Gesundheit2

Well, I don't know about western women. I know the women that got divorced in my country, and the reason for some of them was jealousy and suspicion of cheating husband, and other ones because their husbands were physically abusing them. I don't think women can suddenly become a completely different species in a different country, but hey believe whatever you want.

What's the equivalent of that for men pursuing better jobs?

What exactly are these goals that motivate women to divorce? To get stigmatized? To destroy their children's childhood? To hurt their husbands?

@Devin Numbers could mean anything. What's your point?

Assuming this is largely correct, once you've identified the problematic demographic, avoid it and you'll be fine.

If they were selfless and unconditionally loving, they wouldn't take it personally and therefore wouldn't get hurt. This goes both ways. Some men who are "players" leave their very loyal girlfriends, so how is it even possible to make such generalizations about how love works depending on gender? What about trans people and bisexuals and other gender identities? Are they selfish or selfless? It's too silly to discuss this.

Absolutely, which explains perfectly why every male on earth faps to the fattest ugliest oldest grannies like 7 times a day (at least) while still burning with selfless giving desire and sacrificing love. If only those grannies knew how much we love them. But alas, they're just pragmatic opportunist soulless robots. They don't care about us and all of our wasted sperm.

Men remain as bad as they were, and women simply start waking up to it, cuz of feminism and cuz of aging/"maturing". Women are not opportunists by nature.

Well, at least this one isn't very abstract. I mean you could probably easily get a very solid and accurate sense of what holism might mean in any given scenario. On the most basic level, it means try to understand and let go of resistance to the opposite perspective. That's not the case with the masculine and feminine dichotomy, especially if you're not very familiar with the metaphysical connotations and their reflections in Jungian psychology. These terms are ripe for projection and misunderstanding, and they can easily confuse the layman, especially when they're used in politics as gender war talking points.

No, dude. Women don't naturally like getting divorced just because it's fun. Men are simply terrible partners. But feminism is teaching women to raise their standards, so they don't put up with that anymore, so it's causing them to get divorced. Feminism is a bad solution for a terrible problem. Just because feminism is bad does not automatically mean men are great. I did not expect this much bias from you, you always seemed level-headed.

The reason behind the divorces is feminism. I live in a third world country, and basically all the women that I know that have been infected by feminist propaganda are divorced. They want to take their power back, so that's what they get. Educated women can afford a divorce more because they can survive without a husband relatively easier than uneducated women. Their jobs are more paying, and they're usually from higher socio-economic levels. Don't assume that the divorces mean there is an immediate replacement, or even a replacement at all.

It's called hypergamy. I don't agree that this is the case. Hypergamy is almost exclusively true with gold diggers, but other than that, it's not really the case. Most people resist change as much as they can. Nobody just simply quits their current job if they're promised a better one. There are serious consideration to take, and serious consequences to be aware of. But yes, don't take it personally. That is wise.

This thread is a good example on how your worldview warps your perception. If you believe women are oppressed, you will think that the problem with men is the general lack of femininity. If you believe in the red pill and that kind of stuff, you will think that the problem is the lack of masculinity. I personally believe in fruit, so obviously the problem is the lack of vegetables. Although, there is a chance we are all saying the same thing in different lingos.

I want to be hidden and seen, both at the same time. Like, I wanna do so much good that everyone can't stop talking about me behind my back with reference to all my good deeds. I want all the girls to want to be with me, and all the boys to want to be like me. I love being praised for my good deeds, but I don't like having people complimenting me and saying good stuff to me directly. It just feels awkward and embarrassing, and some people use that as manipulation, anyway. And while I can play it cool, I still prefer it the other way, where my story is so great and obvious that it needs not to be told, cuz the hero of the story is here. But I know that cannot happen. It's an unrealistic expectation. At best, I could polarize people into some who love me and others who hate me. It's just the nature of humanity. You cannot please everyone, even if you try to, and you shouldn't. I'm not talking about pleasing people. I'm talking about expressing myself fully. Some people will like my expressions, and others will not.

Still

I'm sorry. I don't understand what you just said.

It doesn't. There isn't a causational relationship there, despite the apparent correlation. The correlation is due to other factors, like corruption and lack of governmental control, not due to gun control. If everyone was allowed to own guns, it would get many times worse.

It's funny you said this because you cannot possibly control your daughter since she "has a voice". So she will go and have sex with all the Tates of the world until she realizes the wisdom in your advice from direct experience. There is, indeed, nothing stronger or manlier than the inability to protect your daughter.

Both. But it's easier to control gun traffic than people using the guns. Unless you're the ammunation

Well, that doesn't mean much. Chances of being wrong are still the same, exactly 50%.

Again, just because you or some Buddhist feel strongly about some idea does not make it true. It's still speculation on the same level, and neither of you can prove nor disprove anything. If you have any evidence, bring it forth.

You don't know that. Buddhists believe that while that might seem to be happening, it's only one swing of the infinite pendulum swings. So, from the Buddhist perspective, you're taking this one minor change to be the absolute. So your understanding is actually short of theirs. Buddhists believe in impermanence of form, and you believe otherwise (typical new age type of belief). And the only reason either of you think you're right is because you feel strongly about it, because you accessed that thought in an altered state. But neither of you can prove anything. It's just speculation.

Statistics are irrelevant. You're just one person and you could be on either sides. You can be with the 60% or the other 40%. What actually matters is where you are, not what the stats are.

Oh, man! It is Good to be awake!