41
42

DISCUSSIONI'm feeling depressed about liberalism (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor

I've been doing a lot of mulling around lately about RP theory and I'm depressed about the future of men and women. Don't know where else to post this except here. My thoughts are up for discussion or for comforting ;)

1) Women don't have to marry anymore because they can make their own living and choose to make their own life choices.

2) Traditionally minded men have more difficulty marrying nowadays because the economy is in shambles and a lot of high paying jobs are given to single women due to feminism.

3) It's considered prude or old-fashioned to live apart until marriage, and nowadays if you follow this rule you are a specific kind of religion, and if you're not, people think you're ridiculous for thinking this.

3) Men can cook and take care of themselves and thus lessens the need for a woman to help out at home. A man really only needs to marry to have children, not for love.

4) Due to social media and the Internet, it's easy to find friends, hook-ups or relationships. That means there's less incentive to stay with the same person for the rest of your life. Both men and women can find temporary companionship easily now.

5) Since a lot of women are so financially independent now, traditional men don't know what their purpose is anymore, the one they learned from their fathers.

6) With women being so independent, men lost the need and urge to protect them. If you're not an independent woman, you're mocked for not being able to fend for yourself, and men are brainwashed into thinking they want a woman just as successful as them. So if you're not an interesting and ambitious woman, your SMV is lower.

The bottom line is that I feel traditional thinking is not appreciated anymore. It feels like people think the way to "advance society" is to move toward this type of liberal thinking/feminism, and the people who are "stuck" in the conservative pre-feminism era are considered lame or ridiculous.


[–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (27 children)

Traditional life has taken a beating - you just can't beat instant gratification! It depresses me sometimes too. I think we will swing back around as a society at some point. Just hang on...!

[–]GrowlingBears 7 points8 points  (20 children)

There's a huge difference between just making a living and acquiring enough without so much struggle that you suffer regardless. Feminism is not a philosophy of equality of opportunity but rather forced parity of outcome regardless of input. I get so tired of relationships ending over money because the girl "needs" to work. I don't need the woman to work. I need the woman to demonstrate her nurturing tendencies to prove she can care for children then I'll support her far better than she will ever be able to support herself. It's an exchange of value in like kind. Seems simple to me.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 4 points5 points  (19 children)

That's also another issue - men expect women to have a career now, so if the woman doesn't work, she's boring, lazy, uninteresting. That's why only extremist religions are OK with young women not working, and anything secular doesn't accept it.

[–]GrowlingBears 1 point2 points  (18 children)

I don't buy this explanation. So women can be employed or do nothing is what you just stated. This is the exact problem that feminism supposedly has a cure for. I find it hard to see how a women working at a minimum wage job is increasing her value for a future relationship if it's a "choose a" or "choose b" type of choice.

[–]Galadriel26 4 points5 points  (17 children)

The guys I meet expect me to have an education, a job, stay fit, and have 4-5 different hobbies. Like themselves, so they have someone they can relate to. And of course feminine values. That's fine by me - I'm already doing it. :)

They get much more interested when I say I'm a medical doctor, a martial arts instructor, a semi-pro piano player, have my own apartment, and that I love cooking and knitting. Suddenly interest goes from semi-interested to "wow, when can we meet again?"

[–]GrowlingBears 1 point2 points  (13 children)

Wow. Very little of that interests me since it doesn't demonstrate ability to care for me and nurture children, kindness, or cooperativeness. I guess I'm looking for something very different. But then again, I wouldn't need another high salary in the family given my situation. Stay fit, cooperate to run a house, be feminine and nurturing. That's it for me.

[–]Galadriel26 2 points3 points  (12 children)

I do the the things you mentioned too, but I think most girls in my area do, so it's not enough. :( My last boyfriend, who was an engineer, dumped me because I wasn't into week-long wilderness hikes and survival with just our bare hands. Eventually he found a girl who was. But it might have to do with age, the guys I meet are all in their 20's. "Having similar hobbies" seems to be super important to them.

[–]GrowlingBears 2 points3 points  (7 children)

From my perspective, a man shouldn't be looking to treat his woman the same as a male friend. I see this to be a pervasive mistake that tears the woman out of the nurturing support role and thrusts her into a more "equal" role. This isn't fair to the woman.

[–]Galadriel26 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You might be right, but it's okay for me to have the role of both the best friend and the wife at the same time. :) As long as I have the energy to do everything.

edit: bad statement from me, doing both will give me energy, not take it. -_-

[–]GrowlingBears 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't say it's right or wrong. I'd say that the situation you described didn't satisfy the requirements for the roles and adjustment or guidance was necessary but never provided so you separated. I've met very few women that can maintain a true friendship status in a loving relationship without guidance. There's such a huge difference between what men expect of their male friends and what women expect of female friends. I'd rather have a lover and nurturing woman than an truly equal friend since I'd view her in a masculine light which would tarnish the love I felt. Gender roles exist for a reason and culture tore them all apart. Now we're lost.

I dated a female cardiologist a while back and heard a similar disbelief from her that I valued her for her feminine traits not her job. I wouldn't dream of ever creating a conflict over something like that since it's her chosen path but I already satisfy the requirements for a high value captain so I don't need a second fractional income. I need a healthy, fertile woman to make children and help care for them. I know it's full on tradcon by American standards but I was raised very differently so I have structured my life accordingly. Then regressive liberal feminism happened... Yay feminism!

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Tagging along into this conversation - this was what I meant. It's not enough to be an attractive nurturing feminine woman to find a high SMV man - you need to have a job (preferably an interesting one that isn't minimum wage), your own group of friends and hobbies. Like a man.

My ex boyfriend and I had issues because he's been brainwashed into thinking females are equal to males. We had a fight because we went on a 4 day trekking trip in the mountains, and I couldn't hike as fast as him. I'm average shape, not an athlete but exercise regularly, and I'm 5'4. He was 6'4. Guess who had longer legs and bigger muscles and the testosterone to hike faster. This was one of the breaking points in our relationship. I didn't want to be equal to him but he just expected me to because "women can do it just as well as men."

[–]GrowlingBears 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Thanks for sharing that. I wasn't quite sure which side of the fence your story came down on. I've made the same mistake when I was much younger. I then learned it was so much more fun to go lazy camping and spend the day basking in the sun and cuddling. I now do my survival camping alone or with a family member. It's much more rewarding and doesn't scare the girlfriend when it's time to gut and cook squirrels.

I'm still not sold on the idea that a woman should basically learn complete and full independence then expect she has gained the skills to become a valuable first mate. I'm running into so many logical roadblocks when I consider this situation. I work with multiple roundhouse-kicking crime-fighting "I don't need no man" single mother in training professionals in my career. So many typical 90's power suit career women that never learned how to keep a house or care for a man and now desire to stay home and be kept. No, you don't get both because you chose one skill set over the other and now you're no use to my household. It's like this type can't accept reality. I'm the last one to tell a person not to try but this just keeps resulting in failed homes and neglected children. Yay feminism! I'm saying that a lot lately...

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

But it might have to do with age, the guys I meet are all in their 20's. "Having similar hobbies" seems to be super important to them.

I think this is part of it. I'm 27, but when I remember dating in my earlier 20's, a lot of forming relationships were based on interests and similar hobbies. Now that I'm late 20's and dating men in their 30's, they have more expectations of having good wife qualities and some interests of my own (so doesn't have to be the same interests). I feel a lot less pressure dating now, I feel like I can just be myself and not have to compete to be "successful and interesting enough."

I also notice a lot of my friends who have significant others +/-2 years their age, has the type of relationship as you stated (equal). My boyfriend's seven years older than me and I feel more of this traditional dynamic with him.

[–]GrowlingBears 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I see the same thing with the age difference. It seems like the smaller the age difference the more volatile the emotional balance in the relationship. The larger age difference seems to, but not always, introduce more stability and lower overall emotional stress level.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yeah, and I guess for people who do want that equality can have it. I'm just glad there are still men who want a cute younger wife to take care of, and I'm not forced to be equal if I don't want to.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Yes, this is what I meant!

[–]GrowlingBears 0 points1 point  (1 child)

OK, I misread that somehow. We are in violent agreement!

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

:)))

[–]SharK3D 5 points6 points  (1 child)

The pendulum is already swinging back. In the coming years we will right our path towards our true destiny: the stars.

[–]Galadriel26 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can't wait for that true destiny though. Let's just join www.mars-one.com. :)

[–]BadinBoarder 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yep, like a pendulum, movements and cultural views always swing back. I already see it happening with more and more ppl mocking feminism and SJWs. I don't think the future is as bleak as the present

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Very true. Insanity can only last so long before people want law and order to rule once again.

[–]UCanHaveTheCrown 18 points19 points  (3 children)

I have one child, a son, and with the rise of feminism and man hating that is happening I often feel sorrow for his future and the relationship challenges he will likely face. I especially wonder if by seeing the roles taken in his parents relationship how much more difficult it will be to find a woman he is looking for is he bases his preference off ours.

[–]JusticeForScalia 5 points6 points  (1 child)

On mobile, please excuse my typos. I don't have children yet, but I know this will be a huge challenge, especially bc I grew up in a very liberal part of Los Angeles. Indoctrination has gotten worse since then. Things I know helped me was talking out with older conservatives, like my grandparents and my parents friends. I was always an old soul. Also, my mom always played conservative talk radio in the car, which really helped. Sharing another view point and well thought out arguments daily. Maybe doing what Ben carson's mom did too, with weekly mini book reports to introduce him to new ideas? I don't know if Boy Scouts is completely destroyed in your neighborhood, but sports and competition is also really helpful. Lastly, Ron Paul and other libertarians have created activities and philosophy education for home schooled kids. These might be open for kids who aren't home schooled and be a way to meet other sympathetic parents. Sending you a hug.

[–]5peasinapod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Great comment and great username lol.

[–]Willow-girl 28 points29 points  (1 child)

1) It is good for women to be able to make their own living. My paternal grandfather ran out on his family in 1927, when my father (the youngest of seven children) was only 2. I can only imagine the hardship my immigrant grandmother must have endured to keep her family together, especially through the Great Depression. It's good for women to have options.

2) I'm opposed to quotas, but if a woman is objectively the best candidate for a job, why shouldn't she get it?

3) Men CAN do these things, but most don't really like it and are happy to have their wives/girlfriends take care of the domestic stuff.

4) I do think there's a tendency toward "the-grass-is-always-greener" syndrome. The paradox of choice probably comes into play as well (i.e., when people have too many options, they become mentally paralyzed and have difficulty choosing, or being satisfied with their choice).

5) Men are more than just ambulatory wallets! Just because a woman can support herself doesn't mean she won't want a good man in her life.

[–]ragnarockette4 Stars 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I definitely agree with #1. Also - I like working. I have interests and passions and enjoy improving my skills and I certainly like having 2 incomes. I can still be feminine and submissive and have a great career!

[–]youreallmeatanyway 9 points10 points  (7 children)

Women don't have to marry anymore because they can make their own living and choose to make their own life choices.

This I dont necessarily think of as a total negative. It gives women more choice, which is a good thing (albeit confusing for some).

Traditionally minded men have more difficulty marrying nowadays because the economy is in shambles and a lot of high paying jobs are given to single women due to feminism.

Are you talking about gender quotas? Thankfully in the USA this isnt too widespread as of yet (except maybe on the uber-liberal coasts? Or progressive dominated industries).

It's considered prude or old-fashioned to live apart until marriage, and nowadays if you follow this rule you are a specific kind of religion, and if you're not, people think you're ridiculous for thinking this.

To me it is just impractical.

Men can cook and take care of themselves and thus lessens the need for a woman to help out at home. A man really only needs to marry to have children, not for love.

I learned to do my own laundry when I was 10. Worked as a chef for years. I own my home and keep it clean. I can promise you I still need a woman for love.

Both men and women can find temporary companionship easily now.

Yes, though I find temporary companionship very unfulfilling when its done.

Since a lot of women are so financially independent now, traditional men don't know what their purpose is anymore, the one they learned from their fathers.

I sort of agree on this one. Though a RP woman who has a good income of her own still knows how to make her man feel needed.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

To me it is just impractical.

I see your point, and while I definitely agree that it's useful to understand how the living situation would work before marriage, I feel like this is a disadvantage for the woman. She basically gives the man a lifestyle of having a wife (assuming they're a traditional type couple) without securing the commitment. The man benefits from having a woman in the house without giving commitment. How many couples do you know live together for years and years (usually the woman hoping to lead to marriage) then break up? With the rise of relationship culture (hook-ups, cohabitation without marriage, transient situations) I think it's up to the woman to protect herself from unfortunate situations like the one listed above.

Yes, though I find temporary companionship very unfulfilling when its done.

That's reassuring to know that there are still men who don't want a hookup.

[–]youreallmeatanyway 4 points5 points  (5 children)

How many couples do you know live together for years and years (usually the woman hoping to lead to marriage) then break up? With the rise of relationship culture (hook-ups, cohabitation without marriage, transient situations) I think it's up to the woman to protect herself from unfortunate situations like the one listed above.

You make a good point, though I would actually consider this to be a good (well, "preferable") thing to the alternative: not living together first, getting married, then finding out that you're incompatible after you've tied the knot.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Yes, but there are ways to go about learning about each other's living habits before marriage, such as taking vacations together where you have to spend time together. Not living together before marriage doesn't mean that you can't stay overnight at your boyfriend/girlfriends place as well. You're just not paying rent together or sharing the space together long-term.

Also, I just strongly believe that a couple who is committed and willing to work through problems should be able to solve most living habit problems. Little things like messiness or who does the chores, etc. Should be discussed beforehand, not cohabiting because it's a romantic idea to live together and then realizing you hate the other person. However, smoking cigarettes in house (extreme example), is ridiculous to me. You should know your future husband/wife smokes cigarettes in the house before you marry them and live with them.

The fact that I'm down voted for being Pro-"save living together for marriage" in a RP subreddit is just proof that people think the option is ridiculous now.

[–]RedPillWonder 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Yes, but there are ways to go about learning about each other's living habits before marriage

And

Also, I just strongly believe that a couple who is committed and willing to work through problems should be able to solve most living habit problems.

Agree wholeheartedly!

I wish more women believed the way you do.

The man gets all the benefits of a wife, without a greater commitment that marriage entails. It works out for some, but how many women end up looking back on a failed relationship after "x" number of years that they can't get back and regret doing so?

In some studies many years ago, one of the predictors of divorce used to be if a couple lived together before marriage. I'm not sure if that still holds.

On a somewhat related note, I'd be curious to know how long women on here (or elsewhere, for that matter) who want marriage are willing to wait to secure marriage?

Whether they live together or separately. Finishing college, being financially able, deployments, etc can all delay things, but assuming a couple has the means to marry, I've wondered how long a woman is willing to wait before she has to decide whether she'll continue to stay or end the relationship.

Because here on RPW, there's emphasis on SMV and as the years go by, the trend only goes in one direction. She's using precious time and hoping it finally gets to marriage. Assuming that's what a woman wants, as I stated above. I'm specifically wondering how many women here will stay in their current relationship if yet another year and then another continue to go by and no marriage.

Talk of it, sure, but actually pulling the trigger and making that commitment.

I've seen it happen more and more. Women will say well discussing it and he says he wants it, we're in agreement, but it never seems to happen.

Or asked differently, how many years would you give a relationship before you finally think, OK, this likely isn't happening, I'm moving on? Not you, personally, just wondering in general.

Certainly not all, by any means, but a growing number.

But on the flip side, who can blame the guys? With the way many women are, many guys will take all the benefits, including living together without the marital commitment.

It's a vicious cycle with men and women and many men are simply responding to how things are and thinking, no way!

Edited to add:

The fact that I'm down voted for being Pro-"save living together for marriage" in a RP subreddit is just proof that people think the option is ridiculous now.

My best friend's marriage was well over a decade ago, and when he and his fiancée were applying for a mortgage loan, the banker and everyone they dealt with were shocked when they told him they were living separately until marriage. "We deal with a lot of couples and this is almost unheard of" or something along those lines is what he told him.

And this was in a smaller city, maybe close to 15 years ago, so I can only imagine how much more prevalent it is now.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I was raised that sharing a house is for marriage. My brother and his wife abided by this rule, but of course they had taken some vacations together and stayed at each other's places prior to that. I'm 27 and never have lived with a boyfriend. Sometimes I feel insecure or stupid...but the opportunity never came up. I also don't feel the urge to live with a boyfriend though...I'm not clingy or desperate for company and I've got my finances under check. There was never a reason to.

But we'll see how it works in my favor. My current boyfriend knows I can't live together before marriage and he's pretty accepting of it. But like I said, I do feel insecure when my friends who have cohabited ask me "Don't you think you should see how it goes before marrying?" But to me it's not my decision to make, I strongly feel it should be the man to ask me to live with him.

[–]RedPillWonder 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I was raised that sharing a house is for marriage.

Same. I know others who weren't raised that way but still hold or came to adopt that belief.

I'm 27 and never have lived with a boyfriend.

This is a plus. You get to share a "first" (at least for you, idk about him) that can act like an emotional or mental anchor when you do marry and live together with someone for the first time.

It may be that if someone has lived with an SO and the relationship ended, or it's happened a handful of times over the years, that the next time it happens (whether in marriage or not) that the bond or emotional "adhesiveness" isn't as strong as it otherwise would be. To them, there may be a little bit of I've already had this experience, it's happened before, they've left, this one may or may not be the same. It gets a little easier to leave if and when things get tougher.

But if you've never done that, and it's a first for you or both you and your Captain, it can give you a little stronger bond than what you would otherwise have. It makes the thought of leaving or actually doing it at least some harder, and thoughts of staying together and making it work at least some easier. Maybe significantly more so.

I do feel insecure when my friends who have cohabited ask me "Don't you think you should see how it goes before marrying?"

There's no need to. Change your perspective and feel good about it. Just as I'd guess they feel good about their decision to cohabit because of their beliefs, you can feel about the decision not to because of yours. Let your perspective be (or deepen what you already believe) that this will contribute to a stronger relationship, and I think you'll find any insecurities start to fall away.

In today's society, you're the rebel and the cool one. ;-) Doing things differently. And the one who's likely to have a better relationship in the long run because of it.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, I do feel better about my decision now, even when I know it's the right thing to do and it's just social pressure telling me I'm being ridiculous. Plus, I think it still leaves a nice romantic element of moving in together because you're now man and wife...that being after you've done the practical thing of vetting each other carefully before you've decided to get married.

I have a friend about my age, who has been living with her boyfriend for almost five years...he makes good money but he hasn't asked her to marry him, and now she's starting to have hypergamous thoughts. I just don't want this situation happening to me. When I move in, it's for good.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (8 children)

I'm glad for all of the above, frankly.

I'm glad I can make a great salary like I do and that I don't have to be married to a man I am not attracted to and suck his cock or be homeless. I'm glad I don't have to have children because it is expected of me because being childfree is acknowledged as a lifestyle now. I'm glad that I can live with my boyfriend and we can have sex outside of marriage. I'm glad that I don't have to be a housewife. I'm glad that my boyfriend and I can both contribute to household chores and neither one of us is expected to do all of the cooking and cleaning. I love having social media and meeting people in my interest areas and being able to use it for dating if I'm single. I'm glad my boyfriend is proud of my career and doesn't think it is silly, and I'm glad he's not emasculated by it. I'm glad, again, that my survival and thriving in this world doesn't depend on keeping a man happy or I have to stand for mistreatment and his having a mistress or I'll be homeless and starving.

Think about all of that. You still have a CHOICE to live a so-called "traditional" life. But not all of us want that choice, and having it be the ONLY choice is not something most of us want to return to.

[–]namaste62 5 points6 points  (2 children)

THIS. Thank you. I was beginning to go crazy reading the rest of these comments. I'm a fellow independent working professional, unmarried in a great relationship and happily childfree. And I wouldn't have it any other way. Sad that women feel they need to be second to a man, but I think those like you and I are helping to progress our gender.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels this way :).

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why is it sad? We chose to live this life, just like you chose to be independent working unmarried and childfree. I don't think it's sad for women who chose to live your lifestyle if that's what you really want and I'm genuinely happy for my female friends who don't want family because now there's less stigma to be unmarried. The point of the post was saying it's more difficult for a woman who chooses to live a traditional lifestyle now.

Also, if you're going crazy reading opinions from traditional women, because this is what this sub is about...why are you here? You should know these are the kind of responses you would get.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

There's nothing wrong with what you stated above, and I also enjoy some of the benefits mentioned. However, the point of the post is that now we've swung the other way - feminism is so widely accepted that if you don't want to live a feminist life, you're now shamed or thought of as stuck in the 18th century. I work but I also chose to live a more traditional lifestyle but I'm mocked by my friends often (both male and female), especially as I'm not affiliated with any religious institution. As you said, I will continue with my choice but it comes with difficulties because of what I listed.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well, you have the right to live as you choose, but you don't have the right to live free from judgment. I still get judged for not wanting kids but I don't care. It's my life.

[–]prettylittledictator 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Um, what?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

You don't speak English?

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nothing can take the place of a woman in a man's life with virtue and character. This is a universal truth to all men of good heart and mind.

This is wonderful to hear, and it makes me feel better as a traditional woman amongst a sea of attention-seeking women. Thanks for your response.

[–]RedPillWonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I find myself just as you said telling myself "there is no reason to get married, I don't want kids, I only want a wife. However in today's society there are no women whom want to be a WIFE more than a mother or just want provision and comfort post wall. Marriage is for kids nowadays, not to build an intimate relationship, and enjoy a higher quality of life with another person."

I hold the same position. I'm open to kids, but lean against it. More like a 60/40 or 70/30 split against. I don't how many men in society share the same belief.

But for those who do, I think you hit the nail on the head with women not wanting to be a wife more than a mother. Not all, but a great many.

The ambition and purpose in men is failing for we do not perceive to have anything "out there" to be ambitious for. The prize of our labor was never about money or "things." It was a wife whom you cherish by your side. Whatever it took to get that we would do. Nothing can take the place of a woman in a man's life with virtue and character. This is a universal truth to all men of good heart and mind.

This.

I'll add:

"He who findeth a wife findeth a good thing" combined with "Who can find a virtuous woman? For her price is far above rubies." - biblical proverbs

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]RedPillWonder 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    many more regarding a good wife, and that of a wicked wife. It's not that we as men cannot be alone, it's not that we can't be successful and survive and progress in our life alone, HOWEVER it is not the ideal way it is supposed to be.A good woman adds immense and irreplaceable value to an already good man's life.

    It's striking that God (if one believes in divine inspiration of scripture) makes note of a bad wife/woman with verses like:

    "It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and angry woman"

    And

    "It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman and in a wide house."

    And:

    "The contentions of a wife are a continual dropping"

    This sounds like something you read on RP daily about women who are no good hags, shrews, etc lol

    Because as great or as horrible as men can be, women seem to have the power to be greater/worse. They can inspire a man to achieve heights unheard of, or cause him the worst pain and misery imaginable.

    Ah, women!

    [–]Rommel0502 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Feminism has gotten almost exactly what it has asked for. The result? Single parent families are becoming the norm, the nuclear family has been almost completely dismantled, and by almost any metric women in general are more unhappy than ever.

    As long as it continues to buy votes, more of this is going to happen. People just need to realize it for the failure its been.

    [–]bowie747 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    It's refreshing to hear a woman having these thoughts, lots of men I know are having them too. They're common on this sub of course.

    On the positive side I feel like society is pushing back against liberalism, because many of us can see it is destroying our intersexual dynamics and therefore harming the family unit, which is the foundation of a successful society.

    Despite technological advances and the subsequent lack of need for each other, men and women still have their biological polarities which attract us to each other. No amount of technology will ever replace that soft femininity which is so warm and welcoming. Red pill is about remembering these qualities and accentuating them, so that maybe we can have with each other what our parent's parents had.

    There's plenty of men out there (myself included) looking for a more traditional relationship. Perhaps not 1700s style, but ~1950s style would be nice. A friend of mine confided in me that the reason his gf fell for him is because he replied to texts when he saw them, instead of waiting for days. That was refreshing. It is hard to find a high quality woman with a reasonable amount previous partners, but we'll keep our eyes and ears peeled.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    harming the family unit, which is the foundation of a successful society.

    I think this is what I'm worried about mostly. It's not even about female independence anymore, there's just so many options out there for both men and women. It's accessible for everyone to move to another country, to get social benefits through rideshare, to network and make business connections through social media. Men have options too. They don't have to stay in a 9-5 job and provide for a family anymore; they can choose to jump from country to country, sampling different jobs and cultures, having temporary girlfriends. Perfect for any alpha type male. People nowadays now equate success and purpose to accomplishments outside of raising a family.

    No amount of technology will ever replace that soft femininity which is so warm and welcoming.

    This is true, and my own boyfriend is beginning to be aware of the benefit of a loyal feminine girlfriend. He had a liberal circle of friends and lifestyle before, but he's actually told me how he appreciates a girl who is sweet, nurturing, respectful but also likes to travel and explore, and I haven't given him a reason to leave me because I'm conscious of what I have to offer in the relationship.

    [–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    This depresses me a lot too. However I think conservatism is having a renaissance. At least I hope so. I like to read the website Return of Kings (surprising, I know. It is RP) because much of the site focuses on traditional values, relationships, and fostering masculinity. That and coming here to RPW and hearing the perspective of you lovely ladies!

    [–]Gardrothard 9 points10 points  (2 children)

    Destruction of patriarchy and emergence of matriarchy that ends up being replaced by patriarchy again is just how things always went in history. On the bigger time scale, this is just a natural thing like change of seasons.

    A new idea is born out of the brain of many people, but only a few have the skills and influence to spread it. As the idea starts to spread it's good and beneficial for most because it's still pure and contained within a smaller group of more intelligent and idealistic people. But soon, like some kind of virus it starts eating its host. More people jump on the train because of conformism (and their intelligence is lower (which is what made them prone to conformism in the first place) and motives aren't that pure) which starts to turn this into more toxic and selfish thing. Soon enough, the idea has consumed the population to the point that people start feeling it's futile to work against it and they try to "enjoy the destruction" or even further push it to have their agendas met. And then, someone else comes along, comes up with something else and some new idea starts spreading through society once again. Some come out of it alive, some not (figuratively or not).

    Like summer and winter, both are too hot/cold, the good times are those in transition, they aren't stable states. So that chase will go on forever, from hot to cold blaming the winter or summer and asking for the other one that's not present.

    Look at any idea - capitalism, christianity, feminism, socialism, sexual liberation or whatever else. And we keep fighting over this or that idea, when the real problem is that we are just carriers of ideas, infected by them as if they were some virus. The ideas are fighting between themselves, not people. Just like viruses, they don't care about their host's life, they only need the host to spread them further.

    Feminism has it's faults, but do not kid yourself thinking that patriarchy is much better. I grew up in patriarchal culture. Girls go to schools and chase carriers too, but not because they are liberated, but because their parents tell them "You need to have a job so that you don't need to stay with a husband who's abusive because you have nowhere to go". You fix one problem and you get another one. And if you don't get it, then you come up with it yourself. That's how people work. That's the problem, not that this or that idea is better or worse. It just depends on where you are. A hot day seems like the best thing in the winter, and when that day comes, after a while people long for the snow. Just sit down and watch the show and try to find humor in things.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Girls go to schools and chase carriers too, but not because they are liberated, but because their parents tell them "You need to have a job so that you don't need to stay with a husband who's abusive because you have nowhere to go".

    This is true, and my parents came from a patriarchal culture before immigrating to America so I do see some of this in my mother - she was a freelance teacher so she made some money but she was also helpless in a lot of ways. My father had to take care of her which makes him lose his freedom. You're right, there's no one good option.

    [–]Danimorah 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Thank you!!!!! Some people on TRP and RPW seem to believe that everything was better before feminism, liberalism, etc. It was NOT. Some things were better, some things were so much worse that people felt the need for a new system.

    The only thing that keeps repeating itself is that we human beings are imperfect and ideologies always fail at a certain point, and we (societies) just gotta get ourselves together and move on with the lessons (hopefully) learned from that time.

    NEVER IDEALIZE THE PAST, IT'S A TRAP. Just like socialism didn't work before and will never work again, patriarchy AS WE KNEW IT won't work either.

    My approach: pick the ideas and behaviors that seem to embody the greatest good, whichever ideology they might come from. A quick example: from family values in the past, we can agree that being feminine and working for strong marriages was good, staying with an abusive husband because it is a disgrace to be divorced was bad. From the present, I personally believe that being open to diversity and giving acceptance to minorities is good, and that identifying with a snowflake lesbian transgender pony chair is just being silly.

    Feminism and liberalism are going nowhere, instead of complaining about it we just gotta pick what's useful from these ideologies and work to transform people and ideas around us for the better, starting by improving ourselves and inspiring others to do so!

    [–]dunamis_energeia 2 points3 points  (10 children)

    I agree with every point you make, but it's not just hard for "traditional men", for "traditional women" the same happens.
    Not sure if you are american or not but it seems odd to me that you mix all the bad things that happen with "liberal" values. For what I know it is not the case at all. I mean, if you are talking about the first liberal views, such as the classical english schools, like Locke and Rousseau, yes, youa re right, but today those view are what you would call libertarianism.
    Could you elaborate more in what liberal politics has to do with it?

    [–]PinkTulipz 0 points1 point  (9 children)

    I think she is referring to what is now considered leftism. For example, I consider myself classically liberal, but nowadays that's easily considered conservative in many social circles.

    The political climate is evolving fast now, so it can be hard to find the right label.

    [–]dunamis_energeia 1 point2 points  (7 children)

    I'm not american so I wanted to check if it was the case or not, thank you. What bugs me is that most people do not have to see that either way they were measured taken to what the OP is describing. For example: having in account the specialization of the work force and the international division of labor those classic liberal ideals led to a complete dissolution of the family structure. International competition led to the career mentality that goes like this: I am the maker of my destiny and do not need any background to achieve meaningful life, a value that matters in the world. With that mindset people got so self-centered, so individualistic, that the social bonds and the community role was put aside. The emotional needs and the help that social strutures give to the individual are substituted for an economic mesure of the benefit each person can give. All is objective, numerable and indiferent.
    To be honest, I admire the US on that matter, you guys do seem to have a totally different spirit about the growth and well-being of each community.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    I'm American, but my boyfriend is European and some of the points I made refers to some problems I saw with his culture and also the modernization of his long standing traditional culture.

    For instance, he does complain that now that women work, he doesn't feel needed to take care of the family. Even women in his culture don't feel like men should be the head of the family anymore (even though all the parents generation was traditional like this). This is coming from a socialist European country.

    Also, many men and women are cohabiting in his country without being married, either 1) simply they want companionship not marriage, which makes sense, but also 2) because the man cannot make enough money to provide a house by himself, he needs to split the cost with the woman. This goes back to how women entering the workforce leaves less money for men to make.

    [–]dunamis_energeia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    YES! I do agree with that. The housing renting-buying is expensive and people tend to not want to live alone for that reason, and for what you pointed out: being lonely.
    There is a huge housing problem everywhere. It sure makes an impact in social interactions. It is very interesting to think about it.
    Before there were this huge properties where entire families would live, and the houses went from generation to generation. It doesn't happen anymore.

    [–]PinkTulipz 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    That was a great observation! There is a very complicated phenomenon happening right now. I don't mean to derail this conversation, but do you mind me asking where you're from?

    I notice this new social conflict happening in many parts of the world, and I'm curious to know where it hasn't spread to yet.

    [–]dunamis_energeia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm from Portugal. In the big cities, specially inside the universities it is spread, also in the newspapers.
    In here it is now very hard to have a traditional life if you don't have wealth or live in the countryside.
    Comunities are usually very fragmented unless, once again, on the small villages or in more poor regions, like social housing places. I have to say that some city councils are trying to change that but it takes time. Where I live I've been noticing some changes that excit me for the near future.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    To be honest, I admire the US on that matter, you guys do seem to have a totally different spirit about the growth and well-being of each community.

    Could you explain more on this? My socialist Mediterranean boyfriend seems to think American communities are horrible and don't think about the wellbeing of the community (which I disagree, plenty happens in helping the disadvantaged where I grew up in the US). Also my boyfriend has never been to the US, he's just making assumptions off of the news and documentaries.

    I would think European countries in general think more about the wellbeing of a community because of its more socialist policies.

    [–]dunamis_energeia 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I'm talking only basing my opinion on tv series and films. In the suburbs, or in those states that don't seem very populated, I often see those school parent meetings and volunteering. That classical "welcome to the neighborhood" brownie plate, the neighborhood vigilance, street markets, community parties, church events, it's so different! I would love to live in a place like that, to build a place like that.
    European contries do have nice socialist policies, but I'm talking more about the feeling of belonging and wanting to be a part of a community group.
    I'm a bit critical of public sevice, it drives me mad when things are build/made for commun use and are inefficient. And what I can tell from my experience, what tend to happen is individuals start relaing more on the state than in each other. Kids go to school and the parents don't take care of them in the house; old people are found dead months after they passed away because the neighbors didn't noticed the person was missing; doctors are missing almost everywhere because they only want to be in the big cities; I could go on for a while.
    The US is far from perfect and there are things I don't like, but the care for others who live right at the next door is moving. Is it really the case?

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I think the US is more focused on family and community than most people think. For example, my Taiwanese friend lived in NYC for a while, now she's married to a German man and has spent Christmas in Germany, which definitely has a beautiful environment. However, she criticized Americans from not having a family feel during the holidays...

    ...but I've had two American boyfriends, spent Christmas with them and I can tell you that they emphasize the family a lot during Christmas. Lots of relatives, gift giving with some family traditions (some are individual traditions) and just overall a sense of joy and family. So I was confused to why my friend thinks an American Christmas is just two people sitting together at home by themselves.

    Volunteering is a big part of American culture, so you will see children, teenagers, college students and adults volunteering. I do enjoy this aspect.

    I grew up in a small but very diverse city, so I think there was more of a need for community - for example, at my high school there were ridiculous amounts of associations. Asian American Association, Indian American Association, Math Club, Chess Club, Skaters Club, Thespians, Break Dancing Club - so yes, I suppose there is a sense of if you're interested in something then you're able to find "your group."

    Usually Americans are pretty willing to help others, for example during the Flint Michigan water crisis, a lot of people from my city rallied and donated bottled water. But of course this doesn't get said on BBC or CNN, only the fact that "the white governor disadvantaged the black city" angle was written.

    People are pretty friendly and willing to help although it's a little different in the big cities where people have a faster pace of life.

    My high school was big on fundraising from the community, so there were lots of events, to raise money for trips or scholarships. I don't know about others but our neighbors do look out for each other. My family's Asian but our Caucasian neighbors have helped us get the mail whenever we've been traveling and my dad helps the husband with his computer problems, haha.

    That being said, there's still a lot of things wrong with the country and some of the "benefits" also come with a slew of social and economic problems. There a lot of things I hate about the US and sometimes wished I lived in Europe. But..I always thought socialist countries would have more of a sense of community than the US because of a more coherent cultural identity and less individuality. My boyfriend's southern Italian, as Mediterranean as you can get haha. I visited Sicily and it seems like there's a general sense of Sicilian identity, and he always goes on about how great the public service is (medical, for instance). The only thing he complains about Italy is the lack of freedom to be an entrepreneur, because rich Italians already have a monopoly on their major brands. He claims the Italian government just wants their citizens to be employees and not try to advance the economy.

    One thing I did notice was that in the US, people seems more proactive about changing their situation (whether it's economic or personal) whereas in Italy, they're just totally accepting of their life and what it offers them. My boyfriend left Italy for this reason.

    How different is Portugal from this? So even with socialist policies, you don't feel like you belong...?

    [–]VigilantRedRoosterModerator 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    The political climate is evolving fast now, so it can be hard to find the right label.

    Tell me about it. I consider myself closest to "classical liberal" and hate the way left-right labels are used as empty proxies. People claim Obama is both the most communist/fascist dictator and also the weakest most ineffectual president America has ever had, and try to assign it to "the left" when in fact Obama is quite a ways right of Richard Nixon by many metrics.

    Left-right politics is meaningless and divisive; it is plugged-in behavior that serves Blue Pill means and ends, but often not the self-interests of the very people arguing.

    [–]nonthaki 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    You have got it wrong . Its all your choice . You are victimizing yourself .

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yup!

    [–]neveragoodtime 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    1) Women don't have to marry anymore because they prefer to make their own living and choose to make their own life choices. Compromise is hard.

    2) Traditionally minded men have more difficulty marrying nowadays because their are very few women that are worth the 50% chance of divorce. 2 of 3 that are initiated by the wife.

    3) It's considered prude or old-fashioned to live apart until marriage, and nowadays if you follow this rule you are a specific kind of religion, and if you're not, people think you're ridiculous for thinking this. Women don't like to be considered ridiculous, so they will move in with any guy who asks.

    3) Men could always cook and take care of themselves. Women used to offer to do this for men in exchange for love, family, and children.

    4) Due to social media and the Internet, it's easy for women to find friends, hook-ups or relationships. That means there's less incentive to stay with one man for the rest of your life, when so many men are giving her attention online.

    5) Since a lot of women are so financially independent now, they don't recognize a value to partnering with a man. They equate money with power and relationships are about giving up power to another.

    You make some valid points here about the difficulty for women to maintain a traditional lifestyle. I'm sure it's unfair to place all the blame on women ( men have a different set of problems ), but when I look closely at the issues you raise, they are all rooted in what women have available to them now. Good men are now so abundant that a woman can't see any value in a single one. The second her man disagrees with her she remembers that her tinder inbox is full. And that option is always available to her, until, sadly it's not. And in all that time she has never learned how to add value to another person's life, because abundant men have always been competing to add value to hers. And the world we find ourselves in is one where women have rejected the difficult path of preparing to be a wife and mother for one family.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    2) Traditionally minded men have more difficulty marrying nowadays because their are very few women that are worth the 50% chance of divorce.

    Yes, this is true. Even my own boyfriend is aware of this (women initiating divorce so he has to be careful who he chooses as his wife).

    4) Due to social media and the Internet, it's easy for women to find friends, hook-ups or relationships. That means there's less incentive to stay with one man for the rest of your life, when so many men are giving her attention online.

    My boyfriend told me a story of how he had a friend who only married his wife for three months - because then he found out she was cheating on him through Whatsapp, by sending nudes to another man.

    [–]ElfFey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I agree with everything you wrote. If you don't mind I'd like to post my thoughts.

    1) Women don't have to marry anymore because they can make their own living and choose to make their own life choices.

    A lot of posters point out that this isn't a bad thing, BUT a long time ago somebody on here asked "Can women be MGTOW?" and I responded that modern women are WGTOW, because of feminism. It was a long post but here you've basically summed it up in one line.

    2) Traditionally minded men have more difficulty marrying nowadays because the economy is in shambles and a lot of high paying jobs are given to single women due to feminism.

    Not to make this political but I think this is why Trump won. My parents (immigrants to US) always said, "There will never be a revolution in America, until people can't feed their families." Well it's not quite at that level, but it is at the level that men can't have families due to the economy.

    3) It's considered prude or old-fashioned to live apart until marriage, and nowadays if you follow this rule you are a specific kind of religion, and if you're not, people think you're ridiculous for thinking this.

    Yes! How has it become weirder nowadays to not live together before marriage??? If you're living together shouldn't you be, you know, married? Everyone thinks I'm weird.

    3) Men can cook and take care of themselves and thus lessens the need for a woman to help out at home. A man really only needs to marry to have children, not for love.

    I recently ran into this problem practically with the guy I was dating. He kept taking me out for dinner, which I appreciated, but tbh I would rather cook and I was starting to feel guilty about the $$$. My mom cooks dinner for my dad almost every night, and I would be happy doing the same for my partner. He laughed me off, "I eat out every meal." This skill I have is one he doesn't need (or at least, doesn't appreciate.)

    4) Due to social media and the Internet, it's easy to find friends, hook-ups or relationships. That means there's less incentive to stay with the same person for the rest of your life. Both men and women can find temporary companionship easily now.

    There also isn't as much social stigma over breakups, cheating, etc.

    5) Since a lot of women are so financially independent now, traditional men don't know what their purpose is anymore, the one they learned from their fathers.

    Existential crisis.

    6) With women being so independent, men lost the need and urge to protect them. If you're not an independent woman, you're mocked for not being able to fend for yourself, and men are brainwashed into thinking they want a woman just as successful as them. So if you're not an interesting and ambitious woman, your SMV is lower.

    It ties into your first point, and a lot of the responses. I think there is no way out of it except to be ambitious, even career-oriented yourself, (I'm not and I realized I sort of fake it by working with kids and animals.) More than ever men need to see you have a life outside of him and are not waiting on him. The problem is, it's not really fulfilling to what feminine women actually desire. It is definitely not conducive to the captain/first mate model of relationships.

    On the other hand, two working couples is the norm for most people throughout history, as most people are poor. The problem imo is that now society has tagged on this "I don't need no man!" attitude to a working woman. Well, men were never supposed to be there just to financially support you.

    [–]prettylittledictator 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I make my own living and decided to get married cause I want to be a stay at home mom. And no, I don't feel obligated to suck my husbands dick to have a roof over my head, I'm very capable of making my own money and even one day will be the bread winner. :)

    [–]Bamfmaiden 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Yet no one is happy. Divorce and infidelity are rampant. People are generally angry and dissatisfied!

    Maybe because they are working so hard to deny our own nature!

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I'm super happy.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children)

    a lot of high paying jobs are given to single women due to feminism

    Quotas are terrible thing, I agree with this. I came across this when I was in the UK. I had no idea there were quotas until I started to work there. I found a place where I wanted to work because I liked a lot what they were doing but I thought it was a bit out of my league (as in, I knew I could handle the work but it was a very reputable place and I was new so it was almost too good for me). But I still got a meeting with the boss and actually got a contract. Right on the first day I went for lunch with my new coworkers and found they were all like "oh ok you're from overseas, I get it" and soon I found out there was a group of female immigrant workers who didn't contribute at all to the group but were tolerated by everyone because they had to be there to fill the quota.

    I thought were I just hired because of this? who am I kidding of course I was but I figured I could beat it when I actually work and have results which I have to say did work. A lot of people were friendly, some people still told me things like "there is a lot of talented people in the UK but the management is forced to hire people like you to fill the quota" as if I could do something about that. I still left and went to a more unregulated, meritocratic industry.

    In my view quotas are such a nonsensical thing, it is just adding another layer of hassle to figure out if a person is for real or just another system freerider.

    I don't think however that having a good income is something that should hurt the relationships. I don't think the basis of the relationship should be that the woman is cornered, it's more like that both sides benefit more when they are together than they would when they were alone, no?

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

    I don't think however that having a good income is something that should hurt the relationships. I don't think the basis of the relationship should be that the woman is cornered, it's more like that both sides benefit more when they are together than they would when they were alone, no?

    It depends. Ideally it should be as you mentioned (both people benefiting), but when a man has a much lower income than the woman, he's less attractive in her eyes (usually). Or, if a man is still traditional thinking that he should provide at least the bulk of an income (because maybe the woman has a job but only makes enough to cover smaller expenses) then he's in trouble.

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

    That's tough shit for him, but I'm not giving up my great income so a man can have it.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (5 children)

    Why are you in a RPW sub, may I ask?

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Because I like the Red Pill? Does it require me to be a doormat?

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    You're not a doormat, but your pleasantry is another issue ;)

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I'm just straightforward :D.

    And I mean what I say. Tough shit if a man doesn't work as hard as I do. He's not owed a cozy 9-5 and salary to support a family of 4.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    I also agree, and I do believe if the woman has the ability and works hard she deserves the money/job. I'm just saying, it's more difficult for men to have good jobs now with the competition of women.

    [–]Galadriel26 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    It will be more difficult for men to have good jobs when robots are starting to take over. It has already started. How worklife will look like in the future is more dependant on how fast technology takes over jobs, than on women. Most women do jobs men don't particularly seem to want anyway like nursing, teaching and kindergardens.

    [–]lidlredridinghood 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I can only offer my personal context...

    I'm never going to live with my Captain. I also don't want children. But we both want the type of connection, trust and juiciness that comes from having trusted and loved each other for years. We make a great team; he decides where we're going, he does part of the work, and I clean up around the edges, making it look nice. I have a career- I'm aiming to make about 60K; which is topping out in my career... so I'll be able to put away some for retirement, but it's understood that property ownership is going to becoming from "his" wealth. However, we very intentionally take good care of ourselves, and are constantly courting each other. We never stop showing the other how much we love and admire each other. And we're both constantly trying to figure out how to have better sex. It's pretty great.

    What I'm saying is... I appreciate what you're saying about SAHMs, and the demise of the being a kept woman. But RP is totally applicable to modern life. Personally, I prefer having my own cash, and my own place.... because then I choose to be with him whenever I do. It keeps the magic alive more.

    The "old" way of living may be dying out, in some areas. But I think there's a synergy between new and old that allows for increased safety and functional codependence that is a sweet spot.

    [–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    However, we very intentionally take good care of ourselves, and are constantly courting each other. We never stop showing the other how much we love and admire each other.

    I do acknowledge and appreciate this - the fact that you have to work harder to stay attractive. I definitely think the old generation has let themselves go more and then expect their partners to still be attracted.

    If you don't mind me asking, why is he your captain if you don't plan on ever living with him? Do you still consider each other a team even though you don't share a space?

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm not 100% pro traditionalist but I think there are aspects of it that are healthy for some or the majority of heterosexual romantic relationships. Dating seems messed up. I think what will help is women understanding that they are most attractive in their 20's (even though they can still date later on), that its scientifically best to have a kid in their 20's or early 30's (as far as I remember), and that being a single mom or hurting your looks with drugs will decrease your dating pool. I don't care about having kids, but I also heard somewhere that men also have a probability of making healthier babies when they are younger.

    And men and women need to figure out that LTRs generally have better, more emotionally-engaging sex, less drama, and more happiness, and there needs to be more information about how to have a long-lasting LTR and how to be a parent without ruining the relationship or the kid (which goes along with attachment theory). There needs to be more blunt understanding and curiosity about gender differences along with more awareness around parental alienation and men's issues. As a millennial I'm extremely disappointed in my generation, but it is what it is, the only rational thing to do is focus more on solutions regardless of how massive the problems are.

    [–]Moral_Gutpunch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Except for #2, these all work IN THEORY. Humans may not be monogamous evolution wise, but they are known for pair bonding and forming extremely close social bonds that way (I'm not excluding gays). Most adult humans will want to at some point in their life.

    As for marriage, I do feel it's been ruined economically for several reasons. Too much stress is put on spending money for the wedding and on children (I'm not saying you can't do either of shouldn't, I'm saying getting pushed into them by pressure is wrong). Money, children, and not feeling happy having to appreciate and support their man are the biggest factors of divorce.

    This doesn't mean marriage can't work, it means a lot of so called feminists confuse marriage (or a long-term loving relationship) with a wedding and honeymoon.