@The Cushitic One i appreciate you b you never hold a grudge like @embarassing i appreciate your rational response 
In defence of men, what's left of them
- Thread starter Cognitivedissonance
- Start date
- Status
embarassing
VIP
Apologize@The Cushitic One i appreciate you b you never hold a grudge like @embarassing i appreciate your rational response
Edo Nene
SUGAR breasts
Ironically leaders of modern feminism cult are transwomen. Theyre taking over, no longer care about the real issues like FGM, child bribe, domestic violence etc. Right now in medical setting,the professionals have to say pregnant person instead of pregnant women. They cant even say womb because its fucking offensive to trans and binary people. WTF in world we living atm!
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."
George Orwell
Edo Nene
SUGAR breasts
its not fair, men always winning!"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."
George Orwell
Brad Pitt refuses to pay Angelina Jolie $100,000 in child support
According to a source, Pitt “has no issue taking care of” their six children -- Maddox, Pax, Zahara, Shiloh, and twins Vivienne and Knox, but he will not pay her money to take care of their children.
The statement is the first joint comment from the actors on their divorce since Jolie filed to end their marriage in September.
Custody of their six children has been the primary issue in the divorce, with Jolie initially seeking sole physical custody. California law favours joint custody in divorce cases, although final arrangements are often agreed to by parents and formalised in a written agreement.
Pitt and Jolie were married for two years and together for 12 years after becoming close while filming 2005’s Mr & Mrs Smith.
Their divorce, and every filing in it, has attracted international attention. Last month, Pitt sought to seal custody records in the case, and a hearing had been scheduled for next week on the issue.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...-brad-pitt-agree-to-settle-divorce-in-private
"It is a great day. All Amber wanted was to be divorced and now she is,” Heard’s attorney, Pierce O’Donnell, tells Us. “In the words of Gerald Ford, 'Our long national nightmare is over.'"
The finalization comes just weeks after Depp, 53, requested that Heard pay $100,000 in legal fees, as revealed in new court documents filed by his lawyer, Laura Wasser, on December 20.
According to Entertainment Tonight, the docs asked that Heard pay the $100,000 in attorney’s fees incurred by Depp from her previous legal request, which asked that the Pirates of the Caribbean star pay the remaining $6.8 million he owes her under the terms of their divorce settlement.
PHOTOS: Hollywood's Ugliest Divorces
However, an insider tells Usthat the judge “rejected Johnny's request for Amber to pay his attorney fees. Amber is not paying his legal fees either.”
The source adds: “The settlement, the original terms, will be enforced.”
Heard filed for divorce from Depp on May 23, and after many setbacks and accusations — including her claim that Depp had physically and verbally abused her — they settled their divorce for $7 million on August 16.
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/amber-heard-and-johnny-depp-finalize-divorce-w461117
It's official - Tiger Woods divorce is finalised and could cost him up to $750million
Tiger Woods paid a heavy price for his cheating yesterday when he was divorced from his betrayed wife Elin Nordegren.
The Swedish former model and children's nanny is understood to have been paid more than $100million - £64million - as part of the settlement.
Although she could have pushed for a half share in the disgraced golfer's £650million fortune, 30-year-old Elin reportedly agreed on the lower sum to avoid a messy, drawn-out court battle.
She signed a prenuptial agreement when they wed in 2006, but it was renegotiated in the wake of the sex scandal as Woods tried desperately to save his marriage following his affairs with up to 19 women.
The couple were both at Bay County Circuit Court in Panama City, Florida yesterday as the marriage was described during a ten-minute hearing as 'irretrievably broken'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-Woods-divorce-finalised-cost-750million.html
Last edited:
@The Cushitic One @embarassing @sophisticate @Gambar @Reiko @VixR @TooMacaan @all the chicks peep this girl who goes on a forum trying to bag a sugar daddy and a CEO of JP Morgan responds @LarryThePuntite youre familiar with the jargons of the banker, what do you guys make of this?
Title: What should I do to marry a rich guy?
I’m going to be honest of what I’m going to say here.
I’m 25 this year. I’m very pretty, have style and good taste. I wish to marry a guy with $500k annual salary or above.
You might say that I’m greedy, but an annual salary of $1M is considered only as middle class in New York.
My requirement is not high. Is there anyone in this forum who has an income of $500k annual salary? Are you all married?
I wanted to ask: what should I do to marry rich persons like you?
Among those I’ve dated, the richest is $250k annual income, and it seems that this is my upper limit.
If someone is going to move into high cost residential area on the west of New York City Garden(?), $250k annual income is not enough.
I’m here humbly to ask a few questions:
1) Where do most rich bachelors hang out? (Please list down the names and addresses of bars, restaurant, gym)
2) Which age group should I target?
3) Why most wives of the riches are only average-looking? I’ve met a few girls who don’t have looks and are not interesting, but they are able to marry rich guys.
4) How do you decide who can be your wife, and who can only be your girlfriend? (my target now is to get married)
Ms. Pretty
A philosophical reply from CEO of J.P. Morgan:
Dear Ms. Pretty,
I have read your post with great interest. Guess there are lots of girls out there who have similar questions like yours. Please allow me to analyse your situation as a professional investor.
My annual income is more than $500k, which meets your requirement, so I hope everyone believes that I’m not wasting time here.
From the standpoint of a business person, it is a bad decision to marry you. The answer is very simple, so let me explain.
Put the details aside, what you’re trying to do is an exchange of “beauty” and “money” : Person A provides beauty, and Person B pays for it, fair and square.
However, there’s a deadly problem here, your beauty will fade, but my money will not be gone without any good reason. The fact is, my income might increase from year to year, but you can’t be prettier year after year.
Hence from the viewpoint of economics, I am an appreciation asset, and you are a depreciation asset. It’s not just normal depreciation, but exponential depreciation. If that is your only asset, your value will be much worse 10 years later.
By the terms we use in Wall Street, every trading has a position, dating with you is also a “trading position”.
If the trade value dropped we will sell it and it is not a good idea to keep it for long term – same goes with the marriage that you wanted. It might be cruel to say this, but in order to make a wiser decision any assets with great depreciation value will be sold or “leased”.
Anyone with over $500k annual income is not a fool; we would only date you, but will not marry you. I would advice that you forget looking for any clues to marry a rich guy. And by the way, you could make yourself to become a rich person with $500k annual income.This has better chance than finding a rich fool.
Hope this reply helps.
signed,
J.P. Morgan CEO
That's a logically sound argument. She's only leveraging her beauty. What she needs to do is develop an appeasing personality and enhance her personal development. At least, do something about her intangible non-depreciating assets. There is a clear demarcation between someone a man would date vs. marry. They have higher standards for the latter. Since there are plenty of beautiful women you need to do something that sets you apart. She should consider increasing her income and aim to attract similar others. Business conferences might be the ideal place to socialize/hunt.
Be cautious though, some of these guys with lots of money have shadow lives. I'm sure you're aware of this cognitive. One must also assess their capacity to be faithful in the long run. Not that less wealthy men don't cheat, but they have fewer opportunities to compared to their wealthier counterparts. I suppose cheating means wealthy men have more to lose but most of these financially dependent women would stay, even if he cheated. I guess they prefer the lifestyle.One other thing, now a days having a couple million makes you apart of the middle class.
What is this lady on about when she says wealthy?
First video; my thoughts. [a bit verbose, soz for the essay lol, but it's too much to address it all via text].
1) She is anti-feminist because: it's disastrous to our culture and it's a lie
Claims feminism isn't about that [fighting for equal perception] anymore--
The part I found most interesting about her analysis:
What it was vs. what it is...and...What it is vs. what it's sold as.
She believes that the same goals/values is being repackaged and recycled. "Feminism is hijacked by socialist movement", 'now it's merely a tool to push the 'socialist society agenda''. The remark she makes about 'one of Socialism's goals being "the destruction of nuclear family" since "the family is the framework/foundation of a society" is something which I agree with and dislike as much as she does.
Where I differ in opinion, is about the role of feminism in bringing about that reality.
She claims that "the destruction of the nuclear family" is supported by the feminist movement; 'since it easily creates discontentment...thus, the ideal environment to transform current society into a Socialist society'. While I do agree there is a link there, I believe that's only a possibility if feminism is utilized in the wrong way. As she said, "feminism is being used as a tool"-- if that's the case...it can also be used as a tool for good. The problem isn't feminism itself but the people with power who are directing society towards a certain path. And it doesn't matter if you even get rid of feminism if that's true because that implies a larger problem-- even if you defeat feminism, those ppl will just find a different tool to meet their aims.
2) She dismisses that "women weren't allowed to vote, yes, once upon a time" but doesn't understand that the underlying mentality for 'why women shouldn't be allowed to participate in politics' has never truly left. That mentality still exists. And it needs to be eradicated before I'll agree that feminism isn't necessary any longer.
3) She brings up a lady who 'attacked full time homemakers ideology and later went on to "admit" she was a communist and those values had an influence on her critique of traditional female roles.' This is an anecdotal situation, it doesn't prove there's a tie between the ideologies. Regardless, the part I found interesting here is that she believes feminism was created as a propaganda tool with the intention to "cultivate this victimology among women" (even though there were real women's rights issues back then)...yet she herself 'cultivates victimology among men' by saying there is an intentional war against men and an agenda to make them obselete! Why can't she see that MRA's can also be used as a tool to break down the nuclear family??? Her logic is not consistent in that regard; she's clearly biased here.
4)This girl in the video seems to hold Sarah Palin as some sort of ideal, wtf; Sarah Palin is one of the worst examples for women tbh. My guess is that her idealization of Sarah Palin is only due to her ideological loyalty-- she strikes me as the type to promote traditional roles (this is something that MGTOW is against; since they see it as just another form of gynocracy. I didn't think you'd be for this either. What do you think??). She also declares that feminism supports only liberal women...and that it's not supporting all women. The reason being that it's only about spreading the leftist/socialist world view, not about helping women. I completely agree that mainstream/3rd wave feminism is this way, and it was pretty evident when Conservative women were barred from attending that "Women's march" some months back just because they didn't support abortion and extreme s-xuality.
5) "Women want to act unlovable but be loved", etc. Meh, both sides have their faults and both do this to some extent (men do it with respect).
"I'm gonna dress like a hooker but expect you to treat me with respect" Men don't complain about this though; I'd be the first person to speak against women who do this crap if men didn't simultaneously encourage it from the sidelines. Men are the 'demand' to a hoe's 'supply'; and you guys love hoes, you just don't want your wife or female relative to be one.
6) "Women are the most privileged creatures to ever walk the face of this earth"...
It's crap like this I can't fw.
Earlier she even made the argument that feminism is about helping the liberal rather than helping the woman (& is in fact destructive to women)...how are women privileged in today's society then [let alone historically]?? She contradicts herself a lot, if we're being honest.
If you've read this far...Over all:
She has a right to voice her disapproval of whatever she thinks Feminism is, of course, but Feminism means something different to every individual. It can also be universal, it's not just a concept that's limited to the Western world. But yea, there are parts of it which are poisonous-- especially the mainstream kind, since it's been hijacked, like she mentioned, by other groups who seek to use it as a tool to push their own motives.
1) She is anti-feminist because: it's disastrous to our culture and it's a lie
Claims feminism isn't about that [fighting for equal perception] anymore--
The part I found most interesting about her analysis:
What it was vs. what it is...and...What it is vs. what it's sold as.
She believes that the same goals/values is being repackaged and recycled. "Feminism is hijacked by socialist movement", 'now it's merely a tool to push the 'socialist society agenda''. The remark she makes about 'one of Socialism's goals being "the destruction of nuclear family" since "the family is the framework/foundation of a society" is something which I agree with and dislike as much as she does.
Where I differ in opinion, is about the role of feminism in bringing about that reality.
She claims that "the destruction of the nuclear family" is supported by the feminist movement; 'since it easily creates discontentment...thus, the ideal environment to transform current society into a Socialist society'. While I do agree there is a link there, I believe that's only a possibility if feminism is utilized in the wrong way. As she said, "feminism is being used as a tool"-- if that's the case...it can also be used as a tool for good. The problem isn't feminism itself but the people with power who are directing society towards a certain path. And it doesn't matter if you even get rid of feminism if that's true because that implies a larger problem-- even if you defeat feminism, those ppl will just find a different tool to meet their aims.
2) She dismisses that "women weren't allowed to vote, yes, once upon a time" but doesn't understand that the underlying mentality for 'why women shouldn't be allowed to participate in politics' has never truly left. That mentality still exists. And it needs to be eradicated before I'll agree that feminism isn't necessary any longer.
3) She brings up a lady who 'attacked full time homemakers ideology and later went on to "admit" she was a communist and those values had an influence on her critique of traditional female roles.' This is an anecdotal situation, it doesn't prove there's a tie between the ideologies. Regardless, the part I found interesting here is that she believes feminism was created as a propaganda tool with the intention to "cultivate this victimology among women" (even though there were real women's rights issues back then)...yet she herself 'cultivates victimology among men' by saying there is an intentional war against men and an agenda to make them obselete! Why can't she see that MRA's can also be used as a tool to break down the nuclear family??? Her logic is not consistent in that regard; she's clearly biased here.
4)This girl in the video seems to hold Sarah Palin as some sort of ideal, wtf; Sarah Palin is one of the worst examples for women tbh. My guess is that her idealization of Sarah Palin is only due to her ideological loyalty-- she strikes me as the type to promote traditional roles (this is something that MGTOW is against; since they see it as just another form of gynocracy. I didn't think you'd be for this either. What do you think??). She also declares that feminism supports only liberal women...and that it's not supporting all women. The reason being that it's only about spreading the leftist/socialist world view, not about helping women. I completely agree that mainstream/3rd wave feminism is this way, and it was pretty evident when Conservative women were barred from attending that "Women's march" some months back just because they didn't support abortion and extreme s-xuality.
5) "Women want to act unlovable but be loved", etc. Meh, both sides have their faults and both do this to some extent (men do it with respect).
"I'm gonna dress like a hooker but expect you to treat me with respect" Men don't complain about this though; I'd be the first person to speak against women who do this crap if men didn't simultaneously encourage it from the sidelines. Men are the 'demand' to a hoe's 'supply'; and you guys love hoes, you just don't want your wife or female relative to be one.
6) "Women are the most privileged creatures to ever walk the face of this earth"...
It's crap like this I can't fw.Earlier she even made the argument that feminism is about helping the liberal rather than helping the woman (& is in fact destructive to women)...how are women privileged in today's society then [let alone historically]?? She contradicts herself a lot, if we're being honest.
If you've read this far...Over all:
She has a right to voice her disapproval of whatever she thinks Feminism is, of course, but Feminism means something different to every individual. It can also be universal, it's not just a concept that's limited to the Western world. But yea, there are parts of it which are poisonous-- especially the mainstream kind, since it's been hijacked, like she mentioned, by other groups who seek to use it as a tool to push their own motives.
VixR
Veritas
Lmfao!@The Cushitic One @embarassing @sophisticate @Gambar @Reiko @VixR @TooMacaan @all the chicks peep this girl who goes on a forum trying to bag a sugar daddy and a CEO of JP Morgan responds @LarryThePuntite youre familiar with the jargons of the banker, what do you guys make of this?
Title: What should I do to marry a rich guy?
I’m going to be honest of what I’m going to say here.
I’m 25 this year. I’m very pretty, have style and good taste. I wish to marry a guy with $500k annual salary or above.
You might say that I’m greedy, but an annual salary of $1M is considered only as middle class in New York.
My requirement is not high. Is there anyone in this forum who has an income of $500k annual salary? Are you all married?
I wanted to ask: what should I do to marry rich persons like you?
Among those I’ve dated, the richest is $250k annual income, and it seems that this is my upper limit.
If someone is going to move into high cost residential area on the west of New York City Garden(?), $250k annual income is not enough.
I’m here humbly to ask a few questions:
1) Where do most rich bachelors hang out? (Please list down the names and addresses of bars, restaurant, gym)
2) Which age group should I target?
3) Why most wives of the riches are only average-looking? I’ve met a few girls who don’t have looks and are not interesting, but they are able to marry rich guys.
4) How do you decide who can be your wife, and who can only be your girlfriend? (my target now is to get married)
Ms. Pretty
A philosophical reply from CEO of J.P. Morgan:
Dear Ms. Pretty,
I have read your post with great interest. Guess there are lots of girls out there who have similar questions like yours. Please allow me to analyse your situation as a professional investor.
My annual income is more than $500k, which meets your requirement, so I hope everyone believes that I’m not wasting time here.
From the standpoint of a business person, it is a bad decision to marry you. The answer is very simple, so let me explain.
Put the details aside, what you’re trying to do is an exchange of “beauty” and “money” : Person A provides beauty, and Person B pays for it, fair and square.
However, there’s a deadly problem here, your beauty will fade, but my money will not be gone without any good reason. The fact is, my income might increase from year to year, but you can’t be prettier year after year.
Hence from the viewpoint of economics, I am an appreciation asset, and you are a depreciation asset. It’s not just normal depreciation, but exponential depreciation. If that is your only asset, your value will be much worse 10 years later.
By the terms we use in Wall Street, every trading has a position, dating with you is also a “trading position”.
If the trade value dropped we will sell it and it is not a good idea to keep it for long term – same goes with the marriage that you wanted. It might be cruel to say this, but in order to make a wiser decision any assets with great depreciation value will be sold or “leased”.
Anyone with over $500k annual income is not a fool; we would only date you, but will not marry you. I would advice that you forget looking for any clues to marry a rich guy. And by the way, you could make yourself to become a rich person with $500k annual income.This has better chance than finding a rich fool.
Hope this reply helps.
signed,
J.P. Morgan CEO
I admire her gumption. But the fact of the matter is, depending on how pretty or crafty she is, she can easily reel in a man who is happy to be the "rich fool" JP speaks of. Love it or hate it, it is a tried and true tactic that has survived from antiquity.Lmfao!
What if he wants a replacement? Who am I kidding, she could take him to the cleaners if he files for divorce. 
Bless the courts.
VixR
Veritas
Oh for sure, the whole beauty depreciation thing is a numbers game, age and how well she maintains herself etc, which is why some young women see the power of their sexuality for all it's worth at their peak and cash in on it then. It's almost harder not to tbh. I've noticed women who go the rich man magnet route are amazingly flawless at not looking their age too, but what the heck else is money for anyway, if not keeping nature at bay
She doesn't even have to get married. These are men that are happy to spend money. It makes them feel good, and even their anxieties about her nature and if she really gives a shit about them at all is secondary when compared to what they consider a privilege of their position. To their credit, it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff in care points, from every direction and even their own families will be trying to drain them at all opportunity. Very few of them can resist the hot-chick-who-clearly-wants-you-for-your-money rouse though, even as they try.
Oh for sure, the whole beauty depreciation thing is a numbers game, age and how well she maintains herself etc, which is why some young women see the power of their sexuality for all it's worth at their peak and cash in on it then. It's almost harder not to tbh. I've noticed women who go the rich man magnet route are amazingly flawless at not looking their age too, but what the heck else is money for anyway, if not keeping nature at bay
She doesn't even have to get married. These are men that are happy to spend money. It makes them feel good, and even their anxieties about her nature and if she really gives a shit about them at all is secondary when compared to what they consider a privilege of their position. To their credit, it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff in care points, from every direction and even their own families will be trying to drain them at all opportunity. Very few of them can resist the hot-chick-who-clearly-wants-you-for-your-money rouse though, even as they try.
Like moths to a flame, they fall for the same game. I guess the lacaag in exchange for a young looking beauty is all the love they need.
The wee wee (not french) must be their primary decision maker. I will never believe what a man says about depreciating beauty. Thanks for the info.
In this scenario you would have to be a moron to get married.
It would be very difficult to find a man with money that is also stupid enough to marry a golddigger.
even if you have a simple minded one that inherits his money, his family would be working overtime to arrange one for him.
It would be very difficult to find a man with money that is also stupid enough to marry a golddigger.
even if you have a simple minded one that inherits his money, his family would be working overtime to arrange one for him.
- Status
Trending
-
-
-
Somali men got triggered over this post.. are they overreacting?- Started by Laiis
- Replies: 102
