The 'Elvis Double Standard'

[Anonymous 54]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

C. Just don’t get it yet.

Correct. It’s just that I take myself seriously & therefore am selective about who/what I associate myself.
Added an intro btw ty.

So are we.

[Anonymous 25]

coming in as a first topic criticising of double standards is likely to result in this:

[BlacqueJacqueShellacqueParticipant 6890]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

C. Just don’t get it yet.

Correct. It’s just that I take myself seriously & therefore am selective about who/what I associate myself.
Added an intro btw ty.

Thank you.

I am sorry if I offended you but we are careful here to protect our community. I hope you can understand and appreciate this.

Welcome Villian.

Your first +1 is from me.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22524]

You do not preach double-standard hypocrisy to the victims of hypocrisy and double-standards.

This newbie smells of tuna.

[MACHOParticipant]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

Correct. It’s just that I take myself seriously & therefore am selective about who/what I associate myself.

I am repeating myself but a real introduction of yourself in the introductions section please. Otherwise it’s very likely all you will hit on here is a Concrete Wall!.?

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[Anonymous 54]

Hahhaj.

[MACHOParticipant]

Faust For Science wrote:

You do not preach double-standard hypocrisy to the victims of hypocrisy and double-standards.
This newbie smells of tuna

Unfortunately it does ? ? ?

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[GrumpyParticipant]

I’m pretty certain both songs are actually by Dion/ Dion & the Belmonts.
The Wanderer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wanderer_(Dion_song)

Run Around Sue
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaround_Sue

Anyhow, all either song/concept does is reinforce that hypergamy has been a long standing issue and that women confuse/equate the actions of a single unattached man as justification for her to cheat while in a relationship.

There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it

[Anonymous 54]

If something seems odd, picture a woman saying it.

Does it make more sense that way.

We shall see.

[MACHOParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

If something seems odd, picture a woman saying it.
Does it make more sense that way.
We shall see

That’s the way I do it too.

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[Anonymous 54]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

Ty Macho & Awakened. I found the Introduction part & yes, that helps.
As for the assumption by others that I’m female because I’m saying something critical:
Society can’t/won’t see an individual as just that. We’re all seen as part of some political category i.e. AWALT, in this case male gender. It is therefore not only my right but my duty to be critical of my fellow males, especially fellow MGTOW, as I will be judged by their actions/behavior.

Oh man..!!!my fellow males…hajajha

This oightto be good! Hahah

This whole paragraph is f~~~ing ridiculous!!!

[BlacqueJacqueShellacqueParticipant 6890]

@Villian, what we’d like you to do is start a new thread. Start it under the topic (located on the right side of your screen) INTRODUCTIONS.

Members will respond to your story. What brought you here? Sorry for potentially jumping the gun. Unfortunately, I think the jury is still out.

It’s skepticism.

Since most of us have been f~~~ed hard, we’re skeptical.

Make a new thread under the heading “Introductions”.

We’ll read.

[Unwilling VillianSpectator 9]

Tyvm for all responses especially the intelligent ones who actually adressed the topic, but I really shouldn’t be doing this @ work. Need to get back on patrol.

[Anonymous 54]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

We’re all seen as part of some political category i.e. AWALT,

Oops!! Jajja

You must be as f~~~ed up as I am Sister!! Hahah

[Greg HondaParticipant 6406]

This is the clip I needed for Manipulated Man.

I found it now so here go’s

It's Time to get Wise

[Anonymous 54]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

Tyvm for all responses especially the intelligent ones who actually adressed the topic, but I really shouldn’t be doing this @ work. Need to get back on patrol.

Yes. You run away now!!!

Tuna poinys for every one but me.

Party on Boys!!!

[StormtrooperParticipant 1080]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

Tyvm for all responses especially the intelligent ones who actually adressed the topic, but I really shouldn’t be doing this @ work. Need to get back on patrol.

Still waiting on that intro.

Having a girlfriend is like owning a gun, the longer your around it, the more you want to shoot it.

[MACHOParticipant]

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

Yeah, if your first order of business upon joining is not an introduction, but your need to sort us out on a matter you feel is unfair to women… F~~~ right off.

I don’t care if Tuna or not, just like the guy that needed to sort us out on our Jew problem, you can just GYOW somewhere else.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Unwilling Villian wrote:

My question/point: Is this a double standard?

Yes it is, and women PERPETUATE that double standard.

Heres how it works……

In order for a man to be promiscuous and enjoy many sexual partners, it requires any or all of the following :

• many strict years at the gym / strict diet & self discipline.
• Business and financial success
• Fame
• Rock Star
• Political power
etc.

In order for a woman to be promiscuous and enjoy many sexual partners, it requires only the willingness.

Theres your “double standard”.

It is perpetuated by women so it will never go away, because they don’t want it to. As long as a man is required to achieve those things and they hinge “stud” on those factors , he will GAIN “respect” for having more sexual partners.

And as long as the standards for women to put out are at the basement level — she will not.

BlacqueJacqueShellacque wrote:

“A key that can open many locks is useful; a lock that can be opened with many keys is not.”

Unwilling Villian wrote:

…so you’re saying it’s not a double standard due to the differences between male and female sexuality?

No.

He’s saying it IS. And don’t worry, women don’t have a problem with “the double standard” as much as their pretend for reasons I just explained.

They CREATE the double standard.

If women didn’t broadcast “where are all the guys who make $500K a year? He should make AT LEAST that much to date me. Don’t contact me if you make less than $100K”. . . . . then there would be no “respect” for “studs”.

Women elevate the “stud status” to such phenomenal heights, that they inadvertently LOWER the respect for women who are promiscuous. To get rid of this, women would have to lower their criteria for dating and mating and make sex “no big deal”.

But they will not do that.
Hence the “double standard”.

THE MESSAGE:

“Men should have money/power/fame/success.
Women don’t need to bring anything to the table at all.”

There’s your double standard.

To obliterate the double standard, here’s what need to happen. Very attractive women would have to compete MUCH harder for average dick. They would have to be slim, gorgeous, well behaved etc. and “bitches” would not be tolerated. You get the idea.

Pigs will fly out of your anus before that happens, because they want MEN to compete fall over themselves for a “chance” at getting some tail. Not the other way around. Women have managed to convince themselves that being a bitch is the correct way to keep a man around.

A woman can be as dumb as a bag of hammers, have no goals, aspirations, no business success, no fame, no power, no university degree, brains – or even a killer physique – to score many sexual partners. And they PREFER IT THAT WAY.

They would have to WORK on themselves – like a MAN does.

As long as women don’t need to do anything except lay back and throw their legs in the air, they don’t get “respect” for sleeping around. They set this standard themselves.

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

[Author]

Posts