How about we blame inflation and corporations not paying more?
Like I said I am not a feminist and I don't support it.

There is only so much money going around. But the issue here is men living in insecurity their partner will destroy the family they have built if they are not the main provider. Because yes, they are damn sure to live in that insecurity, because they know divorce and infidelity both increase even more when it's the case.

https://hbr.org/2017/05/does-a-woman...es-the-laundry

That you blame it on "men being insecure" "inflation" or "corporations", or anything else under the moon but women and their own hypergamous instinct, just proves my point. It's not that men don't want to men up, but women cannot cope with the fact that *they* disdain dating or being in a relationship with men who earn less than them or become stay-at-home dads - ostensibly because that would make them "men babies".

So, joke's on them, because the jig is up. More and more men are waking up to reality, and more and more career women find out that their "good men" reach their physical, sexual, and economic prime in their 30s and 40s. They earn their peak income and keep it for themselves (because they don't marry or go MGTOW), and go for younger chicks who are all but willing to date and hook up with older men who have their chit together.

If a man is insecure because his girl is making $250K plus bonuses then the joke is on him and he has deep seeded issues. Who doesn't like extra money? I'm sorry that most women prefers to work than to stay at home watching Soaps all day and getting fat. To me that's not helping society nor mind stimulating. I prefer to make money and have a sense of personal financial security.

I don't date workaholics because work and play balance is important to me and I believe as the saying goes "if you play together, you stay together".

If I'm home first, I will cook but only because I am maximizing muscle protein synthesis for da gainz, hungry and due for a meal asap. On weekends, unless its bbq (man duty), its known who is cooking. I believe in gender roles and have my fare share of man duties around the house to keep me occupied. Albeit, I will help if she is in a pinch. I'm looking to settle down and any if and's or buts at the start of dating regarding these things, its game over.

I remember one of my ex's once said to me "at work, the women tell me their husbands do everything; cook, clean, laundry, kids, etc". I start laughing, pointed and said "the door is over there if you think that will fly around here".

It may sound like I'm a bit of a douche and I fully admit I am spoiled, but I do show my woman I do appreciate these things and respect her; surprises, splurge on christmas, bday, anniversary, regular date nights/activities, etc.

As expected, you don't get *it*. I do not expect you to because you are not, in fact, a man. For you, it's all feelings, "deep-seeded issues".

Let me tell you a secret: We men take IMMENSE pride in being the provider for our family. Healthy, masculine, ego-building pride and satisfaction. Deep in our hearts, minds, and DNA, we can feel people we care about - our partners, our CHILDREN - depend on US for security, happiness and well-being. We get as much pride in this, that you get feminine pride and satisfaction from feeling a baby growing inside you. Because yes, this is a role biologically-ingrained in us like maternity is to a woman.

Get that?

So when you refer to our "insecurity" as "deep-seeded issues" the only thing it tells us that you lack care about what the experience of being a man is. Like 99,9% of women out there. Guess what, we have instincts, psychologies, thoughts, wants and desires as well. These are not fads or "personal issues", but deep-rooted instincts from millions of years of evolution away from being primates walking on our four legs.
Enjoy your money, because I will let you in on another secret: Men (who are not con men, macks, or gigolos) do not give a fig on how much money you earn or how much status you have in the workplace. Men are not hypergamous that way, we monkey-branch from job to job to increase our income and status and acquire more resources. For mating, a girl could be a cashier in a Walmart for all we care. If she's cute, young, down-to-hang with us and all-around fun to be with, we'll date her in a heartbeat and even marry her if she's the right partner.

In fact, this works against you in general - because yes, men also tend to avoid entering in relationships where their partner may hold their economic situation over their heads like a Sword of Damocles.

Here's the thing I don't brag about my job nor status. I'm in a relationship now and my BF doesn't know my salary nor do I know his. We go back and forth when going out, etc.
If a man is dating a 20-something that's a cashier (no hate for cashiers, I was one) shouldn't he be questioning her ambition, because you know the misc guys don't want a gold digger...

Thread turned into a gender war. 'Mirin.

Congratulations, you completely missed the point of my response to you. Again...

The problem is not that women work, or earn more than a man, or that inflation is real. The problem is that women are still beholden to their hypergamous nature and in quite statistically significant proportions will terminate an otherwise stable and healthy relationship if they out-earn the man. Thus, it is the woman's behavioral response to this situation that is the problem, and any sane man aware of this reality will understandably feel some degree of insecurity when faced with this situation, especially considering the heavy penalties for the man often associated with a marriage being dissolved.

Certainly this does not pertain to all women nor all men nor all marriages. However, this phenomena is frequent enough to warrant pause and consideration, and maybe some compassion from women.

If 5 out of 10 people you passed on the street smacked you across the face, and 70% of the people who slapped you were wearing yellow shirts, I'd have to be a real jerk to mock you and tell you you're just an insecure beta for flinching when passing a person in a yellow shirt.

lol

Personally I don’t think money or gender is the issue. In my area there is a surprising amount of women that are the breadwinners/head of household but you really wouldn’t know it just by watching the family interactions and dynamics. I had women message me using assets & accomplishments as the bait. The real issue is a lack of transparency and that is equally shared between both genders.

Those days aren't long gone, if you're willing to live a more frugal lifestyle, where you spend more quality time bonding with your children instead of at a keyboard while you kids are shoved to nannys. A present mother and housewife isthemost important job on the planet, you are raising another human with virtues and love.Quality post. People these days forget about innate fulfillment factors. DanielleGreen would have a point if the sexes were biologically equal, but they aren't.

Why are you assuming "drive, spark, ambition, confidence and will" are all mutually exclusive from stay at home mother?

I want a woman that's intelligent enough to recognize the critical importance of raising our child in a consistent, present and loving environment. And also intelligent enough to realize the value of that role.Nothing would impress me (and garner my respect) more than a womn that see can that(in essence seeing beyond all the feminist ****e) and putting the children first.

There was a hugely strong implication in your post that the domestic role was counter to those qualities.

My Sister is a SAHM to 3, and she is an absolute bada$$. She is a driven wife, mother, sister, woman. The admirable qualities you list above can be well expressed and appreciated outside of a lucrative career.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, I'm just not quite sure why you are saying it.



Also, good on you for being a SAHM.


EDIT: ^^^ Wizard

I wasn't trying to say that men and women are equal, we aren't equal to men. I'm just pointing out that women pretty much has to work in this hyper competitive world. If a woman wants to stay at home and watch the kids all day, you better hope the husband makes bank.

Ye I don't think that's completely true; I think it's true if you want to live an upscale life where your kids complete with the other spoiled kids and you get nice vacations, things and gifts.

People just don't know how to live frugally anymore. You choose between a second job and not living with extravagances.

Personally if I wanted kids, I wouldn't want them to be average. You betcha they would be attending the best private school, have the best tutors, attend summer camps, etc. That kind of stuff takes $$

Bit of a lurker and I never post,
No hate but I've read heaps of your threads and I'm being honest here but you come across as a bit insecure and needy, you always assume things based on nothing, you need to calm down and take a step back, stop telling misc everything and I think you'll go alot better.

I'd exchange all that in a split second for having a mother around to bond with them and raise them. I'm so glad my own mother made that choice, and I guarantee any kid would when they look back.

Also, lol at "I don't want them to be average"... some struggle defines character - are you saying I must be average because I went to public school and didn't have those fancy things?

Yeah I can admit I'm insecure at times about things. Without a doubt. Working on it.

I agree with Luc1fer. I have three sisters who are stay at home moms. Out of three brother-in-laws, two does not make a lot of money but they insist on my sisters to stay home to raise the kids. So my sisters in turn saves up what ever money my brother-in-laws bring home, use coupons, cook at home, clean, buy clothes only for the kids (they wear the same old clothes) and grow veggies in the backyard. Their kids are now working for Google and Amazon as engineers. We look up to our mom as our role model. She did the same thing and worked too.

PS I still wear jeans that are 15 years old... lol .. saves money

It's not inflation, it's supply and demand. If you double the supply of labour, as when women entered the workplace, you halve it's price.

This is why wages have stagnated and in the 60's you could raise a family on one salary and now you need two. Inflation has nothing to do with it unless you mean inflation in the supply of labour.

This is indicative of a lack of self awareness and feminist solipsism. You view the maternal role as a domestic servant but you never ask yourself what the counter role for paternity is in that situation and it's a man who sacrifices his entire life and time working to support his family i.e. a work slave and turning his wages over to his wife to buy what was needed for survival. If you doubt this, I invite you to research the phenomenon of forged/faked wage packets.

This is the problem; feminists see the traditional role of mother as something unvalued (when it's not) and glorified the male role of provider into something it wasn't, simply because they didn't experience it and thus didn't understand it. Nor did they understand that men are biologically driven to work and compete because that is how we attract the best possible mate we can, by rising to the top in whatever competitive endeavour we take part in as this is a primary factor in female sexual selection.

This whole notion of oppressed female history of being a domestic slave ignores men being work slaves in incredibly dangerous situations (mining, deep see fishing, soldiers etc) - the reality is that both men and women have historically ****ty existences, but feminists brain wash women into thinking this only applied to them.

Shes got issues brody. Move on to next

This is on point. Especially this part:

"feminists see the traditional role of mother as something unvalued (when it's not) and glorified the male role of provider into something it wasn't, simply because they didn't experience it and thus didn't understand it. "

I believe that these views were pushed upon society by people higher up and that they were part of an agenda and not a natural organic progression of society.

Sooooooo......did you msg her again OP or are you done?

Why is what he wrote here wrong?
“What a pile of intensive bollocks” isn’t really doin’ it for me, you know?

You can still send your kids to Eton College, Deerfield and they can still be loved. They just have an academic advantage over the kid that went to East High School. Sorry if I came off as "bougie." I went to private school all my life and my mom was still involved in everything I did while working full time as well. Pretty much my entire upbringing was centered around making A's and improving anything and everything.
A kid can have the ultimate advantage by have 2 parents in their life that shows emotional support while attending the best school in the country.

I did not. Thought about it.

No your original post was nonsense and shows little insight into the realities of what is currently going on in society nor of what the evolutionary biological drivers are for the sexes. It's just typical feminist inspired brain washing.

Firstly, no man finds your career or earning potential sexy and that's not because of insecurity. Our drivers are physical appearance but really what we're attracted to are the signs of youth and health because that means the woman is more likely to survive child birth and produce strong offspring over a longer period. It's evolutionary biology and all the bitching in the world won't change it. We don't care because we know that it's our role to provide and protect through that childbirth. Yes it's great to have a smart, sexy woman - it's the ideal but not some woman that puts her career above her own and her family's happiness.

What's more, it's widely known that women date across and up competence hierarchies which means if you earn more than your male partner, you're actually less likely to be attracted to him or stick with him. Sure there are exceptions, but by and large women are not happy with men who make less than them because it contradicts one of their fundamental biological drivers.

I've covered the second part of your post in detail regarding your notion of a "domestic slave" but I'll even go one step further. Numerous blind, large scale studies have also shown that women find men LESS attractive when they see them undertaking domestic chores. They've done those studies and had women rate the men for attractiveness and the results show a substantial gap when one group of women watch a man doing something considered masculine and another group watching the exact same man doing domestic chores.

If any man is reading this whilst in relationship counselling and you're being advised that maybe your wife or partner will be more sexual if you do the washing up so that she's less tired - stop seeing that therapist and go do the exact opposite. Take up something masculine and dangerous - you can't negotiate genuine desire and you won't get laid with passion because you did the vacuuming. Your relationship is already on the way out, if you want to save it she needs to see you as a man and if it flames out you'll know for the next one.


I'll agree with your last point, it is about complimentary lives and putting family first but it's a damn sight better doing that in the fashion that our complementary, evolved roles indicate. A family should be about providing the best possible future for the children.

Only feminist women don't do that, they put themselves first, they tell women that careers are more important and women can have it all without pain and sacrifice. This ideal of putting toddlers into childcare so a woman can get back to work and not lose out on her career is damaging as hell to society, including women, and they've essentially trotted out that all masculinity is toxic, raised a generation of men by single mothers with no male role model. They've told them masculine behaviour is toxic as **** and in the next breath tell them to man up, accusing them of being childish or effeminate. ****ing hell, divorce rates are higher than ever with ~80% being initiated by women whilst we see women rate 80% of men as unattractive on dating apps, that should tell you everything you need to ****ing know about feminist ideas and how implementing them into society has made a mess. .

By every metric women are actually exceeding men in society in terms of education, income and careers and yet multiple large scale studies have shown they are more unhappy now than they have ever been in our history - how strange that trying to be a man and ignoring their own worth and value in the most important role humanity has as mothers results in women being miserable on an industrial scale.

Eh.. I disagree. My parents worked and they were there with me too all the time. However, I went to ghetto schools and a public university. I graduated as valedictorian in high school and honors for undergrad and grad school (sat on stage with my professors twice). I am actually glad that my parents did not send me to private schools. They taught me the value of money (we were poor too).

On the flip side in my neighborhood, I see high school kids driving Hummers, BMWs and Mercedes recklessly and acting very rude to people. They also go to a private Catholic school and have two parents in their lives.

My point: you don't have to go to an expensive school to have an academic advantage. Being a good person is better than having an academic advantage.