Thoughts on this comment by @Overkill_Engine: www.forums.red/p/whereareallthegoodmen/325835/but_life_didn_t_work_out_that_way/7877072

Women shouldn't have been taking the historical ~80% chance to pass on their genetics just for being born with a working womb for granted.

When female supremacists and chivalrists talk about this, I chuckle because they don't consider the darwinistic consequences. Much like with AI, as humans become dependent upon a technology they wind up submitting to it. Men evolved separately to become smarter and stronger than women. In the animal kingdom, where women are often single mothers like cats, they retain their ability to hunt and, more importantly, bear offspring for their entire lives! Yes, a 16 year old housecat can still have litters of kittens.

Indeed, the "working womb for granted" is only for an effective 20 year window in that an eligible man is not going to prefer a 40 year old woman. It's like paying full market price for milk that expires tomorrow. That analogy hits them hard because they 'get it'. My wife will spend a full 5 minutes checking every bottle of milk for the freshest marked one. I'm not handsome but I had a child because I sired my daughter at age 50. So it's not all bad news for men.

Note that the majority of these women throughout history until recently didn't get to choose their mate. The dominant males chose mates or the woman's mate was chosen by a Patriarchal elder. Feminists rail on and on about rape. Wait, RAPE!!! They scream about it. Yet, that was the foundation of their pretty privilege of being protected and looked after. The vast majority of men had to "settle". In other words, men had their mate choice foisted upon us by circumstance. 80% of us do not get the pretty movie star and we learn to live with it. 80% of women "choose" the movie star, don't get him, so they're "raped"!

Imagine that existence. Imagine being in a continual state of misery because you're not a movie star or married to one because that's the life you "chose" but it was denied to you.

Keep in mind that eventually, many women didn't have children such as spinsters. Their parents weren't going to fund a bastard child and these women were unable to find providers. Many of them were ugly or genetically deformed and no man would provide for them. The welfare state, sadly, funds these women's lifestyles and we live with the consequences. Combined with a state that no longer executes criminals but holds them and even permits them "conjugal visits" produces future psychopaths.

Fun story. I knew at a company they were laying off all the Americans to outsource so... I decided to be a gangster. I probably played this song every other day. Here's one thing I did. I CAREFULLY avoided doing something to get me fired for cause. So get this, a dickhead executive said that although there was no "white male" employee groups, I was free to attend ANY one I wanted.

So I attended the women's employee group meeting.

Damn it feels good to be a gangster!

I asked a fellow Pollak to go with me and I saw the look of sheer terror on his face. So I went alone. I was the only white guy there. A white male and Asian male director was leading it. They had the cheapest ass pizza out so I grabbed 3 slices and a half bottle of diet coke and sucked it down. Then I listened.

The women were absolutely barely conscious. I mean, they could barely speak during the meeting as if they were all abused housewives or something. Absolutely astonishing.

So I then just said who I was at the meet and greet. That I didn't know where else to attend.

About 2 weeks later I got called into a surprise meeting and I knew what that meant. I was prepared and...

They were doing layoffs. I got a severance package. A GREAT one.

One of the best days of my entire life.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2iErckaIl8

@Typo-MAGAshiv These issues are all discussed in the George Price theorem as well as Greek philosophy. I am not espousing a particular viewpoint as Truth, but rather just bouncing ideas.

Yes. What you're getting out of it is ensuring that your genes live on, and the pride you see in her growing up.

Interesting story: My brother and his wife adopted a Chinese baby girl and then naturally conceived a daughter. The Chinese girl is very Christian and devout and goody-two-shoes mother of 2 so far and the genetic daughter is covered in tats and living with a Chad, no kids, and just "having fun" for what remains of her 20's. It's fascinating.

As discussed previously, "hypergamy" is the notion of a one side must win more than the other one. One can ONLY be a friend/wife of someone when they get MORE than the other one out of it. A few funny aspects of that similar to what sociopaths go through:

In the case of the British single woman recently, she gripes about how tough living alone is but likely would not want to marry a man whose shorter than her, and earns slightly less, even if "transactionally", she'd be better off.

To me, what's best about marriage and friendship is sure, I have friends who earn less than me and I pick up the tab more often, and my blonde wife certainly gets more out of this than me, but overall, I'm better off with them. It's in the nature of our humanity in that living in a log cabin by ourselves is worse than living in a society.

@Typo-MAGAshiv I use language such as "as some would say that all relationship are transactional" only because I respect others to disagree with that assessment. I suppose I could have just not bothered to put it that way.

Let's try it this way: Do we charge our friends to be friends with us? Do we expect them to engage in some quid-pro-quo transaction? Nonetheless it is transactional and we've all had friends who weren't pulling their weight or were too lopsided we had to cut loose.

Regarding The Big Lebowski and "Does anyone respect the rules?" I meant that in the context of how women play the shaming ploy of men being "transactional" while they themselves then are transactional. The problem is that I think when I wanted to insert that clip into the conversation, the URL was put at the top of the post/comment? So the context got screwed up. Oh well.

It's not just me coming to grips with relationships being transactional. Marriage vows themselves actually imply a form of commitment that transcends transactions: "For better or worse, in sickness and in health". Bare minimum transactionalism: One shouldn't be a doper, or abuser, or so on but beyond that, it's a feeling of being a member of a family.

Let's try this if you could be so kind: Is my relationship with my daughter transactional?

For the record, and this won't surprise you, whatever it takes for her welfare I'll jump under a bus in a second.

I love this scene in Breaking Bad: "What does a man do, Walter?" youtu.be/9-eQU4kw4Q4?t=102

But yet, I think our gynocentric society has set the bar low for "woman"hood as women think that's only a man's job. Don't they know about Scarlet, the stray Calico cat, who saved her kittens from a fire and burned almost to death? She has been memorialized as a hero. That's what we used to romanticize about women. That's what we idolized them as. Now, they're exploiting their kids "Give me what I want otherwise my kids will starve?"

I bring this up because my wife and I differ in our philosophy on parenting: I am conditional with my child FOR HER SAKE. I tell her: "I love you absolutely, but out of that love, I MUST punish you for misbehavior FOR YOUR OWN GOOD. EVEN IF, and PARTICULARLY, when you annoy me. If daddy and mommy want to relax and you need to go to bed, do as we say, Respecting others, including and particularly us, is the step towards adulthood."

So when you said I struggle with that, I want you to know that I understand that not spoiling my child matters greatly to me. I hope I'm raising her to be a decent woman and human being that would set a standard for what we want women to be.

In response to: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cd6unpM_5YA @Typo-MAGAshiv

Posting here rather than WAATGM

I think we've normalized female entitlement to the point that most can't even call out the basics. Someone here said "I don't mind buying women dinner".

Well, I do. Even though I'm often happy to pay for dinner for friends, if I was always paying for dinner and I saw it was an expectation, I'd notice and "mind". Good friends wouldn't exploit me like that. Men often FIGHT to pay for dinner not because of bullshit pride or something like that, but decency and honor: The understanding: "I am your friend, and I want you to see it."

When women expect to be "pursued" and "play hard to get" and men engage in some form of transactionism to be with them, there's got to be two sides. Imagine if you paid to enter a brothel and the prostitute "wasn't in the mood."

As some would argue, ALL relationships are transactional, when done in a healthy manner, but women like to try to pretend they aren't so they can scam men. "Pay because you're a gentleman and if I'm in the mood, we can have sex. Tee hee!" Friendship is one of the few relationships where it's not directly transactional: Just being kind and supportive to each other without "hypergamy" where one side "profits" more than the other and equality is expected and even enforced.

Think about it: yes, friendship is transactional but it's also monitored to be fair. My cat brought me a live mouse, to my bed, out of love and earned trust. He didn't try to ration or meter out affection to me or deny it to me altogether once he "had me hooked". Heck, my current cat loves me more than any other member of the household because I "get" her more than anyone else. We have conversations in how she expresses a mood and I respond to it.

Brother and Tovarische: Without MINDfullness, we cannot achieve contentment particularly in era when CARElessness is costly.

"I spend my life trying not to be careless." youtu.be/6SosMCZwzhE?t=51

@Typo-MAGAshiv Here's my take on this and so-called "marital rape" or "duty sex is rape": Men ENJOY sex. We don't have guilt about it. We don't INSIST it being transactional otherwise we'd be "sluts". If we slept with someone we find unattractive, but we were drunk and they took advantage, we aren't traumatized provided there's no harm done (pregnancy or STD). For this reason, despite all the shit men go through for sex, we can at least enjoy it without shame.

I would add that men enjoy being around women without necessarily being compensated for doing so. That's something I looked for in my wife: That she has platonic male friends, uncles, a good relationship with her father where she respects men overall.

So entitlement thinking by women may ultimately put them into a whore's guild where they only associate with Johns for the most part when they want something from them and regard work as a chore, like most of us do with work, and their attraction to only the hottest men is a function of status seeking.

Women associate some benefit with sex as "consent" and a lack of benefit as "rape". It doesn't occur to them that they can have sex that's not fully pleasurable and consent to it like a man isn't enslaved if his wife asks him to take out the trash, and he would prefer to watch the ball game, but she nags him and he does it anyway.

And heck, the best sex my wife had was when my wife gave in and did duty sex particularly since women ENJOY being dominated by men and find too much "consent" beta such as "may I ask for consent to kiss you?" nonsense on college campuses in the 1990's.

As I've written before, many modern women are so feminist/entitled and whorish their oxycontin/dopamine sex centers are burned out like a stripper pretending to care about some guy's day to try to get an extra $20 tip for a lap dance.

@Vermillion-Rx Back 40 years ago, I recall them mocking me as a loser not "getting with the times" and "you won't get laid with that attitude!" and one in particular, in the early days of USENET, wound up getting a woman knocked up and paying child-support for a kid he never saw. In other words, they thought they were selling out for a benefit, but instead they just wound up selling out.

Nonetheless, back 40 years ago, being a bluepill beta largely was a 3:2 odds of success: You could get married and had a 2/3 chance of not getting divorce raped AND a 1/2 chance the marriage wouldn't be a miserable "happy wife/happy life!" subjugation. I'd say back in the mid-80's, about 1/2 of blue pill boomers were happy with their lives. That's an utter dart-board statistical guess but let's go with it: Nobody cared about the 1/2 of other men that were shafted by this system. Even the blue pill guys would mock them "hehehe, Who Hurt You? Crawl in a hole and die like a man, loser!" Our society treated, and still treats, its men like disposable trash.

I went into college naive thinking that the left was about "inclusivity" and making the world into a socialist paradise via "taxing the rich" but within a year I realized they were saying I was the rich guy, the oppressor, but also a loser to be tossed out. Basically, a scapegoat.

It was sort of an IQ test to see how long it takes someone to figure out that the blue pill they were taught doesn't jibe with reality.

I remember something similar when we were kids. Does any zoomers now have childhood memories of believing in Santa Claus? Like for real, really thinking that Santa existed? I did and many kids kid from age 5 to about age 9 or so. In my case, I got "red pilled" by older kids not out to help me, but they got to feel better about how they knew something I didn't. They liked crushing kids' dreams. I wonder if zoomers would even think such a thing now that a smartphone will tell them otherwise in a moment.

So anyway, I tried tell my blue pilled friend age 9 about it and he refused to believe me. He had all kinds of rationalizations for Santa Claus such as Jesus giving him eternal life and so forth. I didn't want to crush his dream so I let it go, but I never found out the moment he abandoned the childhood nonsense.

Think about it: It's a fascinating exercise: Parents LIED to their children and told them about, well, a heretical supernatural figure who was like Jesus who rewarded virtuous children and then the kids gradually figured out their parents had told them a white lie.

Shouldn't that have been a life lesson to maybe, well, be a bit more skeptical about social beliefs and trends? That maybe just because all the other kids believe in Santa doesn't make him true and that might apply to other stuff?

Heck, I doubt many other kids I knew ever looked back upon that time and wonder to themselves about it. They just went on with their lives and hoped for the best. I overthink things sometimes.