SOZINN:


Well unfortunately, the right man will not get this gold because he deserves it. That gold is waiting for a bad guy who will use her and leave her damaged. Women by default choose temerarious men (alpha fûcks) to pop the pûssy. Their brains know it's wrong but the female honeypot says it's expedient so nice guys can go fûck themselves. You want to hold her waist gently and penetrate slowly but she tells you to choke her and increase your tempo.

In addition, how many of them want to get into a serious long term relationship or marriage without appraising all their options?
Good girls are just bad girls waiting to be unfettered from their aviaries.

TheDarkGamer:
From an Objective point of view:

If we do not want our women to work or have jobs, why do we still complain about them asking for money? I mean, it is only fair if as a man, you do not want your partner/wife to bear any financial responsibility, then you should be able to provide her needs and wants since she would have been able to do so if she had a steady stream of income.

However, some men say they don't want their women working, but they don't want to provide the woman wants. Isn't that having double standards?

I may be wrong in my assertions but I was just thinking about this, and I need clarification.

MJBOLT:
https://www.nairaland.com/6612348/husband-paid-n580k-bride-price

DEMZEE:


A masculine hybrid beast woman is a bad bet for a long-term relationship

Belafonte:


Women have always had rights relative to the times they existed. Society is what it is and you take what you can from the universe. The simple truth is that, the more comfortable and peaceful the world is, the more luxuries(read rights) people enjoy (read peasants and women)

If a war or apocalypse were to occur today, women's rights would drastically reduce. In fact, they woul trade those rights for security willingly. Women had, on average, more rights in the last days of the Roman Empire than in 1777 which is a more recent time in history.

Your comment about men of substance betrays your limited exposure and peurile worldview. By your logic, the likes of Socrates and Plato who spent hours daily debating top issues of the day aren't men of substance.

Hyerin:


I'm sorry but this is hilarious . Are red-pillers now likening themselves to Plato and Socrates? These philosophers contributed to knowledge. what are you lot contributing to society other than being raging misogynists on online spaces which serves as breeding grounds for r@pists, sexual predators & groomers? (school shooters in the west) Please get off that high horse. All I see are entitled crybabies with fragile egos trying so desperately to claim "high value" or "alpha". The men who actually have those attributes don't spend their days negging women nor do they ascribe those characteristics to themselves -- others do. Acting like you're discovering or saying something profound when it's all just pseudo-intellectualism and sexism.

I really wish men could go their own way since there's so much vitriol for the female sex, not just in words but actions. I mean, why still engage with women if you hate them? It just shows you're not as superior if you still want to be dependent on women being subservient.

Belafonte:


Women have always had rights relative to the times they existed. Society is what it is and you take what you can from the universe. The simple truth is that, the more comfortable and peaceful the world is, the more luxuries(read rights) people enjoy (read peasants and women)

If a war or apocalypse were to occur today, women's rights would drastically reduce. In fact, they woul trade those rights for security willingly. Women had, on average, more rights in the last days of the Roman Empire than in 1777 which is a more recent time in history.

Your comment about men of substance betrays your limited exposure and peurile worldview. By your logic, the likes of Socrates and Plato who spent hours daily debating top issues of the day aren't men of substance.

Susily:


Bro how far? We don't normally quote female monikers here cos they are here to derail this thread of which they are not invited

SOZINN:


But these women will invest more in a relationship. Unlike the other type most men desire who can offer only sex.

MJBOLT:

SOZINN:


Later don't ask me why they bring only sex to the table.

ubunja:
yes these successful highly educated women will invest a lot in a relationship materially than the young broke virgin, but men by and large haven't reached that level of accepting money from women. Recall the numerous clashes of late on this thread on the issue.

Zabiboy:

I also have this thought too man...
Personally, i think it's Relative.. everyone has something they want in their own woman/wife
Funny enough for me( not interested in marriage or relationship shit), "submissiveness" doesn't seem to move me the way it moves many other men..
I dunno but i just have this thought that most women's submission is undercover gold-digging... But lets not go there tho..
Just like undercover said, anyone who doesn't want his wife to work should definitely not have a problem bearing the financial burden. But such a man has some work to do when picking a wife. if not, he'll end up with an "undercover gold-digger"

ubunja:
you are right on all the points you have made Brotherman.

Yet the truth goes deeper. Why do women give their best to the worst men? Why do the purest girls meet with the cruelest of guys?
The answer is in the picture below. And I'll break it down.....


Women are allowed FINANCIAL POVERTY, But they're not allowed moral poverty. While men are allowed MORAL POVERTY, But not allowed financial poverty.

Society will forgive a bad rich man easier than a good broke man. While it will also forgive a good broke woman easier than a rich bad woman.

A Broke girl is the equivalent of a bad man.

When men "save" a woman they save her from FINANCIAL PROBLEMS. not character or moral problems because those are incurable in a woman. Hence "you can't turn a whôré into a housewife".
But you can turn a broke girl into a housewife. And that's what men have been trained to do.
Now, women themselves, when they "save" a man, it's usually from his character or moral defects. Those are curable in a man. While financial defects are hard to cure in a man because when men rely on women for finances they begin to feel emasculated and weak.

The reason why the fresh, fertile girls hand themselves over to players and thugs is not because of some defect in the female wiring, but because A WOMAN IS LIKELY TO MAKE THE MOST IMPACT ON A MAN WHEN SHE'S AT HER PHYSICAL BEST BIOLOGICALLY ----------> a fresh young a virgin.

What that fresh young virgin is hoping will happen is that her body and what she is will hit a man so hard that it will change him. Most of the times it doesn't. But once in a blue moon it works. You may have heard that when Players and thugs do eventually marry, they marry a VIRGIN. And it remains forever the virgin's pride that she tamed an animal.

Which leads us to your last sentence: "Good girls are just bad girls waiting to be unfettered from their aviaries. ".
Yes, when the Virgin meets a Player, something in her is set free. As illustrated by the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale. Meanwhile, when the Player meets a virgin, something in him is slowed down or tamed. As illustrated by the Beauty and The Beast fairy tale.

Aarggh man, game has never tasted so good. I can write on these things all day long.

ubunja:
yes these successful highly educated women will invest a lot in a relationship materially than the young broke virgin, but men by and large haven't reached that level of accepting money from women. Recall the numerous clashes of late on this thread on the issue.

Junnior:

You are right.

However, the chic in that photo does not portray the bolded. She's obviously lacking those two. Most men want her type just for fvcks, not for marriage.

ubunja:
yes these successful highly educated women will invest a lot in a relationship materially than the young broke virgin, but men by and large haven't reached that level of accepting money from women. Recall the numerous clashes of late on this thread on the issue.

miracood:
Why do I always have this reluctancy to ask girls out? Not that I cant ask them out...

But I just don't have that natural desire to go after girls..
I'll hit a girl up.. Collect contact and details but... I don't follow up the paroll. R'plliers what's wrong with me

SOZINN:


Well said brother, well said. But there is another incentive I would like you to assess. This was part of my crux in the post you quoted but it seems you were not cognizant of it. For some eccentric reason, nice guys are perceived to have a weak bed game by females. We know women fantasize about how they want to have their carnal knowledge taken. And sometimes they have wilder desires than men.

Aside some girls that are of the opinion that numerous affable males are virgins. The ones that think nice guys have had body counts believe that they have too few to be able to satisfy them. It's only rational that a guy who has been in so many honeypots would have the best experience to deliver envisaged results in the other room.

We both know that the best men that fit this category are players. These guys have the attitude that gives off the "numerous body count aroma" and the scent of it makes them wet. My point is, women desire wild and who better to give it to them than the bad guy.
Your thoughts man.

ubunja:

Good guys can't fvck. And also women want to create their own good guy. They want to take a bad boy, and mould him into a good guy. That's the feminine mothering instinct.

DEMZEE:


Those successful highly educated women are masculine for fvck's sake. They have masculine traits that are very repulsive and unattractive to men.

Women are sexual objects and men are success objects.

Women are not designed to provision for men period!

Only average low valued beta male simps care about the status and money of their women

DEMZEE:


Those men are beta low valued men, they don't want to accept their own burden of performance

Saviolamemphix:
Y can't u pass ur opinion without sounding st00pid

ubunja:
we all agree.

But here's the thing, Women are changing because there are forces political and corporate that are bent on seeing that change happen.

What will men do? Hold the line or correspondingly change? It's not an easy answer.