Saturday, 2 February 2008

"Lets insult men into marrying us. That'll work!"

Where have all the men gone?

Short answer; they're in hiding from the sperm-hungry old career hags who want a sucker to fund their early retirement and the single-mother whores who want a stepdaddy to their illegitimate kids.

This article, which many have already stumbled upon, is fucking great. I mean it.

Sure, it's the usual spew of shaming language, hypocrisy (when women don't want to marry, they're independent and strong, whereas when men - especially eligible ones - don't want to marry they're immature selfish losers who have something wrong with them), arrogance (no questioning as to whether modern women are worth marrying) and general drivel, but it's still great.

In my younger years, when I was still vulnerable to shaming language, and actually gave a fuck about women's opinions, it may have offended me, it just brings a big smile to my face because I smell the sweet stench of desperation.

These articles about the lack of good/real/marriage minded/etc men are cropping up repeatedly - all swimming in the contradiction of their authors denouncing men as useless whilst they pine for a man - and it makes it clear the marriage strike (and associated dating and baby strikes; basically just rejecting women completely, except perhaps for casual flings) is having an effect. Despite all their posturing, these women - sick of working, lonely, realising they've got a limited amount of time to have babies, seeing the interest men used to have for them evaporate now they've passed thirty - desperately need men to marry them. And we're not taking the bait. Actually, there is no bait. There's nothing for us to tempt us into going to the altar.

As some wise chap once said: "Us men didn't start the battle of the sexes, but we're clearly going to win it via the simple tactic of just leaving the battlefield in contempt."

Best of all are the comments at the above article. There are far too many to quote here, but they're just one man after another pointing out that women aren't worth marrying, that divorce laws make marriage a stupid risk, that feminism, ironically, has ended up liberating men, and generally showing complete immunity to shaming language. Hell, some of the guys practically revel in the shaming language, pretty much declaring "Yeah yeah, I'm selfish and immature, whatever you say bitch, but I'm enjoying my life, you aren't. Up yours with knobs on!"

Seriously, I can't imagine many of those guys being amongst the small (relative to the number of internet users) squad of guys who make the rounds in the anti-feminist portion of the internet, and I dare say many have never heard of the term 'marriage strike', but pretty much every one of them just sneers with derision at modern women, marriage and shaming language. It's the same with the comments at all these types of articles that have been cropping up recently.

Men are truly waking up, and women are shitting bricks. Seriously, thirty-something career gals reading that article will no doubt nod and agree gleefully at the article itself, but their faces must drop with an Earth-shattering crash when they read the comments and see that the attitudes of so many men suggests the odds of her and her fellow spinsters finding a sucker willing to get married are rather low.

158 comments:

Duncan Idaho said...

Oops, I've just found a mangina amongst the comments:

Great article, I'm a 34 year old male. Luckily, I did take the plunge and get married 10 years ago. Had I not, I may have turned into one of these man boys you describe. - Believe me, I see them all around. - I too see girls such as yourselves who are really really nice, but don't seem to be settling down. Your right, it's cause all the men have become man boys. - Great article.

Chris H, London,


That's either a woman or a hardcore mangina. Samething really.

Actually, I'd say it was probably a woman; 'he' referred to himself as a '34 year old male'. Men would say they're a '34-year-old man.'

ednistic said...

I recently placed a link in the comments section to an article in a Dallas newspaper where some feminazi was basically saying the same thing... a coincidence...I think not, this is probably part of a concerted effort, worldwide,from the feminist infected media services, trying to shame the legions of MGTOW into worshiping at the alter of the stench -trench once again...too late ladies that boat has not only sailed but has run aground.

Anonymous said...

The mangina may be actually married, but wait until he gets divorced. Most men complain in marriage usually, so I believe he is actually a woman.

Anonymous said...

Men are waking up and women become desperate. They planned theri lives rejecting men and having fun but still always expected that at the end their would be a knight in shining armour.
Women get used to be loved in their youth and they imagine this will go forever or at least till 35. Well, it does not, and of course it is men's fault again: a modern man should be happy to marry a 35yo woman.LOL

Anonymous said...

Two young sluts steal money, are toally unremorseful and get away with it.
Imagine one would marry them, they would cheat and divorce, robb you, this time legally.
The girls are hot, but having sex might be very dangerous, they might charge false rape accusations.

http://www.wpbf.com/news/15194935/detail.html#
Authorities said that a 17-year-old girl in a hot-pink sweatshirt approached Smith outside of a Winn-Dixie supermarket at Hypoluxo and Jog roads in Boynton Beach Wednesday evening and asked the girl what her favorite cookies were. Police told WPBF that, while Smith was telling the teen about her favorite Cinna-Spins, the teen snatched an envelope containing about $167 off of Smith's table, hopped into another teen's car and drove away.
The Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office said that the case has been handed over to the State Attorney's Office to determine if charges will be filed against the teens.

Smith's mother, Charlene Rubenstrunk, told WPBF that the girls returned to the store Thursday to taunt her daughter.

"They are within 10 feet of the same kid they just robbed last night and there is nothing anybody can do about it. I find that offensive," Rubenstrunk said.

The girls, whose names are not being released because they are minors, told WPBF that they were not remorseful for the crime, and that they did it because they "needed money."

"We went through all that effort to get it, we got all these charges and we had to give the money back. I'm kind of pissed," one of the girls told WPBF.

The other girl told WPBF that she was upset because police found them.

"I'm not sorry, I'm just pissed that I got caught," the girl said.

Money collected from the cookie sales were supposed to go toward Smith's sleep-over trip with Troop 664 to the Miami Seaquarium. Police were unable to recover the stolen money, but a father of one of the teens accused in the crime paid the money back to Smith's mother, WPBF reported.

Authorities said the teens were not charged because they did not use force to steal the money, nor did they take the money from the Girl Scout’s hands.

Anonymous said...

I think that telling women the real reasons for not marrying them is a disservice we do to men.

Engaging in a dialog with a woman is a no-win: they will keep on yapping until hell freezes over.
If we say nothing, if we keep our mouths shut like an oyster, they will draw their own conclusions, whatever they are: we don't care what they think anyway.

Trying to discuss with a woman is a waste of time, nothing more.

The best way to converse with women is to be as evasive as can be. Don't give them any information. Let them be in the dark. They are in no position, intellectually, to understand anyhow.

More importantly: we now know that women are insane, so let's abandon them, let them cook in their own juices. There are three million worthy females the world over: use locals for quick sex only.

Darren said...

The bit I love is at the end where she ponders whether women like her should go for men who are 10 years older, but bitter divorcees. Now, why do you think they would be bitter, sweetheart? And which sex is it that initiations 70% of divorces? Oh, sorry, that would take actual research to work that one out, wouldn't it dear? Far too hard. Best stick to writing articles based upon anecdotes from your girlfriends.

Uncharted Thoughts said...

The Irony is that the whole article she dictates that she is entitled to a good man, ect. ect.

Notice how she never asks what men want?

Not once does it even cross her little selfish mind that maybe men don't want to be put in a position where they can be destroyed by the courts...

They just do not get it.

Woman with a Question said...

Where have all the men gone? Well many have gone to prison, the unemployment line, etc. In fact, more women are entering colleges and universities than men are (here in the US that is). So what is a gal to do? Lament? No way. A gal has to realize that she may be the one with the power is she enters a relationship. Or she could stay happily single. Men could do the same, but what does that solve?

The fact is, none of you are happy in the state you are in. If you were, the tone of this blog would be different.

Anarchiste said...

What goes up.... must come down.
What goes around comes around.
Nice phrases. But they are true.

It matters not what women say or think.
What matters is to get the most out of life. There are many ways to accomplish that: marriaga not being one of them.

Men's life expectancy is on the rise and rising faster than women's. We can postpone marriage and kids yet another twenty years or so.
I know men in their sixties who bacame fathers for the first time.
And they love it because they have plenty of time on their hands and they are no longer afraid of the corrupt justice system.
Men have now the upperhand in reproduction: nothing starts until we say O.K.

We now have the ultimate last word in reproduction because we can wait almost indefinitely. Let's use that power and have fun in the meantime.

Anonymous said...

The Irony is that the whole article she dictates that she is entitled to a good man, ect. ect.

Notice how she never asks what men want?

Not once does it even cross her little selfish mind that maybe men don't want to be put in a position where they can be destroyed by the courts...

They just do not get it.


Most women these days live at don't-get-it central.

Anonymous said...

The Irony is that the whole article she dictates that she is entitled to a good man, ect. ect.

Notice how she never asks what men want?

Not once does it even cross her little selfish mind that maybe men don't want to be put in a position where they can be destroyed by the courts...

They just do not get it.


(hit the publish button instead of the preview button - here is the comment as intended)

Most women today live at "Don't-Get-It Central."

I'm not sure that "Irony" is the proper word to use here. The real question is not whether she, or any other woman "gets it", but whether men are getting it - and from the comments they obviously are.

Conceptually replace "men" in her little hissy fit with "prada handbag, Jimmy Choo or Manolo shoes, or Ikea furniture" and I think what is really happening will be obvious - men are not human beings with feelings or desires, at all, they are nothing more than inanimate "lifestyle accessories" to her, one more item on her shopping/to-do list.

Of course she isn't going to ask whether that handbag or pair of shoes or cheap armoire "want" what she has in mind for them - they are inanimate objects, how in the world could they have any opinion, or preferences, or wants or desires?

Anonymous said...

A gal has to realize that she may be the one with the power is she enters a relationship.

The power over what?

That's not a relationship, it's a chess game.

Please note the 16 missing pieces on the other side of the board.

It's really not all about you, ladies, I swear. It isn't. Not your "ehtitewd", not your having it all, whatever "all" is, it's simply not a big fucking movie that rest of the universe and a few poor shmucks have a bit part in.

That's TeeVee.

Feminism is the museum of not getting it.

Say this word over and over a few times: "masculism".

Sounds silly, doesn't it.

Anonymous said...

Or she could stay happily single.

This is a good option. I believe wholeheartedly in what Blaise Pascal said "All people's miseries derive from not being able to sit in a quiet room alone."

It is a pity that women, after telling proudly "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bike", "We can do it alone", "We don't need men", they are not believing their own rethoric.

I think women would be much happier if they were able to be happily single. Some of them can do that. But most of them cannot. On the contrary, they complain, whine and write articles full of desperation like the one we are talking about.

Men could do the same, but what does that solve?

I don't know what it solves for others (male or female), but I can tell you what it solves for me. Specifically:

1. I don't have to support economically a woman (or kids), so I save a money and I spent the rest in whatever I want.

2. I can do whatever I want. On holiday, I can wake up when I want. I can make the household chores I want and when I want. I can go whatever I want without need of asking somebody for permission. In summary, I am a free person (Next September I am going to live in another country. I am excited about this adventure, which would be impossible if I was married).

3. I am not restricted to monogamy. When I get tired of a woman or this woman becomes annoying, I can scream with joy the most beautiful word in the language, that is, "Next!".

4. I don't have to listen a woman who nags me and complain all the time because I don't do everything she wants.

5. I can work only part time and devote the rest of time to my passion.

6. I can study. This is my passion. I have a Bachelor's degree, a Ph. D, a master in Education and speak four languages. Now I am studying an online MBA.

When a girlfriend deludes herself thinking she can trap me, the first thing she want me to do is to stop studying and, instead of this, to work full-time to support her fat ass. This is the perfect signal to kick her to the curb. Study has given me satisfactions that no nagging woman has given me.

The fact is, none of you are happy in the state you are in.

Yes, men are not happy if they are not married. This is why you see millions of men:

1. asking "Where have all the women gone?"
2. writing articles who complain about women not wanting to marry
3. telling "women are female Peter Pan"
4. telling his girlfriend "If you don't marry me, this is over".
5. reading hundreds of self-help books about "how to marry the women of your dreams" or crap like that.
6. reading romantic novels where a poor man marries a rich woman.

Yes, it is true. We are not happy being single. I am going to stop writing because I want to read a new book that has just arrived by mail. I enjoy reading the words of a great thinker. What an unhappy task! It would be happier if I had a women whining endlessly and talking about Britney or Oprah.

Duncan Idaho said...

Bachelorhood or death!

Anonymous said...

" In fact, more women are entering colleges and universities than men are (here in the US that is)."

This is often pointed out by women, but what does a college degree mean these days? Nothing.

Every office environment I have worked in has had secretaries with four year university degrees (or even masters degrees) is something useless like History or Sociology. A plumber (nearly all men) makes more than an English Lit professor in most cases. Why go to college if you don't get a professional degree?

Anonymous said...

The fact is, none of you are happy in the state you are in.

Actually, I live in a fairly nice state - overall low taxes (comparatively), not too crowded, weather not particularly extreme in either direction. I work less than 40 hours most weeks, have lots of time to do whatever I like, NEVER have to listen to nagging, whining, bitching, complaining, pissing and moaning - unless I'm around some other man's wife. There are dozens of great fishing spots less than an hour's drive away; plenty of great museums, bookstores, and theatres to stimulate my mind; and a great Bridge club.

Life is sweet! :D

Oh, and BTW, I don't have to listen to some nag projecting her own unhappiness onto me unless I'm in the mood for the perverse pleasure of rubbing her own nose in it.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Just thought I'd pop back in and offer a piece of advice. I've been looking at other posts/responses and notice that some of you believe that you can postpone marriage and family for years to come. Biologically you can, but socially you cannot. As a result of educational and professional gains made by women, we can judge men by the standards they have used for years. In other words, women increasingly value looks and youth in men. I cannot begin to tell you how many women I know who are dating or even married to men a few years younger than they are. So if you think that you can wait another 10-20 years, keep in mind that you will be competing with men much younger and with much more stamina. For the most part, there will be no contest if you know what I mean. Not saying its right, but it is the truth nonetheless. I have no doubt that most women would take the 35-year-old guy over the 45-year-old.

You may think you are happy to remain single now...that is what "career-only" minded women have said until they reach the point where it is too late. So make sure your desire to be an "eternal bachelor" is rock solid and for a good reason rather than on being afraid that women are out to destroy you. That's nothing more than paranoia.

Anonymous said...

Duncan Idaho said...

"Bachelorhood or death!"


Yeah, that's basically what it boils down to. Over on this side of the pond we have a couple of sayings - "Live free or die" and "Give me liberty, or give me death."

Most of the married men I know aren't really dead, they just wish they were.

Anonymous said...

http://tabloidwhore.blogspot.com/2006/03/man-claims-paris-hilton-has-herpes.html

Paris Hilton has herpes - I wonder why... LOL

Hmh said...

Spot on, Duncan. Incidentally I've been noticing that I'm (finally) getting checked out by the women around me.

The marriage strike is working and the advanced version - the sex strike - is cutting even deeper. Men are increasingly holding the balance of power because we're finally waking up to the new truths:
- Being married does not guarantee a sex life, finances, children, safety, or happiness
- Not having a girlfriend doesn't make you a loser
- In an environment where most of the women don't draw interest even for sport fucking or platonic friendship, not having a woman is simply not a social stigma anymore.

You want men back in your lives ladies? Then get a fucking clue!!

Hmh said...

"The fact is, none of you are happy in the state you are in. If you were, the tone of this blog would be different."

Oh, stick it up your arse. Really. I went downtown today and saw the desperate, lonely, crying-themselves-to-sleep-at-nights chicks wandering around on their own, looking miserable. Duncan's right. In the long run, women need men. Us? We're free to choose, and if women don't measure up, we'll find happiness somewhere else.

Just in case you or any other woman reading this STILL DOESN'T GET IT, for a man to get involved with a woman these days is rather like a woman in the 1950's getting married to a man in a society where all men drink heavily and beating the shit out of your wife is encouraged!!

There - do you get it yet? Has that put it in terms that will actually connect with you??

Anonymous said...

So make sure your desire to be an "eternal bachelor" is rock solid and for a good reason rather than on being afraid that women are out to destroy you. That's nothing more than paranoia.


So you have read Duncans comment, you certainly have read a bit more, but you still deny that marriage is dangerous for men through divorce etc.?

Anonymous said...

ome of you believe that you can postpone marriage and family for years to come. Biologically you can, but socially you cannot.

You're making the mistake of believing that men get baby rabies just like women do. We don't. Some guys want kids, but the majority of men are indifferent to the idea of having them, at best. As often as not women have to trap men into fatherhood, so they can have a sucker on the hook to pay the bills. Once reliable reversible birth control for men becomes a reality, it's going to be a whole new game.

If high-flying women want to marry younger men and support them, I think that's great. Women have wanted a role reversal for years and I'm perfectly happy to give them one. They can end up like Terry McMillan - "Stella getting her groove back" with an exotic gay boy who took her for a ride by pandering to her fragile female ego. Or, the woman who wrote
"I gave £100,000 to my Jamaican toyboy but now he's gone back to his wife – taking my money with him."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=510950&in_page_id=1879

I will gladly be judged on my appearance compared to the sad, obese, desperate middle-aged women I see all around me - chasing the illusion of youth with botox injections, face lifts, and fake boobs.

Anonymous said...

Just thought I'd pop back in and offer a piece of advice.

Advice is well received if you do it without scorn, contempt or using shaming language. You have done that so I welcome your advice very much, although I don't agree with it.

As a result of educational and professional gains made by women, we can judge men by the standards they have used for years.

Well, what you say is against all statistics. Of course, the professional women have higher aspirations than non-professional women (we all know that). But these aspirations are not about beauty. It is about his financial status, which matters most for females. Of course, women love handsome men. But they prefer rich men to handsome men. You can see this every day.

Women still want to "marry up", like always. The difference is now they are more demanding. They earn more so they demand her future husband to earn even more. Women used to be satisfied with an average stable income. Now, they demand a professional career from their partners.

This is why women age like milk and men age like wine. We increase our financial value, that is, our worth to the opposite sex. You decrease your beauty and fertility, that is, your worth to the opposite sex.

Now that I am 37 y.o. I can have more prospects that when I was 25 y.o (when I was ignored by women, but I was more atractive than now). Women who despised me in my twenties would love for me to be their boyfriend now. Of course, they do not have any possibility because younger women are also interested in me now.

I do not want to marry. I don't understand how any informed male -such us- would like to be in a situation that has no advantage for men and a lot of drawbacks. But, let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that I wanted to marry.

The best strategy would be to spend the following 15 years climbing the corporate ladder and sport-fucking. When I am ready to settle down, I can have more bargaining power than in my 20's because I am rich.

If I don't want to spend the 20 years climbing the corporate ladder (because I find it too hard), I have another option. I have lived nine years in Latin America and these women are more beautiful, nice and less demanding than Western women. They are satisfied with an average stable income and they are willing to commit.

So there is not reason to hurry, because our biological clock is not ticking.

I cannot begin to tell you how many women I know who are dating or even married to men a few years younger than they are.

Yes, my cousin is married to a man five years younger. The problem is this man has not a career. He only has a high school degree. He stays at home and takes care of my niece(a lovely 15 month-old blondie) while my cousin goes to work (I am not kidding: this is how it works). My cousin's husband doesn't love to do househould chores (he only takes care about my niece) so they have to hire a Romanian maid to help with the household chores.

Of course, my cousin is not happy and she feels used. But she was 35 y.o. and this was her last call for children after having a career. Of course, she wanted to marry his 48 y.o. boyfriend (son of a wealthy family) but he dumped her and marry a younger woman.

So if you think that you can wait another 10-20 years, keep in mind that you will be competing with men much younger and with much more stamina. ... I have no doubt that most women would take the 35-year-old guy over the 45-year-old.

Of course, if both have the same money, women would prefer the 35 year old. The problem is that they not have the same amount of money. 45 y.o. have had 10 years more to accumulate wealth.

And we are not limited to Western women. They can have the hunks if they want it. We can have foreign women, which are much better (of course, I am talking hypothetically, because I do not want to get married, even if it is with a foreign woman).

So make sure your desire to be an "eternal bachelor" is rock solid and for a good reason

I am sure of my desire. Moreover, the older a single man is, the more reluctant he is to commit. So chances are, if we don't want to commit now, we will never want to commit.

Please read this study to know more about that http://www.enotalone.com/article/2815.html. The relevant section is the "Is He Old Enough to Marry?" section, if you don't want to read all the article.

rather than on being afraid that women are out to destroy you. That's nothing more than paranoia.

Well, tell this to the millions of divorced dads whose lives have been destroyed in courts. Stripped of all this assets, unable to see their beloved children, paying for years to the woman who has destroyed their life (women initiate 70% of divorces while labelling men as "unable to commit"). This is not paranoia, it is fear. The difference between paranoia and fear is that fear is based on reality. And millions of divorcees is too much reality. Fear has an evolutionary reason (to keep us away from a danger) and it is good.

Women don't want to destroy us (it is not their aim). But they don't mind to destroy us if this goes in favour of their interests (see divorce courts, see wives who are always nagging and whining). Of course, they don't think that before marriage but they think that before divorce. Well, in fact, it is something a bit more complicated psychologically. But this message is already too long. Maybe I will explain other day.

So be happy, young man. And don't marry.

Anonymous said...


Valentine's Day is coming!
Valentine's Day is coming!
Valentine's Day is coming!


Muuhahahahahaha.........

Anonymous said...

dingbat with an opinion,

You have some SERIOUS psychological projection issues. Your posts are laced with fear. A universal trait shared by all women.

You are not a man. You don't know how free a well-adjusted man is. Men are just as happy going fishing or hunting. Many male explorers, inventors, artists, and scientists have spent their entire lives alone and felt quite fulfilled and accomplished at the conclusion of their lives. Something that living with a screaming harpie does not provide. To a healthy man (i.e., not a drunk or a mangina) his mind is a palace and the world holds him great interest. He is never lonely or bored. Why? Men possess 2 qualities women lack. #1 Objective curiosity. #2 Wonderment at the universe around them.

So to put it simply, biologically and psychologically speaking WE DON'T NEED YOU. We will get along just fine, if the alternative is life with a Shrew.

Now go to the mall and shop or whatever stupidness fills your shallow, vapid existence.

Anonymous said...

http://markymarksthoughts.blogspot.com/
31 January 2008
My Response to the Child-Man Article...
Folks,

You've probably already read it; if you haven't, you soon will. I'm talking about the 'Child-Man' article that's been making the rounds at MRA blogs, websites, and forums. I'm not going to reprint the whole thing, because I do NOT wish to torture my readers with that trash! Besides, it's nothing we haven't seen or heard before; it's the same old shaming language women hurl at us when we ignore the little darlings.

The "Readers' Digest" condensed version of the article is this: it's a woman spouting shaming language, saying how DARE you young men stay single, carefree, and unattached; how dare they! Miss Hymowitz went on about how, back in the day, when a man was 26, he was 'grown up', i.e. married, working a steady job, with wife, kids, and a mortgage. She then went on and chided today's 26 year old men for living with their mates, playing video games, staying single, and basically doing what THEY want with their time, energy, and money. How DARE those men do that! That, in essence, is the article. IOW, it's nothing we haven't seen 1,000 times before; it's more of the same old crap...

The only difference is, since a woman wrote the article, it takes ten times the words to say the same thing that took me a matter of sentences to convey in the above paragraph. For those who are up for it, you can find this gem here. For all others, you can read my response below...

----------------------

Ma'am,


You women are incredible-incredible!! First of all, you gals spend DECADES telling us you don't need or want us men ; this should be joyous news for you! Secondly, it seems that it's ok for a woman to live the carefree, independent lifestyle; why is it not so for men, hmmm? Thirdly, you gals offer nothing substantive to make us single guys reconsider our lifestyle choice. Fourthly and finally, if we marry you, we can end up homeless if you divorce us.


First, you spend DECADES telling us how useless we are; we're good for nothing men! You spend decades saying how you don't want us; this spiel has been the headline of many, many news 'stories', both in print and broadcast form. Hell, you don't even NEED us! Maureen Dowd, who's no doubt one of your heroines, wrote a book, using as its title the rhetorical question, "Are Men Necessary?" Ok, ok, we get it; you don't want us, Ladies. So, we left you alone. Now, you cry about it? As Warner Wolfe would say, "Come on!!!"


Secondly, why is it when a man lives on his own, has fun, and has control over his money, energy, and time, he's a childish, immature jerk & cad? Yet, when a woman does the same thing, well that's different; a woman living an independent, carefree lifestyle as a single is a "strong, independent, empowered woman who isn't afraid to do what she wants, and lives life on HER terms!" Uh, how do you reconcile the inconsistency here, Miss Hymowitz? How can you criticize men for staying single, yet praise women who do the exact, same thing? You're a hypocrite-end of story.


That brings me to my third point: what do you gals have to OFFER us men, anyway? I'm serious; what would we gain by having you in our lives? From where I sit, you offer precious little to me. Let's see: you can't cook, nor have no desire to learn; you cannot and will not clean; you cannot and/or will not learn ANY of the domestic arts that women of yore possessed; what's more, you're PROUD of the fact that you lack any skills in the domestic arts; hell, you gals can't even be kind, supportive, decent companions anymore! If you all could offer THAT much, it would be something! Alas, you don't. What's in it for men to give up their bachelor lifestyle again?! That's what I thought...


Continuing on that vein, the modern, American woman DOES offer a multitude of things to a prospective suitor; unfortunately, they're not things that decent men would find appealing and interesting. Let's see, you offer American men the following: a birth canal that's seen more traffic than the Holland Tunnel @ rush hour; incurable STDs such as HPV and Herpes ; you 'ladies' have crappy personalities; you offer nagging so bad that it qualifies for mental, verbal, and emotional abuse; we can look forward to a celibate marriage; we can look forward to you all cheating on us and blaming US for your sin; we can look forward to being compelled to give up things we love, such as a prized, vintage motorcycle or car; we can look forward to being compelled to give up hobbies we loved & pursued before marrying you; and, when you're finished making our lives hell, you'll divorce us-wow! Sign me up-please! Uh, I was being sarcastic there...


Finally, we, as men, have NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER when you divorce us, and divorce us you will. According to many studies, it is the WOMAN who files for divorce 70% of the time-70% of the time! Oh, and it's not for adultery, abuse, etc.; no, you'll divorce us because of lame crap such as not meeting your emotional needs as a woman-not that you bothered to TELL us what these needs are-duh! Ma'am, we men are smart, talented, and capable of doing many things; unfortunately, mind reading isn't among our many talents. If you want something from us, you have to TELL us-duh!!


Or, we can look forward to you divorcing us because you're bored. We can look forward to you cheating on us. We can look forward to you telling us you just don't love us anymore. Then, we get to pay HORRENDOUS AMOUNT of alimony and/or child support; you get to retain the BENEFITS of marriage with none of your RESPONSIBILITIES. I can see why you gals want us to marry you; for you, it's the MOTHER of sweet deals!


So, what can I look forward to when you divorce me, hmmmm? I can look forward to being FORCED to fork over half or more of my income; you'll keep the house, while I keep the mortgage payment-sounds fair; I can look forward to you falsely accusing me of all sorts of vile crimes, and having my life, reputation, and career ruined in the bargain; I can look forward to paying for your attorney; I can look forward to living in a beat up, old van by the river-IF I'm fortunate to have any shelter at all-because you, your shark lawyer, and the judge left me with precious little to live on.


Oh, I and my brothers have seen you and your girlfriends CHEER whenever a man got taken to the cleaners; you all would cheer louder and longer than we ever thought of cheering for the Giants or whoever is our favorite team; after all, the man's a scumbag, so he deserved it, right? We also saw you and your sister cheer when Lorena Bobbitt did her slicin' & dicin'. I don't recall many of you, if any, standing up on our behalf, and say that men have rights too.


Those of us who've had the misfortune of working with you have heard you gals go on for HOURS about what scumbags men are; we heard for hours how little you think of us; we've heard you verbally berate and abuse your men when they called you on the phone; we've seen you get away with saying these sorts of things for hours-for hours! Yet, if we men were to say ONE THING about women that's similar to what you all spend hours saying about us, we'd be fired; we'd be tossed out on our asses!! You all have no problem trashing us, yet you all take offense when we men decide to return the favor. Again, where is the consistency in this? Where is the honesty in this?! Oops, I forgot; honesty/consistency and women are mutually exclusive...


Miss Hymowitz, we men, us Child-Men as you derisively call us, have seen and heard what you gals have said about us for years-years!! We get it; it took us a while, but we got it. You don't want us around, so we left you alone. We thought that's what you wanted, so we gave it to you. One would think you and the rest of the sisterhood would be jumping for joy right about now! After all, we gave you what you appeared to want-our NON presence...


Marriage is a crap deal for men; it offers us NOTHING at all-nothing! You gals offer us nothing that we men would find remotely interesting; you have no proficiency at all in the domestic arts, and you're PROUD of this! You want to be proud about your total lack of wifely qualities, fine; that's you're right.


However, you gals forgot one thing while indulging in your haughty superiority complex all these years: we men are humans, and WE have rights too; furthermore, we intend to EXERCISE OUR RIGHTS, just as you ladies have exercised your rights. One of those rights is to decide that the life choices you and your sisters made will negatively impact your suitability as a wife; if you don't have what we're looking for, we'll exercise OUR right to live our lives apart from you. After all, it's my life, my choice-remember?


In closing, you girls should be jumping for JOY that we're no longer marrying you; after all, that's you wanted, right ladies? You've spent DECADES telling how you don't need or want us; looks to me you got what you wanted. Secondly, it seems to me that it's ok for a gals to live a carefree, single lifestyle, but it's verboten for a guy to do likewise. Thirdly, you gals have none of the womanly skills your grandmothers offered to their husbands, and you're proud of your lack of skills in the domestic arts; one of the compelling reasons you gals had for us to marry you no longer exists, so why marry you? Finally, you will divorce us; it's not a question of if, but WHEN you'll screw us over-uh, thanks but no thanks. If we're given the choice of living with an ungrateful, nagging, bitter, controlling woman who makes our lives hell vs. a choice of living with our mates, playing video games, and doing what we want with our time & money, it's a no brainer: we'll prefer to remain child-men, thank you very much. We don’t need no stinkin’ wives! Or, to borrow a slogan from your feminazi heroines: our lives, OUR choice! Have a nice day, and enjoy your cats…

MarkyMark

Anarchiste said...

Someone has said that today's women increasingly value youth and beauty in men...

Thank you so much for opening my eyes. But that just doesn't fit with what we see all around: the only thing that women value in men is their money.

They are fully prepared to destroy them in order to get it.

Young and handsome men, specially if they are rich, are not interested in older women other than a little hop on the sack, as a sexual experience.

We must stick to the facts: men in their fifties and sixties get young gals, not because of their looks or their youth, but because of their money and the shorter lifespan of older husbands.
The sooner the husband dies, the sooner her widow will collect.
It is THAT cut and dry.
So, these women win.
On the other side of the coin, older men have had a full life of the nice things in life, sex included. They are coming to a period in their lives when the desire for a family is born.
So, these men win, too.

Anonymous said...

British model Keeley Hazel published a sex tape on the net, it can be accessed very easily.

Women today are beutiful on the outisde but rotten on the inside. Keeley Hazel looks cute and innocent, but she is a slut. It is sad to say it this way but it is true.

Only marry virgins, a woman who is no virgin, will betray you during marriage. These are women who cannot think beyond their clit.
The consequences are STDs.

Anonymous said...

Many women have seen as much traffic as professional whores.
Men have to conclude that they have to treat women like whores, which means chucking them after sex.

Men are not used to this. Usually a man approaches a girl and expects her to be shy. Today they are as shy as whores.

Women today portray themselves like the women in Amsterdam who dance behind windows as whores.
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=XLOIw8_bgZg

She is cute but unfit for marriage.

Curiepoint said...

"The fact is, none of you are happy in the state you are in. If you were, the tone of this blog would be different."

The tenor of this blog and others like it is anger, not unhappiness; there is a difference.

Anger is a valid state of feeling, just like any other. That which is shown here is the result of moral outrage and indignation, and like it or not, those are the things that make for change in an intolerable situation.

What are we angry about?

Apart from the glaringly obvious paradigms that are oft cited statistically here, we are angry at the attempts to change who we are by deploying the same exact shaming language that has now become the routine vis a' vis women vs. men. Not one of these whiny articles about men makes a verifiable mention of what is truly in it for men in marriage. Not one makes mention of how marriage will bring life long love to any man. It's all couched in terms of what women gain and the fulfillment of their desires. As to the notion that married men live longer, well I suppose that's true. Every man here however will likely agree with me when I say that length of life does not equate to quality of life. What matters is how one lives their life, not how long it's lived. Real quality of living comes from doing what one thinks is right, mistakes made along the way and all. For myself, living a married life under the tenor of the same kind of whining displayed in this article will indeed cause me to live longer, but ardently wish that I would not.

There is a passage in the bible that states something akin to it being better to live in the wilderness than with an angry and contentious woman. If women want men to get jazzed about being married, they need to collectively show us that they are not angry and contentious. It really is as simple as that. I'm not holding my breath however, as forty years of such attitudes has become as deeply ingrained as ground-in soil on a pair of jeans. Nowhere have I seen anything to indicate that women's attitudes have shifted at all. Men have had to endure all the shame and guilt-by-association that has been the rallying cry of women everywhere with nary a blip on the radar. We simply withdrew further and further away from you, to the extent of it being a new norm for men to emrace.

You have all gotten what you demanded and guilted and shamed into existence, Woman With An Opinion. Deploying more feeble attempts at manipulation through invective against men will avail you little if anything, except a momentary personal satisfaction that comes from venting your spleen yet again.

Your bed was made for you to sleep in forty years ago. It has been all this time, and the turn-down service was done by Dworkin, Friedan, Faludi, and a whole host of others. I grant that these are the radical elements of the hive mind, but it is their views that are taught in schools, and enacted in subtle and diluted forms through the law.

Men are angry and likely a bit hurt by all of this. But, rather than willingly crawl back to you to stick our heads in the noose again, we are simply saying "No More". We shall turn our anger and outrage back towards those that oppose us...and make change. the first step in any change is refusal to comply with the demands of the enemy. Such is the marriage strike today.

You want us to marry again? Show us that it is worth something to us beyond statistics and studies. Show us that you are indeed worth marrying.

Again, I do not hold my breath.


Real men will never submit to being led like sheep to a slaughterhouse ever again.

Togakure said...

Nice find D!!

I also find it satisfying that the truth is starting to hit home.

Now, factor in the coming financial meltdown of Western economies, and I'll say that the womenfolk will be literally throwing themselves at the feet of any man that can take care of them.

Victory is sweet.

Keep up the good work!

Woman with an Opinion said...

In the long run, women need men.--hmn

In the long run? For what?

Us? We're free to choose, and if women don't measure up, we'll find happiness somewhere else.--hmn

You'll go somewhere else? To other men? Respectfully, you are allowing yourself to be deluded if you think you aren't being judged by women. A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old. A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry.

Davout said...

woman with an opinion,

Try looking up the term 'cognitive dissonance'. It's a term you and hens of your feather would do well to avoid displaying.

The presumption that men are somehow obligated to fulfill the neverending list of requirements of modern western women is an amusing one but one I suppose you must delude youself into believing.

All you empresses can pretend that you wear the finest garb but everyone can see that you have no clothes.

Certainly there will always be the schmucks who sift for the needle in the haystack but most smart men, who feel the necessity to marry, are finding uncorrupted women ABROAD.

Exposing Feminism said...

hmh said..

'Just in case you or any other woman reading this STILL DOESN'T GET IT, for a man to get involved with a woman these days is rather like a woman in the 1950's getting married to a man in a society where all men drink heavily and beating the shit out of your wife is encouraged!!'

Lol, the funny thing here is that only feminists have ever said that.

Could it be that this poster is purporting to be something she isn't? Surely not!

Good luck, Sweetheart. You might as well try and stop the tide with a toothpick.

E F

Anonymous said...

A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old. A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry.

maybe for a short fling but not for marriage. Women choose the rich man over the young but poor man.
Just look around you: the 60 yo billionaires like trump have young women. Maybe it is because of their money?

Men do the opposite: we choose the young woman over the old but rich one - at any age.
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=XLOIw8_bgZg

Female behaviour has not changed a lot. 300 years ago 17yo married 50 yo men, today they still long for a good provider.

Someone said something intelligen: "women are unable to love poor men."
That is true, they lack this ability.
Men are unable to love ugly women, that is why they long for teenagers, they are the most beauitful.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Well, what you say is against all statistics. Of course, the professional women have higher aspirations than non-professional women (we all know that). But these aspirations are not about beauty. It is about his financial status, which matters most for females. Of course, women love handsome men. But they prefer rich men to handsome men. You can see this every day.--A Man

I disagree. Even when a woman marries a less attractive older man for money...you can believe she has a younger more attractive man on the side. Again, not saying it's right. Women talk to each other so I know what's going on. The vast majority of all women dream of attractive men period. I would certainly take the younger attractive guy over a rich one who is fat and bald. Then again, I don't need a man's money.

Anonymous said...

"A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old. A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry."

It doesn't. I learned realism More than 40 years ago. You should try it some time, the truth sets you free like nothing else.

What's sad is that you obviously can't attract either kind, and are reduced to humiliating yourself trying to find some way to spark an interest in men who have made their lack of interest in you and women like you abundantly clear.

Anonymous said...

"So make sure your desire to be an "eternal bachelor" is rock solid and for a good reason rather than on being afraid that women are out to destroy you. That's nothing more than paranoia."

I doubt that anyone here really thinks women want to destroy them - until they get involved in a divorce, that is. A virus doesn't necessarily start out to destroy the host - just to thrive and reproduce. The fact that it does often destroy the host is just incidental.

It kills you just as dead to crushed by a lumbering elephant as it does to be gored by an angry rhino. Malice is not a requirement to be dangerous.

What makes women dangerous is their narcissism and self-absorbtion. If they were intelligently malicious, they would actually be less dangerous - it is their very lack of awareness of and concern for anything and anyone other than themselves which makes them like emotional train-wrecks which are better to keep at a safe distance than to allow them to get dangerously close.

Anonymous said...

A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry.

What a coincidence.

You... um, I mean... irony.

It's something that has actually passed under your radar, isn't it?

11112I mean it's pretty obvious that saying "any eligible partner has to be attractive" is either a sexist statement or it isn't, aint it?

Cause, um... If it is, then you're the pig that women keep screaming men are, or we're not pigs, either.

I'd like to ask which, so that we can, you know.. close out this obvious thread, but the fact of the matter is I don't give a fuck, and in case you haven't noticed, nor does anybody else.

Men don't need women to make them "watch their step" anymore. You've abdicated that position through four decades of cheap behaviour, misandry and laughably ridiculous self-absorption.

We can watch our own step.

We've had a lot of practice stepping around your shit.

Shame.

Anonymous said...

the name says it all. woman with an opinion. true to form. more nagging. she must have the last word...like her sisters.

Anonymous said...

Woman with an Opinion said...
In the long run, women need men.--hmn
In the long run? For what?


For having children, that's for. When they enter their thirties, women became infected of "baby rabies". So they need a sperm donor/walking wallet, that is, a sucker who is willing to sacrify his dreams to make her dreams (marriage, children, house, SUV, etc.) possible.

Women often think that men are as eager to have children as them but this is simply not true. We men can be very happy without children, enjoying the freedom and stress-free existence. We have no thing comparable to the strong reproductive drive that women have. Moreover, we don't have a biological clock

On the other hand, men don't want children the same way that women want them.

Us? We're free to choose, and if women don't measure up, we'll find happiness somewhere else.--hmn
You'll go somewhere else? To other men?


No, dear. You are not getting it, are you?. It is good that you have discovered this blog, because you are so CLUELESS about men that sometimes you seem a joke. What are your source of information about men? Your female friends, "Sex and the city", the manginas that surround you or the guys who want to get laid with you and will tell you any lie necessary to do that.

So I am glad you are here, because you are learning about how being a men is. On the other hand, it is tedious to see such an ignorance and to have to explain things that a grown-up like you should know.

Us? We're free to choose, and if women don't measure up, we'll find happiness somewhere else.--hmn
You'll go somewhere else? To other men?


We'll go somewhere else. Men don't need relationship as much as women want them. We enjoy travelling, enjoying our hobbies, reading, discovering, etc. We have no dream about a big house and a big SUV. We'll go somewhere else: enjoying your freedom and our happiness, because we don't need a relationship and children.

In fact, the only thing that straight men cannot get from another men is sex. But there are solutions for that:

1. Now, most women are willing to give sex for free. 40 years ago, you had to marry to have sex. Not anymore. So, there's no reason to buy the cow if you can get milk for free.

2. There are a lot of substitutives: porn, escorts, prostitutes, masturbation.

3. What is more important. Once you enter the thirties, you sex drive disminishes hugely and becomes perfectly easy to handle. This is why men used to marry in the 20s when they are so utterly desperate to get sex that they are willing to trade a whole life of slavery to get some of it (the fact that most marriages are sexless marriages is other business). This is why the older you get, the more reluctant to marry you are (as statistics show).

Respectfully, you are allowing yourself to be deluded if you think you aren't being judged by women.

Of course, we are fully aware that we are judged by women. All the time. But, frankly, men in this blog don't give a damn about what a woman think of us. We refuse to be defined by what somebody else think of us.

Once we cared about women's opinion of us. Not anymore. We are "unplugged".

A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old.

This is fine with us. Since we don't want marriage, women can have this 30 y.o. If he is so dumb to surrender to a life of slavery, he deserves it.

A man better be physically attractive these days.

Maybe if he wants to marry a fat, nagging, self-entitled and disgusting Western woman. But we are not interested, thank you very much.

We are eternal bachelors. Those who want to submit to a life of slavery, they can choose a foreign woman. This is slavery but the master is nicer and more humane than the typical Western woman.

But here there is no one interested, thank you very much. We are enjoying too much our bachelorhood.

If the truth hurts, I'm sorry.

Even if we assume that what you say is the truth (which is not), why should we worry? We are eternal bachelors. Western woman can have the hunks and make their life miserable, if they want. What has this to do with us?

You are pathetic when you try to change our opinion appelling to fear and flaky arguments. This only proves how desperate are women now to get men to marry. With the marriage strike in 30% and up, millions of women are condemned to be spinsters. But this is their problem not ours.

What are you trying to achieve? That we marry out of fear? This is not going to happen.

Anonymous said...

Well, my friends, there is a saying in my country that says something like this "Since dogs are barking at us, we know that we are doing great".

When a thing is a failure, it does not get criticism and anger, it gets pity or contempt.

If marriage strike was not working, there would not be so many articles writing by women telling we are immature, child-man, telling we have to grow up and marry. There would not be so many angry 30 y.o. woman desperate to land a sucker. We would not see ladies like "woman with a question", which tries to convince us about we need a woman, with arguments void of logic and reason (and that get more and more pathetic).

Don't discuss with her. It is worthless. She won't change our mind and she won't make us to want to marry.

There was a time when nobody had to convince men that they need a woman. This was not necessary. When you see women trying to convince us to leave a life of happiness and freedom (as the article admits, we are happy and free) to support a fat nagging ass, you only see how desperate they are.

There was a time when a woman could land a man so easily. Since every man wanted to marry, the woman only have to say "no" to several prospects until she found a prospect good enough. Then, she played hard to get and, finally, she accepted and landed a husband.

What a difference some decades make! Now, women have to nag us, label us and use shaming language, fear, delusions and ridicule arguments to try to make us to marry. And, even with that, we are not succeeding.

(Of course, there is only 30% of men refusing to marry, but, because women don't want to marry anyone -drug addicts, bad boys, unemployed men, men without education, men who earn less than them, etc, the drought is severe, especially with beta females - non attractive or not in their prime years )

Yesterday, a woman who is friend of my sister phoned me, with the pretext of asking something about the computer (I have a Ph. D. in Computer Science). My sister tells me that she is desperate to marry because she thinks she is getting old (by the way, I don't think she has to worry a lot because she is only 26 y.o. and moderately attractive but, apparently, nobody wants to have a relationship with her). My sister tells me that she would delighted if she could be my girlfriend. I told my sister that I am not interested and she told her, but I guess she is not getting the clue.

So she phoned me and I solved their computer problem. But she wanted to talk more and more about my life and I kindly tell her that I was busy. I smell their desperation from a mile long. Yesteryear, women played "hard to get". Now we men play "impossible to get". LOL.

So don't be worried by all this women criticizing us and telling that we get to marry. And trying to use FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) and shaming language to do it. Let them bark (or meow with their cats). Enjoy your life and be single. This is the best argument and women can keep on whining, complaining and trying to convince us.

Anonymous said...

Us? We're free to choose, and if women don't measure up, we'll find happiness somewhere else.--hmn

You'll go somewhere else? To other men?


No. To foreign women or to be single.

Hmh said...

Woman with a question -

Right. Fine. Let's go to it shall we?

"In the long run, women need men.--hmn

In the long run? For what?"

If you can even ask this question then you've fully bought into the gender war bullshit that brainwashes every woman in our so-called society. Strictly speaking, you're right. No woman will die without a man, just as no man will die for simple lack of a woman. Nonetheless, my experience from life has usually been that women need people around, and in the long run the best people to have around are husband, children, friends, and extended family.

As an example an old family friend came to visit (my family, not me) about two weeks ago. She'd have been one of the flower power generation on the cutting edge of the movement, back when it swept Australia in the late sixties, early seventies. She took it up, never married, never had children, and now she is aging and terribly, terribly alone. Oh, and she's got health issues which she's had to face without support.

On the flip side, my uncle was surprise-divorced by his wife, who took off with most of his wealth and his daughters. It's been twenty years and he hasn't heard a god-damn thing about what his children are doing. Not there at their graduations. Hell, not knowing if they've graduated. Not even knowing if they have children of their own by now. Despite this rather big bend in his life, he has taken up with another woman, is working hard for his retirement, and is actually pretty happy with things just as they are. He's emphatic that he will never marry again. He got his new girlfriend aged well into his forties.

"You'll go somewhere else? To other men? Respectfully, you are allowing yourself to be deluded if you think you aren't being judged by women. A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old. A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry."

No, having twisty shit like this thrown at me by a BITCH is what hurts. My now-ex-girlfriend-thank-you-God was the heavyweight world champion of sledgehammer manipulation and thanks to her I can now spot it. All you are doing is twisting words around and using social levers in order to force your opponent into a place where you want him to go. So, to shoot your men-avoiding-women-are-fags crap down...

I AM FINE WITH BEING ON MY OWN. Just because I'm not with a woman does not mean that I have to seek happiness with a man. (crikey, that was easy, wasn't it?)

I'll say it again: My last girlfriend was such a total bitch to me that I decided, when I moved her shit out, that I would sooner spend the rest of my life living alone, never even having sex again, rather than to endure even one more minute of that sort of crap.

Your sort of crap, in other words. Physical attractiveness? Bachelor expiry dates? Come off it. My fellow poster is right - you're just projecting your own fears and trying to make them ours.

johnny five said...

i don't know why i waste my time, but here goes...

wwao said: A 40-year-old bachelor just won't cut it next to a 30-year-old. A man better be physically attractive these days. If the truth hurts, I'm sorry.

pop quiz, wwao:
what do ALL marriages between older men and younger women have in common?

...if you said 'one-way cash flow and support,' congratulations, you've won!

...and that is how older men KEEP younger women. it's the only way, and will remain so forever and ever, amen.

now...

how do you suppose an older woman is going to KEEP a young, hot, fit man who could easily be screwing a different, much hotter, younger woman on any given night?

...if you said 'the support dynamic will have to be largely reversed,' you've won again! congratulations!

if you're willing to give your physically attractive young buck a free ride, i'm sure he's right around the corner waiting for you.

...and if you're horrified at the prospect of cash flow from woman to man, then don't mind if i ask, why are you dressing up as 'career girl' in the first place?

Anonymous said...

I've said this before and I'll say it again:westernised women treat real life like they're starring in a personal Hollywood drama or a reality/soap opera show.Guess what? real life is not like that at all. It's well,REAL.Not a poorly acted sweeping drama featuring skinny tramps who always get the man,even when they are absolute bitches to all and sundry.Women,wake the fuck up - you're being peddled a crock of shite.Look to your grandmothers if you want lessons on how to live your life - you'll find selflessness,self respect,sexual morality and modesty.That's what a REAL women should be about,but there's hardly any who shape up these days.So in other words, we're looking for REAL women but,by and large,they're posted missing.
If they want an answer to the eternal question they're constantly asking:"Where have all the real men gone? Answer: They're living happily with all the REAL women", not floundering for dear life in some loveless relationship/marriage with some nag-monster who is obsessed with celebrity,has the full dvd set of "Sex in the city" and has a subscription to Cosmopolitan,Hello and O.K. magazines.

Anarchiste said...

Your post was right on the spot, MarkyMark, but it doesn't hit home with women. Nothing will: they are caught in a vicious circle, a sort of Moebius band, a broken record.

It doesn't matter, really. I have stopped arguing a long time ago. It's a waste of time and energy.

But men who read your posts do catch on and that makes your comments quite worth while.

Anarchiste

Anonymous said...

3 out of 4 women prefer a man for the boss at work.

http://msn.careerbuilder.com/custom/msn/careeradvice/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=1285&SiteId=cbmsnbc41285&sc_extcmp=JS_1285_msnbc>1=10884&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=7e18d4cd0a384a9e953facf7c9064b36-255444165-RR-4

Female sociologist blames this on "sexist society."

phoenix said...

Let's, for the sake of argument, pretend that the cunt's claim that 40 year old men are unattractive is true. Let's further agree with her logic that if said men want to be married they must do so at 30, or it won't happen.

If that is true, isn't it awfully hypocritical to then turn around and say 30+ year old women deserve men? Physically women are worthless at 30+, their prime years are definitely early 20s. So if the truth hurts, too bad, shoulda married in your 20s.

Really, I don't get the point of this "argument." Logically, it's absolutely conceding that women should marry in their 20s or they don't deserve marriage at all, so they should just shut up and stop whining.

Clearly men do not need women, and clearly men are able to attract 20 year old women while the men themselves are in their 40s and beyond. That is how nature has set it all up. It is clearly not a problem for us, it is a problem for women. We men, in our infinite kindness, had allowed women to create a system wherein they would be supported and provided for when they were still young enough to get that support from weak willed men. Women in their infinite greed wanted to delay this source of support and also to maintain this source of support without obligations. They overstepped their bounds, and now they whine and complain about men.

Oh and as for physical strength, clearly a 40 year old man has more stamina and strength than a 20 year old woman, so that argument doesn't make much sense either. Since women don't actually have to do anything in sex they don't seem to realize that men actually have more control the older they get. It's just we also don't like ugly older women at that point either, so we instead wind up having sex with those 20 year old women that clearly can appreciate this truth that your old saggy 30 year old ass doesn't understand. So keep on deluding yourself, and keep on buying those cats.

Anonymous said...

I love these types of articles , the arrogance displayed towards men by these types of women , god I love being single.

Anonymous said...

Everything's in today's world is always about "Why men wont commit" or "Where are all the good men" or "Why dont men want to get married"

When are you feminist hags going to realize that good men are everywhere. The fact is that we are on to your bullshit and are not commiting to you bitches because we dont want to ruin our lives, go financially broke, lose our kids, and become a shell of the man we once were. I am a successful available man but I absolutely refuse to marry a bitchy stuck up, arrogant, entitlement western girl. When are you hags going to wake up and start directing your questions towards WOMEN. Hello, anybody home. Oh, I forgot the modern western woman has a mental disorder called feminism. How about asking these questions "How come women dont act like women anymore", "How come women are driving men into Eternal Bachelorhood", "How come women think that they are entitled to everything" and my personal favorite "How come women think they can kill a man's baby without consequences or feeling that it is morally wrong".

KARMA said...

http://blogs.theage.com.au/lifestyle/allmenareliars/archives/2008/02/a_reply_to_the.html?page=fullpage#comments

dudes come to our blog for a short time please :)

KARMA said...

" Togakure said...

Nice find D!!

I also find it satisfying that the truth is starting to hit home.

Now, factor in the coming financial meltdown of Western economies, and I'll say that the womenfolk will be literally throwing themselves at the feet of any man that can take care of them.

Victory is sweet.

Keep up the good work!

03 February 2008 11:39"

but this time we will not take them back....

Anonymous said...

http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=memory+loss+pregnant&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=

Women suffer a higher forgetfullness when pregnant.

Anonymous said...

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/dailymail.html?in_article_id=512315&in_page_id=1790&in_author_id=322
"Children's Minister Ed Balls wants four-year-olds to be taught about same-sex relationships"

Maybe I should start?
"Dear little Johnny, you know, homosexuals make love their own special way. They get an erection and then they thrust their penis in the anal hole of the other. You know little Johnny, this is absolutely normal and can be done by everybody. Homosexuality is a choice it is not genetically dtermined, even if one gets the impression that homosexualy are talking, walking and behaving in a weird way."

I believe little Johnny will be fairly confused.

Anonymous said...

http://mirrorofthesoul.blogspot.com/

The Queen Gets Trapped

Looking at the chessboard, we see life and its dynamics before us. Novice chess players make fatal mistakes and lose accordingly. Their tactical rush to acquire material pieces, and failing to focus on the strategical game that chess is, causes them to always lose.

One such mistake is using the power of the queen's movements to capture wing pawns (or poisoned pawns as they are called) that reside along the edges of the chessboard. In the novice's attempt at tactical success, he fails strategically - and when he uses the queen to take wing pawns - the chessmaster will trap his queen, dispatch her accordingly, and win the game in grand style.

In similar fashion, we see women in the Anglosphere rushing to capture the poisoned pawns (the bad boys, the thugs, the players, etc., and note that players are not connaisseurs, for connaissuers pick and choose women at a time and place of their discretion [that's called strategy] - in polar opposite to players and their constant obsession with getting laid - the citizen dildo pawn to say), and then we see Anglosphere women moaning and lamenting that there are no good men left or men are in a suspended state of adolescence.

When the queen takes a poisoned pawn, she opens herself up to the grand plan of the chessmaster, to be trapped, and dispatched. Once she is out of the way, the victory is quick - this is actually what feminism did for the average man (the chessmasters have always known what women really are, but the average man was always deluded in his Niceguy mentality - for the queen raised him to be such) - it exposed the queen, and now average men can see clearly what women are, were, and will be.

Thus we see before us, and always increasing, the chessmaster trapping the queens around him, and it is only a short time before she is taken out of the game (left with cats, old age, irrelevancy, and a bad attitude on the sideline of life).

While the chessmaster is focusing on strategic success in the game of life, the rest of the novices (men and women) are focusing on tactical successes to which a loss will always occur in the grand scheme of things. You can win a battle, but lose the war - as the common cliche goes.

Needless to say, don't be a knight (and chivalrous at that) and save the queen in her entrapment, because the chessmaster will take you out as well.

It is far better to realize, if you are going to act like a chesspiece, to act like the king. The queen might be the most powerful piece on the chessboard, but the king is the most valuable piece - and that is something to consider yourself as.

Anonymous said...

http://www.engrish.com/recent_detail.php?imagename=entrance-of-hell.jpg&category=Clothing&date=2008-01-09

Women's panties found in Japan: "entrance of hell and cobwebs"

Bachelorhood is attacking japan.

Anonymous said...

A movie about captain save a ho:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maid_in_Manhattan

Plot summary

Marisa Ventura (Jennifer Lopez) is a struggling single mom who works at a posh Manhattan hotel and dreams of a better life for her and her young son (Tyler Posey). One fateful day, hotel guest and senatorial candidate Christopher Marshall (Ralph Fiennes) meets Marisa and mistakes her for a wealthy socialite. After an enchanting evening together, the two fall madly in love. But when Marisa’s true identity is revealed, issues of class and social status threaten to separate them.

[edit] Box office

Earning $18,711,407 in the U.S. opening weekend, the movie was #1 at the box office playing in 2,838 theaters. Though critics blasted the film, it finished with over $174 million worldwide, more than half of which came from the United States. The movie grossed $93,932,896 and remains Lopez's highest grossing film.


Well, this is how women imagine love today: being divorced single mom and getting a rich senator boyfriend.
How romantic!

Anonymous said...

This comment in the article is fucking genius.

"The urge to have a baby is nothing more than thinking with one's reproductive organs. Men are supposed to be restrained with their biological urges, why cannot the same be expected of women?

Want a baby and can't find the perfect man? So, don't have a baby. Duh. The willing deferment of self gratification is the hallmark of maturity.

zammo, Fort Lauderdale, US/Florida"

:)

ThorGoLucky said...

Laura Nolan, it would help if women would give me their actual phone number instead a fake one. Also, it would be nice if women would mean it when they agree to meet somewhere instead of standing me up. Of if we do meet, they're out to get me to admit that I enjoy sex (well duh) so they can say, "So that's all you're interested in, harumph!"

Well, I got tired of the yerning for a life partner and decided to be happy or at least content with my life. I discovered multiplayer video games and found a lovely dog, Ruby.

Of course, I'd like to give and receive physical pleasure with a monogamous person, female or male, but don't expect me to live with you or get you pregnant (I had a vasectomy) because it would cramp my style now.

I have hatched, grown up, and become a free man. So you can do what a good woman friend of mine did: she got artificially inciminated and now has a lovely boy that she's raising on her own.

Perseus said...

Duncan,
I've been reading your archive and it has been a life changing experience.
I was always a nice guy and that meant (of course) that I was roundly ignored by girls and women from a young age. This was painful and confusing as I was quite a handsome young man, and meant well.
Like most of the lads of my time ( I was born in 1957)I actually experienced the beginning of the socially corrosive volcano of hatred that is modern feminism. By the time I took an interest in the opposite sex it was way too late, the damage was done to my society. I could only stand by and watch the unfolding of the feminist cloak of darkness smothering freedom, decency and love.
I lament for my condition, for my fellow men - my brothers of the western world - as we pick our painful way through the blackened and charred wreckage of humanity. The screams of murdered children ring in my ears, overlaid by the heartless laughter of the modern "liberated" female. I see men, good men, moving amongst the remains of an apocalypse, their lives in rags. but, their faces upturned, their step steady and strong. It is men who by power of their will can change worlds and bring justice to the unjust. This is not the first battlefield we have strode upon, nor our last, but it is the most important battlefield of all of human history. This is the fight we cannot - must not - lose. On our eventual victory lies the fate of humanity. Every single man is a soldier for the cause. You didn't volunteer, you weren't conscripted, you were born to this role. Nature equipped us with the ability to survive horror and deprivation, to fight with courage ,honor and sacrifice and upon triumph, to show mercy and wisdom to the defeated.
This is the point at which we now stand. The very world itself poised at the brink of a bottomless pit. It is time for MEN to save the world.

Anonymous said...

Let's, for the sake of argument, pretend that the cunt's claim that 40 year old men are unattractive is true. Let's further agree with her logic that if said men want to be married they must do so at 30, or it won't happen.

If that is true, isn't it awfully hypocritical to then turn around and say 30+ year old women deserve men? Physically women are worthless at 30+, their prime years are definitely early 20s. So if the truth hurts, too bad, shoulda married in your 20s.


So true. Women desperately need men. They need to be looked at, they live for this. That is why they buy clothes, shoes, make-up and jewellry. That is why they show off so much skin, their tummy, their arms etc.
Women need men much more than men ned women, because women need a provider. Instinctively having children and being provided for is what women are longing for.


A young man is easy to trap. A young man would pay insane amounts of money just to have sex with a young girl. The older he gets, the wiser he gets, and the more he is able to see the negative aspects of women.

A 45 year old man can marry a 16yo girl, the opposite is impossible.
Money and youth attracts itself like the opposite poles of magnets.

Today women behave like sluts, it is disgusting. They do it primarily to attract men, this backfires, they attract just the bad boys.

Anonymous said...

I just copied off over twenty articles I found after entering "why men won't commit", and "where are all of the men", etc., out of >hundreds< of articles available about the plight of women who can't find men. How many such articles exist telling men how to get women to commit?

Uh, do I hear silence?

Anonymous said...

Many men seem to base their appeal to women purely on what they can offer materially.

Well, I know it's old fashioned to say this but I wouldn't want a woman who only wanted me for money.

If I were not able to able attract a woman by my looks and keep her (if I was inclined to) with the strength of my personality then I'd completely abstain from the dating game.

Men who think their money is what makes them attractive to women are quite sad, I think a man should value himself much more.


It's also counter-productive to mens rights activism, especially in the areas of child custody and child support, to say that a mans greatest value to women is his income, we can hardly criticize women for viewing us as cash cows if this how we ourselves define our worth to them.

No - a man is much more than his financial worth. I can be a poor but good father, companion, lover and friend.

I mean, I hope my male friends stick around because I offer something more than just to buy the next round.


The greatest gift a man and woman can bestow on each is their loving commitment to each other, Not youth, beauty or even money.

Unfortunately men have made the mistake of not valuing themselves highly enough in response to women gross over estimates of themselves.

But that's changing.

Anonymous said...

I disagree. Even when a woman marries a less attractive older man for money...you can believe she has a younger more attractive man on the side.

It is good that this is said by a woman. MRAs have been saying this for a longtime and women have denied that they are such cheating, selfish and amoral bitches.

We know that woman love bad guys and only want nice guys to have a meal ticket.

So please fellow men, don't marry. It is a trap. You will be slaving yourself 80 hours a week to support one of these self-entitlement princesses who are banging a guy on the side. You may end up raising his children.

Remember the statistics:

- 75% of women would marry for money (see http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article3166507.ece)

- 59% of wives would leave their husbands if they could afford it. See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508804&in_page_id=1770

Woman With An Opinion said...

So now I get it. It appears that most of you are older (I could be wrong). That is why you can't accept that older men are less desirable. The same goes for women. Again, truth is truth.

I was recently "approached" by a much older man and was absolutely repulsed. I didn't tell him that of course, but was repulsed by the thought of him touching me. That is how most women my age feel. I thought, why does this guy think that he could possibly attract me as old as he is? In fact, I'll take a younger guy with less money than an older man with money. So looks matter just as much to women as it does men.

The only time an older person has luck is if they maintain a youthful appearance (men and women).

Lastly, women do not need men (not even for children). We could adopt (no sex required for that). Now I know someone will take that statement and run with it.

Do you all WANT women to need you? Wouldn't you rather feel wanted rather than needed? The fact is, women don't need men like we needed them in the past. As a result of economic gains, we can look at more important things: Is he easy to get along with, appealing, great personality, etc. His money is no longer needed.

thergolucky,

Dogs are great (I'm a rottweiler fan myself). But they are no where near the fun of having human beings around.

As for phone numbers and standing you up...that happens unfortunately. The issue is that some women don't have the guts to tell you that they aren't interested. Still doesn't make it right.

But perhaps you should focus on the times you received the right number instead of the negatives.

hmn,

We'll have to agree to disagree on the physical appearance issue.

You admit to having had bad experiences which led you to make the choices you have. But, there are plenty of men and women who have gone through much worse but still maintain positive attitudes toward the opposite sex (and marriage).

Perhaps your method is best for you. That's fine. But others are determined not to let experiences discourage them from meeting the person of their dreams.

Pumpkinhead said...

If I ever get married, it will only be after a woman proposes to me. Well, it's women who seem to want marriage so much.

Xaver said...

I’m a 27 yr old heterosexual, debt free bachelor fully prepared to remain single indefinitely unless the corrupt family court system is permanently fixed.

It is flabbergasting witnessing even girlie with nothing blow off common-knowledge statistical fact as “paranoia.”

The effects of court corruption are so widespread now that many of us have witnessed a family member or two devastated or held over barrels consequently.

UNCLE bides his time like a jailbird, waiting for kids’ 18th to escape a prison fashioned by his psychotic wife, who plays “legal advantage” like it’s a game.

No surprise she was caught committing adultery and now therefore openly believes infidelity is acceptable.

If Valentine’s Day is not done in the proper way, there will be hell to pay. Heaven forbid if he forgets it, because she would most certainly throw a hysterical fit.

My uncle had zero debt before meeting her; unfortunately, his financial situation is now very grim. Children cause financial strain but nothing compared to chief child called wife.

Essentially he walks on eggshells and must ultimately surrender to her nastiness or else.

He needn’t even mention separation before she threatens legal ramification to reaffirm her self-indulgent lifestyle.

Uncle is not alone is he? Should I believe online chicks or my lying eyes, ears and established facts?

Girlie with nothing said... “You are allowing yourself to be deluded if you think you aren't being judged by women...”

Why concern ourselves with shallow judgments of unprincipled chicks? Good looks are a nice addition but would NOT be a decisive factor for choosing a bride if I were looking.

As a moral person, I would select a lady (woman of refinement) based predominately on her fine character. We would instill decency in our children, rearing outstanding citizens fit for a society that currently doesn’t exist.

I for one want nothing to do with sluts with superficial standards and couldn’t care less about their sheepish judgments. Besides, any possibility of worrying about marriage at age 40+ is unlikely because we are eternal bachelors now. I will not compromise real standards to conform to some pretentious skank’s fickle standards.

Neither will other informed bachelors sacrifice their priceless freedom for a dead, valueless Barbie in this dying, decedent society seemingly hell bent on destroying the common man.

Deal with it, observe, leave or continue serving as an example. Those are your options girlies.

Insults and shaming language will never lure us into your snare called marriage.

Anonymous said...

This point is so important, it's worth repeating:

3. What is more important. Once you enter the thirties, you sex drive disminishes hugely and becomes perfectly easy to handle. This is why men used to marry in the 20s when they are so utterly desperate to get sex that they are willing to trade a whole life of slavery to get some of it (the fact that most marriages are sexless marriages is other business). This is why the older you get, the more reluctant to marry you are (as statistics show).

For Opinionated Female this concept is apparently quite the doozie: most of the men who post here aren't single because they derive some kind of sadistic pleasure from watching women suffer (although a certain level of Schadenfreude is at this point hard to deny); nor do they do it because they're interested in strugle for hegemonic control. Although - that last projection of hers is certainly quite telling of how she relates to the opposite sex: strictly in terms of conflict, power, and making sure that her "opponent" is absolutely never in any fashion advantaged or "above" her (what a sad, lonely, and pathetic existence she must lead).

From an evolutionary perspective, OF's assertions that modern women want handsome men could not be more baseless. For thousands of generations, men were primary providers in their families; so for thousands of generations, women's genes (based on an evolutionary model) were shaped to seek out the most capable provider - not the most handsome one. Conversely, for thousands of generations (and obviously even today) women were solely responsible for bearing children; so for thousands of generations, men's genes were shaped to seek out females who were most likely to produce the most genetically advantaged children. That she now comes along and claims that a mere 40 years of feminism has changed all this is delusional. I suppose the question then becomes, does she at least manage to fool herself into accepting her assertion as Truth? Or is she among the 2/3rds of women who are losing their grasp on reality and, like true mental patients, increasingly seek out psychotropic meds in order to maintain the growing cognitive dissonance that allows them to to cling on to that fading pipedream that they're independent, empowered, and happy.

Anonymous said...

The HMS Feminism is like the HMS Titanic.

The ship is sinking, but some passengers remain in their cabin telling themselves everything is all right.

Delusional women are NOT uncommon. Could you imagine being married to this selfish harpie? She stated children don't need fathers. Unfuckingbelieveable.

Anonymous said...

“You are allowing yourself to be deluded if you think you aren't being judged by women...”

Oh, this is real new - clear back in the pre-historic old 1950s, the head cheeleader married..... (wait for it)..... the captain of the football team, not the captain of the debate team. Women have always judged men and chosen the best looking among the potentially good providers.

The difference today is that women have become increasingly shallow in their assessments and will quickly shag the "hot" dude that plays bass for the grunge band, while the future attorney looks on in confusion.

Anonymous said...

Well, woman with an opinion, as always, you answers what it suits best. Please answer this statistics I have asked and you haven't answer

- 50% of marriages end up in divorce. 70% of divorce proceedings is initiated by women

- The vast majority of divorces, women get assets from their husband and the custody of children. Men get the obligation of paying child support and, sometimes, alimony.

- 75% of women would marry for money (see http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article3166507.ece)

- 59% of wives would leave their husbands if they could afford it. See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508804&in_page_id=1770


And, moreover, I just realize that you are not answering the argument about foreign women that several men has made here (foreign women are golddiggers like western women, but nicer than them). Another example about you nitpicking the arguments that suit you.

And now, because I believe in doing what I preach. I will answer all your points.

I was recently "approached" by a much older man and was absolutely repulsed.

Considering the kind of woman you are and, therefore, the kind of man that is desperate enough to approach you, it is completely understandable.

That is how most women my age feel.

I don't know this. I am not a woman. But I can tell you that this is how most men feel when approach a 30-something women (I am a 30-something man). This is why the article says that we don't want to marry with these chicks.

It's strange that if women find us so disgusting, they whine endlessly about "we are afraid of commitment", even writing articles to express their utter desperation. Why they want to marry us and be 40 years with a disgusting old men? Even young men end up ageing.

Why does something like you want to convince us that we are so wrong? Each bachelor is a woman that don't have to stand a disgusting old man. So you would have to tell us we are doing great and be grateful for our decision of being bachelors.

I thought, why does this guy think that he could possibly attract me as old as he is?

Being you such a disgusting woman, he must be over 80 y.o.

Lastly, women do not need men (not even for children).

Yes, this is why they are always complaining "Where all the men gone?" (like this article), this is why they nag us everyday into marriage.

We could adopt (no sex required for that).

1. It is not that easy for single people. A female friend of mine is trying to do that and it is almost impossible for her, because adoption agencies prefer couples. It is difficult to adopt if you are a couple and even more if you are single.

2. For women, a man = sperm donor+ walking wallet. Adoption can solve the "sperm donor" part. But having a slave who works for you and your offspring is not available when you adopt.

Anyway, if you want to adopt and let us be bachelor, go for it! This way, we will be happy on our own.

Do you all WANT women to need you?

Frankly, dear, I don't give a damn about what women need. I am only following your advice: "DON'T MARRY!". It is difficult to argue with you because you are changing your position every day. Firstly, you try to convince us that we married. Then you told us not to marry. Now you want us to marry again. Please, before telling anybody how to behave, put order in your brain, because we have always hold the same position.

Wouldn't you rather feel wanted rather than needed?

I don't give a damn about if they need me, want me or despise me. It's their problem.

My problem is living the happiest life I can live, without a dead weight who is always complaining and spending money. Without a whinning woman who has PMS and quickly degenerates into a beached whale.

I enjoy my freedom. I recommend women to do the same, but if they don't want so, it is not my problem.

The fact is, women don't need men like we needed them in the past.

That's great for me. Now only if they stop writing articles whining about we are single and telling that we should marry these empowered women (who don't need us), it would better. Peace.

As a result of economic gains, we can look at more important things: Is he easy to get along with, appealing, great personality, etc. His money is no longer needed.

Your standards are high and you think that after hearing this, we all are going to try to be appealing, have a great personality, etc only to please these entitlement princesses.

Fuck them with their demands. My standards are higher than yours, although I am a man. My standards: No woman except for sports-fucking. So 0% of women met my standards for a relationship. Why bother?

But perhaps you should focus on the times you received the right number instead of the negatives.

Well, it was strange that with a long message like this, the female word hasn't appeared. Yet.

The female word is "should" (and their equivalents "must", "have to" and similar). This verb is only applied when the subject of the sentence is a male. If the subject of the sentence is female, it receives other kind of verbs "have rights", "are entitled to", "feel", "think", etc.

Dear, we shouldn't focus on anything. In fact, we shouldn't do anything. We will do what we think and we want, whether you like it or not.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the physical appearance issue.

Dear, I don't give a damn. Let the women marry whoever they want, young, old, handsome or ugly, unless it is me.

Perhaps your method is best for you. That's fine. But others are determined not to let experiences discourage them from meeting the person of their dreams.

I don't give a damn about what others do. Live and let live.

I find childish that a grown-up person thinks that reality is like dreams, that he/she still believes in fairy tales. This is a sign of immature person. The person of your dreams doesn't exist because dreams are not real. Dreams are perfect and reality is tough.

But it is his/her problem if he/she wants to believe in fairy tales. It won't be me who ends up divorced, broken and without children that I have learned to love. It won't be me who has to bear a whining beached whale who is always dissatisfied. It won't be me who will be working 80 hours a week.

Of course, all my friends that have told me that they have met "the woman of their dreams" come back, some years after, telling me "She is a bitch", while their life is utterly destroyed. So bad.

I will be travelling and doing whatever I want whenever I want it without asking for permission. But everybody is free to do what he wants, even to surrender to a life of slavery. If I wouldn't value freedom, I wouldn't be a bachelor.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Anonymous said...

3 out of 4 women prefer a man for the boss at work.

http://msn.careerbuilder.com/custom/msn/careeradvice/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=1285&SiteId=cbmsnbc41285&sc_extcmp=JS_1285_msnbc>1=10884&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=7e18d4cd0a384a9e953facf7c9064b36-255444165-RR-4

Female sociologist blames this on "sexist society.

I'll admit that I prefer male bosses over females. I personally don't care what anyone thinks of that (men or women).

Also, most women I know express the desire to have children over the desire to be married. So I think the lack of desire for marriage goes both ways. The difference is, only a few women I know express angst against marriage even though they don't themselves want to marry. I know I don't want to get married. Dating without sleeping around is enough for me. I think it is a good idea if women (who don't want to marry) avoid giving up the goods so to speak. If a guy wants to remain an eternal bachelor, it is a good idea to let him "use his hands" for the rest of his life.

Anonymous said...

Please, friends, remember that "a woman" said this:

I disagree. Even when a woman marries a less attractive older man for money...you can believe she has a younger more attractive man on the side.

Remember, fellow men, that this is said by a woman not by a MRA.

Reason #13,456,789 for avoiding marriage. Don't be trap into being the meal-ticket of a cheating bitch.

ex-boyfriend said...

Oh no, I feel so ashamed of being a bachelor! Let me run out and dump all my hard earned money on a greedy slut to make it all better.

L
O
L,

bitch.

Anonymous said...

Keep on it, Mr Idaho! I have saved your blog in my favorites and will be checking in regularly to see what else you drudge up. Thanks.

Martin said...

Duncan. Take a look at this article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=512957&in_page_id=1770

Patriarchal Phoenix said...

A woman with an opinion is like a sea elephant with a typewriter.

No one knows how she got it, and they're damned if she knows how to use it...

Anonymous said...

Boys:

The female who is gracing us with her company is delusional. I'm 47, modestly successful with a very good position with the government, somewhat above average looks, in shape, but not particularly stunning in appearance. Hell; I'm 47. What do you expect?

HOWEVER, I have a very expensive home that was given to me by my parents, free and clear, two newer Harley's, and am almost debt free.

Since I turned forty, I have had more women in their late twenties to forties and beyond actively pursuing me for some sort of commitment, or at least a date. In fact, I have had more women chasing me and dropping hints in the last seven years than I had from the time I was sixteen until I was forty.

Now, I know it's not my stunning good looks, or my sexual prowess. My sex drive is drastically reduced these days. Common sense would dictate that women are pursuing me because of my very secure financial situation, nothing more, and nothing less.

I don't say this with any particular pride. It is what it is. It's not personal; it's just business. They want what I have. I will readily agree that if I did marry, my wife would no doubt be screwing on the side. That's just the nature of women. They cheat, hence the fact that almost all of them have Herpes and/or HPV.

Women are disease-riddled sluts.

Period.

My situation is not isolated, either. Most of my single friends, especially those of who have never married and have been able to amass wealth, are encountering the same thing. At first, I was quite confused. I knew I wasn't getting any younger, nor was I turning into a George Clooney-clone, so I figured something else was happening to make me so "desirable" to women. I'm not foolish or vain enough to think women suddenly wanted me for my body. Hardly. I'm just not that great.

I do, however, have something that few men have. A large mortgage-free home, and an expensive one at that, on a good-sized piece of land in a good neighborhood.

So, possibly a woman would find me physically repulsive because I'm not in my twenties, but you can bank on the fact that there are a significant number that would "lower themselves" to marry me for financial reasons. I know. It's been happening, and again, I don't say this to boost my ego or boast to any of you.

I'm 47, and really don't care that much anymore about women. Their antics amuse me, as I'm no longer fooled by their tactics. It's pathetic, really, to watch them at work.

I'd rather read a good book than get laid. I'd rather take a nap than get laid. I'd rather polish my Electra-Glide, which is an all-day proposition. Considering that most women have genital warts, I'd rather screw an electric fence than put my Willy in the average vagina.

Be safe, boys, and don't be fooled by the harpies. They size you up primarily by your income and social status. Looks and sexuality are distant concerns.

Read "The Manipulated Man" by Esther Vilar. She explains how women really think, and she debunks everything that our visiting harlot is telling you. My own mother, God rest her soul, told me the same things that Vilar said. Women value a man by his status and income, and everything else is only of minor concern.

For those of you in your twenties, be patient. Your sex drive will subside by massive amounts by the time you're thirty, and you will be able to sit back watching these aging hags chase men with whatever looks they have left.



Christopher in Oregon

Anonymous said...

By the way, if the battle-ax is right, why do you see rich men with beautiful women a third of their age in their beds, and NEVER do you see rich sixty year old women with handsome twenty-something husbands? Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

Reading this blog and the posts has articulated some of the feelings I've had for many years. It's really great to find something that I subconciously knew but now explicitly know for sure.

I had a good night. I studied some higher level mathematics. I watched some TV for awhile. Bear Grylls is insane. I drank some wine and a bit of Cuervo and retired to my room.

This is the life. Thanks to feminism I can do whatever the fuck I want. I spent some time in Korea and all the Koreans asked me if I was married. Whenever I said I wasn't, I got looks of surprise. Feminism has arrived there by now, I think, but nowhere near as here in the US.

Female soldiers (imagine that) are falsely accusing male soldiers of rape. Why are they in the army anyway?

Anonymous said...

@woman with a question:

There are studies that show that women choose two different types of men for two different purposes.
One is very masculine, the other is more caring. The first is chosen for reproduction/sex, the latter as a husband and provider.
The studies were conducted by showing women pictures and so on.

These were studies.

Now, we see everyday that women want men who have assets. These may be cars. Most women ask for a man who has a car.
Can you deny that rich men marry women much younger, but the opposite is very rare?
I do not believe you can deny this.

At school the girls chose guys who were 5 to 7 years older than they were. One was full of wrinkles, it was pretty strange, he was not really attractive. But he was at university and now he is earning well.
But the same girl had sex with a good looking funny guy her age while she was away during holiday. This was clearly infidelity and I believe her current lover has no clue.
I know that she wants to marry him and have children.

When girls are younger, 13, they always choose guys at least 15, 16 or older. They say they pay for the movies and are not als childish as the young boys.
They pay for the movies - see, women as young as 13 get paid for services, these may be sex, petting, escort.

Women long for a provider, money is what makes a man attractive.
Women who stand over me in the hierarchy of my workplace never look at me smiling. The women below me smile often.

Women today choose handsome men, true, but only for short sex. If asked, they would definitely choose the better provider.

Anonymous said...

As a woman with opinion says:

I disagree. Even when a woman marries a less attractive older man for money...you can believe she has a younger more attractive man on the side.

And it is a study that:

- 75% of women would marry for money (see http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women

In fact, the number must be higher because many women must be ashamed to admit that they are such golddiggers to the interviewer. Remember all the girls you have known that outrightly deny looking for money and you always see them with wealthy guys.

Ok. So, if you marry you can have ONLY THREE possibilities:

1. You are lucky and you get some of the 25% of women that wouldn't marry for money. In fact, as I have said, it must be lower than 25%. And, according to "woman with an opinion", if you are getting old, your percentage must be far lower (practically zero).

However, don't think that such a tiny percentage wants to marry for love. If a woman doesn't want to marry money she can marry for a lot of reasons: for love, for having kids, because she is getting older, because she has been socialized to be a wife, because of boredom or loneliness...

Are you willing to risk your assets, your freedom, your peace of mind and your future happiness with such an microscopic probability of succeeding? I am not. Only fools are.

2. You are wealthy and you marry one of the 75% of women (probably more) who want to marry money. Are you willing to accept being "loved" for your money, being considered a meal ticket? Do you consider yourself a walking wallet? Are you willing to accept that your wife can have a younger more attractive man on the side, as "woman with opinion" says this is sure to happen.

What about if you lose your wealth? (I remember this British TV host that became poor and, of course, his wife divorced him taking the children).

3. You are not wealthy and you marry one of the 75% of women (probably more) who want to marry money. Of course, your wife has married you out of desperation, because if she had been able to land a rich guy, she would have done that. So, maybe she is hearing her biological clock ticking and you are her last opportunity for children. Are you willing to being "loved" for being a sperm donor? Are you willing to be Mr. Worse is to Be single? Being despised by your wife that thinks she deserved better (a rich guy) and not looks at you with contempt. Everybody here knows this type of women.

So whatever the situation (1,2,3), your probabilities of being happy are tiny. Your fair bet to be happy is simple: DO NOT MARRY! Don't sacrifice your dreams to fulfill the dreams of a woman who only sees you as a tool.

And thank you "woman with an opinion" to remind us what we already knew: the gold-digging, selfish and amoral nature of women

Anonymous said...

I agree with the guy a few posts above.

"Today women behave like sluts, it is disgusting. They do it primarily to attract men, this backfires, they attract just the bad boys."

There is nothing truer in today's British society (ditto U.S.A. AUS/CAN/NZ)They shamelessly whore themselves around,claiming they're "free,empowered strong women" Bollocks.All they're doing with this sluttish,disgusting behaviour is basically whoring themselves to the highest bidder.You see it everywhere,all the time.Then they hook some dumb fuck for marriage as time is ticking down(after being fucked upside down and chucked by the bad boys when they were in their 20's)and some years later initiate divorce from him after she has her little treasures(kids), half his earnings and the house secured.They then cash out and move on and M.R.MUGGINS is left to rake through the ashes.

A high profile example is the high priestess of modern trollops - Heather Mills(Mccartney).This slattern is almost certain to take Paul McCartney for 10's of millions of pounds.Perhaps more:the case is in court very soon.Now,if McCartney was just a normal guy in his 60's who worked with the local council or in a low paid job somewhere,there is no way this tramp would have hooked up with him,had he somehow been introduced to her.No fucking way.When she met him,the pound signs flashed up in her eyes and she schemed,plotted and hatched her plan.McCartney fell for the act,now he'll pay dearly for it.It's just as well for him that he's almost a billionaire,so it'll not damage him financially.

Lads,for the sake of your sanity,freedom and future,stay well clear of these trollops of modern society.They've been brainwashed by television and the media.Their minds are puggled with princess syndrome and they truly believe that they're something really,really special.Are they fuck!Kick them down,keep 'em down,ignore and reject them.Choose happiness and contentment for yourselves.Oh, and all your cash too - keep that in your wallet!

Anarchiste said...

In today's world,travelling to different countries has become much cheaper than in the past. This tendency will increase for the foreseeable future.

Marrying a foreign lady is becoming easier than ever before. This is where the solution lies for those men still wanting to marry and raise a family.

Marrying a Western woman is asking for utter misery: only the fools and the uneducated do that and they pay dearly for their lethal mistake.

Are there still "good" or passable women in the West? Well, perhaps, but the pool is quickly dwindling and worse, those remaining are subject to be plagued with the virus sooner or later.

We already know that Western women are not the women we want. I suggest we write them off.

There are plenty of very good women out there in other countries and it would be a crying shame if men who want a wife and family didn't find the love of their lives in one of those countries.

Enough has been said about the irrelevance of Western women: we know them perfectly well now.
At least, feminism has brought us that: a thorough understanding of the Western woman. What we are given to behold is not pretty.

We now should turn our attention to the alternatives: women from other places.

Western women do not need men for anything anymore: they keep on telling us. I think it's wise to believe them.
But Western men still need and want women. So what do we do?
Easy. Ignore WW as defective, unfit and undesirable and turn our attention to the world out there.

Anonymous said...

A woman who gets it, excellent read for Duncan (who will already know everything) and woman with a question, who might gain access to reality:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/single-marry
My friend and I, who, in fits of self-empowerment, had conceived our babies with donor sperm because we hadn’t met Mr. Right yet, surveyed the idyllic scene.


To the outside world, of course, we still call ourselves feminists and insist—vehemently, even—that we’re independent and self-sufficient and don’t believe in any of that damsel-in-distress stuff, but in reality, we aren’t fish who can do without a bicycle, we’re women who want a traditional family.
Chris believes that women are far too picky: everyone knows, he says, that a single middle-aged man still has appealing prospects; a single middle-aged woman likely doesn’t. And he’s right. Single women are painfully aware of this. I hear far more women than men talk about getting married as a goal to be met by a certain deadline.



LOL LOL LOL

Anonymous said...

More and more articles appear, that say that women change their bizarre way of life.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=512718&in_page_id=1879



We complain about living in perpetual motion and yet shrink from a state of absolute rest. That's why Generation Nigella isn't an evolutionary discovery but simply a reaction by bored alpha females who want to escape the tedium of professional, financial, sexual and emotional liberation with an exit route marked breadbaking and baby-making.



SUUUUUUUCCCCKKKKKKERRR - where are you, I NEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD YOU!!!!

I do not want to work - HELP MEEEEEEE!!

ME!!! ME!!! ME!!!!! ME!!!!!!!!!!!!

AAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!


And again, it is all about her, her feelings, her finances, her goals.


Dear fellow bachelors, do not marry a single career woman who is 30 and desperately wants to stop working. You will get problems. She does not know what she really wants, she will accuse you of stopping her career, she will eventually divorce you.

Her smile might be pleasant, she might even support men's rights, at the end she will diivorce you and take away your children.

I know, because I had contact to such a woman, she did as if she had a lot of understanding, compassion for divorced dads, at the end she divorced a man with whom she had 2 children, who had gotten divorced before.
I tried to reason with her, to tell her, her behaviour was contradictory, she did not want to understand, nor to argue in a civilized manner.

Do not do them the favor of marriage, they use you, as they rejected you in their youth.

They lie.

Anonymous said...

Women should be employed more often in the upper positions, they say.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/book_extracts/article3313473.ece


But why would anyone wish to employ a woman, who wants to settle at 30?!?
The latter is now confirmed by these two articles:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=512718&in_page_id=1879
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/mailonsunday.html?in_article_id=511928&in_page_id=1791

Anonymous said...

I just found out today that my woman supervisor marked another woman's initials to work that I did. My initial reaction was to reach for the white-out, but when I grabbed it, I dropped it. The white-out smashed on the floor. Now I realize that that was for the best. If I had changed anything, there would be some severe emotions. I'm stuck because I really need this job and for the time being, I have to suck it up.

bold n' brave brunette said...

I cannot believe you guys and the way you whine and whine and whine. Have the poor little boys feeling gotten hurt? Ahhh diddums.

There is more important stuff going on in the world you know, like Kylie's got a new hairdo for instance.

Anonymous said...

http://blog.collegebars.net.nyud.net/meet-college-isnt-necessary-author-lynzee-stauss/

It seems that Lynzee Stauss is indeed real.

Anonymous said...

LOL: Where have all the men gone?
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23185220-5006016,00.html

The man drought seems to get worse for women when they reach their 30s.


No, really, that is news to me. I did not know. I promise, I did not know at all.




"When I was in my 20s, there seemed to be a lot of single guys around, but now the guys my age who are single are single because they're not interested in a relationship or they want younger girls."

Well, men have always wished to marry women in childbearing age.

Women not wanting to "marry down" is also part of the man drought issue.

"The corollary to that is women are used to their indulgences and don't want to marry down. They want someone with assets and who earns at least the same as they do.


Their problem, why do they complain?

"I spoke to a woman who told me she went out on a date with a guy and when he didn't know how to pour a glass of wine she realised they had no future together."

I do not know either. Usually I open the bottle and put the wine into the glass. LOL.


If men are over 30, they may also know that statistically there are plenty more female fish in the sea.

Sure.

"My girlfriends and I go through long stretches of being single because we won't go out with an average Joe. We'd rather wait for someone special," she says.

LOL. So every woman wants to find someone spcial, that may be difficult. ROFL.



The number of female members of her agency outstrips male members by a ratio of four to one.

"It's difficult to offer the ladies the same amount of dinner opportunities as we can offer male members," she says.


LOL. That is no news either.



She says most female members are aged between 35 and 50.

Yeah, sure, I will marry a 35 yo.

"Women are more career-minded these days and they are leaving marriage and children until later," she says.

You made your bed, now lie in it.

I doubt these women actually have any sort of career. If you have a career you are really focused on your it. These women just have jobs, not careers.


"They are getting to their mid to late 30s and they've done their degree, they've travelled and they have a career and then there is a mad panic to find a husband."

They have not just travelled. They had sex with many many men, they have STDs and many of them had abortions.

Who in their right mind, would want to marry a woman, who is not capable of handling her own life?


BWWWWAAAAAAAAAHAHHHHHHA!!!!!

Too funny.

Imagine: this is news for women!

Advice for women: marry young at 16 as a virgin.
Then you will find a very good husband.

bozo the economist said...

Does anyone else see a connection here or is it just me?

A few weeks ago Trevor Phillips made a statement concerning the "White flight" from inner cities in the UK which mirrors what's happening in the US as well.

Could men be turning away from marriage these days a kind of "male flight" in the face of the high risk of emotional and economic ruin as opposed to any "marriage strike"?

Anonymous said...

War is not the answer:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=1y939QyHyhs&eurl=http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Xgl0AxSYFII&feature=related
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=O1SfXuTD_Tw&feature=related

Anonymous said...

There is another reason we might not be so aware off, another reason that pushes women to delay marriage.
Stars and famous women use massive amounts of make-up, lifting, and photoshop to enhance their looks so that they look like 20 when they are way over 30.
http://www.bild.de/BILD/leute/star-news/2008/02/10/stars-ungeschminkt/promis-ungeschminkt.html

A woman does not need any make-up when she is in her teens and ready to get married at any moment.

They believe they can look good at 30+, due to the unrealistic example of moviestars.

Anonymous said...

Fellow bachelors, please educate Joanne Jacobs on the marriage strike:

http://joannejacobs.com/2008/02/07/marriage-strike/

Woman With An Opinion said...

But it is his/her problem if he/she wants to believe in fairy tales. It won't be me who ends up divorced, broken and without children that I have learned to love. It won't be me who has to bear a whining beached whale who is always dissatisfied. It won't be me who will be working 80 hours a week.

And it won't be my man working 80 per week either, He'd be working at least 360 per week to finance my lifestyle. but that's not the point. (watch angry males take that seriously). But yes, I believe that true love can be found and cultivated. You call it fairy tales, I call it truth. But I think singleness is a valuable option. The problem is, none of you practice singleness in its true sense.

No, it won't be you. You'll likely be the old man looking out the window at the old man with visiting children and grandchildren.

I think it was you who claimed to be in your 30's. You're an eternal bachelor so this won't apply to you. But for those who still have faith in marriage, make sure you find a woman now while you are in your 30's and desired by most women. A guy around 30 to 32 is ideal IMO. Try not to get a lady too much older than you are as fertility begins to decline after 35. I only know of a few fertile Myrtals who are near 40.

Question is, why not stay away from women completely. That's the part I don't get...the sport fucking issue. What's the point if women are worthless.

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe you guys and the way you whine and whine and whine. Have the poor little boys feeling gotten hurt? Ahhh diddums.

No. The little boys are just waking up. Enjoy your Oprah, your Dr. Phil, and your loneliness.

bunner said...

The point is, nobody sane wants to enter an endlessly litigated, adversarial situation that is, ostensibly, founded upon deep feelings of love an affection, and certainly not one where they are stripped of their ammunition by simply participating.

Wedded bliss, for men, has become a de-facto oxymoron.

It’s a chess game from “Care to have coffee with me” all the way to “I’ll fax you my attorney’s number. I’m taking the children to mother’s”.

There’s nothing in it for us, anymore.

Anonymous said...

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/single-marry

Still a woman whining. It's all about ME, ME, ME.

What do men want? WOMEN COULD GIVE A FUCK.

Do not let yourself be suckered in. They could give a fuck about you. Yeah, they'll marry you. And then clean you out and destroy you in the divorce. Let them all rot.

Anonymous said...

I think it is a good idea if women (who don't want to marry) avoid giving up the goods so to speak. If a guy wants to remain an eternal bachelor, it is a good idea to let him "use his hands" for the rest of his life.

Hahaha! Good luck with that! Once it was this way. Women didn't give sex away so men had to marry to get it. Sex was highly overpriced (some 50 orgasms traded for a life of slavery - remember that women didn't work back then so marriage slavery was worse than now).

Of course, it was the perfect trap, because, several years into the marriage, sex disappeared and the wife became a whining and nagging beached whale. But it was too late, because divorce was a shame (in my country was illegal).

Anyway, no bachelor knew that sex disappeared in marriage, because sex was taboo and your sexual problems were not commented with other people. So everybody was thinking that (other) marriages were fucking like rabbits.

Men entered to marriage thinking about wild sex (I think Erasmus wrote than men marry thinking of white sheets and soft skins) and ended up slaved to provide for a lifetime to their women.

This system was based on three things:
-Women not having sex before marriage.
-Sexual taboo.
-No divorce.

These points were enforced by two ideologies:
- Religion (Sex before marriage is a sin, marriage is forever because it is a promise before God).
- Stigma (Sex before marriage makes you a slut that nobody wants to marry. Nice girls don't do that. Nice girls do not divorce.).

But, then, feminism appeared and achieve to convince woman that being chaste before marriage, avoiding talking about sex and avoiding divorce were male oppresion techniques and that this made them "female eunuchs". They wanted to have the sexual freedom that the patriarchy had denied so they had fun whoring around. So, suddenly, female sex was cheap and there was no need for men to marry. Women started whining (God! Do they know to do other thing?) "Where all the men gone?"

Now going back is impossible. When famous actresses having sex relationships, valued politicians (like Sarkozy) having his third marriage, and TV gossiping about sexual things; it is impossible to restore the stigma for sex before marriage. And try to say a guy that you want to be his girlfriend but remain virgin until marriage. He would find another to get sex.

It is too late. It would be necessary for all women to agree to deny sex ("a sex strike") to men to create the artificial scarcity that made sex price huge in the past. It is not going to happen. It would be impossible for men to collaborate in such a huge scale. For women it is even more impossible, because despite all the claims about the Sisterhood, they stab each other in the back to get a men. Each woman who is horny or who knows that can trap a man with having sex will open their legs, ending with the "sex strike".

Even if this impossible task was achieved, eternal bachelors would still have foreign women and escorts.

And, of course, our hands. Why not? Our hands have never nagged us, stripped of half of our assets or been paid alimony and child support for years>

Curiepoint said...

AWWAO,

In response to your question regarding any gay proclivities amongst the men here (and elsewhere on similar blogs), I surmise that the answer is 'No'. Please do not mistake our eschewing female contact with the existence of diametrically opposed affections. To not want to be with a woman intimately is mutually exclusive to wanting homosexual experience. It is an unfair question to ask, as it reflects upon attitudes confronted from women who thought that they were "all that" when attention from a particular man was not forthcoming. In most cases, they were deluded by their own inflated self-image. I don't suppose you should be taken aback by the anger you have encountered through your postulation, as it is speaking in the same language of those we despise the most.

I also believe that as paranoid as we seem to be with regards to women's ulterior motives, the mere fact is that those motives do exist out there. It is virtually impossible to tell who has them and who does not, and thus we decide to not take the risk. If 1 out of every 100 of a particular model of car were to spontaneously explode whenever the windshield wipers were turned on, is it paranoia or good common sense to avoid that make and model, regardless of what the manufacturer says about it's safety or the sticker price on the car. The cost/benefit ratio is simply too high.

I think you will find that we merely don't wish to put faith in what one says, and would rather take stock in what someone does. From my vantage point, the way things are do not justify the risk.

In the end, there are no modern benefits to marriage for anyone. The only people who seem to bemoan it's decline are the ones who say nothing as to what they would bring to another person. Everything is couched in terms of what they expect marriage to bring to themselves. Love, Honor, and Cherish are just too important to imply; so is Respect.

Woman With An Opinion said...

A 45 year old man can marry a 16yo girl, the opposite is impossible.
Money and youth attracts itself like the opposite poles of magnets.--Some angry man

Now this is absolutely disgusting. First references to homosexuality are entertained and now pedophilia? Again, notice the men on this board are ignoring these types of vile comments while whining about 30 year-old women. This is not the first comment about underage girls that I've seen on this blog. Seriously, is this how eternal bachelors want to be represented?

Anonymous said...

"If a guy wants to remain an eternal bachelor, it is a good idea to let him "use his hands" for the rest of his life."

I have spoken to many men about masterbation vs. intercourse and most admitted that sex is about the same as jerking off, if not marginally WORSE. A minority of women are good in bed, but these tend to be the psychos and the disease-ridden (hell, even many frigid women are disease-ridden nowadays).

When you weigh the costs vs. benefits, dating and marriage just to get sex is not worth it. Masterbation is about the same or better than a sex life with the average woman with none of the negatives.

And, of course, there are always prostitutes, most of whom have some sexual ability - unlike the average amateur woman. Given how infested with HPV most of the female population is today, sex with prostitutes is not any more risky from the point of view of health concerns than just sex with dating, if not less so.

There are some sweet girls to be had for a mere $120 an hour.

http://escorts120.com

Now weigh that against the cost of a date and only the chance of (lousy) sex.

Lastly, what will women do for sex if they don't marry or put out in a relationship?

Anonymous said...

I wish I came across this blog BEFORE I was married and then divorced.

King Cobra said...

"Dating without sleeping around is enough for me."

OK, and sleeping around without spending money is even better for me. Do you think that just because you won't give it up that we have no other options? If you say no, there is a girl less than ten feet away that will give us what we want.

Dating is a great short-term option for everybody. Since your looks will fade, we can upgrade very easily. I'm 23 and I know 50-year-old men that date women my age. Even if I choose to date only a few years younger my entire life, I can still choose a woman that has had less wear and tear on her body.

"I think it is a good idea if women (who don't want to marry) avoid giving up the goods so to speak. If a guy wants to remain an eternal bachelor, it is a good idea to let him "use his hands" for the rest of his life."

In addition to the multitude of women that will service us. We can go abroad and find non-westernized women for relationships.

You don't want to admit that what we are looking for as men is much more available than what you want. There are hundreds of millions women around the world who meet our standards for youth and attractiveness. No matter what you are looking for (foreign, rich, young, handsome), it is likely that the man will reject you.

Anonymous said...

http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/vilar.html#quotes

Some quotes:

"If a young man gets married, starts a family, and spends the rest of his life working at a soul-destroying job, he is held up as an example of virtue and responsibility. The other type of man, living only for himself, working only for himself, doing first one thing and then another simply because he enjoys it and because he has to keep only himself, sleeping where and when he wants, and facing woman when he meets her, on equal terms and not as one of a million slaves, is rejected by society. The free, unshackled man has no place in its midst."

"Men have been trained and conditioned by women, not unlike the way Pavlov conditioned his dogs, into becoming their slaves. As compensation for their labours men are given periodic use of a woman's vagina."

"If praise is applied in the correct dosage a woman will never need to scold. Any man who is accustomed to a regular and conditional dosage of praise will interpret its absence as displeasure."

"Someday it will dawn on man that woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries, and though she may well admire his marvelous works of art in museums she herself will rarely create, only copy."

Anonymous said...

Everyone take a look at woman with an opinion's MySpace. She is 34 years old, Black, has a graduate degree (in Psychology?), and is SINGLE. May she stay that way.

Anonymous said...

Hi. Woman who every time tries a new argument to disguise she is not answering the previous one.

What about foreign women. Your silence is eloquent. Anyway.

Question is, why not stay away from women completely. That's the part I don't get...the sport fucking issue.

The fact that I want to eat a cake, doesn't mean that I want to buy the cake shop. Too much expensive! Too much problems! As the saying says: "If it flies, floats or fucks it is better to rent"

With women, it is worse than that. They only have one kind of cake (and men like variety), the cake gets rotten with the time and, even worse, the cake disappear (because in marriage, sex dries up). So why buying the cake shop?

Anyway, I have been without sex during periods of my life (mostly when I had a girlfriend in other country, back then when I was a sucker) and, believe me, it is not that bad. You get used to do without sex. But if I can have it, why not?

But yes, I believe that true love can be found and cultivated. You call it fairy tales, I call it truth.

With 50% of divorces (70% initiated by the women) and 59% of women who would divorce if they had money, I call it very unlikely.

I have seen all my friends marry with "true love" and six o year later being stripped of all their assets by the same "true bitch" that promised them "true love".


But I think singleness is a valuable option. The problem is, none of you practice singleness in its true sense.

Wow! You know what is true love and what is true singleness! You are dipositary of the truth. Congrats!

Definition of single (from the Webster dictionary). 1 a: not married

You'll likely be the old man looking out the window at the old man with visiting children and grandchildren.

Hahaha. What makes you think I am affected for such a pathetic excuse of justifying marriage? This is an old shaming language, repeated by women. As Mirror of the Soul says:

"If I had a dollar every time I have heard a woman I would die alone, I would have an extra million dollars on hand."

I have two answers to this.

Answer 1. It is not true. When social scientist Dykstra made a survey about loneliness in older adults, old single men averaged 3.6 in a scale from 0 (not lonely) to 11 (the loneliest), less lonely than the previously married (divorced or widowed) which scored 4.3 (quoted from "Singled out" by Bella DePaulo).

Answer 2. What makes you think I am not able to be happy alone? That I need some spoiled brats to give happiness to my life when I am old? Do you think that I am so immature to rely my happiness on external events or persons?


Please read the book "Happiness" by Mathieu Richard (who has been SCIENTIFICALLY proved to be the most happy man in the world), a single. Or remember this quote from the great philosopher Blaise Pascal:

"All man's troubles come from not knowing how to sit still in one room."

I think it was you who claimed to be in your 30's.

I am 37. I have two female friends (ages 26 and 30) that want to be my girlfriend and put me in very delicate situations. I feel very uncomfortable when rejecting their advances, because I want to be polite. When will women realize that I want to be single? I am 37, for God's sake!!! I have had time to marry if I wanted. I just can't wait to be considered a confirmed bachelor.

But for those who still have faith in marriage,

You will find none of this delusional suckers here. This is why this is called "Eternal Bachelor". Are you so dumb that you can't understand two basic words of the English language?

make sure you find a woman now while you are in your 30's and desired by most women. A guy around 30 to 32 is ideal IMO.

Wow!!! You don't only know what "true love" and "true singleness" is. You also know how the "true" age to be married is. You have direct connection to the truth. You can start a religion.

We are not our mother nor our wife to tell us whether and when we marry.

First references to homosexuality are entertained and now pedophilia?

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!!!!

This must be the most pathetic argument ever! LOL LOL LOL

You are not usually good at making logic statement but with this arguments you have reached new levels of stupidity. You have excelled yourself. Congrats!

I won't ever bother to answer that. It is only a prove of how desperate are women to nag us to marriage. The marriage strike is working and women are running out of suckers. This is why they become more and more pathetic trying to convince us or to nag us to marry.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Anonymous said...

Everyone take a look at woman with an opinion's MySpace. She is 34 years old, Black, has a graduate degree (in Psychology?), and is SINGLE. May she stay that way."

Absolutely. Feel free to visit my blog as well (click on the link). I've developed a following. I talk about politics, religion, atheism, entertainment, heck I even started author interviews. The next one is from an author who writes about 9/11 from the perspective of an Arab terrorist. Since you mentioned it, thought I'd advertise, LOL. Would you like to step into the lions den? Don't worry, I'd be much more formal. Also, all comments should be formal and respectful even if they challenge my views.

Strange thing is, I was wondering where all the hits on my page came from.

Anonymous said...

It is only a prove of how desperate are women to nag us to marriage. The marriage strike is working and women are running out of suckers. This is why they become more and more pathetic trying to convince us or to nag us to marry.

When you see a woman trying to convince men to marry in a blog called "Eternal Bachelor", you realize how high is the level of desperation of women.

Back then, there was no need to convince men to marry. Men were eager to marry and women could even reject lots of them after finding the one they wanted. Back then, the sentence "Where had all the men gone?" was not a common one.

But then, a lot of things appeared. Feminism, sexual liberation, non-fault divorce (initiated mostly by women), entitlement princesses, divorce laws who ruin a man and so on and so forth.

Women spent decades telling men what they were not willing to do anymore (household chores, having sex without feeling like it - the marital duty -, giving the authority to their husbands, staying in the marriage despite being bored, being supportive, submissive and sweet and so on and so forth). Women spent decades telling men what they were expecting (that they did not expect before): having their man sharing household chores and children's upbringing, giving emotional support, leaving the wife always having things their own way, admiting the authority of the wife, giving the wife sexual fulfillment, happiness and excitement, spending lots of money on crap, standing living with a harpy, paying the ex-wife half of their assets and a monthly wage -alimony, child support- (even if he is not able to see the kids).

In summary, marriage started losing all the attractives it had for men and starting having all kind of drawbacks for men that it had never had. Women thought they had achieved a better deal and that men would bear with all that. They feel liberated, empowered and free of millenia of male oppression. You go girl!!!

And, one day, the western man woke up and realized that it was far more convenient to be single than to be married. And they started to stay single. This process is only in its beginning with 30% of men refusing to marry (and counting). But, even in its infancy, it has caused a severe drought in some segments of female population (for example, 30-somethings women)

And then women started going crazy and writing articles to show their desperation. If they wanted men to marry, they only had to restore the previous deal of marriage.

Of course, they didn't want this. They wanted the new version of marriage (with all the advantages for women) but at the same time, they wanted men to be the old-fashioned beings who were eager to marry. When men refused to collaborate in their own destruction, women tried all their usual things: shaming language, emotional cheap tricks, weak logic (with no result).

Anonymous said...

you girls sure have got some stamina regarding arrempting to getting men to fund & fuck you, considering we do so much of the "holding you back" why dont you cut your losses & fuck off. is cos, your doing us a favour - how sweet.

King Cobra said...

Now this is absolutely disgusting. First references to homosexuality are entertained and now pedophilia? Again, notice the men on this board are ignoring these types of vile comments while whining about 30 year-old women. This is not the first comment about underage girls that I've seen on this blog. Seriously, is this how eternal bachelors want to be represented?

Actually, since I live in Virginia, the law says that 16 is legal age. Of course, being from New York, you probably have your head up your ass when it comes to how the rest of the nation operates. Since you don't want to think logically, that means a 90 year old man and 16 year old girl is legal and none of your fucking business. In some states, you can marry even younger with your parents position. So once again, fuck off.

At 30 something, you are way too old for any man that has looks, money, game or self-esteem to want. That's why you don't want marriage, it's because you have given up. Mr. Right would never be interested in you. As far as 30 being the age for men. The list of 40, 50 & 60 year old men that are still desired by women is extremely long.

Question is, why not stay away from women completely.
That's the part I don't get...the sport fucking issue. What's the point if women are worthless.


You want to know why? Because its our choice. Women have all kinds of choices, stop complaining about ours. We can sport fuck, go abroad, find foreign women or marry a girl that is the minimum legal age.

BTW, since you want to criticize this blog so much, let's look at your blog and myspace page.

I like Barak Obama (can't say I like his middle name for a president or Vice president).

You ever think that he didn't pick his name? Or maybe the world has plenty of people named Hussein who were named before the dictator came to power? Or maybe you need to stop being so ignorant and realize that names come from (often distant) heritage. Your political commentary should be cause to take away your right to vote.

I notice that you don't have any pictures of yourself. I'm sure that means that you are smokin' hot and have to avoid marriage proposals at every turn. It's probably why you end up going on dates with men that say “I’m married and I’m looking for a part-time girlfriend.”


But what I’ve learned is that people, myself included, are less interested in marriage than previous generations. It is not a problem to the individual but it is to society as a whole. We need strong families and enduring marriages. But there are very important questions that need to be answered. What is it going to take for marriage to make a comeback? Does it necessarily have to?

Why don't you figure it out? Change the laws, that's what any man would say. Abolish alimony, establish child support accountability, prosecute paternity fraud and don't let wives take their husbands money in divorce. Give men a reason to get married besides being stuck with a old, fat bitch that can't shut the fuck up (like YOU). You won't do that because you care more about entitlements than restoring marriage for the "good of society".

You can thank me for bringing your blog closer to 2,000 hits. I could also help you reach 100 friends on your myspace page. We are actually doing you a favor by responding to you and strengthening your (very unsuccessful) bid to be an attention whore.

Woman With An Opinion said...

but in reality, we aren’t fish who can do without a bicycle, we’re women who want a traditional family.
Chris believes that women are far too picky: everyone knows, he says, that a single middle-aged man still has appealing prospects; a single middle-aged woman likely doesn’t. And he’s right. Single women are painfully aware of this. I hear far more women than men talk about getting married as a goal to be met by a certain deadline.

Only a couple of points are correct in this.

Women can be far too picky when it comes to men. I'll admit it described me for a long time.

Most women who want to marry would prefer to do so by a certain age. What's wrong with that? I don't see middle aged women in "my circles" having this problem though.

Xaver said...

Woman with an opinion said..."Now this is absolutely disgusting. First references to homosexuality are entertained and now pedophilia?"

Even though you took it out of context, yeah a 45-year-old man with a girl that age is immoral and disgusting.

Woman with an opinion said... Seriously, is this how eternal bachelors want to be represented?

No, that’s how you want EBs represented.

Get back to current subjects if you’re capable otherwise be honorable and concede.

Woman With An Opinion said...

You ever think that he didn't pick his name? Or maybe the world has plenty of people named Hussein who were named before the dictator came to power? Or maybe you need to stop being so ignorant and realize that names come from (often distant) heritage. Your political commentary should be cause to take away your right to vote.

Nope, can't say I like the idea of having a president with the middle name HUSSEIN. Just about everyone I know feels the same way (concerned about any connection to Islam)But I can think of something I dislike even more...President Hillary Clinton. But back to the point, I support Obama for president. Why is this turning into a political discussion. I do that at my own blog.

"I notice that you don't have any pictures of yourself. I'm sure that means that you are smokin' hot and have to avoid marriage proposals at every turn. It's probably why you end up going on dates with men that say “I’m married and I’m looking for a part-time girlfriend.”--King Kobra

Nope, no pictures at this time. Thats for the website I'm creating. It will also include my very own video blogs. So you will be the first to know that I am actually 4'tall and 6'wide, bald with no teeth.

You can thank me for bringing your blog closer to 2,000 hits. I could also help you reach 100 friends on your myspace page.--King Kobra

King Kobra baby,

Thank you

Woman With An Opinion said...

Before I dismiss the following as typical male behavior:

"When you see a woman trying to convince men to marry in a blog called "Eternal Bachelor", you realize how high is the level of desperation of women." A guy who won't identify himself.

How have any of you arrived at the conclusion that I'm trying to convince you to marry?

Anonymous said...

Anyone contemplating marriage, please think that marriage is like being with "woman with an opinion" (and having the obligation of listening to her) all the day long for years.

Divorce (even if your wife strips you of half of your assets and requires monthly payment for years) must be the most liberating experience in the world.

Anonymous said...

Listen, even if you increase the hit count of this woman, please post a link to her Myspace page. I have not been able to find it (I have searched in Google and Myspace).

And please "woman with an opinion" put any of your pictures (without fixing it with Photoshop) in your page. I want you to see your face and see how hot you are and how you are able to marry at 34 y.o. and even older LOL

I notice that you don't have any pictures of yourself. I'm sure that means that you are smokin' hot and have to avoid marriage proposals at every turn. It's probably why you end up going on dates with men that say "I’m married and I’m looking for a part-time girlfriend."

Computer. $1000
Internet access. $70/month
Reading the truth about a nagging bitch. Priceless.

Anonymous said...

@woman with an opinion

"Underage" - you malke me laugh. Are you angry that the "underage" have way better chances to find a husband than you are, full wrinkles, 30yo, maybe with some STDs, maybe having performed abortions?

The "underage" girls you wonder about, are those who can get legally married in most states and got married when society was still healthy.

These underage girls today have sex at 13, catch different STDs, abortions and end up at 30 and unmarried.

A 16yo woman is fully developed and absolutely marriageable, waiting just decreases her worth as a wife.

At 16 there is still a chance to find a virgin. Healthy, young, fit for making babies.

Anonymous said...

How have any of you arrived at the conclusion that I'm trying to convince you to marry?

Well, I will only quote some of your words.

When we talked about our decision of staying bachelors you answered

If you were jaded by a number of women, then STOP CHOOSING THE WRONG ONES. It's that simple, LOL.

In other words, stop complaining and mate the right women

I've been looking at other posts/responses and notice that some of you believe that you can postpone marriage and family for years to come...You may think you are happy to remain single now...that is what "career-only" minded women have said until they reach the point where it is too late.

In other words, marry now before it is too late and you became bitter like "career-only" minded women.

make sure you find a woman now while you are in your 30's and desired by most women. A guy around 30 to 32 is ideal IMO. Try not to get a lady too much older than you are as fertility begins to decline after 35. I only know of a few fertile Myrtals who are near 40.

This is hilarious. A women giving advice about the right age to marry in a blog called Eternal Bachelor. Pathetic. Please go to dear Amy.

I think it is a good idea if women (who don't want to marry) avoid giving up the goods so to speak. If a guy wants to remain an eternal bachelor, it is a good idea to let him "use his hands" for the rest of his life.

So you want to "punish" eternal bachelor, dear. It is not going to happen

Please, woman put some pictures of you in your blog. I want to know who I am talking to. Or are you so ugly that you are afraid of us knowing how you are?

Anonymous said...

@woman with an opinion

I think I know why you are accusing men of paedophilia when they wnat to marry 16yo.

You are not 16 anymore, you are 34.


Yes, that is the sole reason. When you WERE 16, you loved being looked at and cherished by men. Now you are old and you envy the young women.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Please, woman put some pictures of you in your blog. I want to know who I am talking to. Or are you so ugly that you are afraid of us knowing how you are?

17 February 2008 13:54

You, like many of the men on this blog, post as anonymous and you want me to reveal myself? Give me a break. But if you must know, I'm 7'2" 100 pounds, size 22 shoes and huge birth control glasses (as known in the military). Do you know who you're talking to now?

Anonymous said...

Her article is a direct outcome of the promotion of feminism in Western culture. The only positive thing I can say about feminism, with its drive to destroy marriage and push women away from traditional motherhood, is that at least the females that buy into this cultural lie don't end up reproducing and passing this psychological disease on to their offsping...

bunner said...

"I have a huge bug up my ass and I complain a lot and I have rules that YOU have to live by and I will reassess your worth to my life, constantly and remind you endlessly if you don't make me delerioulsy happy and then maybe you can do me and give me babies. MY babies. And watch your manners and be nice to my family, even if they treat you like shit or I'll just decide to bail on a whim and take all your money and our home and our children away and make you cover every nickel of my expenses forever"...

.... isn't an attractive offer.


GET

OVER

IT.

Anonymous said...

Try not to get a lady too much older than you are as fertility begins to decline after 35.

WRONG!!!!!

A woman's fertility starts declining as early as her late 20s - not in her 30s as was previously thought, according to a study. See more in http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/20020401195016_health_news.shtml

Anonymous said...

Fertility of women decline at 27. It is at its height at 18. At 15 women are more fertile than after 20 and the chance to have malformed children is just 0,05%. At 40+ the latter rises to 10%.
Yes you read it right 10% versus 0,05%.

Woman With An Opinion said...

Anonymous said...

Try not to get a lady too much older than you are as fertility begins to decline after 35.

WRONG!!!!!

A woman's fertility starts declining as early as her late 20s - not in her 30s as was previously thought, according to a study. See more in http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/200204011
--Anonymous male

Actually, I'm still correct. A woman's fertility does decline in her late 20's. She's also less fertile at 28 than at 22. But the fact is, there is no real nose dive until after 35.

http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/news/20040618/fertility-treatment-less-successful-after-35

Of women trying natural conception:

* At age 30, 75% will get pregnant within one year.
* At age 35, 66% will get pregnant.
* At age 40, 44% will get pregnant.

Within four years after trying to conceive naturally:

* 91% of 30-year-olds will be successful.
* 84% of 35-year-olds will.
* 64% of 40-year-olds will.

In other words, women are likely to become pregnant even after 35. The issue is, it takes longer and gets harder (and almost impossible for many in their 40's, even with fertility treatments). It may be ridiculous to wait until 40, but it's not impossible.

Anonymous said...

But if you must know, I'm 7'2" 100 pounds, size 22 shoes and huge birth control glasses (as known in the military). Do you know who you're talking to now?

Well. I don't know. I can't know whether you are telling the truth. Maybe you are. Maybe you are not. You have seen so many times things that are opposite and contradictory that you have lost any credibility.

You must be very ugly if you don't want to put pictures in your MySpace page. After all, this is what MySpace pages are for. And the stories in your MySpace page about the men you date and your obsession about inexistent rights to have children without father are further proofs that you are not beautiful.

In fact, this is not important. Eternal Bachelor is not a beauty contest. But it would help that, regardless your level of beauty, you would be able of rational discussion and you could have always the same argument instead of contradicting yourself every time.

Anonymous said...

Every time woman with a tiny IQ makes a comment, I usually think there cannot be something sillier to be said.

But I am wrong!!

She lowers more and more her level so I have ended up teaching things like to a child..

See this:

Try not to get a lady too much older than you are as fertility begins to decline after 35.


WRONG!!!!!

A woman's fertility starts declining as early as her late 20s

Actually, I'm still correct. A woman's fertility does decline in her late 20's. She's also less fertile at 28 than at 22. But the fact is, there is no real nose dive until after 35.

What a nonsense! She doesn't even know what "begins" stand for.

My dear, if a woman's fertility is lower at 28 than at 22 and then goes even lower, then it BEGINS to decline in the 20s, unless you want to change the meaning of verb "to begin". So your claim "begins to decline after 35" is wrong as I have said.

You are willing to contradict yourself and saying nonsense only to win the argument. Next time, please check the dictionary to understand one of the most basic words of the English language.

Woman With An Opinion said...

My dear, if a woman's fertility is lower at 28 than at 22 and then goes even lower, then it BEGINS to decline in the 20s, unless you want to change the meaning of verb "to begin". So your claim "begins to decline after 35" is wrong as I have said.

You are willing to contradict yourself and saying nonsense only to win the argument." Another Angry Guy

There's no nonsense about it. The implication of the post that I responded to was wrong. Fertility is not a problem until a woman nears 40. I'll concede only on the use of the word begin, nothing more.

Anonymous said...

Subtitling this whole article:

We've got the vagina guys, comon, marry us so we can divorce you turn my children against you and make your life hell. Plastic Pocket Pussies are about 1,000 times better than the real thing since they don't nag you or divorce you.

bunner said...

You hear that, you dear, little boy? You're obviously an angry little boy, my dear, and she will concede upon the use of the word "begins" (and .. you know basically your whole argument} and NOTHING MORE!

So there.

Never try and discuss facts with irony-proof people of either gender.

Jesus, sister... do you really think there are any men left who aren't immune to baseless condescenscion : )

bunner said...

Oops, I thought that was her commenting, not you about what she said.

I was gonna say... that sounds ridiculous.

Looks like you conceded her point, instead.

What I want to know is.. who gives a **** if she can pump out babies until she's 90 if you never get to see them and you get a bill for the privilege of fathering them?

Anonymous said...

Please guys take a look of my conversation with the woman who attracts 50-something married men. You will be able to see how full of flaws are her reasoning skills.

Her first post: fertility begins to decline after 35.

My first post: WRONG!!! A woman's fertility starts declining as early as her late 20s

Her second post: Actually, I'm still correct. A woman's fertility does decline in her late 20's.
(Please notice that the two sentences are contradictory).

My second post: if a woman's fertility is lower at 28 than at 22 and then goes even lower, then it BEGINS to decline in the 20s, unless you want to change the meaning of verb "to begin".

Her third post: Fertility is not a problem until a woman nears 40. I'll concede only on the use of the word begin, nothing more.

Translation to English: Of course, you are right and I was wrong. The fertility of a woman starts declining in her late 20s. But, because I don't want to admit I was wrong (I have a vagina so I can't admit being wrong), I will change the argument in order to give the appearance that I am right. So now the argument is about the fertility being a problem, an issue which you (my male counterpart) never talked about (instead of the fertility starting declining which was the original argument and which I was defeated in, regardless of my reluctancy to admit it).

These are the reasoning skills of woman desperate to win any argument in the world (whatever it is) but whose brain doesn't allow her to succeed. A bunch of fallacies (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy) and changing arguments in order to give the impression that she is winning. A typical female reasoning.

Anonymous said...

Christ who cares! Spend enough time around Western Women and you will NOT want to live with them nor have anything to do with them. Much less mate with them!

bunner said...

Hey, sis?

Lemme tighten it up for you.

“We want to be EQUAL!”

“OK”

“We’re equal now!”

“Sounds wonderful. Pick up a shovel.”

“No, you gimmie half your stuff.”

“I think you misread the fine print.”

“You just hate women!”

“Yeahhhhhhhhh, whatever.”

“Hey… our culture is collapsing!”

“We know.”

*bows*

*makes a sandwich*

karma said...

http://www.joerogan.net/news/newsItem.cfm?cms_news_id=23

guys you have got to chk this out for female ego based logic...

http://www.joerogan.net/news/newsItem.cfm?cms_news_id=23

or

http://ilovephotoes.spaces.live.com/

my best mate is going to leave his wife - well maybe - because she is a 38yo version of this.He is always
wrong and hed is getting sick of it.Mind you he has alot to learn himself.

I told him not to marry her 15 years ago but he did not listen.

LOL
KARMA

bunner said...

"You're a dick cause you wont stop and play along with me!"

"I raised her to get her ass kissed endlessly."

"You're cocky! You're a dick!"

I think listening to 30 seconds of that and I would have said "Aren't you fascinating?" and walked away.

They say if you want to see your wife in 20 years, look at her mother.

That bitter, ridiculous, manless, corn fed cow who raised her daughter to be a pail off piss with a cherry in it pretty much sorts that family out, tut suite.

"PAY ATTENTION TO ME! I'M BEING RUDE!"

Pass.

Anonymous said...

Spend enough time around Western Women and you will NOT want to live with them nor have anything to do with them. Much less mate with them!
I cannot agree with this more. Even the East is not spared -women who are getting too big for their boots and a media that panders to them shamelessly. Thank god for men like Glenn Sacks who work tirelessly to awaken public awareness on the anti-male phenomenon. Oh and by the way, here in Singapore, those who disdain marriage translate alimony to read "all his money" -something to DEFINITELY avoid if the union goes sour.

Anonymous said...

I'm new to this blog so forgive me if I offend anyone's sensibilities rearding their view towards marriage. I respect one's right to remain single, but note a hint of "thou dost protest too much" and fear of legal and financial implications in some of the arguments which bely an underlying and fundamental desire for human companionship and procreation for at least some of you.

Having been on all three sides in rapid succession- single career woman, wife and mother, now facing divorce, I have a few observations and a genuine question: where did I go so wrong?

First, wouldn't a pre-nup alleviate many of your fears and allow you to have your cake and eat it too? I signed one because I honestly felt I had found true love and do have (some) family money and my considerable education to fall back on (three Ivy degrees including law and an MBA).

Even though American, I was a virgin when I married at age 40. Because having a children and family was a dream of mine, I started seriously looking at age 26. While never short of suitors or marriage proposals, I actually was at the height of my looks in my mid to late thirties. (Because many of you seem to believe that most women who comment here must be fat and ugly, I will say that I am frequently compared to a young Kim Basinger and men have often asked if I was a cheerleader in high school; I was actually captain of the debate team).

While I can't speak for all women. many of us do long to be in love with the men we marry; although for those without money, a good provider is important not only for themselves, but, more importantly, their children. Most of the female species in the animal kingdom do this instinctively for survival and protection. And for the human species money=survival One has to be able to adequately protect themselves in order to protect one's children. The instinct to protect children is also why male species are most attracted to "hotties"- females (in a position) to bear them the "fittest" offspring: the most desirable at their most fertile (and most energetic). Moreover, society traditionally discriminates against women- particularly past child-rearing age- in their ability to earn an adequate living; considering them intellectually inferior even today as evidenced in some of the comments. Unless you have been on that side of the coin, it is hard to understand the fear that engenders.

I was lucky in many respects, my looks, success, money, intelligence, and education aforded me the luxury of waiting for someone I loved, who wasn't emasculated by me, and matched or exceeded me in almost every department so that I was sure it was "until death do us part." I also got pregnant the first time we tried(at age 40) which I do suspect may have had something to do with the fact that I never had used birth control pills or been exposed to any STDs.

Yeah. Things changed radically right after I became pregnant, though it was so soon after the wedding/moving in it is hard to say what exactly precipitated the change. I am here to say that any marriage involves a certain amount of "slavery" on both sides, though in a healthy, loving relationship "teamwork" might be a better term. I remember working at a stressful job on Wall Street vowing to never take for granted a man's sacrifice to make a living (and I didn't- my husband has never had to cook, clean, change a diaper or get up for a feeding). After carrying, birthing, and nursing a baby, taking care of him 24/7 (he is still only 5 1/2 months)while scrubbing bathrooms, mopping floors, vacuuming, cleaning, grocery and necessity shopping (forget about clothes- I don't even have time or opportunity to exercise to get back in shape), learning how to mealplan and cook everyday- I often long for the days of getting by on my wits rather than hard physical labor.

Some of you refer to such work as "domestic arts" and things our grandmothers did willingly. BS. Much of the child rearing- when it is your own child- is fulfilling at least for me. The rest, particulary coupled with the exhaustion and lack of time an infant, or multiple children, imposes (and I still worked part-time since merely days ater a C-section)- is pure drudgery. For most of the age of man- these tasks-including child-rearing have been performed by slaves or low paid servants. Only since the late 19th century when this option became economically unviable and illegal that a wife began to shoulder so much of the burden alone. And that lasted barely half a century before women rebelled and fueled the real impetus behind the "feminist" movement. What that afforded us was the ability to achieve financial independence, if not parity, and to be able to go back to the days of employing still low-paid and often illegal servants to perform as much of these domestic "arts" as possible.

"Foreign" women still do not have these options which is why so many seem to be more appealing- they are often from poorer cultures where women have had to put up with it and are seemingly more engrained to play a more submissive role. It is bred in them or forced upon them in order to survive- they are not "nicer" just better trained (read Memoirs of a Geisha). I would argue they have less regard for men than Western women do because they are that much more repressed by their male counterparts.

The bottom line is it sucks on both sides which is why respect, trust, commitment, and willingness to work together are so important in sustaining a partnership, which then make the good times worth the sacrifice.

I'm still bewildered by what happened to me. We spent so much time going over "1,000 questions to ask before you get married," etc. I thought we had covered everything. Financially, we were in a position, and had agreed, that I would be the primary caregiver. That he would support the family while we were married was part of the quid pro quo for the pre-nup I signed (at his request).

Yet my husband had no regard for the "job" of keeping a house and raising a child, refused to give me a bank account or credit card for household and child expenses- saying he thought he married an heiress and when did I plan to get a real job- even though he made 20 times my prior full-time salary. I paid for everything (groceries for both of us, including the entire nursery, clothes, and childcare expenses for our child) out of my own salary and savings.

You would think that with all our money we could aford to hire at least a bi-weekly housekeeper, part-time childcare provider so I didn't have to bring the baby to work. Or even a baby-sitter for the evenings he wanted to go to the Philharmonic then acted upset when I reminded him we had no one to watch the baby. Yet I missed a big red flag- or was completely lied to. When we met, and throughout the relationship his, albeit vast and potentially gorgeous home, was in a state of interrupted construction, filth and incredibly clutter which he attributed to "neglect of batchelorhood." And he waxed rhapsodic on his renovation plans.

I came to find out that my seemingly non-addicted husband had a compulsive hoarding disorder coupled with a desire to control everything regarding the house. The house was never going to be fixed up because he could not throw anything away and it would have been too anxiety provoking to have to deal with the existing clutter. We could never have a housekeeper or babysitter because no one was allowed to be in the house unsupervised by him. It was also far too embarassing to entertain any of my friends who wanted to see the baby because the house was so horrendous. Most importantly, there were no doorknobs, switchplates, or electrical outlet covers (thus exposed wires at crawling level), he refused to remedy this and I feared or my child's life.

Last, after waiting so long, our sex life was bad initially, then non-existant. I thought it was because when I was unpacking I found evidence that at least in the past he had solicited protitutes (a Catholic who never missed mass). But you all have enlightened me to perhaps another reason given he was approaching his mid 40's. Regardless, it was profoundly disappointing and made me feel constantly rejected. Apparently I was just a "brood mare" to him.

I probably should start my own blog since this is so long and it is five in the morning, but I don't want to wallow in this funk forever. I concluded that I can't afford to have any more children with this man (nor would I want to), and that my son will have a better life not growing up in that house and being socially isolated with an unhappy mother.

I am wracked with guilt, yet simultaneously feel I got taken advantage of since I am walking out with nothing and now have to raise my son as a single mother with little income (my inheritence is years away). He has the house, his bachelorhood, freedom, millions and shown an appalling lack of interest in seeing his son (once in three months)though I have encouraged it.

So like many of you I feel compelled to remain single, not wanting to repeat my mistakes and I no longer feel the right to bear another child lest this happen again. I know in the long run I will be okay as I am very spiritual and value freedom above all else, and my spiritual studies teach me that virtually all "special relationships" become a playing field for the unconscious ego, thus a block to true enlightenment. Yet, I am currently so sad because I can't look forward to dating or "sport-fucking" at my age with a young child, and it is such an isolating thought.

While so many of you seem to feel that society stigmatizes single men, in reality it is just them opposite. We are characterized as frustrated "spinsters," aging hags, sour milk and crazy cat ladies as you yourselves have noted. While I am genuinely looking or feedback on my situation, I nonetheless can't understand your anger. The amount of articles bemoaning lack of men and batchelors is miniscule to gloabal societies' true attitude toward unmarried women. Can't you take your own advice and just ignore them as women looking to get married should ignore you? I envy you as society and my own son will increasingly devalue me. While I agree the legal system is unfavorably biased toward women, that's what pre-nups are for. And that's how to find the good ones.

Lost in the US

bunner said...

MBA, Wall Street, looks, money, captain of the debate team, wow I'm hot shit, waited to find a man I wouldn't "emasculate"...

Gosh, that was big of you. You carry a razor in your purse?

I'm really sorry you waited forty years to do some lucky guy the biggest favour in the universe but you picked an idiot.

You went about marriage like a breeder goes about whelping dogs.

1,000 questions to ask before you get married,"

Sister, are you kidding?

It's not a race. Nobody wins.

The "ideal" mate somebody you can sit down with at a kitchen table ( not a designer kitchen table, not a "breakfast nook", not an artfully delineated bôit ) look in the eye and know who you are talking to and that you love them.

The rest is just a series of decisions you make together.

You had your perfect life in a nice trophy case and all mapped out.

And you drew a lazy pack rat.

There's no map. That's why you get a partner who'll help you find the way.

Men aren't accessories.

Maybe the "I can do it all and I am God's gift to men" road doesn't attract the kind of guys you think it should. Welcome to working your ass off for nothing. *hug*

Woman With An Opinion said...

"So like many of you I feel compelled to remain single, not wanting to repeat my mistakes and I no longer feel the right to bear another child lest this happen again."

Hi lost in the US,

I think that what many of the men on this board do not understand is that there are risks involved in everything we do (including marriage). My fear of marriage partly stems from the fact that divorce reigns supreme in my family (parents, all my siblings, uncles, etc). Why get married if it's likely I won't remain as such? While men fear the financial ramifications, as a woman I fear the emotional risks. Having witnessed spousal abuse, adultery, and abandonment in the lives of women close to me, I can say that I am afraid to take the plunge. But I am conflicted being a hetero lady (no longer ashamed to admit that I like male companionship), thus I decided to date and make a regular "friend." Another conflict for me is the issue of my "religious" background (that's for another blog) so I can't even enjoy having a friend. I was taught to either get married or avoid romantic relationships of every kind. To make a long story short, some married co-workers of mine firmly told me that I should not allow the events in others lives to cloud my view of marriage. I can't speak for others, but I don't want to look back on my life knowing that I avoided certain things due to fear. Still, I can understand and respect why others would want to protect their emotions and/or their pockets. Anyway, I hope I didn't sound judgmental since it wasn't my intent.

I think that if you created your own blog, it would certainly be worth reading.

bunner said...

I can joyously inform all of the ladies posting here that you can all rest easy and that your fondest dreams of marital bliss will come true the second you ditch the fashion show and get your nails dirty and deliver the product on the label.

Curiepoint said...

WWAO, there is a distinct difference between being ruled by fear, and not taking risks that carry a certainty of not only failing, but costing one their very life. The latter should be considered betting wisely. The former is cowardice. purely and simply.

Hmh said...

Oh, hi Lost In The US - since you ask for the source of my anger... hell, why not. I've been badly treated by women, and by our society, for being a man. My whole life.

Male? Whoops! Rapist, murderer, thief, abuser, criminal, liar, leaver, cheater, deadbeat dad, bore, bum, loser.

Demonised from birth for my gender.

And that's it. Public praise for the men around me repeatedly risking their lives or going the extra mile to get the job done is frankly conspicuous by its absence, while the few women who can keep up with them are publicly hailed as heroes for simply doing the job. Firefighters, police, ambulance guys, roadworkers... you name it. Men do necessary work but are forgotten.

If you want a look at how attitudes between men and women have changed, and soured, have a read of some Raymond Chandler. It is a different world.

Then there's the legislative stuff... getting nailed on dodgy charges of sexual abuse, getting your life stuffed on a vicious ex's false rape charge or DV claim... which the courts automatically treat as true... I really do feel like I've been given every possible reason to simply avoid the risk of an encounter with women for any reason other than in public and in plain sight... because anything else requires me to prove my innocence!!

Having most of the women around me being not much fun to be around just makes bachelorhood easier. Oh, and for the record: I don't protest too much, I actually wanted a woman and children. It's just under current circumstances, and with women they way that they currently are, it's just a stupid way to go.

bunner said...

We ain't afraid of you, ladies.

We're just sick of your shit.

I realise that 40 years of indoctrination has flatly stated that you fart rainbows, piss sunshine and every time you don't get your way, an angel weeps, but, um... if you think that's true, marry each other.

We can't afford the risk, anymore.

Liberation, on your terms, in the west, equals getting what you want, when you want it and men supply it.

We had all this "roles" crap stuffed up out rear ends about how women must be "given equal opportunity" and the result was women being installed in jobs they can't do, playing "roles" for a paycheck. On the upside, we get to listen to you bitch, whine, and puff yourselves up because you think that "role" means you're in charge of something. You think being pushy, annoying and endlessly demanding is what bosses do. If a man acts like that, other men will kick his ass to the curb so fast he'll land on the sidewalk with a welfare voucher. Men don't get away with that shit for long.

This ain't an episode of Dallas, ladies.

Mo bigger, mo better, gimmie gimmie and if you don't "measure up" - I.E: deliver whatever she demands and kiss her ass in the process, you're not a "good man" and she can sell that to any clown with a long robe on and a wooden hammer and take every thing you own and tell you to go pound sand and start over because she in ENTITLED to everything you own, your kids and your paycheck.. if she WANTS.

Tell ya what...

Get a really good job. Bust your ass 60 hours a week for about 20 years, get a home, furniture, a car or two, them marry me, give me children - as many as I want because my needs to validate my reproductive system are your responsibility - hand them over to me with no say at all in their upbringing, make sure I have enough money to manage, decorate and run our house... oops, MY HOUSE! I GAVE YOU CHILDREN!

Flush your sex life down the drain while I slather on a few stone of lard and maybe work 20 hours a week, part-time, so I can give that money to a babysitter, so that I don't feel disenfranchised and then wait for me to watch one too many talk shows where men sit around, sipping lattes, saying what a bunch of pathetic jokes women are, let me rub your nose in a few years of derision, passive aggressive BS and then finally, gimmie all your shit and move out.

Any takers?

Have women gotten raw deals from men?

Lord, yes... far too many.

Has trying to legislate it into a snake pit of money and mistrust and codified misandry helped?

Hahahahahahahahahah.

Have men gotten raw deals from women?

Honey?

It's seems the only deal left, sometimes.

Pass.

We still remember what love is.

And we know that if you love somebody, you don't heap unreasonable demands on them, devalue their dignity, play family (yours) politics with a relationship that was supposed to supersede the ones we forged as children and look for excuses to shove them aside and strip their assets, should you become disenchanted.

We're still up for the great adventure, but we'll be dirty sonsabitches if we're gonna turn over the ship, sails, cargo and crew for the privilege of having a co-captain.

Real men don't leave?

Real women don't shove them out of the way and cry "leaver!".

Put away the kid gloves, don't tell us what a favour you're doing us by not "emasculating" us, stop saying that you can prove you are God's gift because you've decided to not treat us too cheaply... That's redolent of the sort of pissy, uniquely female hubris that makes you about as attractive as a hyena.

In other words, if you ever start meaning the words they ask you to say, again, and we don't feel like we're being asked to join a chess game where all of our useful pieces have already been removed... when we no longer feel like you expect us to reduce ourselves to something that fills out the last few pages of your scrapbook, for your life, starring you... we'll know.

Until then, there's Ben and Jerry's, Oprah, Sex in the City DVD sets and mom will call, once a week, to make sure you're eating.

And that... was not our idea.

You'll never be able to legislate men into being required to stuff themselves into a prefab corner of your lives so that you can play Barbie, forever.

Get over it or just try and start liking men, again.

Lost in US said...

Bunner:

I think I may have misrepresented myself. I in no way think that I am all that and God’s gift to mankind. After reading all the previous comments about women over thirty being dried up and unattractive; and particularly all the unnecessary and salacious comments towards Woman with an Opinion, I was merely trying to preempt that particular rash of speculation. There are plenty of 40 somethings who are very hot and fertile-like Halle Berry (no, I’m no Halle Berry ;).

Maybe in a way I was trying for fairy tale life; but I certainly didn’t consider the man to be just an “accessory.” If I did I would have pulled the trigger a long time ago at Princeton or Harvard. I waited for what I thought was not only true love, but someone I could go the distance with. It took a long time to find, because the man I loved before for ten years was an alcoholic and didn’t want to drag me down with him (I have a “spaniel” heart).

I didn’t understand your comment about the 1,000 questions being like trying to win a race. I thought it was one route to, as you said, determining the person you wanted to sit at breakfast with for the rest of your life, to make decisions with, and the one who’ll help you find the way- before making the mistake of committing. As my divorce attorney said, “it was the 1,001 question you should have asked.”

I got over my materialism a long time ago after working personally for a famous Wall St. financier who subsequently brought down an entire company and destroyed many lives because of his greed and corruption. I left before the cataclysm and went to live in a convent raising abandoned babies for 7 months just to restore my soul. After that I said goodbye to NY and the Hamptons forever and live a modest, low profile life in the country.

Don’t forget I signed a pre-nup forfeiting rights to even be in his will. If he had decided to divorce me and my family’s business went under (it is extremely sensitive to our current recession), I would have had nothing.

But you are correct, I drew a dud. That’s the part that scares me the most about future commitment. The risk is enormous. But it wasn’t totally for nothing; I have a beautiful baby who is helping me through the pain and to rediscover life as I watch it through his eyes (at least until he gets hurt).

Woman with an Opinion:

Thank you for your comment and all your comments which I find very thoughtful. I agree that men underestimate how emotional it is for us- most of us do want love and the majority wind up getting hurt mentally and/or physically. I don’t think your comment was judgmental at all. I don’t live in fear of getting hurt myself; but it doesn’t work for me personally to involve a third party (a child) in a trainwreck they are not responsible for; which is why I don’t believe in premarital sex. I wish you the best of luck in finding your happiness.

HMH:

I will have to check out Raymond Chandler. Men are still my heroes- especially my father.


Think about it:
If everyone stopped procreating now, all of human suffering would end in less than 120 years. I guess you have to believe in eternity to see the hope in that.

Still Lost

Woman With An Opinion said...

Curiepoint said...

WWAO, there is a distinct difference between being ruled by fear, and not taking risks that carry a certainty of not only failing, but costing one their very life.--curiepoint

If one believes that marriage carries a certainty of failing or the cost of their lives, that would be living in fear. There are risks, but not a certainty of negative consequences.

Hmh said...

Oh, hi Lost In The US - since you ask for the source of my anger... hell, why not. I've been badly treated by women, and by our society, for being a man. My whole life.

Male? Whoops! Rapist, murderer, thief, abuser, criminal, liar, leaver, cheater, deadbeat dad, bore, bum, loser.

Demonised from birth for my gender."

I know you were addressing Lost, but I think that a bit of fairness is in order here. It is often stated that EB's don't necessarily hate all women, but feminist. The trifling actions of many women have made men cynical of women and/or marriage. But could it also be that men unfairly receive this demonization due to the actions of many men? That leads to another question: Is it fair to project negativity onto an entire group because of our bad experiences?

"Put away the kid gloves, don't tell us what a favour you're doing us by not "emasculating" us, stop saying that you can prove you are God's gift because you've decided to not treat us too cheaply... That's redolent of the sort of pissy, uniquely female hubris that makes you about as attractive as a hyena.--bunner

First I'd like to say that women and men are God's gift to each other IMO. Also, I'm not sure I see the offense in telling a man to be happy we won't attempt to emasculate him. After all, there are plenty of women who emasculate their men at every turn. He could have hooked up with one of them, no?

If I were married to a man who told me to stop complaining and be happy I have someone who is not a "leaver, cheater, abuser, etc", I'd think he were absolutely correct in his rebuke (assuming he is not any of those things). Why is it different when women say the same things?

Anonymous said...

Wow, what a lot of bitterness from supposedly "happy" people. Okay, some of you do sound happy. But most of you sound angry (if not vindictive to boot) or very, very bitter.

Look... here's the problem ... look at the Gaussians for men and women's intelligence. Men have fat tails, women do not. MOST WOMEN HAVE AN AVERAGE INTELLECT.

There are way more low-IQ men than women, which is most of the reason (not testosterone) that 10x as many men as women are in prison. (Another reason is that some men are born YY, and due to the low intelligence/lack of impulse control/aggression cocktail this embues, YY's land in prison very regulary.)

But ... here's the kicker ... there are also WAY more genius-level men than genius-level women. This is why "women don't create". Yes, they do, but there are a LOT less of them. (Now, if we're talking artistic talent, you might have a point: a hugely disproportionate number of the greatest artists of all time were gay men. Which doesn't help your argument because prenatal development of gay men is different from that of straight men. But I digress.)

If you are a man with a genius-level IQ, you are going to have a damned hard time finding an acceptable mate (unless you're gay)!

Now, the funny thing is, I came out of hard sciences. Almost every man I knew in that world was married. Women in hard sciences (except for the lesbians) tend to marry their PI's (eg Marie Curie, and this still goes on today) or maybe a fellow research student if their family is middle class and they don't have a problem waiting a while to have enough money to have kids. (Well, the Asians don't wait, but they seem to know how to raise kids cheaply; whites seem incapable of this.)

After leaving the hard science world, I have run into, at least online, these very intelligent, highly compensated, but unattached men. Btw, I have never met a physicist who was bitter about his marriage, complained about his wife, or was even divorced. Hmm. *But they were all married.* Something about "computer science" or "computer engineering" (software code-monkeyism is neither, except for the old farts, the "dinosaurs") seems to drive all women away.

So these high-IQ (but perhaps lousy personality?) men are frustrated in their teens and twenties as all the "bad boys" get all the women. They go on blogs (heck, check out Slashdot some time) whining that "women hate nice guys". Funny, all the genuinely nice guys I know are MARRIED. Maybe you aren't that nice. Anyway... eventually they make some money and start scoring big with women. It slowly dawns on them that every woman they attract is a gold-digger (not to mention kind of crazy and stupid).

It's kind of sad, actually. Hey, if I were in that situation, I would go abroad to find a wife. My wife has most of the attributes that foreign wives are praised for. She is cute, slender, loyal, emotionally supportive, excellent with a budget, caring, thoughtful, and did I mention she has two BA's and an MS? She also has a career that she is very, very good at. She is the star in her office.

Her only annoying trait is her knitting obsession. Now, she limits her purchases to about $30-50/mo., but she talks about knitting all the time. Hon, get on the phone with your girlfriends, because I just don't care! But I guess having a wife that knits you high quality sweaters and socks is not really a bad thing!

In summary, the flip side of not getting "hooked" into "slavery" in college (and, okay, it can be that) is that you also missed your best chance to find a woman with a very high IQ. Once they leave college they are gone! Either that, or they're like a former roomer of mine: absolutely fucking crazy psycho. I must have a self-protective instinct, because I liked her as a friend but was never in the slightest attracted to her. She was a one-way ticket to crazy town.

woman with an opinion: marrying a 16yo girl is not pedophilia
anonymous: a 16yo girl who marries will probably see that marriage dissolve in less than 5 years. She will have 2-3 babies and no prospects and she and her children will live in poverty for the rest of their lives. Remember what I said about the female Gaussian? Yeah. MOST WOMEN AREN'T STUPID*. That is why they protect themselves and their future offspring by delaying marriage past this point.

*-before you take this out of context, go read the first few paragraphs of my post. "not stupid" != "fucking geniuses"

Too lazy for a cite on that, but if you look at the divorce statistics and this time look at the age factor, you will find that teenagers' marriages fail with alarming frequency. Higher teenage marriage rates are much of the reason why divorce rates are so much higher in the South than, say, Massachusetts (where people cohabit for many years but wait to marry). Of course, the fundies said that legalizing gay marriage caused divorces. We all had a good laugh on that one.

If I were Sultan (or whatever), I would take a 16yo as a concubine, but there is no way I would marry some teenager whose brain hasn't finished developing. Who knows what you're going to get at the end of that. Pig in a poke.

bunner said...

I have no argument with over 40 attractive women.

I have very little interest in women under 35 because I find them to be staggeringly self-absorbed.

The point I was trying to make, hon, is all of this by the numbers bullshit is a joke.

I mean, you keep reading your resumè.

You know what you sound like to me?

Google Charles Dana Gibson, Gibson Girl.

Painfully patrician... all about where she is and what she's associated with... did I mention painfully patrician ?

Wall St. Robber Barons, the Cloister.

What you need, bunchkins, is somebody who gets their nails dirty, likes WHO YOU ARE... if you can find her under that stack of degrees and curriculum vitae entries and 24 karat Rolodexes - and wants to hang out with you because who you are, and what that makes you both feel when you're together makes him - and you - wait for it...




Happy.



Sadly, even if you find him you're just going to size him up on your scale of what does and doesn't matter and either reject or condescend to him because you, my dear, are about pedigrees.

Assuming any of what you stated is true.

And now, you are hard wired to want recognition for all that crap and I don't think you could have a cup of coffee with some guy without assessing his social status relative to yours and sticking at least 3 "Oh, look at my interesting life" buzzwords into the chat.

Of course, I could be wrong.

You could be God's gift, for all I know.

You could be some greasy schmuck from Iowa. Trolling, here. Who knows? I never met you.

I couldn't care less.

But if you are what you've said is on the tin, you're probably going to have to settle for somebody just as pretentious and designer label obsessed as you are and who also has their sense of self-worth tenuously tied to a series of ostensibly lofty accomplishments, passport stamps and bank statements.

And you can snipe at each other, endlessly, with tales of wonder and woe and accomplishments in a sea of one-upsmanship until you have to grit your teeth to sit at the same table.

Finance?

Then you know about sunk costs.

If you're going to blithely sashay through life, watching your every move as the masks fall to the floor, you risk looking around and noticing that there's no audience.

Go to a baseball game.

Buy a mustard smothered weenie, a 7.00 crappy beer and enjoy all the hooting plebes.

If you find something to cheer about without wondering if it will be on CNN, later, you may have something to offer, after all.

Then again, what do I know? I'm just a rock and roll singer.

But, to quote that jock in The Breakfast Club: "Okay, fine, but I didn't dump my purse out on the couch and invite everyone into my problems."

bunner said...

First I'd like to say that women and men are God's gift to each other IMO. Also, I'm not sure I see the offense in telling a man to be happy we won't attempt to emasculate him. After all, there are plenty of women who emasculate their men at every turn. He could have hooked up with one of them, no?

Let's look at that notion.

"Oh, dear, I COULD just metaphorically deball you! Oh, yes! For you see, I am a STRONG woman and tout le monde, a STRONG woman is one who can stick a man's nuts in a vice! Oh, yes, but I wont! No, not me. It's because I LOVE you, my little pookum ookum and mommy wont smash your widdle nuty utsies in a vice and make you look silly! Aren't I ever so caring"?

My immediate response, once I've finished laughing, is "Why don't you go take your vain, ridiculous, "look at what I'm doing for you by not using you to practice my backstabbing cunt skills on" ass up the street, perchance to find somebody who cares?"

Can you imagine a world where a man's strength was based on whether or not he could stick a roto rooter up a woman's flue and damage her ovaries?

Love is proactive.

It's not sitting around saying "I wont betray any sense of trust we have to try and make you feel shit upon and like I tore your nutsack off.. today".

Save that shit for the gossip fence.

For all of this "powerful woman" posing and the endless, faux power game cloying horsehit that goes along with the notion, it seems odd to me that women only seem to be able to achieve this sense of uniquely, feminine empowerment *snorT* if there's a man around to use as a fodder for the process.

Other women just tell them to blow it out their ass.

Maybe women aren't so dumb, after all. : )

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go complain to a woman that I feel disenfranchised, in some vague way and they should listen to how I feel about it, smugly smirk at some women executives and try and make them feel "threatened" and then demand their jobs and then maybe hit on them and ask them if they feel uneasy in the presence of a strong, sexually attractive equal who...

Ah, wait, no. Sorry, wrong schedule. I'm just gonna make a sandwich and watch a movie.

Wow.. where did I come up with that load of horseshit?

bunner said...

There is one paragraph I must take issue with, here.

forgive me.

I have a beautiful baby who is helping me through the pain and to rediscover life as I watch it through his eyes (at least until he gets hurt).

Bad. Wrong. Do not think for a moment that your baby is helping you through anything.

Don't use your mental snapshot of you saying "you are MY beautiful baby" as an emotional tourniquet.

"I believe that children are our future" is a load of saccharine malarkey from a very lame bit of pop chart fluff that has, as it's central theme, that particularly distasteful sort of narcissism that's only fulfilling if somebody is WATCHING you be narcissistic.

That beautiful baby... is not there to be a repository for your fears and hopes and to prop you up.

Stop that.

Children are not "our future".

WE are our future and it is incumbent upon us to make that future in a responsible fashion, as best we can, and to train, love discipline and enlighten our children and let them depend on US for emotional anchor points as we train and guide and encourage them to pick up a hammer and continue building that future with skills, resilience, and a genuine love of learning and working.

You don't have your baby to help you.

Your baby has you to help it.

It would ill serve your child to invest it with your sense of emotional disappointment and use it as an anchor in this often cruel world.

As for your prophecy that this child will eventually lose their ability to be a dispenser of crutches for your, as of late, ill wrought sense of fulfillment, as they will, surely, "get hurt".. that's disturbing.

Oh, hell no. Seriously.

Love, share, enjoy but it's a child and they need more than rainbow farting unicorns, fluffy bunnies and a skillset that consists of being nice to mommy when she needs it.

The Blasphemer said...

"Where have all the men gone? Well many have gone to prison, the unemployment line, etc. In fact, more women are entering colleges and universities than men are (here in the US that is). So what is a gal to do? Lament? No way. A gal has to realize that she may be the one with the power is she enters a relationship. Or she could stay happily single. Men could do the same, but what does that solve?"

"Or she could stay happily single"- if that was true, there wouldn't be billions of articles from female journalists complaining about being single.

And- men are doing the same. What does it solve? Higher life expectancy, less stress, more free time, more self-guidance, less drama- and we can use local women for cheap sportsfucking while we wait for a decent foreign girl to show up.

Do men complain about being single? No, men do not. Boys in highschool and freshman year of college might, but then they realize "Wait, I got better shit to do"

Yeah, I love this deal. :D

Western Women have fucked themselves. "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle". Yeah, ladies, have fun flopping on the dry lakebed that was once your youth and potential; us men are riding off into the sunset with a nice foreign lady on our brand new tandem that we saved up for because, incidentally, we weren't spending our money on you.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm - let's see.

Scenario 1 = Stay single and get all the comforts of marriage (a warm bed, sex, companionship) from an unending pool of morally casual (easy), "feminized" (do what the guys do with impunity), post-college "B" women desperate for commitment or....

Scenario 2 = Get married, have kids (if SHE CHOOSES - she may also choose to kill my kids in the womb and I don't have a vote), have her roll out of bed after 3 years saying she's "unfulfilled" or "scared of being abused" or "needs to go find herself", no-fault divorces me, boots me out of my house, gets custody of the kids and teaches them to hate me, takes my income and spends it on making herself into a very appealing "B" woman. Sounds great so far but there's more...

Facing financial ruin (I can lose 70% of my take home pay), if I can't afford to live on 30% and I REDUCE the payments, I get my license suspended and I go to jail. I can't even deduct my child support - but she can.

Guys, which one would you choose?
I can see you're wise also.

Ladies let me put it to you even more succinctly: if YOU wouldn't fly a commercial airline where a little more than 1 out of every two planes that left the ground crashed, and in 70% of the cases it was pilot error, don't expect us men to fly it either.

Gary Thomas
Austin, Texas

Anonymous said...

I'm a 42 year old divorced white man who isn't going to have anything to do with western women ever again. The risks are just too great to my sanity, my health, my finances and my future. This vapid bitch just doesn't get it. Ever since my teens, females treated me with contempt more often then not or disinterest because I was an average looking, unassuming guy who was different than they were. With girls and women treating me this way, why in the world should I want to be around them? Why should I approach them? In the past they just went psycho on me sometimes, so now I keep my distance and sometime fix them with a look akin to the muzzle of a gun. I'm no male model, but I am not a criminal, junkie or wife beater. I don't make a lot of money, and I definitely can't meet most women's insane expectations. Women are selfish, narcissistic, amoral, vain and in some cases, ruthlessly evil. I feel nothing but intense contempt for many younger women, who disgust me with their behavior, and avoid them accordingly.