So What Happened to That "Do Women Love Men" Thread?

[Anonymous 14]

Pedal, run, row wrote:

Joe Bauers wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

Keymaster wrote:

If this is the case, could one argue that a relationship is entirely based on ones ability to maintain a stable revenue in a world where the financial markets are rapidly changing ?

You did an excellent breakdown KM.
TO me, the above section (his final conclusion) is the most troubling.

It clearly places the onus on earning love (the actual existence of female love being another debate entirely) and a successful relationship on the man and his ability to earn at a level to satisfy the ever changing, whimsical expectations of the female. Thus if the relationship fails, we must reasonably conclude that it is the man who is to blame for failing in this regard.
It is also completely inaccurate at its very core, as I kept trying to point out by asking him if he supposed that above average or high earning men were immune to divorce, failed relationships etc.

I welcome him, you or Joe B, or anyone else for that matter to correct where I am wrong.

The answer would be yes, in the current Gynocentric paradigm the onus is on the man to produce what the female expects/demands or she in turn will take the next best or better offer. So if you are to play the game the way it is set up, you will always lose, hence MGTOW. Do not play the game. And certainly do not play the game according to someone else’s rules i.e. Society’s rules, that being the Female’s rules and the State’s rules. If you are going to play at all play by YOUR OWN RULES. The amount of money a man makes is not relative to the equation, unless of course he has the most money on the planet and cannot be beat in the game of potential better offers as there is no operational threshold that guarantees a woman’s satisfaction.

I guess that is where we will always differ.

I am MGTOW, but I will never concede that it is ok for women to operate on pure hypergamic urges. That it is justified for them to destroy and divorce rape men because they feel like it, and that men who do want relationships just have to suck it up and play their evil game.
It isn’t logical, it isn’t justified, and it is not supportable in anyway.

I make no concessions to that of a broken game and the broken mind’s of females, this is just seeing it for what it is then deciding to not play by those rules.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Jackinov wrote:

The grammar and way of wording things used however, was definitely ambiguous enough to be mistaken for baiting.

Easy to see too. The middle part, “could one argue” …..

Could one argue that a man’s ability to maintain a relationship is often based on one’s financial ability to maintain a lifestle compartively equal to the class that the woman aspires to associate with?

A man would not argue that.
But a hot chick would.

—

Notice how Joe and Pedal (above) are also “arguing” it in a way.

• Joe ( and everyone ) already knows the deal from the gynocentric/female perspective that its socially acceptable.
• Pedal re-inforces from the MGTOW perspective that it’s simply not.

The OPs question above is asked from the gyno perspective.

Jackinov makes an excellent point.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Pedal, run, row wrote:

Sounds great.

hopefully in the future he can defend, clarify, answer, correct or simply concede any points of discussion that meet with disagreement.

I have PM’d the member a link to this thread for his interest.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

Keymaster wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

Sounds great.

hopefully in the future he can defend, clarify, answer, correct or simply concede any points of discussion that meet with disagreement.

I have PM’d the member a link to this thread for his interest.

The Tuna?

I am kidding!

Seriously, outstanding as always, except when I disagree with you… 🙂

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

Pedal, run, row wrote:

The Tuna?

I want to be clear, in case ghost reads this: I do not think Ghost is a tuna… mostly.
I mean there is a chance, but probably not.

Much more likely that he is a dweeb, nerd, dickhead, spaz, geek, blood or wastoid, than he is a tuna.

He is probably a righteous dude.

🙂

[Anonymous 14]

Yea, once again it is a matter of context that was confused. The OP is posting from the fact that it is indeed a Gynocentric system we live in, and therefore, yes, the onus is put on men. He in no way blames men when asked, yet was continued to be attacked based on what was said OUT OF CONTEXT.

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

Keymaster wrote:

The member expressed that he didn’t “feel” welcome or at ease for asking the question and wanted to delete and start over at a later time. Said he was very disappointed.

If he “didn’t feel welcome” and was “disappointed”, then why even consider starting over at a later time???

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

Keymaster wrote:

Do most women actually love a man for who he is, or, is it rather the lifestyle, or potential lifestyle, that the a man creates the object that is loved ?

Nobody loves ANYONE for WHO THEY ARE. If that were true, nobody would ever fall out of love!! The person could get fat, ugly, broke, mean, abusive and you’d still love them since you love them for “who they are“!! LOLOL B.S.!!!

Could one argue that a man’s ability to maintain a relationship, (not that one should necessarily want one) is often based on one’s financial ability to maintain a lifestle compartively equal to the class that the woman aspires to associate with, with a subsequent departure if this lifestyle is not maintained ?

Sure – if a man is dumb enough to enter a relationship , his ability to do so will be based on his ability to CONFORM WITH THE BITCHES DEMANDS (“maintain lifestyle equal to class the woman aspires to…”), which makes the “relationship” a master-slave partnership.

If this is the case, could one argue that a relationshp is entirely based on ones ability to maintain a stable revenu in a world where the financial markets are rapidly changing ?

Sure, but again – you’re talking about a MASTER-SLAVE PARTNERSHIP. We might as well be talking about what it takes for a man to maintain a refrigerator full of rotten food. Why bother?

[Author]

Posts