mr_engineer

See?! They're just words. You're not clarifying what they mean in practice. The dictionary will just have more theory. Not practical information. You're just saying that 'it has nothing to do with reality'. When it does. And I have proof that it does. It's the rational conclusion from what you did say. That's not the answer to my question. What propaganda? It's just logic.

No, it's not clear to me. 'Abuse' and 'exploitation' are just words in this context. I don't remember you clarifying what these words practically mean. When you tell me that you're not hating men, I don't believe you. Because you're using words like 'abuse' and 'exploitation' willy-nilly. Do you even know what it means?! Isn't this misogynistic, though?! Aren't you insulting the women in those other countries, that they're unable to deal with men on an equal footing, that they're these 'damsels in distress that need to be saved'? Making a providing-commitment, which the third-world countries value and expect from men in general, is not the same as 'buying her'. If anything, he will have Western individualistic values and that will be a gift to her, compared to the more oppressive society that she's living in. If you say that 'those third-world women don't know what they're getting themselves into, because they're not conditioned to be independent, and that's internalized misogyny of their culture that the passport-bros take advantage of', that's misogynistic on your part. You're insulting their level of maturity and wisdom when it comes to making life-changing decisions. And, what you're also saying is that 'female independence' is an absolute good and that anyone who disagrees is immature. What if, they don't actually believe that? What if they believe in 'interdependence' more than 'independence'? And, what if, when they make it work and they see you complaining about the situation, they think that you're the one being immature? That 'independence' doesn't actually work well for women, because women don't have that level of physical strength and testosterone? And that it's totally fine to let men do the providing? Name one person who actually cares about your opinion on this. Whose life actually gets affected by your opinion on this. If you can't, this proves that the fact that this is masturbation isn't just 'my opinion', it's the objective truth. You said 'usually'. Strong word. This is true. I don't agree with the solution either. But, I will defend their right to give it a shot and see how it goes. The way the biggest stakeholders see this, is that those third-world women are beating the first-world women in the competition to get these men. And now, after losing the competition, you're sour-graping them. I mean that in the case of love, no matter what you do to 'earn' love, if the other person chooses to not love you, if they choose to not consider your best-interests, there's nothing you can do about it. Whether you're loved or not by someone else, is purely their choice. (Even if that someone else is yourself, in the case of self-love). If they are a loving human being, they will choose to love you. And, if they're not, they won't make that choice, no matter what you do.

Then you need more observations. Your loss. In theory, there's nothing wrong with disagreement. In practice, though, what disagreement practically means, is war. If I say 'This is my phone' and you disagree with me and you say 'No, this is my phone!', that's not very loving. Replace the word 'phone' with 'rights' and we get our discussion. You're basically saying that 'men shouldn't have the right to go and marry someone from a certain country with a certain background, that should be considered abuse. And that I, as a random woman, should have the right to 'defend her' from who I consider 'abusive'.' And what I'm telling you is, that that's not, in fact, your right, that they have the right to do what they're doing. Which is, creating the relationship that they want. I choose to leave it. I'd rather not entertain a man-hating ideology. And many times, it's not the case. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I have female friends, women of color, who love white men. It's too obvious. Then stop with this narrative. If you're talking about individuals and not the group, don't hurt the image of the group and deal with the individuals on their own. My point was that there is no point to coming here and mentally masturbating about something that you can't directly affect. Nobody who actually matters, no actual stakeholder cares about your opinion on this issue. Yeah, dysfunctionality is the norm in those relationships. Now, you're 'normalizing' it, you're saying that it's the norm. And you're shaming the majority of those men and calling them toxic. That's the man-hate we're talking about, right here. Tell me one thing - why would the concerned women sign up for it if it were so dysfunctional?! Do keep in mind that the communities in third-world countries are much more tight-knit, that most of the world has PTSD from colonialism and they are weary of white men coming and taking their women. And that the vetting-process can be much harder in third-world countries because the family-unit makes or breaks these societies. Why are you wasting your time talking about these 'low-quality men', then?! Get a life! I talked about 'importance' or 'significance'. And that has nothing to do with money. And, like money, even significance has to be earned. And, 'love' and 'significance' are different things. You can buy neither. But, love doesn't take work, significance does.

There are a bunch of challenges that come in starting a business, that can be broadly classified into 3 parts : Finding a product-market fit Building a brand around this product-market fit Having a USP and having it click with your niche It is so much work to get this handled that most people just don't go through the pain of doing it.

Because you said that 'the only thing that matters is whether men hurt and exploit women or not'. That's what you're reducing men down to - predators and abusers. That's operating from a place of fear. If you learn, sure! To love something is to recognize yourself in it. So, if you recognize yourself in people that hate you, you will stop getting triggered by it. Love brings people closer, fear separates people further apart. Feminine women operate from this understanding. It creates a gender-ego and it makes your gender-identity more important than being a loving human being. You're in battle against the opposite sex. You want to 'call BS' on men's preferences. Why are you making preferences a moral right/wrong? Why are you making it a part of your anti-male agenda?! They're not doing anything to you, they're minding their own business. Let them be! The whole 'exploitation' thing is a big assumption. If you ask most of those women whether they value their men or not, they'll say 'yes'. If you deny that, saying that 'they were pressured into saying that', I don't know what to tell you. That's classic confirmation-bias for your anti-male agenda. \ Where did I use the word 'feminism' on this topic?! I didn't say anything about feminism. That's not the point. I said that this attitude towards 'passport-bros' is man-hating. You're hating on men for having preferences. Nobody asked you whether you do. Cuz you're not a part of this conversation. It's those men and their happy wives. If they're happily married, why do you want to come in and regulate their marriage for them?! You use a lot of strongly negative language towards men who are minding their own business and not giving a damn. So, I thought it was important to remind you that you're not entitled to them choosing you over those women. And by the way, men do not get told that 'our needs and opinions are very important'. It takes a lot of work for us to earn that. I'd rather you focus on doing that than dissing on happy couples.

To you, this is the only thing that matters. The reason for that is that you're operating from a place of fear. And that's not feminine. Cuz feminine women operate from a place of love, which is the opposite of fear. This is not 'female solidarity'. There are women out there who don't hate men, who aren't all anti-male. We're talking about dating those women. Your 'female tribalism' is not welcome as it's an obstacle. For men and for women who love men. If you want to be anti-male, your opinion on how men date isn't based on reality. You deserve no credibility on this topic. And, one final point - there are other people in this world who have different agendas, different needs. And, if you're not willing to acknowledge their importance, you are being narcissistic. Other people also exist. The world does not revolve around your needs, your wants. Grow up.

The game is, in fact, rigged. And this is because feminism makes women less sexy, less desirable long-term. More masculine, less feminine. The independence-thing is really screwing up dating. Dating is becoming ever more competitive for men because under the existing system, women want richer and richer men. Because it's only the rich men who can give them a lifestyle that they can't already afford on their own. This is not only because the economy is harder, it's also because of feminism. You literally cannot win with the average 'modern woman' for this reason. So, now, men get two options. They either have to compete in this competitive dating-marketplace, or they change the rules completely. And, by changing the rules, I mean, change the definition of 'relationship'. The gender-roles will have to change. And, for the new system to work better, what you have to do is you have to find your authentic masculine expression. Then, you have to figure out the qualities you want in a woman to complement you. Then, you design a system that works for you. This is how you bypass the competition that redpillers talk about. And, the catch is that she should have a proper understanding of masculinity and femininity, she should have a relationship-vision that she's working towards and it should align with yours. This is why you look into dating New-Age women. The average 'modern woman' is too 'independent' to know what 'love' even means. The ones who have any idea about it, are 'good girls' who give a 'mom-vibe'. This is a serious problem, because 'love' is a core pillar of feminine wisdom. It gives meaning to a feminine individual's life, the way 'truth' gives meaning to a masculine individual's life. When the center of gravity of women's consciousness is this low, you need a woman who is actively working on raising her level of consciousness relative to this stuff. Especially relative to masculinity and femininity, who has an accurate understanding of them.

Don't approach 'good girls'. They tend to be repressed, sexually. They will talk about whatever they know about, i.e. whatever will get them social approval. But, they will not be themselves on the date. And, you should see that as a red-flag. They're doing this out of insecurity. It's not the insecurity itself that's the issue, it's what they're doing about it. If they're unconsciously seeking validation to fill that void, red-flag. You want someone who is genuinely smart and who actually has some wisdom to share with you. Then, you will have a strong connection. The 'hook-point' that Leo talks about in his 'How to get laid' series will be deeper. Then you'll hit it off with them.

I want to have a kid before age 40. That's my target.

You're not going to find a useful skill that you can just flow with like you're playing a video-game. A video-game is consumption-oriented, you're not technically 'doing anything'. The grind will always be there. For the grind to not get to you, though, you need this skill to align with some creative-capacity of yours. This will fulfil you, fill your life with passion and give your life meaning. If the wind is blowing too hard, consider the possibility that you're going too hard on yourself, you're going too quickly in the learning-process. You need to baby-step it more.

if you gave me such a country, the first thing I'd do is I'd create a new education-system, where learning happened more practically, where theory wasn't so important and where you didn't have to learn what you didn't want to learn. Your creative-capacities would be identified by your teachers, confirmed by you and then you would be put on a mastery-track for a profitable skill in which that creative-capacity applied. I did that for myself and it worked out for me, I would love to do it for other students. Also, we would teach about money, emotional-mastery, relationships, farming, cooking and house-building. Learning the basics of these would be mandatory. We would have crypto, decentralized money. No government involvement in money. And, the algorithm would regulate money, no human involvement in financial regulation. And, as far as crimes went, justice would be served by the collective. The crime would clean itself out. And, we would eat natural food that's not regulated by the FDA. Psychedelics would not be banned and people would be getting enlightened every day. Over the course of 10-15 years, an economic-system without wage-slavery would mushroom, thanks to this education-system. We would surpass the rate of economic-growth of every country thus far. And, assuming that nobody invades us, we would be the most peaceful, internally. A lot of the problems in countries come from wars with other countries.

What you're talking about, is the reality with 'the modern woman' or 'a woman who is lost in the modern world'. You are right to feel frustrated. They do, in fact, fuck up the masculine/feminine dynamic due to their shit-tests. So, it is perfectly reasonable to get offended by it. A deeper reason behind this is that because they can work and support themselves, they think they're the shit and that they don't need a man. So, they have bigger problems to solve. Even the money-dynamic with them is going to be polarity-flipped. They're screwing that up as well. If you're an average man trying to date an average woman, you're not doing well, precisely for this reason. Which is why you do not have the luxury to settle for an average modern woman. As @integral said, you absolutely have to go to New-Age communities and date women who have some understanding of masculinity and femininity and who are making an active effort to embody their femininity. And no, looking hot is not going to cut it. That's the patriarchy's definition of femininity, it's not the reality of it.

You sound like you don't know what you want. 'Me want girl' is not concrete enough, you're going to have to do better than that at defining what it is that you want. The reality is that you do not have a clear goal with women. And, if you're expecting women to set this goal for you, if you're expecting women to just tell you what to do to get laid, that's not going to happen. Not even proper PUAs are going to do that for you. They're just going to tell you how to improve your game. Do you know how you're picking women? Or, are you just going for the one who just has the right body-proportions? Do you know why you're picking them? There are probably other women you reject. Do you know why you do that? Until you figure out the answers to these questions, you have no business complaining about women. And, one final point - I'm sorry if this comes across as harsh, but when a woman reads what you wrote, even if she's giving you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to her own safety, she's thinking 'Boring guy. Spends most of his time on the computer, doesn't know how to have fun'. A lot of guys like you hit on them all the time. You have to think about why they should choose you and not them. And, even if she's not in the 'girls wanna have fun' mindset, even if she's growing up and thinking about you in a mature way, she's thinking 'Sounds like he doesn't have the physical space in his life for a relationship. He's not ready and I don't know if he ever will be. So, I will go for someone who is ready, who does have time'. My point is, with your lifestyle, you have absolutely no time to waste wallowing in frustration. You have a lot of work to do. You will have to confront these problems, figure out the root-causes, probably radically alter your life over the course of many years before you're ready for a loving relationship. This doesn't mean that your life will be shit throughout those years, you can have better experiences with women. The better it gets, the better it gets. HTH!

Why is the police and military co-operating with the regime? Won't they also starve if they do so? Won't they also suffer the consequences of their own actions?!

It would be very interesting to talk about in this era of social-media.

@Jacob Morres I'm 'conservative', in the sense, that I want to conserve the world as it was 5-10 years ago, as opposed to the way it was 50 years ago. I liked the way it was 10 years ago. Now, it's gotten too insane and I think we should dial it back a little bit.

Yeah, but it didn't give him as a contemporary charismatic figure. If it's not woke, that's what it has to do, right? This is what I got.

@something_else There is nothing controversial about Hitler, everyone agrees that he was a 'tad worse' than Tate. But, Tate is a controversial figure and the woke AI will not acknowledge that he is charismatic. Want proof that it is woke? Ask it to 'make a joke about men', then 'make a joke about women'. You'll see what's what.

They do this with their girlfriends all the time. It'll be along the lines of 'I have a date with this other guy. Do you approve of the dress?'

It was my explanation for OP's question. And no, ChatGPT is not unbiased. It is woke AI. If you ask ChatGPT for a list of the most charismatic figures, it will put Elon Musk's name but not Andrew Tate's name. But, if you ask it why Andrew Tate is famous, it will say 'charisma'. If this isn't bias, I don't know what is!

ChatGPT will not tell you that he has charisma, that's for sure. The reality is that he is charismatic. That's why he has the following that he does.

First of all, you got rejected. There's no coming back from this. Move on. If we reflect back on the mistake you made, I think you should've done the 'bold' and 'risky' things if you wanted to get with her. If you tell me that 'it would've been the wrong move, she has an avoidant attachment-style and I didn't want to bulldoze that', I get it. You wanted things to flow more smoothly. In that case, you have a bigger issue to resolve. You go for emotionally unavailable women. For this, you go to therapy and do inner-child work. And, one final point about her calling you late at night and stuff - all of that is her being friendly. And, quite frankly, sucking on your attention, getting too close for comfort. If I were in your position, I would distance myself from her because I would have bigger, more important life-commitments than wasting my time with her. And, if you want to take this a step further, I would not pretend to take it casually. It would be better for her too to understand that moving on is going to be a challenge for you.

If you've hit a wall studying practical stuff, I'd suggest you follow your passion. If you were just out of high-school, I would have different advice for you. I'd tell you to be more practical in the beginning, then as you become more competent and have more doors open, choose the one that you like more as opposed to the one that pays more.

Thank you. Peace.

Ma'am, this is not funny. Lives get ruined because of naive behavior like this. Joking about this is almost as offensive to us, as a guy making rape-jokes. It's also offensive to actual victims of sexual harassment. It makes a mockery of their fight for justice.