High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born

[wwhy]

5 hours ago, Preety_India said:

You really showed your girlfriend to your mom..... Bwahahahahahahahahah. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Preety_India said:

And ama answer your question honestly just because you're a fellow INTP.

I cancelled the "showing to parents" as the girl was acting a bit too crazy and unhinghed

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by wwhy

[Consept]

18 minutes ago, wwhy said:

Am not blaming you of anything, my friend.

You have said nothing but common sense. I'm taking it to another level...

 

My bad then, maybe I read into what you said too much. 

An interesting article I just came across, basically saying that marriage rates are down because women are becoming more educated than men and earning more themselves, so because they are looking for someone who is earning higher its harder to find an 'acceptable' mate. 

https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/marriage-mismatch-husbands-wives-earnings-education-jobs.html

[intotheblack]

2 hours ago, Consept said:

An interesting article I just came across, basically saying that marriage rates are down because women are becoming more educated than men and earning more themselves, so because they are looking for someone who is earning higher its harder to find an 'acceptable' mate. 

https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/marriage-mismatch-husbands-wives-earnings-education-jobs.html

Makes sense.  Also less people see the need for getting married, especially since women earn their own money now. Whereas up until recently and even to this day women were stay at home moms and the husband controlled all the finances. They were more dependant on men, so no matter what the man was earning or what job he did, it would always be more than his wife. The man held the position of power in the relationship, so he could just pretty much choose any woman who needed to be taken care of.

Now though, women are more independent and they don’t need men for that financial support so much. So they can now afford to be more picky with who they want to be in a relationship with, and can search for a better mate based on values and connection. whereas before, it was more based on who can give you the most financial security.  Whether or not the man could take care of her was more important than if they had a deep connection. 

Now they have the opportunity to have well paid jobs, better education and lengthy careers. I can see how it might be more difficult to find a partner who is equal or higher, and how men might feel intimidated by a woman earning more or being of higher status than him. 

So I guess that’s what we see with the celebrity examples that were given...if the woman has high status and money she will more likely pair with someone of equal/higher status... or.... a man who is not gonna be intimidated by that (but this comes down to consciousness I believe) 
I suppose it depends on the individuals and if she/he wants his/her partner to be earning more/less than him/her. But of course, it’s all very materialistic, and stage orange.  
 

David deida also talks about a similar thing regarding consciousness 

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by intotheblack

[Consept]

28 minutes ago, intotheblack said:

Now though, women are more independent and they don’t need men for that financial support so much. So they can now afford to be more picky with who they want to be in a relationship with, and can search for a better mate based on values and connection. whereas before, it was more based on who can give you the most financial security.  Whether or not the man could take care of her was more important than if they had a deep connection. 

It is stage orange yes but remember higher stages usually incorporate lower stages not completely jump, also this dynamic would've been the same throughout human history, from purple to orange and above. 

Women can be more picky yes but the problem is majority them (according to the research) will not 'settle' for someone lower in education and/lower in income. So they wouldn't even consider someone in this bracket to even build a connection with. This is fine but as they become higher earners the pool of men that fit into an 'acceptable' bracket shrinks, meaning they would have the choice of 'settling' or dying alone. 

If it were just about connection and not income this would not be an issue. You will get men who are intimidated by success of a woman but many will be rejected before it even gets to that. 

This is all fine, but I think what men get pissed at is the women that complain that there are no good men around, when in reality their criteria for good men doesn't include majority of men. 

[Consept]

@intotheblack good vid BTW, I agree with pretty much everything he said 

[Etherial Cat]

3 hours ago, Consept said:

My bad then, maybe I read into what you said too much. 

An interesting article I just came across, basically saying that marriage rates are down because women are becoming more educated than men and earning more themselves, so because they are looking for someone who is earning higher its harder to find an 'acceptable' mate. 

https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/marriage-mismatch-husbands-wives-earnings-education-jobs.html

I'm not seeing the same conclusion for these datas.  

The status quo before was that women were pushed to settle down early because they weren't financially independent nor skilled enough to survive on their own (it goes from being denied an education or profession to just not being encouraged to).  So locking a provider husband was the default mode and it was supported culturally

This trade was not fulfilling. Nor for the husband, nor for the woman. Check out this stage Green analysis made by Beauvoir which narrates what was the female condition from her POV in the 70s. 

Note: I've just noticed now that @intotheblack has already made the same point. 

Regarding women with higher status as such as celebrities:

I think there is a point where they are content enough with what they have and maximizing isn't interesting. Just like when it comes to these studies about happiness which concludes that there is a diminishing return point for money that can be reached pretty fast. So it can explain why some high status women are settling for men of lower status instead of higher ones.

But it's also possible that when you've got money and status, you might be afraid people are interested in the leg up you can provide them. It can be practical to go with someone who is sharing some of your caracteristics and understand your struggle. (a typical case could be a couple of celebs)

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Women can be more picky yes but the problem is majority them (according to the research) will not 'settle' for someone lower in education and/lower in income. So they wouldn't even consider someone in this bracket to even build a connection with. This is fine but as they become higher earners the pool of men that fit into an 'acceptable' bracket shrinks, meaning they would have the choice of 'settling' or dying alone. 

If it were just about connection and not income this would not be an issue. You will get men who are intimidated by success of a woman but many will be rejected before it even gets to that. 

It's also possible that "educated" women not "settling" for someone of lower education and lower income might be a symptom more than the causality of another phenomenon tied to resonance...

Different education level can create difficulties when it comes to understanding one another. I have family members who never went to college nor had the experience I had traveling around, living abroad etc. I'd say that we aren't seeing the world the same way and having a conversation with them is painful sometimes. I would say that I have statistically a better resonance with people who have been to college per example because it's likely correlated with a similar drive for intellectual matters, intellectual curiosity and cultural capital. But of course, not everyone who resonate intellectually has been through it.

I would have no peculiar issues going for a penniless dude with little traditional education if he's intelligent enough to resonate with me and if I'd fall in love. But we'd need to figure out how to survive together and not be miserable financially, which is a very serious issue. I think difficult finances can put a lot of pressure on a relationship as both individual get into a survival mode...

I would also add that just as men are finding difficulties in finding role models, women who are top earners are in difficult situations regarding finding a suitable mate due to being stuck in a cultural limbo.

 

[wwhy]

18 hours ago, Consept said:

My bad then, maybe I read into what you said too much. 

An interesting article I just came across, basically saying that marriage rates are down because women are becoming more educated than men and earning more themselves, so because they are looking for someone who is earning higher its harder to find an 'acceptable' mate. 

https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/marriage-mismatch-husbands-wives-earnings-education-jobs.html

No surprise there. A woman will typically look for a man to "look up to"

Edited April 18, 2021 by wwhy

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Etherial Cat said:

I would have no peculiar issues going for a penniless dude with little traditional education if he's intelligent enough to resonate with me and if I'd fall in love. But we'd need to figure out how to survive together and not be miserable financially, which is a very serious issue. I think difficult finances can put a lot of pressure on a relationship as both individual get into a survival mode...

I would also add that just as men are finding difficulties in finding role models, women who are top earners are in difficult situations regarding finding a suitable mate due to being stuck in a cultural limbo.

I accept what you say, I think where your coming from is that this dynamic does happen but there are reasons for women selecting a guy based on  wealth, status or education that are logical considering what the woman wants. So its not as shallow as just selecting for that its more about how they would fit considering the womans socio-economic position, if these can be worked out with the man being lower than potentially it could work. I agree with this, i didnt mean to simplify the reasoning, obviously the statement from op is a simple way of saying it, the reasonings people use for getting to that conclusion is different thing. 

We are switching to a world where women will eventually have as much money and status if not more than men and thats cool but the rub is that traditionally men of higher status have never had a problem with dating women who are lower, or who make less or who are less educated, they have focused on other things, including looks but also co-operation, peaceful nature, femininity etc. Women who are highly educated and high earning do have a problem with dating someone lower status or lower earning, even if the reasoning is they need someone who can keep up with them or they need someone they can look up to or whatever it is, in general women dont go for men lower value than them, the research is pretty clear on this. If they did there wouldnt be much problem, theyd definitely find someone but the reason they dont is because of their standards, so something has to give if they want to get married, either they drop their standards or the look at what a man of a standard they desire wants and try and fulfil that.

1 hour ago, Etherial Cat said:

The status quo before was that women were pushed to settle down early because they weren't financially independent nor skilled enough to survive on their own (it goes from being denied an education or profession to just not being encouraged to).  So locking a provider husband was the default mode and it was supported culturally

This trade was not fulfilling. Nor for the husband, nor for the woman.

 Theres a lot of research that says the most happy marriages are when a man is earning and a woman is looking after the home, much more than when theyre both earning the same or the woman is earning or when the man is a house husband (although this is the next happiest situation). Now there could be cultural reasons or conditioning behind this i dont know, but thats what the research says. - https://theconversation.com/most-couples-are-less-satisfied-when-the-woman-earns-more-131659

The problem with the old school mentality was women werent given a choice, obviously thats wrong but now that there is a choice it doesnt necessarily guarantee happiness, as you say its a cultural limbo

 

[Karmadhi]

@Preety_India If you women approached guys this situations would not happen. Guy almost never gets approached so of course he is forced to approach. What is he supposed to do? He will not get approached so he is forced to approach. 

Male privilege is get rejected dozens of times and feel unlovable? What kind of privilege is that? 

[Preety_India]

@Karmadhi as though men treat women very respectfully when women approach them? The hypocrisy. 

 

[Karmadhi]

@Preety_India I do not know about your experiences but usually guys will give girls a chance as long as they are somewhat attracted to them if she approaches the guy. Some are dicks i guess but usually they will not be more rude than girls will be. 

[Preety_India]

@Karmadhi not true. Guys tend to look down on women who approach them. They look at them as "low value" no matter how beautiful the girl might be.. A woman approaching a man automatically makes her "low value" in his eyes because men believe that they should win a woman rather than the other way round. 

Even beautiful women who approach men are treated badly, rejected, exploited for sex and usually dumped faster. 

Most importantly they are not given any respect because they are considered shameless and without dignity or pride or considered low worth, low self esteem and too "bimbo" or too desperate. 

Does this mean that these women are inferior in some way? Absolutely not. It's just that it doesn't tickle a man's ego enough for him to be excited enough to be with her. 

Men like chasing women not because they like the woman they are chasing but they like the excitement of chase and conquest than the woman herself! 

 

 

[Preety_India]

@Karmadhi @Karmadhi  

That's why women don't bother to chase a man even if they find him attractive because there is no incentive to it. The man doesn't get pleased, rather displeased 

The fastest way to lose a man is to approach him. 

So even if I found a man absolutely attractive, I will never consciously approach him because he is going to treat me if I did that, I would rather want him to be attracted to me, so I would try to look pretty or sexy in front of him but will never dare to approach him because that would be foolish and an instant way of losing him. 

In essence, men dig their own graves by making it difficult for women to approach them. 

 

 

[wwhy]

16 hours ago, intotheblack said:

Now though, women are more independent and they don’t need men for that financial support so much. So they can now afford to be more picky with who they want to be in a relationship with, and can search for a better mate based on values and connection. whereas before, it was more based on who can give you the most financial security.  Whether or not the man could take care of her was more important than if they had a deep connection. 

That's one way of looking at it. You could also say they are still looking for the exact same thing: a man of higher status.

Because if they are doing better, such men are harder to find.

[wwhy]

3 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

@Preety_India If you women approached guys this situations would not happen. Guy almost never gets approached so of course he is forced to approach. What is he supposed to do? He will not get approached so he is forced to approach. 

Male privilege is get rejected dozens of times and feel unlovable? What kind of privilege is that? 

Let women be women. Are you looking for a woman, or a man who looks like a woman?

Women do not usually approach guys, but they do give you the opportunity to approach them if you know what to look out for.

Edited April 18, 2021 by wwhy

[Consept]

@Preety_India would you say you have quite a negative opinion of men? 

[Preety_India]

4 minutes ago, Consept said:

@Preety_India would you say you have quite a negative opinion of men? 

I have an opinion. It can be positive or negative depending on what I have observed or experienced.

If you want to hear only goody goody stuff then that's not an opinion, it's called sugar coating and ass licking and I don't do that to gain validation 

When I say it, I say it like I see it and I say what I mean. 

One can twist my narrative to put a negative spin on it and put it back on me, or one can take some nuggets from it and apply them to their life and make real change. 

If we never have opinions, it means everything is perfect. So opinions gonna hurt. 

 

[wwhy]

13 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

and ass licking and

eewwww
 

[Consept]

@Preety_India do you see potential issues with having an unbalanced view? For example you said women that approach guys are exploited for sex, treated badly, rejected etc, now this could be part of the picture, but it's definitely not the whole picture, however you've said it like it's very common and the reason that women don't approach men. You could take a more holistic view and say approaching is difficult across the board, for example even a good looking guy who's good at talking to women would only get a hit rate (number, date etc) of around 10% from cold approaching women, so meaning if he approached 100 women only 10 would show a good level of interest.

I could easily say women are bad, they always reject you and lie to you that they gave a boyfriend or whatever, or I can look at it like that's just how it is. If I did say women are bad I could also paint it as that's my opinion and it's what I see and women can improve from what I'm saying because I don't want to sugar coat things. Do you see the problem? 

Your opinion, in this case, is like taking something that happens (generously) 5% of the time and saying people should act as if it happens all the time and put judgement on a whole group of people based on this opinion. 

 

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, Consept said:

@Preety_India do you see potential issues with having an unbalanced view? For example you said women that approach guys are exploited for sex, treated badly, rejected etc, now this could be part of the picture, but it's definitely not the whole picture, however you've said it like it's very common and the reason that women don't approach men. You could take a more holistic view and say approaching is difficult across the board, for example even a good looking guy who's good at talking to women would only get a hit rate (number, date etc) of around 10% from cold approaching women, so meaning if he approached 100 women only 10 would show a good level of interest.

I could easily say women are bad, they always reject you and lie to you that they gave a boyfriend or whatever, or I can look at it like that's just how it is. If I did say women are bad I could also paint it as that's my opinion and it's what I see and women can improve from what I'm saying because I don't want to sugar coat things. Do you see the problem? 

Your opinion, in this case, is like taking something that happens (generously) 5% of the time and saying people should act as if it happens all the time and put judgement on a whole group of people based on this opinion. 

 

Nope. I'm not trying to generalize. Just showing one facet of it based on my experience. To have a holistic view, one needs to have a holistic experience which doesn't happen in everyone's case. Don't take whatever I say with a grain of salt but also don't ignore it because there is a certain truth to it as well, although it doesn't apply to everyone, it does apply to some. If it happened to me it could happen to others as well. Should it mean that everyone is that way, absolutely not. It only means it's one of the many dimensions. It's impossible to have an opinion to not color your perception, this is bound to happen. But one thing is true, that whatever I say is not 5% of the time, I'm quite confident about it. It happens a lot more than that. Because many people agree with me, by which I mean women. 

Men say bad things about women on the forum all the time as if it's the holy grail. I'm not trying to play into that though. 

My final take is that whatever I say is a part of the picture but not the whole picture but just because it's a part of the picture, it shouldn't be ignored or considered irrelevant.