk that women face in this climate. The benefit is that she is free to seek out the best possible person of her choosing.
You also have to remember that women aren't happy to settle for a mediocre person even if she herself is no better. I agree that sexual interest and interest in commitment aren't the same thing but the former can and will mislead women about their potential for securing the latter.
Freedom is a benefit that comes with costs. The reason why women are unhappy today is that they are not being properly informed about the pitfalls which are unique to being a woman. They end up wasting their prime years without even being aware of it and only realize it once they're on the wrong side of 30. Being 30+ and dating casually is no big deal for a man but it's downright depressing for a woman.
Many women are wasting 3 yrs, 5 yrs or even 10yrs with one man in the hopes of marriage. What you are forgetting is that the tables have turnt. Whilst in the past the man had to work hard to marry. A woman now has to act like a wife to get the ring. Most men in the west have a trial period A.K.A cohabitation before even dreaming of marrying a woman
Also, what do you mean by mediocre women not accepting mediocre men? I very rarely see an average woman married to a guy that is out of her league. Men with money and status have access to high quality women.
For a lot of women, a high quality man is a man that provides and is intelligent. Yet, in many western marriages mostly due to the economy most women are footing the bill along side of their husbands. Hordes of women are with mediocre men, they have to help provide. So really what advantage do women have?
In the past a woman wouldn't just have one suitor. That is something a lot of men are forgetting. A very pretty girl would have multiple suitor and due to pressure from family she will be forced to choose the one considered the most high quality. Therefore, compettion was rife. Being a 'nice guy' like many guys here think should be enough wasn't.
Low quality men or men that cannot provide actually have more of a chance now, as now women are placing 'love' above other things. Also, women are now able to provide for themselves so giving those type of men a chance is no longer a huge risk.
Why is common to see a thug or a jobless man with multiple baby mothers? If anything women's standards have dropped. Yet men are still complaining. I'm telling you if you are finding it hard to get a woman now in 2018, you would have found it brutal 100 yrs ago, as men actually had to offer tangable things, not just love and a bit of game.
Dating apps are an instructive microcosm of the sexual market. Research shows that women rate 80% of men on dating apps as below-average. Think about that for a second. Men have to be in the top 20% to be even considered above average. The loser men that you are describing are usually hyper-masculine or the women involved have some issues going on which is not unusual at all.
It is true that the bar for nailing down a desirable man is higher for women than it was before since sexual availability is no longer a motivator for these types of men. This in itself is not a bad thing. The problem is that woman are actively being trained to not exhibit the characteristics that men find highly attractive in a committed relationship. A woman that cultivates the qualities that men would traditionally find desirable before committing will have zero problems eventually find a man to commit to her longterm. Such skills and traits are being systematically devalued in society which is worse for women than men.
Basically, the bar for commitment is higher for women and the bar for having sex with reasonably attractive women is higher for men. The actual dynamics at play isn't really widespread knowledge when it should be. Spinsters and incels are two-sides of the same coin.
Look at it from a western context.
Why buy the cow, when you can have it for free? What incentive is there for men when cohabitation is the same as marriage without the commitment?
Sex was I would say the main motivator when it comes to marriage. men/ women in the past and men/ women in Muslim countries get married earlier.
Also, as a muslim woman, there are no expectations of me doing anything for a man before marrying a him. No cooking, sleeping with or anything considered wifely duties before a man commits to me. There is no try before you buy. So how is a man going to know I have the right feminine qualities? If that is really the case?
You got one thing wrong. Men got married back in the day because their retirement plan were their kids plus most kids die of early so they need to produce a lot. If they were only looking for sex then prostitution and mistresses would have probably done the job. Also wife duites aren't valued as much since men have to learn to be self-sufficient same way women can provide for themselves. Looks like the value of gender roles is on a steep drop.
Last edited:
Now a man does not have to marry a woman to live with her and have kids with her.
In the past, due to how conservative society was, men could not live with a woman.
Also, the type of women they could sleep with were limited. A man's options were limited to harlots, not a normal girl he might be attracted to or in love with.
Example, imagine there was a girl from you're area you were attracted to? The only way you could be with her was through marriage. The average woman a man would see was not a prostitute or mistress. They were from respectable families governed by strict codes of conduct.
"Why buy the cow if you can have the milk for free?"
In the above analogy, the assumption is that acquiring milk would be the sole motivator for buying a cow. For it to apply to dating then sex would have to be the only motivator for marriage. I think you are overestimating the percentage of people in relationships that cohabit and whose relationships closely resemble a satisfying marriage. For example, there usually are no children nor an explicit commitment to lifelong companionship with somebody you desire. Men want these things just as much as women so there is still strong motivation "to buy the cow." even if the milk is free.
In this climate, you're going to have to do a mini-trial of marriage-like conditions if you want to lock somebody down in all honesty. You'd simply have to spend enough time with a person in a variety of circumstances and at their most relaxed to accurately assess what they're like beneath the surface. Everybody puts their best foot forward early on and there is actually a biochemical "honeymoon" phase early in relationships where judgement is coloured by desire. It is bad advice for both men and women to cohabit actually before marriage/engagement.
I don't know how conservative you are but you'd basically have to simulate what life together would be like before you settle down. Spending time at each other's homes and so forth. Stereotypically feminine qualities didn't appear in a vacuum and are super attractive to the vast majority of men. Being a good cook, nurturing, tidy, appearance-oriented, highly empathetic, etc. Of course, there are other virtues regardless of gender that also apply (intelligence, work-ethic, kindness, etc)
Tinder makes it easy to f*ck nowadays. There is no need for cheap skates like us to pay for a relationship when we can get free sex.
I guess we shouldn't worry about rising populations then. Look at asia! almost all the men are incels and that's good since they already have a combined population of 1 billion.
You look at what society wants not what motivates a man. They can have lived in farms were then need lots of labor or he simply wanted a family to continue his lineage. Also, women were much smarter at get a man to commit to them and theirs no much pressure to being a father or a husband nowadays.
The fundamental mistake in your logic is assuming all women can and will get married to the type of man their hearts truly want. Just like being incel is a reality quite a number of men are facing these days, an equal number of women will either have to settle for being side-chick 6, a second wife, or being alone.
The Xaalimo in the diaspora and to an extent back home have very little standards, if they had high standards, you wouldn't have so many broken homes in the first place.
The average Asian/White women practice hypergamy which Xaalimo's don't, and before you come with the excuse they are stuck with a bad pool, well, they select even worse partners when marrying out.
It's some wise intellect when the average full cumulative cost of Miss Intelengensia Xalimoid getting married would set the couple back anywhere between 15-40k in cost or debt all paid to foreigners.
If they had any intelligence, we wouldn't be in such a dire state as a community and they wouldn't be selecting bums disproportionately to all other groups.
In a society like the west were all the marital powers are in the hands of females, they are to blame for all the dysfunctions and the same principles apply to patriarchal societies.
Blame always falls on the party that holds power, you don't see the dysfunctions in the diaspora back home for a good reason, despite the wide scale polygamy.
In the west, the Xaalimo selects her partner from the streets without any parental input or guidance, and in the case of divorce they initiate 75% of them
In the Muslim Asian/Arab communities the parents select a pool of suitable partners in the vast majority of cases to avoid the pitfalls we continue to fall into.
The women simply never fend for themselves on the streets for husbands and this is for good reasons because they know they will make suicidal choices to the determinant of the whole community and themselves. (even their mothers understand this)
Agreed, the losers in present times cannot be compared to the losers in the past, it's night and day.
The damaging aspects of this current society harms both genders, it turns male's into weak spineless cowardice bums unless they were raised properly and experienced adversity.
It equally turns women into spoiled entitled clueless brats that don't even know what's good for them
This is were parental guidance comes in to correct those imbalances created by modern society, or at least it should!
Your back at it again ... I thought I already told you that keep repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it true. It just makes you delusional
I swear you must have your paragraphs saved on word
I agree with your Premise that for Non Muslim males or Muslim males that don't fear their creator and are willing to fornicate like wild animals, this is the best time for them to be alive.
Because the women today in comparison to those in the past, are very cheap, excessively shameless, immodest, impulsive, stupid and therefore easy to manipulate.
Had I been one of those shameless people, I would have died from paralytic stroke due to excess like Pope Jon XII
But for a practising Muslim males that seeks quality and piety, the diaspora is a death sentence for them.
- Status
Trending
-
-
BREAKING NEWS US and China reach deal to transfer TikTok ownership, trade- Started by Sigmundd
- Replies: 34
-
