Struggling with Blackpill

[Gesundheit2]

5 hours ago, Emerald said:

You see, it isn't really selfish because it sets up a win-win situation. It's not like anyone loses in that scenario.

The men I'm not interested in win because they can move on to find someone who is interested or to continue doing pick up. So, I don't waste any of their time. 

The man I'm interested who reciprocates wins because my choices have led to the relationship he wants.

And I win because I get the relationship that I want with a man who I'm really attracted to who really cliques with me, loves me, and values me.

I look to repel who I don't want to leave room for who I do want.

While it does seem like you're creating an absolute win-win situation, an overpriced product still has the risk of expiration. So, you're going for high risk/high reward, which is a really dangerous bet, just like gambling with all your money.

And I'm telling you, you could wait and wait, and your imaginary prince would not likely show up, and then you could wind up a maiden. There are countless women who have fallen for this risky bet already, something to reflect on.

Think about it, there's nothing special about any one human per se. If the guy could afford a relationship with a woman who is around your level of attractiveness and where sex is not a struggle, why would he settle for the lesser relationship? He's high quality, serious, relationship oriented, and everything, so why shouldn't he be having sex? It won't make sense for him to wait, rightfully so. So he will go and find a better deal.

There's ideals/theory, and there's reality/practice. And prior to both there's carefulness and balance.

I truly have the best of intentions when I tell you this. Be careful of the maiden trap. It's a timebomb that could end up blowing up in your hands.

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, Preety_India said:

A good self esteem lesson for women is to know that you don't need to be with a man who is already thinking that you're replaceable.

Exactly. You can find men who are genuinely interested in you as a person. You don't have to settle for men who are just looking for any and all women that will have them. 

[Preety_India]

12 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

While it does seem like you're creating an absolute win-win situation, an overpriced product still has the risk of expiration. So, you're going for high risk/high reward, which is a really dangerous bet, just like gambling with all your money.

And I'm telling you, you could wait and wait, and your imaginary prince would not likely show up, and then you could wind up a maiden. There are countless women who have fallen for this risky bet already, something to reflect on.

Think about it, there's nothing special about any one human per se. If the guy could afford a relationship with a woman who is around your level of attractiveness and where sex is not a struggle, why would he settle for the lesser relationship? He's high quality, serious, relationship oriented, and everything, so why shouldn't he be having sex? It won't make sense for him to wait, rightfully so. So he will go and find a better deal.

There's ideals/theory, and there's reality/practice. And prior to both there's carefulness and balance.

I truly have the best of intentions when I tell you this. Be careful of the maiden trap. It's a timebomb that could end up blowing up in your hands.

 

This doesn't relate to women

It only relates to your own fantasy of what a woman should be or should have to be.

 

 

[Gesundheit2]

1 minute ago, Preety_India said:

This doesn't relate to women

It only relates to your own fantasy of what a woman should be or should have to be.

Seriously, how?

[Preety_India]

Just now, Gesundheit2 said:

Seriously, how?

It's not about how and why.

It just doesn't. Women don't think like that. 

Just see it on the forum..

You have a hard time accepting @Emerald 's opinion on the forum.

But her opinion is completely backed up by female psychology and science. 

That's why women on the forum are in agreement with her.

No amount of your convincing can change how a woman thinks. This is both biological and psychological.

You can't change female survival agenda 

Also remember women produce babies. 

That's why women are valued automatically by mother nature. You don't like to hear it though, understandable.

A woman's survival agenda is not her alone.

It's also the survival agenda of her biological clock.

This clock wasn't planted by you. (Laughs)

This clock was planted by dear Mother Nature.

So a woman's survival agenda is crucial to the survival of the species to which she belongs.

If her survival agenda is defeated or ignored, the whole species pays a price.

So you can't afford to reject a woman's survival agenda.

It's crucial to overall survival.

 

 

[Gesundheit2]

6 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

You have a hard time accepting @Emerald 's opinion on the forum.

I don't. You're all free to be maidens if you want. I just care for your survival agenda, that's all.

Really, I'm on the contrary of what you said. And deep down, you know I'm right.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[Harlen Kelly]

6 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

So a woman's survival agenda is crucial to the survival of the species to which she belongs.

So is the man's survival, your point?

[Preety_India]

Just now, Gesundheit2 said:

I don't. You're all free to be maidens if you want. I just care for your survival agenda, that's all.

Deep down, you know I am right.

There is no maiden. There is only a woman. 

And it doesn't matter to women how you think about women.

Women will continue to thrive as they have always been.

Nobody beats female survival agenda.

If she wants a man, she only needs to look around, they are dime a dozen.

But why does she still reject ?

Because her survival agenda is more valuable than being with any random man.

 

 

[Preety_India]

4 minutes ago, Harlen Kelly said:

So is the man's survival, your point?

Man's survival lies in finding and impregnating a woman to pass on his genes.

No woman. No genes.

 

[Emerald]

11 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

While it does seem like you're creating an absolute win-win situation, an overpriced product still has the risk of expiration. So, you're going for high risk/high reward, which is a really dangerous bet, just like gambling with all your money.

You see. I'm not an overpriced product. I know my worth. And I know that I can find a man who values my worth... many would actually. 

Now, I'm not for everyone. I'm a real weirdo who's super into stuff that most of society isn't interested in at all. I'm in my own weird little niche of the dating market that most men take one look at and run away from.  

But luckily, I don't even need 5% of the male population to be interested in me to find a man who wants to invest in me. I just really need one guy who's compatible with me and who really values me if I want to make it work. 

And I'm telling you, you could wait and wait, and your imaginary prince would not likely show up, and then you could wind up a maiden. There are countless women who have fallen for this risky bet already, something to reflect on.

I'm married but separated. And I already have been a mother for 10 years. So, there is no ticking time bomb around having kids. And there is no risk of being an old maid or a spinster, because I was married for 9 years.

Plus, I'm 32 not 80... so I won't have as easy of a time finding an eligible man as a 20 year old woman dating men in their early 20s.

But it won't be that hard. There are plenty of men in their 30s and 40s who have children too who are separated and would be looking for a relationship with a woman in the same life-stage as them.

Also, understand that I'm not looking for some ideal handsome prince guy. I don't even value the idea of relationship before I'm attracted to a guy. Most men that I get struck by the Cupid's arrow for are men that exist in my wider social circle. They are very much real normal men who just so happen to strike at my heartstrings. 

Think about it, there's nothing special about any one human per se. If the guy could afford a relationship with a woman who is around your level of attractiveness and where sex is not a struggle, why would he settle for the lesser relationship? He's high quality, serious, relationship oriented, and everything, so why shouldn't he be having sex? It won't make sense for him to wait, rightfully so. So he will go and find a better deal.

If this is the man's strategy, then I will allow him to sort himself out. He doesn't need to be with me. He can find someone else like you said. If a man sees me as replaceable, then I allow him to replace me. And if I'm too much of a hassle for him to wait for, then he can find someone else who's less of a hassle than I am.

There's ideals/theory, and there's reality/practice. And prior to both there's carefulness and balance.

I truly have the best of intentions when I tell you this. Be careful of the maiden trap. It's a timebomb that could end up blowing up in your hands.

Trust me, I'm not in a maiden trap. I am taking some time off of relationship right now because I just got out of year-long relationship a few weeks ago. This is pretty much the first time I've been single since I was 16. I've only had a few months off here and there. First I had a 4 year long relationship, then a 9 year long marriage, then a 1 year long relationship, and then another 1 year long relationship. I am relationshipped out at this point in my life. 

 

[Harlen Kelly]

2 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Man's survival lies in finding and impregnating a woman to pass on his genes.

No woman. No genes.

A woman's survival lies in getting impregnated by a man to pass on her genes. 

No man. No genes. 

You haven't made any point yet. 

[Preety_India]

Just now, Harlen Kelly said:

A woman's survival lies in getting impregnated by a man to pass on her genes. 

No man. No genes. 

You haven't made any point yet. 

And why won't she get a man ?

Why is this thinking by you and others that women are living in fantasy if they're employing their agenda?

 

[Gesundheit2]

@Emerald Fair enough, and best of luck.

[Harlen Kelly]

2 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

And why won't she get a man ?

Why is this thinking by you and others that women are living in fantasy if they're employing their agenda?

What? Are you trolling or did you not understand my response?

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, Harlen Kelly said:

What? Are you trolling or did you not understand my response?

You're asking me if a male's survival is crucial. Of course it is. You don't need me to tell you that..

But look at the context in which I wrote that post. You're taking things out of it without looking at the whole context.

The context was this underlying thinking that a woman is in a maiden trap if she exercises her choices. Also this assumption by you that men have so many options and somehow women don't have any ?

So I wanted to point out that not only is it impossible to change a woman's survival agenda but also how dysfunctional it would be to consider it to be useful since a woman's survival agenda is deeply connected to the species. Of course I'm not ruling out the role of a male. Yet you fail to see that a woman's survival is not just her own survival. 

So you aren't gaining much by trying to defeat it or manipulate it to suit yours. If a woman can't find a man, is that good for the species ? 

That's what I was trying to convey.

I did not denigrate a man's role in this.. but this bias that everything is run by men, everything is decided by men is kinda ridiculous, it's deeply rooted in patriarchy that believes that the woman's role doesn't matter much. 

However that's not the case. When you're assuming that a woman's viewpoint is not relevant, you're cancelling yourself from the equation as well.

How does it serve to completely ignore female survival agenda ?

 

[Harlen Kelly]

5 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

You're asking me if a male's survival is crucial

When did I ask you that? Tag it please, let me see it.

5 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Also this assumption by you that men have so many options and somehow women don't have any ?

Which one of my assertions implied that women don't have any options?  tag it.

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, electroBeam said:

most relevant post in this entire thread.

Thanks @Emerald for posting on here. They say that if you're trying to catch a fish, don't ask fish but only ask fisherman, that's not always true.

Thank you!

Though I would say that the fish catching analogy is only applicable for player kind of guys. The men who want to serve only their own agenda and devour the woman without giving her anything in return. This is the relationship of the fishermen to the fish.

So, I won't help a fisherman catch a fish because I am a fish and I don't want to see other fish be exploited, devoured, and used. And you won't find me biting on any hooks. 

But I will help fishermen realize that fish don't like being fished. And they will argue that fish really love it. And I'll say, actually no we don't.

And it is my goal to help clear up distortions around female sexuality.

Women really do generally want to be "caught" by a man. We just don't want to be caught in the losing side of a lose-win scenario. We want a win-win scenario where the guy is actually looking for love just as much as we are. So, I'm quite happy to help with that. 

And I'm also not totally against helping a guy who's struggling with meeting women get to a point of proficiency with that. Pick up can be useful that way. 

[Preety_India]

8 hours ago, Harlen Kelly said:

If you don't prove to be worthy of a monogamous relationship you either stay in the rotation or a stop contacting you.

This one.

 

[Preety_India]

6 hours ago, Harlen Kelly said:

Guess what? The current Emerald who you have to wait 3 months to have sex with is not ''high value'' for 90% of men (and high value guys would stay miles way from that because they simply don't have to deal with it since they have options)

This one

[Harlen Kelly]

@Preety_India

1 minute ago, Preety_India said:

This one.

Ok, and how exactly did you make the jump from that to ''women don't have any options''? 

I am genuinely confused.