I have been told that I don’t bring any solutions to the modern dating problem, that I just bitch and complain. The reason is because I’m pessimistic the course we’re on can be reversed within our lifetimes. But I do think about it.
Before I present my solutions to the problems of modern dating, we need to imagine a world where these problems don’t exist.
Roosh’s Dating Utopia: I want to be able to go to a leisure venue and be a man (approach) until I find a girl that I connect with. This girl will be open, affectionate, and willing to put in 50% of the effort. She will possess a healthy personality that places more value on life and pleasure than appearances and material gain. She will not have insecurities that make connecting with her on a deep level to be an impossible, teeth-pulling task. She will be sexually secure, emotionally secure, self-aware, and have a willingness to enter relationships without concern or fear for how they will end. She will live in the moment based on feeling and state instead of social norms and preconceived notions. She will not only hit my physical buttons but my emotional buttons as well, providing with me a state of mind that I cannot achieve on my own.
The American way-of-life makes the dating utopia an impossible achievement. Women fail to learn how to treat a stable and secure man, resigning him to a life of sport fucking without the strong pair-bonding that previous generations have enjoyed. That last sentence is critical: the reason I do not get into relationships is because—other than sex—relationships with the girls I meet do not give me anything I can’t get through on-and-off, low-commitment dating. It’s not the sex that leads to an end of these three-date relationships, it’s the girl’s inability to provide the man with anything more.
I believe that women should get most of the blame because they are the gatekeepers—they determine the rules of engagement and construct the dynamic that men respond to. They are the ones who have created the modern man through a basic system of reward (sex) and punishment (no sex). A man’s game and behavior is in response to women he interacts with. I do a certain move or behavior not because I was born with it, but because I learned it through experience as an adult. Since we are products of our environment, to solve the dating problem we need to re-engineer the woman by changing her environment, one that she has accepted without protest.
Solution No. 1: Regress to a society based on satisfying needs instead of consuming wants. Capitalism has created a disposable mindset that women have adopted into their relationships. “I’m just going to test this one out to see if it is perfect for me. I’m not going to get attached because maybe I’ll want to try something else.” Are we talking about shoes or men? Unless they become gluttons for disappointment, men have no choice but to return the treatment in kind, icing the dynamic for both sexes.
Solution No. 2: Other than giving women the right to vote and protecting them from abuse, stop teaching feminism, an ideology that will soon join communism in the history books as a nostalgic failure. Women were tricked by their man-hating, eternally single idols that in order to be treated better by men, they had to treat them worse. The strong man and submissive woman role that has worked for hundreds of thousands of years (the proof is your very existence) has been reassigned in a continuing experiment that goes against genetic roles and behaviors. Feminism is great for empowering women to spend most of their lives working in office buildings, but terrible at training them how to be good wives and mothers.
Solution No. 3: Stop destroying the middle class. The government’s complicit destruction of America’s manufacturing sector and drive towards globalization (i.e. imperial profit) has made it impossible for a man to raise a family on one income—to take on a role that creates stable households and balanced women who do not starve for attention and validation. The necessity for women to enter the workforce creates a lack of adult supervision in a home where two-hundred channels creates generation after generation of ADD-saddled zombie American girls who believe pleasure can only be derived from drug substances, merchandise, and wealth, not commitment, work, sacrifice, and effort. These young girls grow up with beliefs that poison male-female relations. It doesn’t help that the continuing shift of power from people to corporations and the government-led drive to foster voter apathy through secrecy and hypocrisy has created a neurotic, debt-burdened middle class that only looks forward to consuming products and obsessing over trainwreck celebrities. Girls grow up part valley-girl and part entitled princess, with a bunch of other stuff filled in with whatever’s hot in the glossy magazines
That’s how you do it. That’s how you create women who are capable of making a man happy, who will in turn makes her happy. That’s how you reverse the climbing age of marriage. That’s how you make human beings who are capable of being in an intense, fulfilling relationship for longer than three
years months weeks. But no one wants to hear it because the solution doesn’t come packaged in a pill or magic diet where you can still eat all the desert you want. And no woman wants to stay home and fix buttons when she can spend money pretending to be like the one-dimensional soulless hacks she sees on television. We all reap the costs of her lifestyle.
Not all hope is lost for the American man. There are still countries in the world where the above conditions I propose still hold, where a women still values a man and understands how to serve his needs like she should. It’s our job, our duty, to get that first-hand experience to see and feel how different things can really be. No flashing cash and no flashing passports: if you worked to build yourself up to the man that you should be, all you have to do is show up. In the end there are going to be two types of men in this country. The first settles for a typical American woman who complains about his hair on the soap bar even though she resembles her mother—twenty years early. The second is the eternal bachelor, love and companion-starved, lamenting that his genes will not be passed on.
Both lose.Tweet Follow @rooshv
Related Posts You May Like:
Game Tips Newsletter:
‘“I’m just going to test this one out to see if it is perfect for me. I’m not going to get attached because maybe I’ll want to try something else.”’
This describes my recent approach to dating almost perfectly. I’m always on the lookout for an upgrade. It’s actually kind of sad. My excuse is, I get bored with a guy after I’ve been seeing him for about a month. They usually are so nice and treat me pretty well. I’m usually all pressed the first month and then BAM. Someone else comes along and I get to thinking. “I’m bored. This new person is intriguing and a little bit taller. Sigh. I should just break things off with ‘Tom’.” I don’t instantly go after the new guy and I try to stay single, but it never works. I end up shacking up with the new guy and repeating the cycle. I hate dating.
BTW, I couldn’t disagree more with Solution 2. The strong man and submissive woman thing just kinda grosses and weirds me out. I’d like to be with someone that treats me as an equal, not a child.
“BTW, I couldn’t disagree more with Solution 2. The strong man and submissive woman thing just kinda grosses and weirds me out. I’d like to be with someone that treats me as an equal, not a child.”
So you’d like to be with someone that’s constantly surveying his surroundings for a better woman? Who is never content with the person he’s seeing because she doesn’t satisfy X, Y, and Z physical requirements?
Do you wonder why you’re single in your 30s?
I’m not in my 30s. I’m only 23. To answer your question, no. I don’t want a guy just like myself. I’m trying to change my approach to dating and I’m trying to become satisfied fully with myself, which I believe is probably the root of my little problem. Until we are happy and satisfied with ourselves, we will never have a healthy relationship.
“Feminism is great for empowering women to spend most of their lives working in office buildings, but terrible at training them how to be good wives and mothers.”
I hate and love this statement at the same time. The problem with feminism is that women take one extreme or another. It’s very difficult to find someone who’s willing to take the middle ground. As much as you might argue with this, you -wouldn’t- want a woman that was truly submissive. You’d be dying for her to take a stand, have an opinion. The true solution is for women to do both, because we want both things as well. Any woman who says she -doesn’t- like it when a man takes care of her is lying.
I think feminism’s biggest failure is not what it has done to level the playing field but rather a subtle, semantic, and extremely crucial distinction that feminism fails to make, and I’m willing to bet spinsters like mm never figure out.
Equal does not mean identical.
What Roosh (and so many of us post-feminism men who actually have the wherewithall to see what’s going on in modern America) yearns for is a world where women stop acting like men and start acting like women again, which is the basis of #2.
You’re blaming the wrong factors in #3, Roosh. Once women started working, prices adjusted (increased) to accommodate what a couple with two incomes could afford. Couples also grow into their income, which means that once the wife starts working, now she has to keep working to maintain their current spending habits and the lifestyle to which they’ve grown accustomed. You’ve already suggested the solution to that problem though — make sacrifices. An American man can today support a family on his own income. My girlfriend’s mother has never worked, and although I want my girlfriend to have some kind of job for reasons primarily motivated by factors other than her income (i.e., I don’t want her to become fat, bored, or insane), her part time income is so small by comparison to mine that I might as well be supporting us both. You sound like a crazy liberal with talk like #3.
The real solution is to find a woman who isn’t like the ones we hate so much. They’re out there, you just won’t find them in the places you’re looking. Immaterialistic, wholesome girls who enjoy cooking you dinner and blowing you after your long hard day at work don’t wear Prada and go to clubs looking for one night stands and serial relationships. I am not surprised that you are so pessimistic about what you’re finding because you’re just not looking in the right place.
If pussy was a stock, it would be plummeting.
you tell ‘em, Roosh!
Can’t there be such a thing as a woman who has a career, wants to make dinner for her man, blow him, AND wears Prada? And can’t it work the other way around sometimes – the guy comes home, makes dinner, goes down? I mean, this all sounds like it’s one or the other. I know equality in relationships is really tricky, b/c I agree with Jo – women do like to feel like they’re being taken care of. But at the same time, why should that render a woman powerless, not able to take care of things herself in addition? How does that make her the man-hating extreme feminist with 6 cats?
I think there are a lot of valid points here. For the most part though, I know a lot of women who are capable of the Roosh Dating Utopia. Those women look for guys who are capable of the same, but run into roadblocks with men as well.
Until these utopian men and women find each other, I guess we’re fucked.
sad but true…
A man making dinner and going down? I suggest you read Roosh’s article about betas.
As Roosh points out, evolution is what it is, we are what we are. One of the tragedies of the 20th century was our parents deciding in the ’60s that their parents’ way of living was completely wrong and they — a bunch of potsmoking 20 year-olds — knew how to do it so much better.
As a result, you have this idea in your head that such a creature exists, this mythical androgenous woman who competes with a man in the workplace and the comes home and takes off her powersuit and puts on an apron. But only every other day, because on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, her equally mythical, equally androgenous metrosexual beta does the same thing. You’ve been fed these ideological lies about men and women your entire life.
Well, look at our parents. They brought the divorce rate in this country to over 50%. FIFTY PERCENT. And why? Because they live in a world that should be instead of a world that actually is.
And it makes me sad that young women today aren’t wise enough to understand that the world they were born into is a failed experiment. We’re raised by the people who conducted it and many of them haven’t realized — or failed to accept the fact — that their generation was a giant, catastrophic failure. They listen to the rhetoric and they believe it chapter and verse.
This is a blog written by a man who sees through the bullshit, and he’s looking for a woman who does too, and he’s not finding them, because sadly they’re a small minority of girls. Most girls, like you, still hold on to this fantasy world where men and women’s roles overlap in some gray area of androgeny (“equality”). I find that the happiest moments of my life are the ones where I am acting completely stereotypically male and my woman is acting completely stereotypically female. These activities fulfill me at an extremely deep and emotional level that trying to fit the square peg of modern equality ideology into the round hole of human gender biology can never touch.
“Women fail to learn how to treat a stable and secure man…”
Wait…. those exist?
You’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this, I see. Always makes me wonder what made you start thinking so ill towards women.
Not all women are like you’ve described above. I’m going to agree with Carrie M. on this one.
I don’t think life is that simple: alpha vs beta, powersuit vs apron. Life is one big grey area.
So a woman who ‘sees through the bullshit’ so she can nestle into her stereotypically woman role – that’s utopian? It sounds like you’re saying that because that was the way it was in the 50s and 60s and because of human’s primative hunter/gatherer instincts it must be correct. What I think is bullshit is the fact that any other version of evolved reality is crap.
Life’s not that simple. Women are a product of the way men treat them, and men are a product of the way women treat them. Neither sex is better or worse than the other.
“I’m not in my 30s. I’m only 23. To answer your question, no. I don’t want a guy just like myself. I’m trying to change my approach to dating and I’m trying to become satisfied fully with myself, which I believe is probably the root of my little problem.” — mm
I know this response wasn’t directed at me, but it speaks volumes about the attitude many American young women have.
Of course women like mm don’t want a guy like themselves. That type of man is the pump-and-dump variety, the player, the man who won’t commit. In other words, the type of man they can’t control and who won’t be waiting for them when they’re tired of banging bad boys. It’s not my intention to attack mm, but her attitude, like that of many of her contemporaries, won’t change as long as her looks will still allow her to change men as frequently as she changes underwear, often for purely superficial reasons (by her own admission). It is only when her looks fade that her dating habits will change — because she will have no choice.
I applaud mm for recognizing her attitude problem at the tender age of 23, but in all honesty, she should never have developed such an attitude in the first place. So why did she? Assuming she is like her contemporaries, from a tender young age she instinctively recognized the power her budding womanhood had over men and took full advantage of it. Yet instead of using it wisely to find a man of strong character who would be loyal and committed to her, she chose to follow her desire for fun and adventure. In other words, the feeling and roller-coaster drama associated with unpredictable men. By her own words:
I’m usually all pressed the first month and then BAM. Someone else comes along and I get to thinking. “I’m bored.”
In terms of Roosh’s proposed solutions, the key lies with men, not women. Men are the ones who have changed, or more accurately, have allowed themselves to be changed. Fewer and fewer men are willing to demand what they want. It’s all about compromise. Yet there comes a point in time where compromise becomes concession. There’s an enormous difference between these two little words. Compromise implies a voluntary and calculated exchange for value, while concession implies weakness and an involuntary surrender in exchange for little or no value. Men must be willing to compromise, but not concede.
You know, we may believe in different methods to get where we want to go, but our ideals are damn near identical. I think you nailed it here. Very nice.
I don’t agree with everything you say in terms of solution, but this was a fucking great article.
Ultimately, I look at some of the responses and see that part of the problem of the haters is a “have it all” mentality. No compromise, no gray area, give me everything or give me nothing.
Your husband makes big bucks and has a power job? Don’t expect him to be cooking for you too often– he’s busy. He may want to cook on weekends, but he may also want to relax. You want to spend a lot of time with your man? Well then get ready to do stuff he likes too, and keep in mind he may not have as much money because he isn’t at work– he’s with you.
Want someone who is ready to be totally committed and devoted? Don’t date rich playboy assholes.
GET EM BOY!
But I must point out something here. Some of the responsibility for women’s action especially in this area should be placed on the men. These beta’s with no game except to throw money and attention in the direction of every female. Causing women to think and assume they’re more valuable than they really are. I call this cost of inflation of the vagina concept. In other parts of the country some women don’t act like DC women, don’t mind cooking now and then and don’t expect to be showered with money but rather just want to be loved first. Nah mean?
If most men act like real men and stop bending over backwards and kissing ass just to get laid, women would respond and change their game.
Paten pending on this post / concept you unoriginal fuckers. You know who you are, I’m watching you.
Where are these immaterialistic, dinner-cooking, after work-blowing women to be found? You sound like you’ve got the answer.
Are you sure you want to go out with a “submissive” woman?
Maybe you just don’t want to go out with a bitch…
I sometimes get the feeling that what a lot of men want is a woman who is self-sustaining, but chooses to fulfill a particular gender role for the sake of the union, and is happy to do so.
All of which is fine. But the point is, you need to offer this woman something other than what she can get for herself. If the point to all of these solutions is to make that easier for the men, isn’t that a little… well, beta?
I’d like to see a serious post on what value women bring to a relationship. I don’t mean it to be an attack against women because we could easily do a post on what value men bring to a relationship.
Let’s take out the assets that both people provide (e.g., income, companionship, friendship) and what do we have?
Men typically provide (1) physical security and labor — killing spiders and changing the oil; (2) humor and entertainment — we are always doing stupid stuff like acting like clowns or making ridiculous bets; (3) logic — just kidding, sort of.
Women typically provide: (1) sex.
Men don’t find women funny in general, or seek protection from women. Is that a fair trade: sex for humor and physical protection? Hmm…
mike, I can’t tell you. I already have a girlfriend but I don’t want the supply to be exhausted if this one doesn’t work out. ;)
With regards to solution No. 1, I think we can all agree that this applies to men and women across the board. I think that American men and women have set their standards so rediculously high that they are unwilling to accept any minor inperfections in their partner. Roosh’s description of his ideal woman is likely unrealistic and idealized– he himself admits that the woman he dates cannot meet his standards, and he rather casually date than invest time or emotional energy into a relationship. I often think that this type of thinking is unique to places like DC where people are focused more on themselves than on family and the community. Ultimately, I think the key is to realize that no other person will complete you in every way, and that there will always be “shortcomings” in any person you date. Ultimately, you have to want to make it work.
Your mention of communism and feminism in the same sentence is interesting. There are many similarities. I recommend you check out some of the men’s blogs like Eternal Bachelor, No Ma’am, and Hate Male to see posts others have done on this.
Karl Marx once said something like “destroy the family and you destroy the society.” This is what feminism has done.
Solid post. I’m not sure that I agree that gender relations are quite so bleak, but I think that you did nail a lot of the problems on the head. I particularly liked the line, “Feminism is great for empowering women to spend most of their lives working in office buildings, but terrible at training them how to be good wives and mothers.”
I think that the biggest problem with the modern feminist movement is that it taught women that they can have everything without sacrificing anything. If a woman wants to devote herself to nothing but her career, that’s her choice and it’s fine by me. But it is ridiculous if she thinks that she will be an equally good wife and mother as the woman who does nothing but work at being a wife and mother.
Moreover, the woman who wants to devote herself to her career is also living in fantasy land if she thinks she’ll find herself a great alpha guy…who will also help out around the house. I think women think that the solution to the problem is to feminize guys–but then they also want a guy to keep fulfilling traditional male roles too.
In the end, it’s all about balance–you can’t have anything in life without giving up something else in exchange. I think what Roosh articulated very nicely here is that both men and women are suffering for lack of finding meaningful relationships. The only difference is that in the interim us guys can generally be more fulfilled by sexual non-relationships than women can.
Ask most women of the baby boomer generation (for instance, your mother) and they will sadly admit that feminism has failed. It failed like so many other great ideas of decades back (unions, MADD, etc) because, having achieved its stated goals, there were too many people nutty about it (or making money off of it) to let it dissolve into history. The glass ceiling is gone. A woman can hold any job without anyone thinking twice about it (even fighter pilot.) Heck, in two years there’s a decent chance we’ll have a woman president. Yet the feminist movement continues; when being equal to men isn’t good enough, us men must be demeaned. Like Roosh says, this can only lead to increases in divorces, serial dating, and cat ladies. Do you really think this is what your mother burned her bra for?
A society with ‘dominant’ men and ‘submissive’ women doesn’t have to look like a shariah state. In our grandparents’ day the man was the breadwinner and the woman cooked and cleaned. These were, in their time, acceptable gender roles. It didn’t mean the woman wasn’t allowed out of the house or that the man did what he pleased, and it didn’t mean that they didn’t share equal standing in important decisions. Feminism told the stay-at-home wife she was a traitor to her sex, and that she should be ashamed, she should be, as mm put it, “grossed and wierded out” by it. What kind of a movement teaches that choosing your own way of life is shameful, gross and wierd? Besides, let’s be honest; if a kitchen really was supposed to be occupied by a man, the counters would be 6 inches higher. You think we like to stoop to cook?
A middle class family is perfectly capable of living on one income these days. It will not be capable of affording a McMansion in the ‘burbs, a Harley for Dad and a loaded SUV for Mom. If you think there was ever a ‘middle class’ on one factory income that lived that kind of lifestyle you’re in la-la land. The middle class is only eroding by moving on up.
Gatsby — “It’s not my intention to attack mm, but her attitude, like that of many of her contemporaries, won’t change as long as her looks will still allow her to change men as frequently as she changes underwear, often for purely superficial reasons” — shit, man, I hope that’s an exaggeration if she’s only changing men once a month or so. Otherwise, she might just be gross and weird. You’ve got more than just superficial reasons to change your underwear there, miss.
So many interesting layers here. One thing that strikes me is that societal changes have created an atmosphere in which, unless they marry right after high school or college (and how many 18-22 year old guys are up for that these days?), most women must support themselves financially while looking for a mate.
We’re told that it would be great if we end up with a well-off husband, but it would be unwise to pin our financial fates to finding or keeping one. So we get educations, find a passion, and pursue a career in that area. Meanwhile, we’re also dating and having relationships.
It’s seldom easy to strike a balance between doing what we need to do to keep ourselves intellectually stimulated at work and advance our careers (thus providing for ourselves), and also being fully feminine and willing to drop any and all business to meet the needs of a man who may or may not stick around. And when a guy is so non-comittal that he balks at even buying a girl a drink, why should she trust that one day he’ll turn into the kind of guy who will offer her enough financial support that she can spend more time tending him and their family? What incentive does that give her to be less career-focused?
I’ve encountered more than a few men in our generation who are deeply ambivalent about being that kind of strong provider. They want all the benefits of a full-time wife and mother, but they also think it’s unfair when a woman doesn’t contribute financially to the family. You can’t have it both ways. A man has to be strong enough to really take on his role if he wants his partner to be able to let go of more stereotypically masculine pursuits and embrace feminine ones.
carrie m -
“Life’s not that simple. Women are a product of the way men treat them, and men are a product of the way women treat them. Neither sex is better or worse than the other.”
Couldn’t disagree more. We choose the way we are treated. To say otherwise denies each person agency over themselves and their interactions with the world.
Don’t like that your boyfriend doesn’t call you and is distant and any other myriad complaints? Don’t like that your girlfriend is acting like a princess with an undeserved sense of entitlement? Not making a stand by cutting that shit off at the pass is a choice, and that choice is saying to everyone “Please treat me like this, because there is no evidence that I am upset by it”.
So to all the ladies who always say “Men do it too” or hate on the men here who call women out on things, take note on the tactic. You ought to employ the same and not blame men for your lot or the way things are, because you have the agency to choose how other people treat you. Christ, it’s like I’m more of a real feminist than the prada-wearing serial daters here…
“Women fail to learn how to treat a stable and secure man, RESIGNING HIM [emphasis mine] to a life of sport fucking without the strong pair-bonding that previous generations have enjoyed.”
“I believe that women should get most of the blame because they are the gatekeepers—they determine the rules of engagement and construct the dynamic that men respond to. They are the ones WHO HAVE CREATED MODERN MAN [again, my emphasis] through a basic system of reward (sex) and punishment (no sex). A man’s game and behavior is in response to women he interacts with.”
Do you agree with him?
If you do, then you are saying that Roosh is the way he is/believes how he does because he has the “agency to choose how other people treat” him… and if he isn’t getting the results he wants in reltionships, then it’s HIS FAULT for allowing it!
Anyway, I take issue with the idea that past-generations ENJOYED their pair bondings. They didn’t. Cheating, partner switching, staying for the children, abuse, deceit and all other relationship killers have existed throughout eternity. And for most of history there was rarely any sort of casual dating!!
From stealing brides, to formal arrangements between families, to ceremonial declarations just to hold hands… there were no “good ole days” of mating rituals. Dating (as we know it) has been about popularity.
And frankly, what’s wrong with that? It’s totally Darwinian and is probably the reason that we have amazingly intelligent/gorgeous/humorous/inventive people on this planet. If a more suitable partner can be found… one with better genes… they will be found and used for nature’s purpose (reproduction) under the guise of romantic love.
The question is not about who’s to blame… The real question is are we meant to be with just one person?
Here’s a solution – Give up the delusion of 2 become 1 forever… the reality is staring you right in the face. Choose to ENJOY a relationship while it lasts – give your all and you’ll get it in return. EXPECT the best and you’ll get it. And when it’s over, THANK your partner (of 3 years, months, weeks, days) for helping you become better for the next one.
this is, without a doubt, the best post i’ve read by you — i literally got goosebumps reading certain parts of it, and the part about “dating utopia an impossible achievement” resonated so strongly with me. *excellent* work, my friend, top-notch shit.
I concur with carrie m.
Men see women as the problem while women see men as the problem. I don’t think it’s a sex-related problem. It’s in everybody’s human nature to want better, especially women nowadays. Why should anyone settle? If you settle, your relationship/marriage will inevitably end in divorce because you won’t be happy. Personally, I would rather be a bachelorette for the rest of my life than settle.
Alot of women would be willing to cook for/blow their boyfriend’s if they were happy with their relationship. How is she happy? By getting the same in return.
I started writing a long-winded response in which I likened this post to French Nationalist propaganda that bascially rips off Marx et. al and conflates and warps biological determinism and socialization.
Then I did some quick internet research and realized that what you’re peddling here is the latest fad form of misogyny – and what’s even better is that I’ve heard it before. This is someone else’s idea, you no-talent hack! And I almost gave you credit for ripping off Marx and Le Pen, lol!
Be sure to read the part about you and your ilk being just as bad as racists. Let that really sink in.
If you do travel, godspeed. You will need it when your convenient Adam & Eve tautology falls away and the underlying disillusionment with your own pitiful life follows you around like a shadow.
The district court found defendant guilty of willfully failing
to pay child support, in violation of the Child Support Recov-
ery Act (CSRA), 18 U.S.C. S 228 (1994) (amended 1998).
The court based its finding of willfulness on defendant’s fail-
ure to seek available employment, which would have earned
him enough money to meet his child support obligations.
Among the questions we consider is whether, so construed,
the CSRA violates the constitutional prohibition against slav-
They didn’t consider him a slave because you know after all he didn’t get a job. “willfulness on defendant’s failure to seek available employment” So because he didn’t get a job to pay the child support they put him in jail for 6 months. Wow yea that guy really was free before they put him in jail. What kind of life do you think he had? What choices after you have a child with a woman does a man have. He cannot choose not to work. He cannot choose what type of work. He has to take whatever is available for the next 18 years of the kids life and 21 I wreckin if they go to college.
Bianca says “The question is not about who’s to blame…” The U.S. government is to blame along with the people who pass these laws.
Some Catchy Chick says, “I don’t think it’s a sex-related problem. It’s in everybody’s human nature to want better, especially women nowadays.” The problem is what woman want always seems to have to become a law in order for things to be equal in there eyes. Equal pay in the military for instance equals equal pay but not equal responsability. They have a lower run time on the pt test than there male counterparts yet at the same time get paid the same. Yes another version of equal for women. Oh yea and if that man gets there same time on the pt test and fails to get his. Guess what happens? He gets kicked out of the Army. How is that Equal?
Yet people have been so brainwashed that you show them the numbers and they will still say it is equal. So the definition of equal has changed to different rules for you and me but we are equal. dagny T. says, ” All of which is fine. But the point is, you need to offer this woman something other than what she can get for herself.” Men are already giving up there freedom and going into slavery for woman and kids especially after they seperate. What more could be given or made to be given than 18 years of indentured servitude.
Jo says,”The problem with feminism is that women take one extreme or another. It’s very difficult to find someone who’s willing to take the middle ground.” The problem is we are not talking about just the difference in choices. The problem is that men have no choices and the will of the woman is enforced by police and lawyers. Again I will use my Mother as an example. She locked my Dad out of the house and did not let him back in the house to get any of his stuff. He consulted a lawyer who told him he better stay out of the house or he would be arrested. He had nothing and we where not wealthy. She turned there friends against him and had everything planned out. Telling me about there personal sex lives or lack thereof as if I wanted to know at 18 years old. She got an anulment to an over 25 year marriage from the church. She didn’t get to keep the kid though my sister was 9 at the time. She went with my Dad. Who could keep a job and who could take care of a kid. My Mom had a masters in liberal arts by the way and was unable to take care of herself financially for a long time. Who the heck wanted to talk to her after that crap when the truth comes out. Did my dad throw her ass in jail for not paying child support no of course not. Because Men have something called a soul and a goodness and can understand situations beside the law says you have to pay this money I know your not working I know your all f*^^% up but you have to pay. Oh yea she kept the house and still didn’t get anywhere. He worked and provided a decent life for my younger sister. The saddest thing I have ever wittnessed and the most righteous and the reason I am mad at God for allowing me to continue to live in this hellhole of a planet. Where things are so grossly unfair and people call them equal.
I’m not going to pretend I read all of these replies, a lot of whining going on. Everyone is so worked up about finding this perfect mate. I dont need a girl to cook me dinner every night or fall at my feet or any of that bs. If theres mutual respect, values, and attraction I’m usually happy.
I keep hearing everyone bring up all this stuff ‘oh you cook dinner for your girl you’re a beta male etc..’ I think you’d have to be pretty insecure with yourself to exclude anything like this out of fear of someone thinking you’re weak.
I don’t think that bs matters and people overanalyze it. I think the best thing you can do to have women want you is not have them as such a high priority. Do your own thing(it can even be a hobby band/racecar/whatever), do it well and let them know it comes first and they fall all over you.
Gunslingergregi- child support obligations apply to the non-custodial parent– not exclusively to the father. Therefore if the father is the custodial parent, than the mother would be obligated to pay child support and the same enforcement mechanisms would apply to ensure that she meets her support obligation.
I have to say, you complain about women wanting too much, but have you looked in the mirror? Half of what you write about is judging girls based on appearance and using them solely for sex. And you wonder why the girls you meet are insecure and unwilling to open up to you? As one of the other commenters said, women are the way they are because of the way men treat us and men are the way they are because of how women treat them. So if you can’t find someone perfect for you, maybe the problem isn’t them.
Also, the whole evolutionary argument for submissive women is just crap. Did you ever stop to think that women working in jobs formerly considered male is the latest step in our evolution? Evolution didn’t stop when we crawled out of the mud and started forming societies. Idealizing the past is ridiculous. It wasn’t better because we were “obeying the natural order of things.” It was just different because things were different thing. Adapt or get left behind.
The article you posted has practically nothing to do with what Roosh argued. Trying to conflate his well-thought out critique of the shorcomings of modern feminism with the woman-bashing hyperbole of a Tucker Max is a cheap tactic. It allows you to inject rhetoric into an otherwise thoughtful discussion in an attempt to shame people into swallowing their opinions. The fact that you even tried to draw a comparison between Roosh and a racist is laughable and only cements my point.
What is a cheap tactic is using feminism – which is more than just an “ideology,” it is an internationally respected school of thought – to reduce and totalize women for the convenience of his own theory for why his life is shit.
Just how is this argument well thought out when all he does is attack women (for being ignorant, mentally and emotionally deficient, and wholly responsible for the ills of society) and recycle tired old cliches?
All he did was read up on Marx, listen to too much Rush Limbaugh, and jump on a bandwagon. It’s woman-bashing disguised as intellectual critique, and it’s pretty despicable.
Feminism is only “internatonally respected” by Lesbians and man-haters. Feminism has chipped away at the family structure and is destroying society. As Marx said, destroy the family and you destroy the society.
Feminism ignores basic biological impreatives so just like Marxism. Luckily, feminists have fewer kids or none at all, so the disease will die off soon.
Also, your above post that referenced “frat lit” is more idelogical garbage from trendy leftist feminists. Years ago, men bought into this crap. Thanks to the Internet, we can now confer and agree that it is in fact crap.
I’m sure Jewcano, Roosh and me have nada in common, yet we have all rallied around our hate of feminism. The Internet (invented by men) allowed us to do this. Now feminists are trying to define anti-feminism as “hate speech” when in fact the entire genre of Women’s Studies is hate speecha against men — funded by universities.
When you make your little online speeches, try and remember that pretty much everything that you work on was invented by man. The entire concept of freedom of speech was invented by men (women gave us Victorian repression). The “great strides” women have made in the workplace are the endless paper-pushing red-tape jobs they have created for themselves.
um….yea, I’m not going to co-sign on the last post. I don’t care who invented what or any other “man vs. woman” oriented-speech because it’s not a competition. That’s the point. What Roosh and most of the guys on this site are saying is simply that women are free to zealously pursue careers and maintain aggressive, contentious demeanors if they so choose, but we men are equally entitled to pass them over for the sweet, more “traditional” woman EVERY SINGLE TIME. Don’t become embittered because your model is less popular; either follow market principles and adapt to feed the demand or accept the consequences of sticking to your guns. It’s a choice we all have to make in some form or another.
DoBA: Women didn’t give us “Victorian Repression.” Go look up “Angel in the Household,” one of the quintessential documents of the time on the attitudes toward women at the time. It was written by a man.
As for “the ‘great strides’ women have made in the workplace [being] the endless paper-pushing red-tape jobs they have created for themselves,” I believe you will find that a. bureaucracy existed long before women entered the workforce and b. many women aren’t in those kind of jobs and many men are.
You blame feminism for everything bad in society and accuse it of being “anti-male.” Well, you know what? Society wouldn’t get too far without women. Perhaps the feminist movement does occasionally veer into vitriol. But so does the anti-feminist movement, and it seems much more frequent. I have met feminists who don’t hate men, but you are only further supporting that anti-feminists hate women.
But that’s your quandary, isn’t it Mike? Finding a traditional woman in the sea of “zealous” career-minded bitches. Listen to yourself. And women are the embittered ones.
I’d also like to point out that by treating women as commodities and relationships as an exchange of goods/services as Roosh advocates (i.e. ‘before I invest in this woman I need to know what my return will be’), you are endorsing the capitalist framework you claim to abhor, thus perpetuating the cycle.
Bottom line – blaming this “problem” on women and capitalism is very convenient, but you guys are no geniuses for thinking of it. It’s been done before, and your reincarnation here is not making a dent on women’s equality, much as you would have it otherwise for your own personal satisfaction.
And until Roosh goes all Walden pond, his wet dream about regression to a pre-modern society will get no merit. You don’t get points in life for spouting bullshit that you can’t back up with your own principles.
No one here is going to convince you to change your opinion or attitude about male/female relationships, so I’m not going to waste my time. That said, you should consider that we live in a capitalist economy, and therefore capitalist principles will be applied to more than just the economy. The concept of “return on investment” is a universal one, and it has as much of a place in male/female relationships as it does in the economy. Women use the concept just as much as men do, only their measure of return is different. In fact, I’d say women are BETTER at ascertaining their return on investing in particular men (e.g., sex, children, etc…)
OK, I agree. Women and men are both capitalistic. I brought that up because Roosh seems to want relationships to be about more than economics (i.e. emotional fulfillment, etc.), but his equation rests on the logic of the free market.
My point with all this is that perhaps there is another perspective here that looks beyond women as a group of people totalized by their gender!
Not ALL women are ANY one way despite socialization. Same with men! People are complex beings. Yes, modern society has alienated a great deal of us and things are not perfect, but you can start to change it by giving people the benefit of the doubt when you meet them and being open to the possibility that they might be different, even if your last 200 encounters were not.
I’m just afraid that Roosh’s brand of “logic” here is symptomatic of a larger trend of drawing tautologies that are based upon limited experiences of meeting women at [DC] bars. I hope he experiences more of life and the world before he writes his manifesto.
“I have to say, you complain about women wanting too much, but have you looked in the mirror?”
This is a funny comment which you only could get from a typical American woman. The reason is that other women are much more reasonable, and understand that this argument is going to backstab them as well. It might be hard to understand while you’re 18-25, because you receive a lot of attention, and cannot understand that the reason for this is not that you’re the most brilliant, smart and beautyful woman around. But you’ll definitely understand it as soon as you turn your 30-35.
“Half of what you write about is judging girls based on appearance and using them solely for sex.”
He is actually a generous person, as I would not even consider most American women as my sex partners. The only thing I could do is to laugh when I see a typical woman, which looks ugly to me, but behaves like she is a queen. This is SO funny, when a grown-up tries to hide herself under a mask which is too small for them.
However there is a good thing: most of them are single with no children, and this means that after they die their stupid genes will die with them, and the disease won’t spread. Therefore, having the evolution clean up this shit, so our children will see a better world.
And I make sure that both my daughters would not grow up as feminist bitches. There is no feminism nor Jesus in my house, and there will never be either.
“I believe that women should get most of the blame because they are the gatekeepers—they determine the rules of engagement and construct the dynamic that men respond to. They are the ones who have created the modern man through a basic system of reward (sex) and punishment (no sex).”
This isn’t true. I’ve never been in a relationship where my girlfriend has denied me sex as a punishment. I’m not saying that relationships like that don’t exist but its not a basic dynamic of your typical relationship. If it is you are a beta and probably are attracted to horrible women.
“The first settles for a typical American woman who complains about his hair on the soap bar even though she resembles her mother—twenty years early.”
My girlfriend and I use separate bars of soap. The second part of that sentence is probably true of most women.
“Gunslingergregi- child support obligations apply to the non-custodial parent– not exclusively to the father. Therefore if the father is the custodial parent, than the mother would be obligated to pay child support and the same enforcement mechanisms would apply to ensure that she meets her support obligation.”
Yes he could of had her thrown in jail but that is the point. A man doesn’t need to have the law get involved when it’s obvious that someone cannot pay the money. A man can look at a situation and use a little bit of reason. My mom oh yea tables reversed would of had him in jail. The stupid child support laws need to be abolished. Whoeever keeps the kid can pay. If the other person wants to give money so be it. Everything is always for the children. Children grow up and become adults so should the system just keep going to insure nobody ends up with too much. Child support is a redistribution of wealth along with alimony. We are equal now we don’t need all this extra help do we? Guys don’t need the woman to pay woman don’t need the guy to pay. How bout make it equal that whoever makes more money gets the kid. Pretty straight forward right. Since they make more money they don’t have to get money from the other one. The talk about men and woman just never puts out the real inequities in the relationship. The guy would have way more power in any relationship if the woman didn’t have all these extra laws on there side to almost help make it equal. That thing between your legs gets old over time and all you have is the ability to go to court and take what the man worked for. How the hell is that equal. It is just one-sided. People think there free but as you can see not many are making choices in real life about themselves. One wrong move and all your choices have already pretty much been made for you.
I studied the case mentioned. Read it here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/9th/9730326.html
Basically the court in this case is right (please read it before you argue). If you are unemployed, or earn much less than you did before, you just need to go to court, and the judge will adjust (or remove) your child support obligations. The guy in question didn’t do it.
But the point really is – get divorced outside of US. Especially if you can do it in some Islamic country :)
Yes, it takes balls. However this way you can get much quicker divorce (one month in some countries), no alimony payments, and get a child custody.
“judge will adjust (or remove) your child support obligations” It does not work that easily. The person can choose not to work and the court will still demand money, because they can work. Let’s say your all broken up over the divorce and really can’t deal with working. The court really doesn’t give a dam about that problem and will still demand money, because after all you “can” work. What would the person be working toward though is the question. Before the event they where working to raise there kid and take care of there family. After the event they are working to pay child support to have the person who has custody raise the kid in another household than they are in. More than likely they will also be supporting the new significant other in the household as well.
I just wanted to point out, Rooshy, that just about every girl I know back home is dying to get married so she can quit her job, run a home, and raise babies. They also don’t leave the house unless they look absolutely perfect. It sounds like you would like them except…
They all vote Republican. So what is more important to you?
EE: When I said Roosh needed to look in the mirror, I didn’t mean any judgement about his appearance. What I was trying to say was that he claims that women want too much, but if you look at the list of what he wants, it’s a bit ridiculous and impossible.
And you might find you change your mind when your daughters start dating guys who treat them like crap and expect them to take it. Or maybe you won’t. Maybe you’ll be the kind of dad whose “ideals” are more important than the emotional and financial well-being of his kids.
Gunslingergregi: “It does not work that easily. The person can choose not to work and the court will still demand money, because they can work.”
Courts treat it the same way as your tax obligations – so you cannot go to court and tell the judge you do not want to work. What you need to tell is that you cannot work because of emotional stress, and provide a letter from your doctor. That’s what my friend did.
BTW the case looks kinda weak, especially Judge’s arguments regarding 13 amendment. I wonder why they didn’t go to Supreme Court. Or they did?
2Rebecca: I didn’t mean appearance either. What I was trying to say, that a typical woman will get a lot of attention in her 18-25, even if she is a real asshole. But the things WILL change dramatically when she turns 30-35 and still hasn’t been married.
It is very difficult for an average woman to understand the supply and demand theory when she is young, and receives a lot of attention. As a result, she has overvalued herself, and this leaves her in shock when she turns 30, and the attention she receives cuts in half, and decreases every month. What most of them do is they adjust self-value, but they do it very slow. That’s why we see so many 35 year old chicks with flaked skin and extra pounds, who behave like they are perfect 18 year old hotties. Not only this is always funny to watch, but this also explains their emotional problems as well.
“What I was trying to say was that he claims that women want too much, but if you look at the list of what he wants, it’s a bit ridiculous and impossible.”
Yes, it might be impossible to get from an American woman. Not a problem; there is a lot of women in this world, and he definitely has his chance somewhere else.
The big difference here is that if typical American single man (not a redneck type) goes, for example, to Europe – he’ll most likely find a woman of his dreams to have a relationship with, and in most cases would have no problem with her later. If typical American woman (again, not a redneck type) comes to Europe, she will have hard time trying to find anyone to have a relationship with, because Europeans do not expect their women to behave like cold bitches.
“And you might find you change your mind when your daughters start dating guys who treat them like crap and expect them to take it.”
I do not care what OTHERS think about how my daughers are treated. The only thing which is important is how they FEEL themselves they are treated. For example, according to some feminists I talked to – which was stupid thing – I treat my wife like crap. But none of us cares what others think – as long as we are both happy in our relationship. It is not anyone’s business.
So I teach them to:
- Do not set high expectations. You will not get a prince, nor you deserve a prince, because you are not a princess, and will never be. You are not much better than others; maybe better looking, and smarter, but it doesn’t make you much better.
- Try not to have girl friends at all. Women make really bad friends. Most of them are self-centered, stupid, jealous, and they will reject you anyway if you do not follow their standards – which you should not follow. Hang out with men, and have men friends. That’s what they already do.
- Your chance to find a life partner is the best in 25-30 range if you do not set high expectations, and are in a good shape. Your success here will affect the quality of half of your life. Do not look on girls who “decided to stay single” or pursue their careers in their 30s – most of them lie about it, and those who do not will regret every second of it as they turn into their 40s. You can perfectly pursue any career when you’re 40, but you will have hard time to find a relationship in your 40s.
- While making children is not the goal you want to achieve as soon as possible, this is why we are born on this planet, and this is how we survive. Again, you could be the best and smartest person in this world, but if you do not have children, you are wasted resource, as your genes do not spread.
- No Jesus in your life. Every religion is based on lies, and in most cases (like Christianity) those lies are obvious. You do not need a Flying Spahetti Monster to help you with anything – better put more efforts yourself.
The emotional well-being of my kids only depend on how THEY feel about it. If in the same relationship a woman feels that she is better and deserves better, there is no way this relationship will survive. Nor it will be a happy relationship for anyone. The things might change dramatically if a woman feels they are on the same level.
Not being a club goer, I’m not in on what type of women and men go there, so I can’t make a generalization. I agree though, that you’re more likely to find the women Roosh savages here, and that if he’s tired of that he shouldn’t go there.
BUT, your point proves mine. He cuts that shit off after three dates when he realizes he’s in with a lady that is behaving in a way he doesn’t agree with. In effect, he’s saying “I’m choosing not to be treated this way by you, individual (x)”. Could he avoid numerous women like club-going individual (x) by not going to meet women at those clubs? Possibly. I don’t know the scene.
But it doesn’t take away from my point about the person-to-person interactions Roosh may have, or any of us for that matter.
Jeez, teaching your daughter’s to not have female friends is a BIG mistake. The truth of the matter is that men do not want to just be friends with women, you are kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
“The truth of the matter is that men do not want to just be friends with women”
First, the general statements like this are not always true. At least in US I would not have sex with majority of women even if I was paid for it. This is because most of women I’ve met here are well outside my acceptance standard for a sex partner. However this doesn’t mean we cannot be friends. In fact I already have a lot of female friends, and I don’t want to be anything more than friend to them.
But it is still unclear to me what’s wrong with that? Sure, a stereotype male friend would like to fuck his female friend at least once. However a stereotype female friend would betray her female friend – for example by stealing her boyfriend, or just being jealous. So what?
Not to mention you’re w
I have a lot this makes them better friends.
I have had several male friends throughout the course of my life, and almost every single one of them has wanted more from the friendship at some point. I have had several female friends throughout the course of my life, and only one has ever tried to steal my boyfriend. As a man, I don’t think you are qualified to judge female-female friendships. Also, it is hard to maintain a friendship w/ a friend of the opposite sex when one friend gets into a serious relationship. For example, if the guy starts seriouly dating somebody, the girlfriend will never trust the female friend, and ultimately the friendship will wane. It works the same way if the female friend gets a boyfriend. A woman who doesn’t have any female friends should not be trusted– usually these are the women who steal other women’s boyfriends, and pretend to be “one of the guys” just to get in good with men. Its kind of like a black person who only hangs out with white people, or a white person who only hangs out with black people. Embracing friends from different cultural backgrounds is clearly a positive thing, but to do so to the exclusion of your own race (or gender in this case) makes me wonder why that person turns their back on their own…
I don’t see any problem when your friend wish to have more from the friendship at some point. If you are ok with it, fine. If you are not ok, have balls to say it. No reasonable man is expecting to get laid with you just because you are friends, and if someone expects this, he is not reasonable, and therefore is dangerous as a friend. The same is with dating: if a girl does not trust her boyfriend’s female friends, this means that she does not trust her boyfriend’s ability to make right decisions. Therefore it has nothing to do with his friends, but tells us that the girl is unsecure and stressful nature.
For example, my wife has only male friends – actually, she has never had any female friends in her adult life. And I have no problems with that. If it did not work for you, it does not mean it would not work for anyone else. YMMV. Again, women from Europe are more open and secure, and don’t make it a problem if a man go for a lunch with his female friend.
As a final note, I have seen a lot of female-female friendships. And, having an outside view, most likely I am more qualified to judge them than you.
[...] People want the best without putting in work, without sacrificing, without caring. We expect to get more than we are putting in, but ask anyone in a happy marriage how it’s really done and they will tell you it’s all about the effort. You have to care and you have to try, every single day. Good luck finding someone here under the age of 30 who understands that concept. Instead of working towards real change to increase their value, most twenty-somethings instead whine about how life isn’t fair and how bad their luck is, as if there is a concerted effort by the overlords of our universe to keep them single and unhappy. You are responsible for your romantic happiness, and no one else. If there is a problem then get off your ass and do something about it, no matter how many years it takes to solve. [...]
I totally agree with this.
basically, most ‘relations’ i have last a max of 3 weeks if i don’t connect on a deeper level that satisfies my head. otherwise I’m not interested.
[...] linked to over at The Fourth Checkraise, does an entertaining job of it. One comment in the post Solutions caught my [...]
[...] Travel South America Argentina Bolivia Brazil Chile Ecuador Paraguay Peru Uruguay Hall Of Fame Solutions For Girls 5 Washington DC Bars For Men Solutions Before Sex, After Sex Rising Sun American Culture I Dated A [...]
I’m a girl, and I agree with a lot of your advice, but I thought you might find this interesting. It’s not exactly on topic, but it counters some of your theories. It also might appeal to your former scientist self: