Women treat MEN the way men treat JOBS: how relationship goals change the dating

[Devin]

     Like consider pre 'no fault divorce' which started relatively recently, the big push was 1950s, do you think rich guys were ever swooning their women with romance? Why would they if it's something unnatural to men, if you have to "work at it" in the will power sense it's unnatural.

 

https://daily.jstor.org/the-lost-history-of-no-fault-divorces/

The Lost History of No-Fault Divorces

This all ended with the introduction of the “no-fault” divorce. And as Oren explains, one organization—the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL)—was instrumental in creating this change. Its work on no-fault divorce, which began in 1947, is little known, but Oren argues that it constitutes “a lost chapter well worth recovering.”

Edited March 8, 2023 by Devin

[something_else]

2 minutes ago, Devin said:

if you have to work at it it's unnatural

 

I guess hunting and foraging was unnatural for our ancestors then.

[Devin]

 

25 minutes ago, something_else said:

I guess hunting and foraging was unnatural for our ancestors then.

      Men do that for fun even to this day, even with grocery stores everywhere. Surely you see a difference between primal ancestors hunting for survival vs a man asking about how his woman feels about her brunch with her mother, basic survival is a lot more "natural"  wouldn't you say? In the less willpower sort of way.

 

https://www.graham.law/blog/no-fault-divorce-coming-soon-to-the-uk/

United Kingdom Debating No-Fault Divorce

June 17, 2020

Better late than never? This is one of those “I can’t believe they don’t already have it” situations. A no-fault divorce bill is set for debate in the House of Commons this month that could radically change the way couples get divorced according to BBC.

 

https://blackballad.co.uk/views-voices/twitter-says-that-black-british-men-are-the-least-romantic-but-is-it-true?listIds=5b86675d8ab6c5c66cb89dde

According to psychologist Professor Richard Wiseman, who studied 6,500 women and men from every country, British men are among the least romantic. His findings exposed that they were one of the least likely to do simple tasks, such as giving breakfast in bed.Feb 14, 2022

Edited March 8, 2023 by Devin

[Devin]

 

[something_else]

22 minutes ago, Devin said:

Surely you see a difference between primal ancestors hunting for survival vs a man asking about how his woman feels about her brunch with her mother, basic survival is a lot more "natural"  wouldn't you say?

 

Natural is one of those words that is very vague, almost to the point of being meaningless. There is no obvious line that defines what is natural and what is not, especially for humans.

My only point was that just because you have to work for something doesn't make it 'unnatural' as you said. There are plenty of other examples. Walking a mile to your closest river to get water required a lot of work, was that unnatural? War with other tribes required a lot of work, was that unnatural? What about building houses and huts? These are all things our ancestors did by their nature which required lots of determination and work.

Quote

 a man asking about how his woman feels about her brunch with her mother

 

Maintaining complex and subtle social relationships is one of the core aspects of humanity. We have been doing for millions of years. If anything, it is more unnatural not to.

[Devin]

24 minutes ago, something_else said:

Natural is one of those words that is very vague, almost to the point of being meaningless. There is no obvious line that defines what is natural and what is not, especially for humans.

My only point was that just because you have to work for something doesn't make it 'unnatural' as you said. There are plenty of other examples. Walking a mile to your closest river to get water required a lot of work, was that unnatural? War with other tribes required a lot of work, was that unnatural? What about building houses and huts? These are all things our ancestors did by their nature which required lots of determination and work.

Maintaining complex and subtle social relationships is one of the core aspects of humanity. We have been doing for millions of years. If anything, it is more unnatural not to.

 

      My meaning of the phrase "work at it" was more about requiring will power, like if you're thirsty it doesn't require will power to go to the stream or in the warm months build a mud and stick shanty for the cold months. I don't see romance as a need like water, except for poor men in a society with polygamy. Which is now what we have reverted back to with no fault divorce, musk, bezos, gates, trumps of the world have multiple wives they support and procreate with.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Devin

[Devin]

Time Magazine

https://time.com/2889816/more-millennial-mothers-are-single-than-married/

More Millennial Mothers Are Single Than Married | Time

Jun 17, 2014 — And the number of these millennial single mothers is increasing. In fact, in a study just released by researchers at Johns Hopkins University

[Emerald]

On 3/6/2023 at 0:22 PM, Bobby_2021 said:

Who wants to be with an average man afterall? 

The majority of women

[Manusia]

@Devin It's not cool to generalize about how rich guys treat their partners. People are different, regardless of how much money they have. And let's be real, the push for no-fault divorce wasn't just about a lack of romance or willpower. It was about recognizing that many marriages were unhappy or even abusive, and giving couples a way out without assigning blame. Plus, saying that men have to "work at" romance or that it's unnatural for them is a pretty outdated stereotype. Both guys and gals can show affection in their own ways, and it's not fair to put everyone in the same box based on gender. 

[Devin]

1 minute ago, Manusia said:

@Devin . And let's be real, the push for no-fault divorce wasn't just about a lack of romance or willpower. It was about recognizing that many marriages were unhappy or even abusive, and giving couples a way out without assigning blame. 

Abuse would be a "fault".

2 minutes ago, Manusia said:

@Devin . Plus, saying that men have to "work at" romance or that it's unnatural for them is a pretty outdated stereotype. Both guys and gals can show affection in their own ways, and it's not fair to put everyone in the same box based on gender. 

See youtube; "How to..... women..... for men", notice the view count on the videos, it's not natural.

[Roy]

30 minutes ago, Emerald said:

The majority of women

Then how do you possibly explain the statistic going around that "about 63% of 18 to 29-year-old men reported being alone in 2022, a 12 percent increase from 2019, while only 34% percent of women in the same age group reported being single." ??

It's almost literally double, which is outrageous.

 

[Emerald]

38 minutes ago, Roy said:

Then how do you possibly explain the statistic going around that "about 63% of 18 to 29-year-old men reported being alone in 2022, a 12 percent increase from 2019, while only 34% percent of women in the same age group reported being single." ??

It's almost literally double, which is outrageous.

 

I don’t buy those statistics. They might be sampling in a way where they’re more likely to survey single men and non-single women.

Otherwise, it just doesn’t make sense.

Most women statistically are straight, monogamous, and dating men who are an average of 2 years older than them.

So, either the sampling is skewed… or women are more likely to report “situationships” and FWB as relationships while men do not.

Also, even if those stats were true, how does that imply that women aren’t interested in average men?

Just look around at the world and you’ll find tons of average men with girlfriends and wives.

Also women develop feelings for average guys because women tend to be more adept at seeing beauty in the ordinary.

It’s like all the little personality tells come through in his appearance and you can read so much about him and his energy.

Women are not typically idealists as it pertains to dating. And if they are, it’s a piss poor strategy for finding a partner because you’re looking only for on paper traits.

For most women, it’s much more about feelings than it is about men matching some arbitrary standard. Though of course, developing one’s self can make a person more attractive in a general sense.

Also as a side benefit… if a man is average in looks, it let’s us be the peacock in the relationship. It would be hard to feel desirable in a relationship with Brad Pitt or someone like that because he’d be the peacock.

My rule is that I have to be the peacock. Otherwise, the relationship just doesn’t feel good.

Edit: I think the main issue is that men have a hard time understanding what women find attractive about them because men generally don’t find those things attractive.

So, they have to understand male attractiveness and female attraction through the lens of what makes logical sense to be attracted to. And they create these narratives about women only being interested in the guy at the top of some hierarchy.

But female attraction is not logical. It’s emotional. And it’s just the joy of feeling a man’s personality and virtues shine through his appearance and gestures.

All the other stuff is just logistics or spice.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Emerald

[Roy]

23 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Also, even if those stats were true, how does that imply that women aren’t interested in average men?

The statistic implies that women are typically dating men that are older than them (which they are, according to your own statistics).

They are doing that because they want something above the average of the men in their own age group (18-29). Those men 30 and above generally will have;

- Better income/resources

- Better career stability

- More established life goals

- Stronger and in prime biological shape (ability to protect)

- More emotional maturity

- Higher wisdom

- More life experience, better at handling difficult situations

- Higher intelligence

- Better overall development and understanding of themselves

I'm sure there are things I've missed but I've hit the big ones.

If women truly wanted "average" like you said, they wouldn't reject the men in their age group at such a staggering rate in order to date men in the next bracket who are by most metrics higher quality men.

I don't blame them either. Most humans are selfish and will take the best deal they can possibly get. It's just hard to take your statement seriously when reality points to the contrary lol.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you might be projecting your own unique experiences and preferences onto your gender at large, when you're clearly more intelligent and spiritually gifted than 90% of women and will be interested and pursue different things from men than most women seem to.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Roy

[Emerald]

8 minutes ago, Roy said:

The statistic implies that women are typically dating men that are older than them (which they are, according to your own statistics).

The average age difference in American couples is 2 years… not 10 years. So, that doesn’t account for the discrepancy in the stats you talked about.

They are doing that because they want something above the average of the men in their own age group (18-29). Those men 30 and above generally will have;

- Better income/resources

- Better career stability

- More established life goals

- Stronger and in prime biological shape (ability to protect)

- More emotional maturity

- Higher wisdom

- More life experience, better at handling difficult situations

- Higher intelligence

- Better overall development and understanding of themselves

I'm sure there are things I've missed but I've hit the big ones.

Older men are more mature typically. So they will be viewed by some women as more attractive. I have always found myself attracted to older men because I was always looking for the maturity factor. But these older men that I’ve been attracted to have tended to be normal guys.

But most women are looking for their match and tend to go for men who are just slightly older than them. This is something you can notice, and the statistics bear that out.

If women truly wanted "average" like you said, they wouldn't reject the men in their age group at such a staggering rate in order to date men in the next bracket who are by most metrics higher quality men.

Statistically, women in 1st world nations aren’t dating men who are that much older. Maybe 10% of couples (if memory serves) have an age difference of more than 10 years.

Now, in developing nations the average age difference jumps up to about 6 years. And there’s a much higher occurrence of larger age gaps.

I don't blame them either. Most humans are selfish and will take the best deal they can possibly get. It's just hard to take your statement seriously when reality points to the contrary lol.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you might be projecting your own unique experiences and preferences onto your gender at large, when you're clearly more intelligent and spiritually gifted than 90% of women and will be interested and pursue different things from men.

My way of orienting to men is the common way for women. It’s more of a Cupid’s arrow than anything else.

Just like a high conscious man is going to like a nice figure like a regular guy is… high consciousness women will be attracted to men in similar ways to regular women.

It’s mostly about chemistry and the development of feelings. To choose a man any other way won’t yield good results… because it won’t enable pair bonding.

You can’t choose with your logic-mind and get feelings that way. It’s softer than any of that.

Pair bonding comes from the shared experience of ordinariness. 

 

[Devin]

 

[Gesundheit2]

@Devin He's not talking about what loyalty means to men and women. He's talking about what loyalty means to adults and children, and then applying his male bias to that perspective.

[Devin]

24 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

@Devin He's not talking about what loyalty means to men and women. He's talking about what loyalty means to adults and children, and then applying his male bias to that perspective.

       Do you think a man or woman is more likely to leave if their relationship desires aren't met?

 

[Devin]

          After 50 the single trend goes the opposite way and eventually quite drastically with more than double the amount of single women than men actually. When older men divorce they usually re-marry younger, this not only contributes to the relationship age gap but broadens the amount of men in the lower age group dating pool, you have older men returning to the dating pool while their ex wives stay single, resulting in a higher number of men pursuing the same younger women.

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/08/20/a-profile-of-single-americans/

Edited March 9, 2023 by Devin

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Devin said:

Do you think a man or woman is more likely to leave if their relationship desires aren't met?

That's a gross oversimplification of loyalty, and it's also a caricaturization of the issue. Leaving the relationship is not the right criterion to measure loyalty. Ex: If you physically beat your wife and she leaves you, it's only fair. In fact, if she doesn't sue you and put you in prison, she's still better and more loyal than you, which is most women. Most women take a lot of abuse (not necessarily physical) in relationships and they don't report them nor do anything about them. They are softer than that.

Regardless, this "video dude" is, again, suggesting the same rhetoric about women viewing men the same way men view jobs. The dude is caught up in that narrative and he is dogmatic about it. Notice how he's trying to reinforce that narrative by reiterating it through different ideas. This time it's Loyalty. The next time, I don't know what it will be. Just notice the insistence on this concept in the videos.

In any case, loyalty means staying despite hardships. If you are loyal to something, then you (explicitly or implicitly) agree to stay in sickness and in health, etc. There are limits to that of course and no one can be, nor should they be perfectly loyal in the extremes. I don't think we disagree there. But you do not agree to be loyal beyond the contract when you make a job contract. So you have very little loyalty to your boss or the position you got at their company, and you can leave whenever you please as long as it's not breaking the contract. But that logic only applies when you have very little, or otherwise a hyper-pragmatic kind of loyalty in the first place, not when the meaning of loyalty is different to you than other people. This is the fallacy he's making and you're not catching. He's claiming that women are loyal, but to their emotions, and he says that that's a different way of being loyal. But then he portrays women as disloyal to men whom they are in bonding agreement with. It's a very self-serving narrative for sure.

Now, if you get involved with a tyrant, then hard luck for you. There are women who are tyrants out there, so watch out. But they are a small minority, so you need not to get paranoid.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Gesundheit2

[Devin]

47 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

That's a gross oversimplification of loyalty, and it's also a caricaturization of the issue. Leaving the relationship is not the right criterion to measure loyalty. Ex: If you physically beat your wife and she leaves you, it's only fair. In fact, if she doesn't sue you and put you in prison, she's still better and more loyal than you, which is most women. Most women take a lot of abuse (not necessarily physical) in relationships and they don't report them nor do anything about them. They are softer than that.

 

       For sure, I see these videos as looking at subtle general nuance rather than hard categorizations. Many women leave for abuse, I don't think that's the leaving he's addressing, many women leave without abuse.

47 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Regardless, this "video dude" is, again, suggesting the same rhetoric about women viewing men the same way men view jobs. The dude is caught up in that narrative and he is dogmatic about it. Notice how he's trying to reinforce that narrative by reiterating it through different ideas. This time it's Loyalty. The next time, I don't know what it will be. Just notice the insistence on this concept in the videos.

 

    I don't consider the loyalty he attributes to women as self serving, I think it's loyalty to the man. He says something like they'll help hide the dead bodies, I find that true(in the general sense) women are more loyal in that way, say a man wants to move for whatever reason, the women gladly go along, men would be almost opposite.

47 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

 

In any case, loyalty means staying despite hardships. If you are loyal to something, then you (explicitly or implicitly) agree to stay in sickness and in health, etc. There are limits to that of course and no one can be, nor should they be perfectly loyal in the extremes. I don't think we disagree there. But you do not agree to be loyal beyond the contract when you make a job contract. So you have very little loyalty to your boss or the position you got at their company, and you can leave whenever you please as long as it's not breaking the contract. But that logic only applies when you have very little, or otherwise a hyper-pragmatic kind of loyalty in the first place, not when the meaning of loyalty is different to you than other people. This is the fallacy he's making and you're not catching. He's claiming that women are loyal, but to their emotions. But then he portrays them as disloyal to men whom they are in bonding agreement with. It's a very self-serving narrative for sure.

Now, if you get involved with a tyrant, then hard luck for you. There are women who are tyrants out there, so watch out. But they are a small minority, so you need not to get paranoid.

      I think the leaving he's speaking about in all these videos is what he says in this video, paraphrasing "you have to continually do what attracts her to you". Women leave due to lack of emotional connection, whereas men will stay even if they're not getting anything from the relationship. This is a gross over generalization of course but still peaks into the pyches.

       This is important to understand for relationship quality as well, not just to avoid separation. It's why everyone says men don't put in the work for relationships, because those men don't know that women are different about things compared to men, and women don't know about men.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Devin