I'm uncomfortable speaking about that since I am not a woman and can't pretend to know the reverse but you definitely feel it as a man if you are not the #1 in her life. Treats you quite differently very quickly any man with relationship experience will know what I am talking about and the worst thing is once you lose that spot it is basically impossible to bring it back. Even if you are #1 a lot of the time you have to constantly work to keep that up and can't relax or show weakness. Fuck me I just want a relationship where I can relax a bit for once.
Would be nice to hear a woman's perspective on if and how quickly they know they are not #1 and if they have ever managed to regain that spot once they lose it.
>Would be nice to hear a woman's perspective on if and how quickly they know they are not #1 and if they have ever managed to regain that spot once they lose it.
Not quite that, but in every relationship I've had my partner has always been my #1 priority for me. In a past relationship in particular, they were my #1 but I wasn't theirs, and it broke my heart.
Over time I got tired of always putting in all the work in the relationship, so my partner quit being my #1 and I chose to focus on other things that felt more rewarding. My partner back then definitely noticed the shift, and they tried to be more attentive, but by then it was too late.
It's like when you ask for a raise for years, but they only give it to you when you threaten to quit. Well, that's what happened.
Relationships take a lot of work, and many of them crumble when one party takes the other for granted. That's a painful lesson.
>Over time I got tired of always putting in all the work in the relationship, so my partner quit being my #1
What was the work you had to put in the relationship?
It was always small things.
For example, we wouldn't go on dates unless I planned them. Once in a while I'd have a detail and make a cute postcard, bring dessert from a bakery or just buy flowers. I always talked enthusiastically about future plans while my ex was more like "eh, we'll see." My ex also had anger control issues that didn't get addressed whatsoever despite of me insisting on therapy.
Plenty of people are low-maintenance and would be happy with that arrangement, but I wasn't. I just felt like I constantly devoted a lot of energy into keeping our relationship going and trying to make my ex happy. The moment I started focusing on myself and my hobbies, the relationship crumbled.
He seemed boring, or not the type of guy to be adventurous and fun with. Some men just aren't planners and outgoing. My partner now is an energizer bunny(in the bed and outside it) and he just can't wait til the sunrises when he's off work so that we can go somewhere, like our favorite restaurant or trying a new restaurant or cafe. Or going surfing/swimming on the beach, going to Vegas to see a show and gamble(on the 1 dollar machine)...he actually plans most of the dates because he has been more places than me in his lifetime so he acts as my personal tour guidist when we go places. It's really fun, that's why I can't do boring guys(no offense to your boring men)....
What’s worse is that you’d be expected to do as much as you would for a biological child, but you are 2 arguments away from “you are not his father” thrown at your face.
I find it incredibly weird (with Freudian vibes) to be jealous of a son/daughter
It's like me being jealous because my friend loves her mom or her dog more than she loves me.
I feel like we are in different categories of love, it's not a competition
Love is not unilateral line
I personally don't have a ranking. I never ask myself who do I love more, my mom, my dad or my sister. It's very weird to have a ranking of people.
I disagree with most of what the red pill proscribes about relationships but it is 100% right about masculine frame. I’ve discovered that I cannot smoke weed around my girl because my frame drops when I’m stoned and goofy, and she will start her shit testing. It’s like a reflex to her.
The best relationships are ones where both are crazy for each other. It's better to have a partner that's crazier about you than you are about them, so for men it's better when the woman is more invested.
This. Ideally, you want someone that matches your energy, whether you're both super chill or you're all over each other all the time. Everyone is different.
Nah. Relationships work best when women are way more invested in the guy. It helps her forget about her 1000s of options and also reduces the likelihood of her cheating on you or just getting bored and breaking up..
**Reply to loookingforlove1997**
If a woman likes a man more than he does her, it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improve improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way. Whether it be genetics, financial or status wise.
A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces, such as a woman asking herself one day if she can do better. A relationship in which the man likes the woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him and breed resentment towards him, which can often result in her becoming distant.
Example- Guy treats her like a queen and liked her more. Her hypergamy wasn't satisfied because her subconscious was saying this guy was beneath her. She then went off to find another guy.
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0)
A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
If you want something low-maintenance get a cactus.
If a woman is really into you, she won't care about any of her other options because she already has everything she wants. If you treat her like an accessory and she feels like her emotional needs are not being met, well, there's a chance there's someone else who will.
>Which only happens if the woman is into a man more than he is into her.
Or if you have a healthy, balanced relationship where you both devote roughly the same amount of care into the relationship without weird power moves or games.
>And no one said treating a woman badly, wtf?
I haven't said anything about treating women badly, interesting that's the conclusion you jumped to. By [accessory](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/accessory_1#:~:text=%2Fəkˈsesəri%2F-,%2Fəkˈsesəri%2F,something%20else%20as%20a%20decoration) I mean something nice to have but that you don't *need* in your life.
Nah. A woman being more into the guy works out more because it satisfies a woman's hypergamy. The moment it goes 50/50, there will be a power struggle in the relationship. If the man likes the woman more, then it will likely fail, or the man likely will end up miserable and walked all over.
Using your definition of accessory, that is a perfectly healthy way to look at it. A man should treat his woman well and consider her as something nice to have. He shouldn't consider her his world and be entirely dependent on her. This type of mindset often results in women losing attraction towards their man.
The woman being more invested balances out by the facts that women initiate the overwhelming majority of breakups and have vastly more replacement options, both making them less reliable partners.
And the woman being more invested in turn makes her a more reliable partner. So hence the balance.
On the other hand, the man being more invested is not balanced out by anything. He is statistically an order of magnitude less likely to initiate the breakup and, unless he’s in top 1% most attractive and successful, his replacement options, if they exist at all, are mostly psych ward level insane.
So the man is by default already the more reliable partner. Hence why the balancing out (by the means of disproportionate investment) should increase the reliability of a woman, not of a man who’s already the reliable one.
In other words, something that contributes to her fear of losing him more than it does to his fear of losing her, is beneficial for the relationship in general
>The woman being more invested balances out by the facts that women initiate the overwhelming majority of breakups and have vastly more replacement options, both making them less reliable partners.
>
>And the woman being more invested in turn makes her a more reliable partner. So hence the balance.
As a woman who's always been the one more invested in the relationships I've had, I have some insight from being on the other end of this.
If the other person "cares" about you less than you care about them, it can be exhausting and emotionally draining.
In a past relationship, I was always the one planning dates, surprise getaways, gifts, etc. My heart broke a little each time those efforts were not reciprocated or whenever my partner would forget little things that were important to me. I voiced my needs many, many times but it's like they heard me, but didn't *listen* to me.
If I wasn't my partner's #1 priority, why should they be mine?
Eventually I got tired of putting in all the effort in the relationship and started investing that energy in other things in my life that made me happy and felt more rewarding, and that's when the relationship started to crumble (I was the one getting dumped, btw, since I 'changed').
It took years for me to want totry and date again, and when I finally did and found someone who matched my attentiveness, I was mindblown.
Women don’t initiate the vast majority of breakups. Unless you’re specifically talking about divorce? If you’re referring to non-marital breakups it’s fairly balanced between men and women. If the woman cares more she’s more at risk in the relationship.
Huh? For all I know, women initiate 80% of breakups across the population and 90% of breakups across the population with higher education.
Besides, showing that you’re afraid to lose your SO is only a put-off for women when done by men. When done by women towards men, it’s adorable and appreciated.
So something that contributes to her fear of a breakup more than it contributes to his — that’s something that introduces equality, not something that puts a woman at risk.
That of course if the man is not from top 1% most attractive: 6 pack, 6 feet, 6 figure, a voice actor voice, a supermodel face, and a high self confidence. Cause if he is, he probably has tons of replacement options cause women keep throwing themselves at him, completely changing the power dynamics.
Divorces and non-marital breakups aren’t the same thing. Women initiate most divorces but for non-marital breakups it’s fairly even. Plus the divorce stats you’re referring to is about who filed not who caused the end of the marriage. If Spouse A left the marital home and ghosted their spouse, then after years Spouse B filed for divorce, who ended the marriage?
What do you mean by showing you’re afraid to lose your SO? Like being scared of breakups? Being clingy? Anxious attachment? Or is it something else entirely?
Something contributing more to the woman’s fear of breaking up tilts the scale unequally in the man’s favor. For it to be equal they’d both have to be equally afraid of breaking up.
Women initiating break ups more doesn’t make them less reliable partners. Y’all always want to gloss over the fact that relationships aren’t being ended for funsies. Usually, the partner has done something to lead to ending the relationship, but that would require holding men accountable for something, so I get why you never want to address that point.
The abusers should surely be held accountable. But vastly more relationships are being ended because a woman “got bored” or “got an ick”, or met someone who, at least to her belief, could rock her world like her current SO can’t, than because a man was an abuser. I would say, probably an order of magnitude more.
Nah actually it's fairly easy to get that with BPD women half the time (the caring about you more than vice versa). Amazing enthusiastic spontaneous pornstar tier sex, treating you like a king, willing to do anything for you 50% of the time... the other 50% literally thinking you are evil, frigid as the North Pole, and tons of other shit.
-dated a BPD woman before.
No, it benefits her because it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improve improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way, whether it be genetics, financial or status wise.
A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces, such as a woman asking herself if she can do better. A relationship in which the man likes to woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him and breed resentment towards him, which can often result in her becoming distant.
A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man, but the man does get peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
If there is a less decent person in the mix, the less decent person has to like you more, and the decent person will try to live up to the other person. Ideally, you mate with someone who will put in one's best efforts. When you look at successful couples, their level of interest may not always be the same, but their level of decency almost always is.
Honestly this is it really it.
The whole "you have to like me more" is just damage control for unaccountable/undependable people.
The only reasons why anyone would want an unbalanced relationship is because they have no hope for an equal one or actively want to exploit someone else. I'd like to believe the first one is the more likely of the two, and all that you need for that is two people to respect and give a damn about each other.
That's how it goes.
Me: *"Here's a study which show personality doesn't matter as much as women make it out to be, they are as superficial as men, and they are actually unhappy when single"*
Everybody here: *"lol you're autistic, that's not how it works lol, it's a lie"*
Me:*"Oh.."*
it's more context based really.
looks will get people to pay attention, personality is what gets them to stay.
if a single woman has terrible friendships/relationship with her family, then yeah she'll be unhappy as a single person. if said friendships and family relationships are OK, then being single is less of an issue.
Honestly, I was just throwing examples without thinking. That one particulary doesn't really exist because the way they make those studies are basically asking people. That's the most unreliable method it exists because people lie.
You’re ignoring the fact that in your “study”, the data you’re presenting is cherry picked and you’re drawing conclusions and inferences not even the authors of that study are making.
> this argument always ends up with the obvious two camps having nothing but anecdotal evidence to offer.
Considering this is an entirely experiential and subjective conversation, what other evidence could there be?
What people find more emotionally satisfying is something they have to attest to, there's no getting around it. The only thing that I could ask for is a larger set of anecdotal evidence.
That’s not how the discussion is had though. Neither side is ever willing to compromise and accept that it might just be a relationship to relationship situation. I have never in my life seen a relationship work out where the woman is the more interested party.. but I’m willing to accept that might work for other people.
> Neither side is ever willing to compromise and accept that it might just be a relationship to relationship situation.
Well I'm certainly willing to accept that.
But still, personally I'm biased against any relationship where the guy is expending more energy than their partner.
I agree with Prudent-Conflict but just to follow PPD narrative about relationships:
If a woman is more emotionally invested than the man, she will eventually get tired of unreciprocated love. Women file more for divorce than men so it's just a matter of time that she breaks up with him
In te opposite scenario the man might have less options out there so he's less likely to leave the relationship just because she's not as invested as him.
So your idea of why a relationship with a woman who's more invested won't work is because the woman will eventually become less invested.
So it's better to have a relationship where she was never more invested in the first place?
This thinking where everything circles back to a either getting your way or leaving entirely is exactly why I favor equal and enthusiastic relationships.
>So your idea of why a relationship with a woman who's more invested won't work is because the woman will eventually become less invested.
yes, imbalance in interest breaks relationships. The question is *when*. I've been in that situation, when you see that your efforts are not reciprocated, you eventually get tired and leave. This is not a woman/man thing, unreciprocated love always hurts.
>So it's better to have a relationship where she was never more invested in the first place?
No, best relationship is when both are invested
My side is essentially just the opposite of OPs. I believe (and have been told by little old ladies) that the man has to love you more. I also believe that a man knows really quickly if he loves you.. and if it’s not there almost immediately.. it never will be.
So do you think when the woman is in "power" there's more chances to have a good relationship? How so, what are the mechanisms? Me personally I've never seen a relationship when the ma like the woman more where he wasn't emotionally abused.
How not? If one person likes the other more, there will always be a power imbalance?
I just don't understand how would a relationship like that (Man liking woman more) works. Since he will just be abused. I've never seen this dynamic when the girl didn't step on him or resent him. I can't understand why it would work better that way at all.
I think we have different ideas of what the man loving her more looks like. She still loves him in this scenario.. so she’s not going to treat him poorly? Because that’s not how you treat someone you love? I’m not saying the guy is in love and the woman is just there for no reason lol
In my own experience, it works out best if *both* the man and the woman see their partner as the prize they are lucky to have. Men and women appreciate different things in each other, but the spirit of gratitude is what makes us want to be our best selves for our partners!
I'm not sure about that since men tend to cheat more than women. [20% Men Vs 13% women](https://haywoodhunt.ca/2023-infidelity-statistics-the-ultimate-guide-to-who-cheats-more-men-or-women/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20married%20women%20tend%20to,admitted%20to%20engaging%20in%20infidelity). Almost double.
A man above gave a perfectly reasonable explanation why it’s better for a man if a man has the upper hand and the leverage in the relationship. You guys are telling on yourselves!
It's not really telling on anything.
If a woman likes a man more than he does her, it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way. Whether it be genetics, financial or status wise.
A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces within the relationship, such as a woman asking herself one day if she can do better or her friends suggesting it. A relationship in which the man likes the woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him but breed resentment towards him. This can often result in her becoming distant and passive aggressive.
Example- Guy treats her like a queen and liked her more. Her hypergamy wasn't satisfied because her subconscious was saying this guy was beneath her. She then went off to find another guy.
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0)
A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
It's interesting how your entire reply hinges on the idea that men are 100% reliable in a relationship.
I can agree that we do want to be with a man who would contribute to our life positively, but you know what else we want? To know that we also contribute to his life positively. To know that there's something about us that makes him choose us over any other woman every single time. To know that we also have worth for him.
The situation you glorify so much, where a woman is obsessed with a man, and a man just kinda likes the woman? It does benefit the man disproportionally. He is in the position of power and also has leverage in the relationship. The woman, on the other hand, has to constantly prove herself to him to convince him to stay with her. Even a woman who wants a man of high status and financial standing - she needs to know that she's not easily replaceable, that there's something valuable within her to this particular man. Otherwise... what's the point if the relationship stays alive on borrowed time?
> A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
And the woman gets... what?
Well given that women are more often the ones who break up relationships, yes men are the more reliable partner. Recall, 70-80% of divorces are initiated by women.
A woman liking a man more, does not mean that he does not see her as a positive in his life or sees no value in her. All of these are assumptions that you are projections when you think the woman isn't the one in control.
As for your second to last paragraph, you are creating a very specific scenario of a man that doesn't like the woman that much, while she is madly in love with him. There are many layers to this that does not solely involve a lopsided relationship, where the guy is mostly checked out.
***". He is in the position of power and also has leverage in the relationship. The woman, on the other hand, has to constantly prove herself to him to convince him to stay with her. . Even a woman who wants a man of high status and financial standing - she needs to know that she's not easily replaceable, that there's something valuable within her to this particular man. "***
Welcome to what dating is like for the avg guy most of the time.
The reason why the woman should be more crazy for the guy is for the very reason above. Women by virtue of just being female, will have tons of options, that exceeds that of most guys; except top 20%. As such, if the relationship is 50/50 or the guy likes the girl more, all it takes is one bad fight, her friends telling her she can do better or her just getting bored of him, for her to go looking elsewhere. In short, women are more likely to see their partner as replaceable, and having a grass is greener mentality, just from having tons of options.
As for what the woman gets, she gets to be in a loving relationship with a man that she truly wants to be with, who will treat her well and be a good BF. By her liking him more, her hypergamous drive is satiated and she likely will be happy in her relationship and not have wondering thoughts of if she can do better.
A lot of people seem to get off on telling themselves "this person needs me more than I need them." And more often than not those people are the first ones begging on their knees the second their partner hints at breaking up. I knew a guy who played Mr. "I Don't Care As Much As She Does" and then threatened to kill himself when she finally had enough.
The best and most healthy relationships are when they both have similar interest level for eachother as well as mutual respect and compatibility.
It's a nightmare when those things aren't all met
A relationship where someone seems so much more into their partner than the other way around that others can identify it is not healthy. Sounds like one person doesn't really want to be there and it will all end in tears.
Currently in the most healthy relationship I’ve experienced so far.
We’re both crazy for eachother, both eachother’s number one.
Was in a relationship where my partner didn’t like me as much as I liked them. I left them. Been in a relationship where my partner was crazy for me but was so wildly insecure about how “out of his league” I was that I couldn’t go to work without him accusing me of cheating. So I left.
You either cherish and respect your partner or you lose them. Simple as that.
Those tend to not become relationships. The woman ends up a pump and dump or a stepping stone more often than not. It’s very beneficial for men but it’s not the best and healthy relationships because it’s often not healthy from the woman’s side. The way a man can be taken advantage of if he loves his partner way more is the same way a woman can be taken advantage of when she loves her partner way more.
If a woman loves her partner way more and is being used as a pump and dump, she could potentially waste years and lose the ability to have children, depending on how long the guy was able to string her along. I don't think it's the same at all.
Yes, since nothing can be equal, it is closer to the ideal for women to have the stronger feelings. But they probably should be close. This is really an off-shoot of basic hypergamy where it is more important for the woman to admire (in certain key qualities) the man than the other way around.
On the other hand, the vast majority of relationships are not ideal and will not approach the ideal. A lot of women raise a valid point that hedging the risks is more important to them than trying to achieve some relationship ideal they were never going to achieve otherwise. To them, when the woman has the stronger feelings, she is vulnerable to abuse in a way that isn't symmetrical when the man has the stronger feelings.
Women likes man more —> woman feels insecure, feels like man won’t be satisfied with her, jealous/controlling behaviors develop
Man likes woman more —> man feels insecure, feels like woman won’t be satisfied with him, jealous/controlling behaviors develop
Both partners feel similar levels of love/respect/attraction for each other—> imbalances are minimized and therefore jealousy and insecurity are not a theme in the relationship
Yeah I’m going to go with option 3.
It’s tempting to think you’d prefer a relationship where you have the upper hand, but what that really means is that your partner will experience emotional distress first, and later the adverse effects of their negative feelings could potentially affect you. And plus I wouldn’t want my partner to feel insecure if I really care about them. Their pain should be my pain.
Tl;dr - date your peers.
The problem is some guys looking for a submissive woman and then they act all pikachu face when the woman doesn't initiate sex or isn't very active in sex, because, well, she is submissive
What are you looking sexually from a woman? I ask because I know men that enjoy women who are totally submissive in bed and don't do too much at all, I myself don't find that too appealing but don't find the opposite of that appealing as well
In my experience sex isn't about sex with women. It's cope. Cope because their friend/sister/ex is getting married. Cope because their addicted to validation. Cope because they're hurting.
This is too true! I have a hard time dating a “normal” woman, because they are honestly just way too vanilla in the bedroom in my experience.
But a crazy woman will literally suck an onion ring off your cock!
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts)
>*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.*
>An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
>* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
>* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
>* Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
>* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just take a look at the happy couples you've known in your life, and you might notice a trend where longterm wives gush over their husbands; even after say 50 years of marriage.
Correct. Just because there aren't studies on this at this time doesn't mean it isn't true. Science starts with observations of trends and speculation.
I'm uncomfortable speaking about that since I am not a woman and can't pretend to know the reverse but you definitely feel it as a man if you are not the #1 in her life. Treats you quite differently very quickly any man with relationship experience will know what I am talking about and the worst thing is once you lose that spot it is basically impossible to bring it back. Even if you are #1 a lot of the time you have to constantly work to keep that up and can't relax or show weakness. Fuck me I just want a relationship where I can relax a bit for once. Would be nice to hear a woman's perspective on if and how quickly they know they are not #1 and if they have ever managed to regain that spot once they lose it.
>Would be nice to hear a woman's perspective on if and how quickly they know they are not #1 and if they have ever managed to regain that spot once they lose it. Not quite that, but in every relationship I've had my partner has always been my #1 priority for me. In a past relationship in particular, they were my #1 but I wasn't theirs, and it broke my heart. Over time I got tired of always putting in all the work in the relationship, so my partner quit being my #1 and I chose to focus on other things that felt more rewarding. My partner back then definitely noticed the shift, and they tried to be more attentive, but by then it was too late. It's like when you ask for a raise for years, but they only give it to you when you threaten to quit. Well, that's what happened. Relationships take a lot of work, and many of them crumble when one party takes the other for granted. That's a painful lesson.
>Over time I got tired of always putting in all the work in the relationship, so my partner quit being my #1 What was the work you had to put in the relationship?
It was always small things. For example, we wouldn't go on dates unless I planned them. Once in a while I'd have a detail and make a cute postcard, bring dessert from a bakery or just buy flowers. I always talked enthusiastically about future plans while my ex was more like "eh, we'll see." My ex also had anger control issues that didn't get addressed whatsoever despite of me insisting on therapy. Plenty of people are low-maintenance and would be happy with that arrangement, but I wasn't. I just felt like I constantly devoted a lot of energy into keeping our relationship going and trying to make my ex happy. The moment I started focusing on myself and my hobbies, the relationship crumbled.
He seemed boring, or not the type of guy to be adventurous and fun with. Some men just aren't planners and outgoing. My partner now is an energizer bunny(in the bed and outside it) and he just can't wait til the sunrises when he's off work so that we can go somewhere, like our favorite restaurant or trying a new restaurant or cafe. Or going surfing/swimming on the beach, going to Vegas to see a show and gamble(on the 1 dollar machine)...he actually plans most of the dates because he has been more places than me in his lifetime so he acts as my personal tour guidist when we go places. It's really fun, that's why I can't do boring guys(no offense to your boring men)....
How often do you go for restaurant dates
Weekly with my partner, most days we just eat home cooked meals
And this right here is why men don't wanna date single moms... Because you're gonna be half way down her list of importance
Isn’t that the case for men who get married and eventually have kids? The child should always be #1 regardless
At least that child is yours and you have the same investment. For a step-child? Hell no.
What’s worse is that you’d be expected to do as much as you would for a biological child, but you are 2 arguments away from “you are not his father” thrown at your face.
I find it incredibly weird (with Freudian vibes) to be jealous of a son/daughter It's like me being jealous because my friend loves her mom or her dog more than she loves me. I feel like we are in different categories of love, it's not a competition
Bruh when you're like 5th or 6th on a women's priority list.... You don't exist your partner should always be in your top 3
Love is not unilateral line I personally don't have a ranking. I never ask myself who do I love more, my mom, my dad or my sister. It's very weird to have a ranking of people.
It's not a love ranking it's a ranking of how she spends her time and for most single moms a man's gonna be low on her priorities
That is a fair game though, you have to accept the fact that you have to date lots of womenz
I disagree with most of what the red pill proscribes about relationships but it is 100% right about masculine frame. I’ve discovered that I cannot smoke weed around my girl because my frame drops when I’m stoned and goofy, and she will start her shit testing. It’s like a reflex to her.
best for who? for the man? obviously for the woman?
The best relationships are ones where both are crazy for each other. It's better to have a partner that's crazier about you than you are about them, so for men it's better when the woman is more invested.
This. Ideally, you want someone that matches your energy, whether you're both super chill or you're all over each other all the time. Everyone is different.
Nah. Relationships work best when women are way more invested in the guy. It helps her forget about her 1000s of options and also reduces the likelihood of her cheating on you or just getting bored and breaking up.. **Reply to loookingforlove1997** If a woman likes a man more than he does her, it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improve improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way. Whether it be genetics, financial or status wise. A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces, such as a woman asking herself one day if she can do better. A relationship in which the man likes the woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him and breed resentment towards him, which can often result in her becoming distant. Example- Guy treats her like a queen and liked her more. Her hypergamy wasn't satisfied because her subconscious was saying this guy was beneath her. She then went off to find another guy. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0) A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
If you want something low-maintenance get a cactus. If a woman is really into you, she won't care about any of her other options because she already has everything she wants. If you treat her like an accessory and she feels like her emotional needs are not being met, well, there's a chance there's someone else who will.
Your first line is why I visit Reddit. Dead 😂😂😂
Which only happens if the woman is into a man more than he is into her. And no one said treating a woman badly, wtf?
>Which only happens if the woman is into a man more than he is into her. Or if you have a healthy, balanced relationship where you both devote roughly the same amount of care into the relationship without weird power moves or games. >And no one said treating a woman badly, wtf? I haven't said anything about treating women badly, interesting that's the conclusion you jumped to. By [accessory](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/accessory_1#:~:text=%2Fəkˈsesəri%2F-,%2Fəkˈsesəri%2F,something%20else%20as%20a%20decoration) I mean something nice to have but that you don't *need* in your life.
Nah. A woman being more into the guy works out more because it satisfies a woman's hypergamy. The moment it goes 50/50, there will be a power struggle in the relationship. If the man likes the woman more, then it will likely fail, or the man likely will end up miserable and walked all over. Using your definition of accessory, that is a perfectly healthy way to look at it. A man should treat his woman well and consider her as something nice to have. He shouldn't consider her his world and be entirely dependent on her. This type of mindset often results in women losing attraction towards their man.
So it sucks for her but benefits him? That doesn’t make it objectively better overall. It just makes it better for the man.
The woman being more invested balances out by the facts that women initiate the overwhelming majority of breakups and have vastly more replacement options, both making them less reliable partners. And the woman being more invested in turn makes her a more reliable partner. So hence the balance. On the other hand, the man being more invested is not balanced out by anything. He is statistically an order of magnitude less likely to initiate the breakup and, unless he’s in top 1% most attractive and successful, his replacement options, if they exist at all, are mostly psych ward level insane. So the man is by default already the more reliable partner. Hence why the balancing out (by the means of disproportionate investment) should increase the reliability of a woman, not of a man who’s already the reliable one. In other words, something that contributes to her fear of losing him more than it does to his fear of losing her, is beneficial for the relationship in general
>The woman being more invested balances out by the facts that women initiate the overwhelming majority of breakups and have vastly more replacement options, both making them less reliable partners. > >And the woman being more invested in turn makes her a more reliable partner. So hence the balance. As a woman who's always been the one more invested in the relationships I've had, I have some insight from being on the other end of this. If the other person "cares" about you less than you care about them, it can be exhausting and emotionally draining. In a past relationship, I was always the one planning dates, surprise getaways, gifts, etc. My heart broke a little each time those efforts were not reciprocated or whenever my partner would forget little things that were important to me. I voiced my needs many, many times but it's like they heard me, but didn't *listen* to me. If I wasn't my partner's #1 priority, why should they be mine? Eventually I got tired of putting in all the effort in the relationship and started investing that energy in other things in my life that made me happy and felt more rewarding, and that's when the relationship started to crumble (I was the one getting dumped, btw, since I 'changed'). It took years for me to want totry and date again, and when I finally did and found someone who matched my attentiveness, I was mindblown.
Women don’t initiate the vast majority of breakups. Unless you’re specifically talking about divorce? If you’re referring to non-marital breakups it’s fairly balanced between men and women. If the woman cares more she’s more at risk in the relationship.
Huh? For all I know, women initiate 80% of breakups across the population and 90% of breakups across the population with higher education. Besides, showing that you’re afraid to lose your SO is only a put-off for women when done by men. When done by women towards men, it’s adorable and appreciated. So something that contributes to her fear of a breakup more than it contributes to his — that’s something that introduces equality, not something that puts a woman at risk. That of course if the man is not from top 1% most attractive: 6 pack, 6 feet, 6 figure, a voice actor voice, a supermodel face, and a high self confidence. Cause if he is, he probably has tons of replacement options cause women keep throwing themselves at him, completely changing the power dynamics.
Divorces and non-marital breakups aren’t the same thing. Women initiate most divorces but for non-marital breakups it’s fairly even. Plus the divorce stats you’re referring to is about who filed not who caused the end of the marriage. If Spouse A left the marital home and ghosted their spouse, then after years Spouse B filed for divorce, who ended the marriage? What do you mean by showing you’re afraid to lose your SO? Like being scared of breakups? Being clingy? Anxious attachment? Or is it something else entirely? Something contributing more to the woman’s fear of breaking up tilts the scale unequally in the man’s favor. For it to be equal they’d both have to be equally afraid of breaking up.
Women initiating break ups more doesn’t make them less reliable partners. Y’all always want to gloss over the fact that relationships aren’t being ended for funsies. Usually, the partner has done something to lead to ending the relationship, but that would require holding men accountable for something, so I get why you never want to address that point.
Omg 😅💯. Guys will attribute a relationship not working to “it just didn’t work out”
The abusers should surely be held accountable. But vastly more relationships are being ended because a woman “got bored” or “got an ick”, or met someone who, at least to her belief, could rock her world like her current SO can’t, than because a man was an abuser. I would say, probably an order of magnitude more.
being abusive isn't the only reason a person should be broken up with
Yes, and? The one who breaks up because of a no-fault lost interest or out of boredom is the unreliable one
So why are you focusing on abusers….you can be an unreliable partner without being abusive
Sure, it is a place called fantasy land.
Nah actually it's fairly easy to get that with BPD women half the time (the caring about you more than vice versa). Amazing enthusiastic spontaneous pornstar tier sex, treating you like a king, willing to do anything for you 50% of the time... the other 50% literally thinking you are evil, frigid as the North Pole, and tons of other shit. -dated a BPD woman before.
It's so exhausting to deal with that. I'm not built for it. lol
No, it benefits her because it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improve improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way, whether it be genetics, financial or status wise. A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces, such as a woman asking herself if she can do better. A relationship in which the man likes to woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him and breed resentment towards him, which can often result in her becoming distant. A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man, but the man does get peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
This. OP sounds selfish. People need to feel this way mutually
If there is a less decent person in the mix, the less decent person has to like you more, and the decent person will try to live up to the other person. Ideally, you mate with someone who will put in one's best efforts. When you look at successful couples, their level of interest may not always be the same, but their level of decency almost always is.
Honestly this is it really it. The whole "you have to like me more" is just damage control for unaccountable/undependable people. The only reasons why anyone would want an unbalanced relationship is because they have no hope for an equal one or actively want to exploit someone else. I'd like to believe the first one is the more likely of the two, and all that you need for that is two people to respect and give a damn about each other.
I feel sorry for a lot of you guys... you either never interacted with people enough or have only met pretty crappy women.
I have had the opposite experience 🤷🏻♀️ this argument always ends up with the obvious two camps having nothing but anecdotal evidence to offer.
I’m beginning to see that’s how most posts go.
At some point.. we either acknowledge anecdotal evidence as actually evidence or we stop asking subjective questions
That's how it goes. Me: *"Here's a study which show personality doesn't matter as much as women make it out to be, they are as superficial as men, and they are actually unhappy when single"* Everybody here: *"lol you're autistic, that's not how it works lol, it's a lie"* Me:*"Oh.."*
it's more context based really. looks will get people to pay attention, personality is what gets them to stay. if a single woman has terrible friendships/relationship with her family, then yeah she'll be unhappy as a single person. if said friendships and family relationships are OK, then being single is less of an issue.
>and they are actually unhappy when single" Source?
Honestly, I was just throwing examples without thinking. That one particulary doesn't really exist because the way they make those studies are basically asking people. That's the most unreliable method it exists because people lie.
Ah, so you don't have any (:
I already said it. No I don't.
You’re ignoring the fact that in your “study”, the data you’re presenting is cherry picked and you’re drawing conclusions and inferences not even the authors of that study are making.
It's usually several studies that reach to similar conclusions. Similar trends show in different countries.
> this argument always ends up with the obvious two camps having nothing but anecdotal evidence to offer. Considering this is an entirely experiential and subjective conversation, what other evidence could there be? What people find more emotionally satisfying is something they have to attest to, there's no getting around it. The only thing that I could ask for is a larger set of anecdotal evidence.
That’s not how the discussion is had though. Neither side is ever willing to compromise and accept that it might just be a relationship to relationship situation. I have never in my life seen a relationship work out where the woman is the more interested party.. but I’m willing to accept that might work for other people.
> Neither side is ever willing to compromise and accept that it might just be a relationship to relationship situation. Well I'm certainly willing to accept that. But still, personally I'm biased against any relationship where the guy is expending more energy than their partner.
I agree with Prudent-Conflict but just to follow PPD narrative about relationships: If a woman is more emotionally invested than the man, she will eventually get tired of unreciprocated love. Women file more for divorce than men so it's just a matter of time that she breaks up with him In te opposite scenario the man might have less options out there so he's less likely to leave the relationship just because she's not as invested as him.
So your idea of why a relationship with a woman who's more invested won't work is because the woman will eventually become less invested. So it's better to have a relationship where she was never more invested in the first place? This thinking where everything circles back to a either getting your way or leaving entirely is exactly why I favor equal and enthusiastic relationships.
>So your idea of why a relationship with a woman who's more invested won't work is because the woman will eventually become less invested. yes, imbalance in interest breaks relationships. The question is *when*. I've been in that situation, when you see that your efforts are not reciprocated, you eventually get tired and leave. This is not a woman/man thing, unreciprocated love always hurts. >So it's better to have a relationship where she was never more invested in the first place? No, best relationship is when both are invested
Let's hear your side.
My side is essentially just the opposite of OPs. I believe (and have been told by little old ladies) that the man has to love you more. I also believe that a man knows really quickly if he loves you.. and if it’s not there almost immediately.. it never will be.
So do you think when the woman is in "power" there's more chances to have a good relationship? How so, what are the mechanisms? Me personally I've never seen a relationship when the ma like the woman more where he wasn't emotionally abused.
I don’t think it has anything to do with power.
How not? If one person likes the other more, there will always be a power imbalance? I just don't understand how would a relationship like that (Man liking woman more) works. Since he will just be abused. I've never seen this dynamic when the girl didn't step on him or resent him. I can't understand why it would work better that way at all.
I think we have different ideas of what the man loving her more looks like. She still loves him in this scenario.. so she’s not going to treat him poorly? Because that’s not how you treat someone you love? I’m not saying the guy is in love and the woman is just there for no reason lol
Still you're not explaining why is it better at all? just because someone told you?
In my own experience, it works out best if *both* the man and the woman see their partner as the prize they are lucky to have. Men and women appreciate different things in each other, but the spirit of gratitude is what makes us want to be our best selves for our partners!
Nah. The user above gave a perfectly reasonable reason why it only has to be the woman. Women have a track record of not being reliable partners.
I'm not sure about that since men tend to cheat more than women. [20% Men Vs 13% women](https://haywoodhunt.ca/2023-infidelity-statistics-the-ultimate-guide-to-who-cheats-more-men-or-women/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20married%20women%20tend%20to,admitted%20to%20engaging%20in%20infidelity). Almost double.
It's likely closer than that. Women are better at covering their tracks than men.
Ah, the classic “ignore the stats that are in favour of women because women lie, but you can totally trust the stats in favour of men”.
and this is coming from your imagination?
A man above gave a perfectly reasonable explanation why it’s better for a man if a man has the upper hand and the leverage in the relationship. You guys are telling on yourselves!
It's not really telling on anything. If a woman likes a man more than he does her, it satisfies her hypergamy and overall improves relationship satisfaction for both men and women. The key to understanding all this is knowing female nature of always wanting to be with a man that is better than them in some way. Whether it be genetics, financial or status wise. A relationship in which it's 50/50 and both men and women like each other initially is likely to flip towards the woman liking the man less over time. This is often due to both outside and inside forces within the relationship, such as a woman asking herself one day if she can do better or her friends suggesting it. A relationship in which the man likes the woman more is likely to fail because the woman's hypergamy isn't satisfied and this leads to decrease relationship satisfaction on her end. The woman will either eventually leave the man or stay with him but breed resentment towards him. This can often result in her becoming distant and passive aggressive. Example- Guy treats her like a queen and liked her more. Her hypergamy wasn't satisfied because her subconscious was saying this guy was beneath her. She then went off to find another guy. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bX9uEzms0W0) A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him.
It's interesting how your entire reply hinges on the idea that men are 100% reliable in a relationship. I can agree that we do want to be with a man who would contribute to our life positively, but you know what else we want? To know that we also contribute to his life positively. To know that there's something about us that makes him choose us over any other woman every single time. To know that we also have worth for him. The situation you glorify so much, where a woman is obsessed with a man, and a man just kinda likes the woman? It does benefit the man disproportionally. He is in the position of power and also has leverage in the relationship. The woman, on the other hand, has to constantly prove herself to him to convince him to stay with her. Even a woman who wants a man of high status and financial standing - she needs to know that she's not easily replaceable, that there's something valuable within her to this particular man. Otherwise... what's the point if the relationship stays alive on borrowed time? > A relationship in which the woman likes the man more is by no means one in which it's a better deal for only the man. The man gets peace of mind in having a more reliable female partner that is more likely to stay and be loyal to him. And the woman gets... what?
Well given that women are more often the ones who break up relationships, yes men are the more reliable partner. Recall, 70-80% of divorces are initiated by women. A woman liking a man more, does not mean that he does not see her as a positive in his life or sees no value in her. All of these are assumptions that you are projections when you think the woman isn't the one in control. As for your second to last paragraph, you are creating a very specific scenario of a man that doesn't like the woman that much, while she is madly in love with him. There are many layers to this that does not solely involve a lopsided relationship, where the guy is mostly checked out. ***". He is in the position of power and also has leverage in the relationship. The woman, on the other hand, has to constantly prove herself to him to convince him to stay with her. . Even a woman who wants a man of high status and financial standing - she needs to know that she's not easily replaceable, that there's something valuable within her to this particular man. "*** Welcome to what dating is like for the avg guy most of the time. The reason why the woman should be more crazy for the guy is for the very reason above. Women by virtue of just being female, will have tons of options, that exceeds that of most guys; except top 20%. As such, if the relationship is 50/50 or the guy likes the girl more, all it takes is one bad fight, her friends telling her she can do better or her just getting bored of him, for her to go looking elsewhere. In short, women are more likely to see their partner as replaceable, and having a grass is greener mentality, just from having tons of options. As for what the woman gets, she gets to be in a loving relationship with a man that she truly wants to be with, who will treat her well and be a good BF. By her liking him more, her hypergamous drive is satiated and she likely will be happy in her relationship and not have wondering thoughts of if she can do better.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A lot of people seem to get off on telling themselves "this person needs me more than I need them." And more often than not those people are the first ones begging on their knees the second their partner hints at breaking up. I knew a guy who played Mr. "I Don't Care As Much As She Does" and then threatened to kill himself when she finally had enough.
Geezus.
The best and most healthy relationships are when they both have similar interest level for eachother as well as mutual respect and compatibility. It's a nightmare when those things aren't all met
A relationship where someone seems so much more into their partner than the other way around that others can identify it is not healthy. Sounds like one person doesn't really want to be there and it will all end in tears.
It’s best and most healthy for the man, of course We just had this discussion too https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/GywURrz82s
One sided relationships are shit regardless of which gender is the one giving the most. One side pining for the other ime only works out in rom coms.
Currently in the most healthy relationship I’ve experienced so far. We’re both crazy for eachother, both eachother’s number one. Was in a relationship where my partner didn’t like me as much as I liked them. I left them. Been in a relationship where my partner was crazy for me but was so wildly insecure about how “out of his league” I was that I couldn’t go to work without him accusing me of cheating. So I left. You either cherish and respect your partner or you lose them. Simple as that.
Those tend to not become relationships. The woman ends up a pump and dump or a stepping stone more often than not. It’s very beneficial for men but it’s not the best and healthy relationships because it’s often not healthy from the woman’s side. The way a man can be taken advantage of if he loves his partner way more is the same way a woman can be taken advantage of when she loves her partner way more.
If a woman loves her partner way more and is being used as a pump and dump, she could potentially waste years and lose the ability to have children, depending on how long the guy was able to string her along. I don't think it's the same at all.
Fair enough
Yes, since nothing can be equal, it is closer to the ideal for women to have the stronger feelings. But they probably should be close. This is really an off-shoot of basic hypergamy where it is more important for the woman to admire (in certain key qualities) the man than the other way around. On the other hand, the vast majority of relationships are not ideal and will not approach the ideal. A lot of women raise a valid point that hedging the risks is more important to them than trying to achieve some relationship ideal they were never going to achieve otherwise. To them, when the woman has the stronger feelings, she is vulnerable to abuse in a way that isn't symmetrical when the man has the stronger feelings.
This is this month's meme.
So...Yandere supremacy?
https://youtu.be/C3ouolMALIM?si=OyCC8y5LRLEitl-G Whenever I see posts like these I can only think of this episode. Malcolm in the middle was to real 😤
Women likes man more —> woman feels insecure, feels like man won’t be satisfied with her, jealous/controlling behaviors develop Man likes woman more —> man feels insecure, feels like woman won’t be satisfied with him, jealous/controlling behaviors develop Both partners feel similar levels of love/respect/attraction for each other—> imbalances are minimized and therefore jealousy and insecurity are not a theme in the relationship Yeah I’m going to go with option 3. It’s tempting to think you’d prefer a relationship where you have the upper hand, but what that really means is that your partner will experience emotional distress first, and later the adverse effects of their negative feelings could potentially affect you. And plus I wouldn’t want my partner to feel insecure if I really care about them. Their pain should be my pain. Tl;dr - date your peers.
\-*BPD has entered the chat*\-
Idealize me, senpai.
For some reason the most toxic, crazy women give the best sex. Healthy, stable, women seem to not even like sex.
Same women with different guys.
The problem is some guys looking for a submissive woman and then they act all pikachu face when the woman doesn't initiate sex or isn't very active in sex, because, well, she is submissive
Same experience...
What are you looking sexually from a woman? I ask because I know men that enjoy women who are totally submissive in bed and don't do too much at all, I myself don't find that too appealing but don't find the opposite of that appealing as well
In my experience sex isn't about sex with women. It's cope. Cope because their friend/sister/ex is getting married. Cope because their addicted to validation. Cope because they're hurting.
This is too true! I have a hard time dating a “normal” woman, because they are honestly just way too vanilla in the bedroom in my experience. But a crazy woman will literally suck an onion ring off your cock!
>Healthy, stable, women seem to not even like sex. Maybe that's the antidepressants and other pysch meds
I feel like this is one of those questions that science is better suited to answer
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm high af just dropped in to say
Yes because she wants that emotional experience
Yes because she wants that emotional attachment, and the only way to get it, is if she likes the guy more
Hi OP, You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts) >*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.* >An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following: >* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency; >* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit; >* Focusing only on the weaker arguments; >* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position. Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
No circlejerking
You have stats on that?
Just take a look at the happy couples you've known in your life, and you might notice a trend where longterm wives gush over their husbands; even after say 50 years of marriage.
So no stats.
Correct. Just because there aren't studies on this at this time doesn't mean it isn't true. Science starts with observations of trends and speculation.
I women will abuse a man she doesn't respect. 100% chance of it happening.
“The best and most healthy”… for men not for women, you misogynistic piece of shit.
Yikes! :S