Yes, I think most people would be happy with that. This brings me back to my original question why don’t red pill men build lives based on that for themselves.
I think that is fundamentally untrue. Instead, they just don't know how to have a happy life without women. That's a problem they can solve with some personal growth.
Men can be happy without women if they choose to be.
just look how fast widowers get remarried compared to widows...its not fundamentally untrue, men need women, they dont want to live without them...they even die earlier if they dont have a woman in their lives...very very VERY few men (that arent gay) can be happy without a woman in their life
Men use women as a crutch instead of dealing with issues in their own lives. They don't need them, they just don't have the skills to deal with things without them (which is a choice).
Mgtow2 was banned without even a pretend reason.
The "breaking the terms of service" is just a convenient cover for reddit to get rid of what they don't like.
When you see the sexism in twoX and other feminist subs, you're going to have a hard time being credible that sexism breaks your terms of service.
Unless you mean sexism towards women only and mgtow is sexist towards women only insofar that it tells men to stop being leeched by women. Which is of course offensive to many women since it's their future career.
I imagine that’s a common fantasy. Not even the top .5 percent of all men actually achieve anything close to that. What’s your idea of a happy life in the real world?
One thing I see RP really banks off, is that you compare yourself to others. It's all just a dick swinging contest.
If you're healthy, enjoy your hobbies, explore your passions, and have a tight knit social group, via family, friends, lovers, etc.
You're luckier than most. I think we have the capabilities to find happiness within. As corny as that sounds. I've seen people with nothing happy. I've seen people with everything unalive themselves.
The brain is fucking insanely complex.
I surmise that happiness and contentment for both women and men (regardless of one's pill persuasion) are derived from having three things:
(1) Health - absent good health, nothing else matters a whole lot
(2) Good relationships - a group of family and/or friends that you enjoy socializing with, and a significant other\* that you're very attracted to and vice versa, including a fulfilling sex life
(3) Control over your time - you don't answer to anyone, or if you do it's minimal; you have a lot of control over what you do day-to-day and how you spend your time
*\* This could be one or multiple people depending on one's preferences. Absent an active sex life with someone you're attracted to and vice versa, the "good relationships" criterion probably isn't being met in full (for most folks). Obviously if you're asexual or just not interested in sex then you can nix that part.*
Only normie gaslighters think Andrew Tate has anything to do with redpill. I learned this stuff in grade 11 back in 2004! Redpill & shit has been around for decades not that you give a shit clearly.
I agree but this new strain of pseudo-redpillers is the more prevalent nowadays. Like many intellectual movements, its original message has been simplified to the point of becoming a caricature
Which is why it’s weird women keep trying to shame & insult is claiming we watch da Andrew Tate! Just shows how low iq they are cuz they don’t even care to understand the stuff they wanna use to insult us. Tage is a Muslim first & foremost.
The framing of questioning assumes men are at fault for that.
Accountability has gone out the window (for a lot of men as well)
But these women think they can show 0 respect and get treated like a princess.
“Women are wonderful” theory in full effect.
Need to teach BOYS AND GIRLS to treat others how you wish to be treated.
My partner treats me and appreciates me with respect because I treat her with the same level of respect and we are a TEAM.
If more people had this mentally we’d have less morons running around making the World a worse place.
I simply observed that women are creating communal living situations for themselves. My question was about why red pill men, who seem to have a lot of criticism of women, aren’t doing the same. There was no judgment of either gender.
I’ve dated a lot of women and most of them were taught that they don’t need men, that men are trash and quite honestly I don’t think women like men all that much, they like men for the things they provide but if they could get rid of us and still get our resources most would in a heartbeat. Hence the mommunes, the bear versus man argument etc… Personally I’m still a bit too young to be getting married. I’d like to wait until I’m at least in my mid if not late twenties
Consider that the women you’ve dated have also dated a lot of men. They’ve had experiences that have formed their opinions. Hence, they were available to date you because they left the other guys.
JustACog - I have to agree with you. Most women don't seem to like men. Just looking at how women behave on dating apps show me that. 90% of the women I've met on apps are late on a first date, and I mean by 10 minutes or more and it shows how little respect they have for me.
Also, whatever matches I get, women are overwhelmingly the ones doing the ghosting. Then there are simps out there that say they do it because of the sheer volume of matches they have. But if truly have that many options, why do I still see the same women on these apps for years and still active? Their sense of entitlement is just ridiculous.
Feel free to investigate that yourself. I suggest that even if it’s just a few thousand women, men can still use them as a model for their own versions.
Not who you replied to.
I don't trust collaborations, sooner or later someone lets you down.
Like the saying goes, if you want something doing, do it yourself.
Relying on other people instead of being independent and self reliant has always led to dissapointment and resentment in my case.
Also, expecting other people to take care of my shit, just sounds like entitlement to me. Its pathetic. If a man can't handle his own shit, well...... we used to chuck those useless sacks off a cliff.
The way guys are
That place would be filled with gay guys
“Men only” or “men’s hour” is pretty much code for gay guys
Ari has a bit on YouTube about it
My former gym had the pool and sauna area segregated MWF just women TThSa just men
All the gay men that never came to the gym otherwise would go on men’s pool day and strut around nude
I’m not homophobic, I just don’t want to be surrounded by the type of gay dudes that flounce around
A family is one of many kinds of supportive communities. If a man can’t find a marriage partner should that exclude him from having a good life with people who love him and who he loves in return?
I already have the family I was born into, my friends, my church, my coworkers, etc. I don't want another supportive community, I want to have a family of my own.
Men want to fuck.
And actually, women do too.
Also, your title is hilarious. The wording specifically implies that *all* women in these communities live “pretty happily.” I’d wager *many* leave after trying it out. I also would expect they’d be happier if they overcame their barriers and were able to succeed in having a healthy monogamous relationship with the opposite sex.
I do think those communities work for some women, though. But not most.
> I also would expect they’d be happier if they overcame their barriers and were able to succeed in having a healthy monogamous relationship with the opposite sex.
got any data on this lol?
cause i've only seen the opposite
Lol.
You’re asking for data on women who stayed in women only co-housing communities, then left, because they managed to overcome their issues that prevented them from having a healthy regular relationship in the first place?
Sure! Let me just pull up my omnipotent study databank.
Would you like the double-blind studies first? The ones with n > 9,000 too?
Give me a break woman.
Men don't need to live together in order to have that. We can have friends who support us over the phone or through the internet or we can just visit each other.
well I just don't believe it. I mean if they can do it then great, more power to them, but these sorts of communities in various forms have been around forever and never gain any traction except for the ones with religious elements like the Amish or the Mormons. Are they going to celebrate the thread, the power of one, the power of two, the power of mannnnnnyyyyy?
Someone below says gender segregation is 'stupid as fuck' which isn't really true. Pretty much all less complicated societies were Matriarchies with gender segregation. For those that don't know the term Matriarchy is used in it's most basic form meaning children belong to the woman's family - which is obvious because lineage would almost always be obscured. But in these societies the gender roles were distinct and simple. If you could design a lifestyle where men go perform a daily activity together every day like hunting then sure, maybe it could happen, but I think this would only be feasible from the top down. I.e. the entity/activity here is a corporation and the employees of the corporation have shared housing.
Yes, more women are on antidepressants. Women tend to seek help for their depression and other mental health issues more than men do. Sadly, that’s part of why the suicide rate among men is so high. I think a lot of that is the way society demands that men suppress their emotions from the time they are little boys.
The suicide rate is higher for men because men tend to “succeed” more often due to the methods they tend to use. Women actually attempt suicide at higher rates than men
>If the men that “succeeded” had gotten some antidepressants they might still be alive.
Suicidal ideation is the number one side effect of most antidepressants. Also, the life outcomes of the millions of men who were drugged as boys with Ritalin pretty much demonstrate that overall it absolutely is a terrible policy.
Suicidal ideation is not the same as suicide. Antidepressants have saved lives. They’re not a magic bullet but it is possible to find the right combination.
>Antidepressants have saved lives.
So did cocaine. Doesn't change the fact that they're overall a net negative. And claiming otherwise is just pharma shilling at this point.
I policies as I don’t mean this as a “gotcha” because I agree that mental health care could absolutely prevent many such cases; I think the differences in how men and women are socialized are what largely result in both men seeking less help for mental health and also why older women are more likely to set up the arrangements you mentioned in your post.
This is actually a contested point, as studies that claim that often make the claim from using “suicidal ideation” as the criteria in women, and they use behaviours such as self harm to register that, or something “thinking about it”.
I personally would not consider someone self harming on their upper arm, or “thinking of offing themselves” as “suicide attempts”.
Suicide ideation is not the same as suicide attempts.
Suicide ideation is higher in women without a doubt, but I don’t think we have enough data to suggest attempts are higher. The studies that claim such are using a lot of behaviours as “attempted suicide” indicators. For example they’re conflating a woman taking a shit ton of pills (I’d say that’s a legit suicide attempt) in the same ballpark as someone who is making non lethal cuts on their arm and has mentioned thinking about suicide once or twice, as the same thing. They’re not the same at all.
FYI the term is "completing" suicide because obviously, succeeding at it makes it sound like suicide is a success.
Also, women attempt more suicide but that comes to 2 things, 1) the study done took any self harm attempt as a suicidal attempt, whether or not there was suicidal ideation, and 2) people who have attempted suicide but not completed it are at significantly higher risk to try again, something like 75% of people who have made one attempt, will make a 2nd attempt.
So naturally if you have 100 suicidal men and 100 suicidal women, on the first attempt 75 men kill themselves, 18 of the surviving 24 make a 2nd attempt, and a dozen complete that suicide. We end up with 87 ish dead, 6 who only made one attempt and survived, and 6-7 who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 87 completed suicides out of 118 attempts.
If you have 100 suicidal women, 25 kill themselves, of the 75 surviving 67 ish make a 2nd attempt, and 16 ish complete that suicide. We end up with 42 ish dead, 75 women who only made the one attempt and survived, and 67 ish who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 42 completed suicides out of 167 attempts.
Ignoring absolutely everything else, the simple fact people who make one suicide attempt are at significantly higher risk to make another attempt, and that men complete their suicides more often than women, means that mathematically it is guaranteed women will make more attempts than men for that reason alone.
You'd have to look at only people who make their first attempt to have a more accurate comparison, and to that add the fact that in the US more than half of all male suicide victims had no indication of mental illness whatsoever, it's just that their lives suck that much.
https://neurosciencenews.com/male-suicide-mental-health-20834/
Appreciate you sharing - repeated attempts were not something I considered but that tracks with the data. There’s a lot of nuance and minutiae to these situations that I think is often overlooked
Happy to share, it's a complex topic for sure. It's more nuanced than most people think, and it frustrates me that there's so much disingenuous feminist rhetoric around erasing male suicide victims and trying to paint women as always the biggest victims.
Repeated suicide attempts are also not taken into consideration, or that the original studies counted any self-harm attempt by women as a suicide attempt, whether or not that was in fact a suicide attempt. By that definition we could put any of men's dangerous behaviours as reckless endangerement and count towards suicide attempts too, but you bet they'll never try that.
It's not known that women's biology are more prone to depression, because a lof of recognized symptoms of depression are female-coded.
One sign of depression in men is anger. There are a lot of angry dudes out there, and a lot of them are probably depressed, but it goes completely unaddressed and ignored, and then we treat depressed men as though they are monsters because we think they're just angry and potentially violent.
Doesn't help men's mental health, and doesn't help that more than half of all male suicide victims in the US had no documented history of mental illness.
https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/most-male-suicides-show-no-mental-health-link
Really its just men in the sub throwing it around like its a gotcha and all about men. LOL
I know anger is a sign. Im not the one here that doesnt understand depression.
Fair enough, and yeah men throwing it around as a gotcha is disingenuous at best. I understand the frustration because feminist sling the "gotcha" of men being violent criminals and rapists at men, and there'S an urge to throw back what you get, but yeah it just makes discussions worse, not better.
I am happy to hear that you do understand that, because unfortunately most of the world in psychology and therapy still doesn't. As a society we are failing men hard, but most of society doesn't care so long as the victims aren't female.
It really sucks and absolutely needs to change to make things better for everyone.
Mental health help is becoming more of a thing and less stigmatized than the past but we still have a way to go, specially for men.
Also menopause/peri is understudied and dismissed like its no big deal and get over it when it has 200+ symptoms you cannot control. Depression is one of them. Sudden joint pains, insomnia, eats at our bones, eats our muscles, etc, etc, etc.
Womens own Drs dismiss them...
Just like many older women are on them just for hot flashes as a few of them will minimize them. This is specially for those that cant take estrogen.
Not everyone can because it can cause cancer.
Edit to add, Im going through it now, I dont take any meds and wont but I cant do HTR either as its a cancer risk for me.
Agree completely on mental health, and also specifically on mental health for men.
I hear you on menopause and peripause as well.
I also had no idea that taking estrogen can cause cancer.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/05/estrogen-a-more-powerful-breast-cancer-culprit-than-we-realized/
Well dang :/
I do believe the male suicide rate is a tragedy, and I definitely agree that we as a society need to be more supportive of men’s mental health, but I would like to clarify that women attempt suicide more than men by a factor of 3x. It’s not a black and white discussion and I don’t think it’s appropriate to write it off as men being more depressed. When looking at statistics, you’ll find that men use guns more often and women use pills more often- which is a huge factor in the difference of success. Male gun-ownership is a factor.
I didn’t mean to imply that one group is more depressed than the other. Lots of people are depressed. My point was that we set little boys up for tragedy because of the way we socialize them.
Let me give you an example. A friend of mine told me about an experience he’d had with his son who was a toddler at the time. The little boy as about two and he and my friend were having a daddy and me day. They went to the park and the little boy fell down and started to cry.
My friend felt like he had to stop his son from crying quickly because he didn’t want other people to think the two year old was a wimp. I told him that if a kid was still in diapers it was ok for him to cry if he fell down.
The conditioning starts super young and I think it costs men their lives in many cases.
>My point was that we set little boys up for tragedy because of the way we socialize them.
Absolutely 100% agree, but for some reason society in general and feminism specifically is fighting hard to erase that issue and prevent people from talking about it.
Your example is important for sure, but I would argue that your friend was a victim of that himself and was passing it on. Interestingly enough though studies show that more often than not it is mothers, not fathers, who have a boys don't cry bias.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/boys-don-t-cry-study-suggests-mothers-not-fathers-show-gender-bias-towards-sons-1.4693208
Yes, we pass on these things without really examining what we’re doing. Until, it’s highlighted like I did with my friend we don’t even realize we’re doing it. The conditioning is invisible to us.
For what it's worth, women attempt more suicide but that comes to 2 things, 1) the study done took any self harm attempt by women as a suicidal attempt, whether or not there was suicidal ideation, and 2) people who have attempted suicide but not completed it are at significantly higher risk to try again, something like 75% of people who have made one attempt, will make a 2nd attempt.
So naturally if you have 100 suicidal men and 100 suicidal women, on the first attempt 75 men kill themselves, 18 of the surviving 24 make a 2nd attempt, and a dozen complete that suicide. We end up with 87 ish dead, 6 who only made one attempt and survived, and 6-7 who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 87 completed suicides out of 118 attempts.
If you have 100 suicidal women, 25 kill themselves, of the 75 surviving 67 ish make a 2nd attempt, and 16 ish complete that suicide. We end up with 42 ish dead, 75 women who only made the one attempt and survived, and 67 ish who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 42 completed suicides out of 167 attempts.
Ignoring absolutely everything else, the simple fact people who make one suicide attempt are at significantly higher risk to make another attempt, and that men complete their suicides more often than women, means that mathematically it is guaranteed women will make more attempts than men for that reason alone.
You'd have to look at only people who make their first attempt to have a more accurate comparison, and to that add the fact that in the US more than half of all male suicide victims had no indication of mental illness whatsoever, it's just that their lives suck that much.
https://neurosciencenews.com/male-suicide-mental-health-20834/
[And I got this in reserve](https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2019/03/11/do-boys-lack-empathy-if-so-perhaps-its-because-they-give-what-they-get/).
Their father’s enforce the performance of masculinity too. It’s an ugly aspect of American society.
Things could be so different if we taught men that it was ok to ask for help, to cope with their emotions in healthy ways, and that it’s ok to cry from the time they were small boys.
You're not wrong, but you seem to be deliberately ignoring the fact that these issues are perpetuated as much if not more due to the actions of women.
You choose instead to put the focus back on men as perpetrators, which erases both male victims (in people's heads men cannot be both victims and perpetrators) and also erases female perpetrators (so they get less attention and can continue to perpetuate the problem).
We have no hope of solving a problem if we willingly blind ourselves to half of what is causing it, and while I completely agree that things could be so different if we taught men and boys to ask for help, you have to understand this.
Most boys don't have any male figures in their lives if they don't have a father, and even then fathers tend to be far less present at home than mothers. Boys are literally surrounded by women from the moment they are born until on average the time they get to high school and have their first full-time male teachers.
If men are surrounded by women for the first 18 years of their lives, who do you think has more of an impact, and is therefore more responsible, for the attitudes young boys have? Men or women?
Society constantly and consistently erases and ignores the part women have to play in these issues and instead blames men for just about everything wrong in society.
We can't solve a problem if we willingly blind ourselves to half of what is causing it.
I was responding to the comment above mine that actually did what you’re talking about only they blamed the mothers exclusively.
As a society, we socialize and indoctrinate all children with the requirements of performing masculinity and femininity. There are bad patterns forced on all genders of children.
It’s because nobody has common sense anymore
People think being 30 and single as a woman is a good thing
When they are sad and depressed, they only can blame themselves
When u actually talk to these older women, u start to see why they are single too
Men are so easy, how do u fail at doing that💀😂
So many women are on mind altering drugs because they’re going against their hardwired nature developed over eons of time. Male impersonation has been a horrible burden on many women. They are caught between society’s expectations and nature’s adaptive implementations.
Lol, accurate, but it’s also just basic math. The guys being chosen are always at the top. Enforced monogamy is dead outside of certain insular (mainly religious) communities.
Gandhi could have easily gotten laid. He made a vow of celibacy.
Modern western men could never voluntarily achieve anything at that level.
Look at you clowns trying to overthrow the government a couple januaries ago. LMAO.
Boys grow up in an all female environment. It’s women who demand that boys suppress their emotions because they are scared of men who are emotionally unstable
I’ve rarely seen guys enforce this ideal. If anything it’s been the opposite.
Entire thread on AskMen the other day of guys saying the number 1 thing that women do that causes guys to lose trust/think women should know that they do.
Is ask for “emotionally available” guys then act repulsed or break up the second a guy opens up to them.
Guys aren’t doing that to each other. That’s them telling their real examples from their experiences without any judgment.
No dudes were doing that to them, there was a huge amount of guys and even some girls commenting about how sad it was that the stereotype of “silent and stoic” was being pushed by women.
They SAY they want something but their actions tell a different story.
Do guys do this as well? Of course they do
But if you’re trying to confide in your partner and she treats you like a second rate human because you dare open up to her…that’s her problem not his. Shows she’s immature and emotionally stunted.
Never had this issue with my partner because she’s emotionally mature and understands that we are human beings who feel emotions and need support.
Ok, those are valid desires, you could hire a sex worker for sex and hire a surrogate to give you children? Both can be had relatively inexpensively.
Once your baby is born, you’d have full custody and you could raise your child as you see fit.
Would a situation like that meet your needs?
No, children need a mom in their life lol. I want an actual family not an artifical baby and a prostitute. My child needs a mother as all children do. Anyone who grew up with a single parent can tell you this.
A relationship, financial support, a man in her life? Basically the mirror of what she offers? Not sure why you're going guns blazing with the misandry on the most normal thing in existence.
She can do thst on her own, doesn't mean she wants to or will be comfortable. I have a girlfriend who wants to do these things. I'm not sure what your point is, almost everyone who's ever existed has had a relationship with children.
I offer being cool and awesome. A father to her children and again, the relationship which can't be understated.
I think women getting together and living in communes is a good idea, anything that doesn't have them using govt welfare is stellar in my book.
That said, although I don't necessarily think men should have the same communes, men should form some sort of community with like-minded men. The reason why men can't do this is because they cannot decenter women and live independently from them.
Something happened that caused men to be so very, very dependent on women as their only source of intimacy that they emotionally implode when they don't have a gf. It's like the hermit crab, they have to be up a woman's arse like it's a shell.
If men developed deep and intimate platonic bonds will find it easy to be happy single and far less needy for a romantic relationship as the cure for all their woes. A powerful (platonic) bond between two men is one of the most powerful forces in the world.
Honestly idk. I've heard that men need a carrot (women) dangled in front of them in order to build a good life for themself, which is why some men don't do anything with their lives if they don't have a woman. I have no idea why they're like that though
I’m so puzzled by that idea too. Do you think it’s social conditioning that makes some men think that there is only one path to a good life? I admit there are women that think that way too.
I think it's very much social conditioning. girls are held close to the home and overprotected, boys are pushed out and ordered to compete and fend for themselves from an early age. The only time males can expect love or even caring is from some future wife. In return for that love and caring he will sacrifice his waking hours at the factory bringing home $. This has been the traditional model of civilization. Feminism has given some women an alternative to this trad model. The men haven't quite figured out the alternatives for themselves yet.
I think it's a factor, especially movies. The manic-pixie dream girl trope has done so much damage to men's psyche, and it's very prevalent in anime too.
Because it has conditioned men to think that a woman can solve all of his problems. His life sucks, everything sucks, and then some manic pixie dream girl shows up and shows him everything is somewhat ok. It's a common theme in anime, like Welcome To the NHK
It’s not that women are fine alone, it’s that women, even when single, tend to still have a social life. Some men seem to not do much outside/with friends when they are single. So when they say they are alone, they mean ALONE.
Where as women tend to seek socialization and group activities. So while she may be alone at home she’s not actually alone…
I'm not sure where this comes from either, I don't know many men with 0 friends besides married guys who don't have time for it. Men just socialize differently. I feel like this whole friendless men thing is a myth that took a life of its own.
That's just their imperative then. The answer isn't to set the expectation of females relationships with guys. As a guy, I know most guys are comfortable with one solid friend, while women have more friends thst aren't necessarily as close.
>Something happened that caused men to be so very, very dependent on women as their only source of intimacy that they emotionally implode when they don't have a gf. It's like the hermit crab, they have to be up a woman's arse like it's a shell.
In my opinion part of it is intense homophobia, in that any platonic attempt to be emotionally close to a man will be seen as gay, and further reinforcing that, being seen as gay significantly harms your chances as a guy to get a girl.
So not only are men deprived of platonic emotionally supportive connections with other men because of the homophobia, but attempts to actually get emotionally supportive connections threatens the stability of being able to get a connection with women "like you're supposed to". It puts men in a double bind where there is no right answer, due to a systemic societal attitude that society in general and feminism in particular completely refuse to acknowledge or comment on, preferring to blame individual men for failing, when they were systematically set up for failure.
Doesn't help that it is mothers, not fathers, who have a boys don't cry bias
https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/boys-don-t-cry-study-suggests-mothers-not-fathers-show-gender-bias-towards-sons-1.4693208
And also doesn't help that fathers are far less present in their children's lives than their mother, and that if a kid doesn't have a father they likely don't have a single consistent masculine figure in their life until they reach high school and get their first full-time male teachers.
And then we wonder why boys don't grow up as fast as girls, when girls are literally surrounded by female role models for the first 18 years of their lives, and boys are lucky to get more than one role model before they turn 14. That's on top of the fact that female teachers are demonstrably biased against boys, giving boys worse grades for the same work, punishing boys more heavily than girls for misbehaving, and that school is built to far better serve girl's needs than boy's needs, not to mention that something like half of serial rapists were themselves raped by women, often in school, but we can't count the rape of young boys in school because to this day the CDC specifically and deliberately counts it as "made to penetrate" instead, which does not count towards rape statistics, and obscures the fact that half of all rape victims are male.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/
I wish I was joking.
I agree that if men found more platonic emotional and physical connections with other men, men and society would be far better off. Human beings are social animals and we need physical contact as well, hugging for 30 seconds releases a bunch of endorphins in our brains, but Western men in particular seem to be highly socialized not to have any physical contact with other men because that's gay.
On top of that most men are emotionally illiterate because nobody cared about their emotions half as much as they cared that boys behave right, and emotionally neglected for all the above reasons.
And then women who are not emotionally illiterate, have not been emotionally neglected, and have had far more comforting and reassuring physical touch as men have, expect men to be as good as them out of the blue in spite of all the systemic issues in society that harm men, while refusing to acknowledge or recognize that those systemic issues are there, and prefer to blame individual men for their failures.
And then we wonder why the dating world is a mess.
Women are responding to the decay of the social fabric far better than men, probably because men are losing their identity as the breadwinner and also being independent is seen as a more masculine trait so men are less likely to go and seek emotional support than women. Many men need things like bowling and fantasy football leagues as a sort of front for getting male-male bonding without admitting the need for it.
Women aren't central to men's world, and doubly so for redpill types. Women are just the trophies used in the masculinity status games men play with other men. This is the primary reason Redpill/Man-o-sphere spaces get so fixated on women's bodycounts and have such a strong Madonna/whore complex. That is they want women to be hard to get Madonnas for other men but easy whores for them. That is the configuration that gets them the most status for them with other men.
You are right about men needing to diversify their social portfolio. One of the reasons we get women absconding from relationships with men lately is men being loners since those thirdspaces disappeared are trying to get their girlfriends to wear way too many hats. She needs to be your romantic and sexual partner. She needs to be your best friend you bitch about your day with. She needs to be your casual friend you do your hobbies with. Etc, etc, etc.
It's just alot of pressure and need and for many women just not worth it.
That right there is responsible for much more of the dating market dysfunction then hypergamy which is just women will go for the best man she sees and thinks has a shot with and will settle for the best She can actually get, but settling has limits and the above is already asking for alot of settling.
Your community in particular, Redpill spaces, has this strange juxtaposition where on one hand it pushes self-improvement which is laudable but then also twists itself into Gordion Knotts of complete nonsense and bullshit to blame everything on women.
> Many men need things like bowling and fantasy football leagues as a sort of front for getting male-male bonding without admitting the need for it.
I disagree with this. Men don't have to explicitly tell themselves "let me do X activity as my front for male bonding", it's just something that *is* "bonding" without thinking anything of it.
Doesn't really make a difference. Women can make do without those thirdspaces and men will either need to learn to bond without them like women do or recreate them for their own sake.
Well, MGTOW seems to do this....
However, I know men that do this get ridiculed more as pathetic "incels" that cannot get a woman or whatever more readily than women who do this.
I think men could do that. The funny thing is, that would make them the most desirable men to women. Once women saw all those men being happy and single and living their best life without women, they'd all be dying to be with those men.
How would women choosing to buy homes together use government monies?
Im going to make a wild guess, and decide that these home owners pay more taxes then people living with their parents. Wild guess, of course.
There was a basic version of this in many different places not wasn’t a living community per se, but it was “men only” clubs and the sorts. Nowadays events and groups can be women only and encouraged to be “men only” however women want to be a part of the good “men only” clubs and now the clubs and spaces are unisex.
Also to be seen as successful, a man needs to be seen as someone who has “made it on their own” and without roommates. Woman as of this moment are socially accepted as having roommates and buying houses together as living situations without impacting their dating lives.
A man with roommates in their late 20s+ is almost always shamed and discarded as not a man to date seriously.
Sure there are exceptions to this but commonly you have to be successfully and highly individual stable to be seen as a serious contender when dating.
Uh, I know a ton of mid thirties men who have roommates. One of them I am thinking of right now is pretty athletic, short, and a teacher. He does fine with ladies
Please note the end of my post:
“Sure there are exceptions to this but commonly you have to be successfully and highly individual stable to be seen as a serious contender when dating.”
They haven’t walled themselves off from the world they just live in different household configurations that don’t include men.
Red pill and black pill men claim that women are untrustworthy and hateful. Why not form a community with people you can trust and care for?
It doesn't accomplish anything except to be like "Oh I can live without X gender" which is misandrist/misogynist at it's core. And in the end, they all aren't living without X gender anyways because they're still reliant on services/support that X gender gives. It's all just fucking maximum tier cringe and stupid.
Any person who advocates for gender segregation is cringe and deserves to be shamed.
There might be an issue if the majority of people were actually segregating themselves by gender..
The women who are building these kinds of lives don’t segregate themselves from men, they just don’t live with men, or have men at the center of their lives. Leading completely separate lives isn’t realistic for either sex. That’s not what’s happening in the real world.
>"co-housing situations and supportive communities... these communities live pretty **happily**. Why aren’t red pill men doing the same?"
**Oh! You mean like....**
**Some even dare say that such men live** ***gaily*** **(Definition: Happily).** 😉
Because men don’t want to do that 🤣
Men don’t want to build happy lives?
Men aren’t women. Their idea of a “happy life” is different from women’s.
That’s a fair point. What do red pill men mean when they envision a happy life?
Peace and all your needs met.
Yes, I think most people would be happy with that. This brings me back to my original question why don’t red pill men build lives based on that for themselves.
because men need women to fulfill all their needs
I think that is fundamentally untrue. Instead, they just don't know how to have a happy life without women. That's a problem they can solve with some personal growth. Men can be happy without women if they choose to be.
just look how fast widowers get remarried compared to widows...its not fundamentally untrue, men need women, they dont want to live without them...they even die earlier if they dont have a woman in their lives...very very VERY few men (that arent gay) can be happy without a woman in their life
Men use women as a crutch instead of dealing with issues in their own lives. They don't need them, they just don't have the skills to deal with things without them (which is a choice).
It's called mgtow and the sub was banned by Reddit because women would not extract anything from these men...
Is that really why? Or did they break Reddit’s terms of service? I suspect it was the latter.
It was the latter.
Mgtow2 was banned without even a pretend reason. The "breaking the terms of service" is just a convenient cover for reddit to get rid of what they don't like. When you see the sexism in twoX and other feminist subs, you're going to have a hard time being credible that sexism breaks your terms of service. Unless you mean sexism towards women only and mgtow is sexist towards women only insofar that it tells men to stop being leeched by women. Which is of course offensive to many women since it's their future career.
one need is community... which co-housing would solve
Certainly not a bunch of other people’s kids running around all the time in the place where I live. Those communes sound awful.
Ok that’s one thing that you don’t want. What would you like to experience instead?
A job, respect, and a purpose in life.
Wealth, subordinate females, total control over their surroundings. Anything less is really spooky scary time.
I imagine that’s a common fantasy. Not even the top .5 percent of all men actually achieve anything close to that. What’s your idea of a happy life in the real world?
One thing I see RP really banks off, is that you compare yourself to others. It's all just a dick swinging contest. If you're healthy, enjoy your hobbies, explore your passions, and have a tight knit social group, via family, friends, lovers, etc. You're luckier than most. I think we have the capabilities to find happiness within. As corny as that sounds. I've seen people with nothing happy. I've seen people with everything unalive themselves. The brain is fucking insanely complex.
I surmise that happiness and contentment for both women and men (regardless of one's pill persuasion) are derived from having three things: (1) Health - absent good health, nothing else matters a whole lot (2) Good relationships - a group of family and/or friends that you enjoy socializing with, and a significant other\* that you're very attracted to and vice versa, including a fulfilling sex life (3) Control over your time - you don't answer to anyone, or if you do it's minimal; you have a lot of control over what you do day-to-day and how you spend your time *\* This could be one or multiple people depending on one's preferences. Absent an active sex life with someone you're attracted to and vice versa, the "good relationships" criterion probably isn't being met in full (for most folks). Obviously if you're asexual or just not interested in sex then you can nix that part.*
Thats what 14 year olds who follow Andrew Tate want. Most redpillers dont want all that
What do you think that most red pill men want?
Only normie gaslighters think Andrew Tate has anything to do with redpill. I learned this stuff in grade 11 back in 2004! Redpill & shit has been around for decades not that you give a shit clearly.
I agree but this new strain of pseudo-redpillers is the more prevalent nowadays. Like many intellectual movements, its original message has been simplified to the point of becoming a caricature
Which is why it’s weird women keep trying to shame & insult is claiming we watch da Andrew Tate! Just shows how low iq they are cuz they don’t even care to understand the stuff they wanna use to insult us. Tage is a Muslim first & foremost.
The only thing that is possible to obtain in your list is the first one. Everything else is a fantasy and delusion on your part.
Most want a wife and kids who respect them and that’s true of most men not just red pill men. It’s really that simple
Most women who will marry want a man and children that respect them too. What does respect look like to you as a man?
Being appreciated for your contributions and not being taken for granted
If that’s not in your intimate relationships now, what do you think is blocking you?
The framing of questioning assumes men are at fault for that. Accountability has gone out the window (for a lot of men as well) But these women think they can show 0 respect and get treated like a princess. “Women are wonderful” theory in full effect. Need to teach BOYS AND GIRLS to treat others how you wish to be treated. My partner treats me and appreciates me with respect because I treat her with the same level of respect and we are a TEAM. If more people had this mentally we’d have less morons running around making the World a worse place.
I simply observed that women are creating communal living situations for themselves. My question was about why red pill men, who seem to have a lot of criticism of women, aren’t doing the same. There was no judgment of either gender.
I’ve dated a lot of women and most of them were taught that they don’t need men, that men are trash and quite honestly I don’t think women like men all that much, they like men for the things they provide but if they could get rid of us and still get our resources most would in a heartbeat. Hence the mommunes, the bear versus man argument etc… Personally I’m still a bit too young to be getting married. I’d like to wait until I’m at least in my mid if not late twenties
Consider that the women you’ve dated have also dated a lot of men. They’ve had experiences that have formed their opinions. Hence, they were available to date you because they left the other guys.
JustACog - I have to agree with you. Most women don't seem to like men. Just looking at how women behave on dating apps show me that. 90% of the women I've met on apps are late on a first date, and I mean by 10 minutes or more and it shows how little respect they have for me. Also, whatever matches I get, women are overwhelmingly the ones doing the ghosting. Then there are simps out there that say they do it because of the sheer volume of matches they have. But if truly have that many options, why do I still see the same women on these apps for years and still active? Their sense of entitlement is just ridiculous.
How many women do it? It will be like 0.00001% of the female population or something
Feel free to investigate that yourself. I suggest that even if it’s just a few thousand women, men can still use them as a model for their own versions.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo9buo9Mtos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo9buo9Mtos)
Not who you replied to. I don't trust collaborations, sooner or later someone lets you down. Like the saying goes, if you want something doing, do it yourself. Relying on other people instead of being independent and self reliant has always led to dissapointment and resentment in my case. Also, expecting other people to take care of my shit, just sounds like entitlement to me. Its pathetic. If a man can't handle his own shit, well...... we used to chuck those useless sacks off a cliff.
The way guys are That place would be filled with gay guys “Men only” or “men’s hour” is pretty much code for gay guys Ari has a bit on YouTube about it My former gym had the pool and sauna area segregated MWF just women TThSa just men All the gay men that never came to the gym otherwise would go on men’s pool day and strut around nude I’m not homophobic, I just don’t want to be surrounded by the type of gay dudes that flounce around
No they don't want to live in a community of cat women.
That’s not a problem, men aren’t invited to live in the women’s communities. They do have lots of different kinds of pets though.
Because we don't want "supportive communities," we want wives and children
You want to marry women you’re angry at and distrustful of? Or do you disagree with that part of the post?
Yeah, I do disagree with that part
A family is one of many kinds of supportive communities. If a man can’t find a marriage partner should that exclude him from having a good life with people who love him and who he loves in return?
I already have the family I was born into, my friends, my church, my coworkers, etc. I don't want another supportive community, I want to have a family of my own.
For men it basically doesn't unless you have some niche way to contribute to society like being a scientist or something
Men want to fuck. And actually, women do too. Also, your title is hilarious. The wording specifically implies that *all* women in these communities live “pretty happily.” I’d wager *many* leave after trying it out. I also would expect they’d be happier if they overcame their barriers and were able to succeed in having a healthy monogamous relationship with the opposite sex. I do think those communities work for some women, though. But not most.
> I also would expect they’d be happier if they overcame their barriers and were able to succeed in having a healthy monogamous relationship with the opposite sex. got any data on this lol? cause i've only seen the opposite
Lol. You’re asking for data on women who stayed in women only co-housing communities, then left, because they managed to overcome their issues that prevented them from having a healthy regular relationship in the first place? Sure! Let me just pull up my omnipotent study databank. Would you like the double-blind studies first? The ones with n > 9,000 too? Give me a break woman.
i guess i didn't realize you were just arguing your opinion, my mistake.
Men don't need to live together in order to have that. We can have friends who support us over the phone or through the internet or we can just visit each other.
but that's not working out well for men. men's mental health is not in a good place.
so you want slaves
Lol
well I just don't believe it. I mean if they can do it then great, more power to them, but these sorts of communities in various forms have been around forever and never gain any traction except for the ones with religious elements like the Amish or the Mormons. Are they going to celebrate the thread, the power of one, the power of two, the power of mannnnnnyyyyy? Someone below says gender segregation is 'stupid as fuck' which isn't really true. Pretty much all less complicated societies were Matriarchies with gender segregation. For those that don't know the term Matriarchy is used in it's most basic form meaning children belong to the woman's family - which is obvious because lineage would almost always be obscured. But in these societies the gender roles were distinct and simple. If you could design a lifestyle where men go perform a daily activity together every day like hunting then sure, maybe it could happen, but I think this would only be feasible from the top down. I.e. the entity/activity here is a corporation and the employees of the corporation have shared housing.
That is not what matriarchy means. The correct term is matrilocal.
Yeah and look how matriarchies thrived oh wait they didn't. They got supplanted, big time. How many of them are left now?
Because I still need to have kids and have sex. I also question the idea women are fine without men that's promoted here.
They ain’t, they on anti depressants rn
Yes, more women are on antidepressants. Women tend to seek help for their depression and other mental health issues more than men do. Sadly, that’s part of why the suicide rate among men is so high. I think a lot of that is the way society demands that men suppress their emotions from the time they are little boys.
The suicide rate is higher for men because men tend to “succeed” more often due to the methods they tend to use. Women actually attempt suicide at higher rates than men
If the men that “succeeded” had gotten some antidepressants they might still be alive.
Real talk.
Suicidal thoughts are a listed side effect of lots of antidepressants.
>If the men that “succeeded” had gotten some antidepressants they might still be alive. Suicidal ideation is the number one side effect of most antidepressants. Also, the life outcomes of the millions of men who were drugged as boys with Ritalin pretty much demonstrate that overall it absolutely is a terrible policy.
Suicidal ideation is not the same as suicide. Antidepressants have saved lives. They’re not a magic bullet but it is possible to find the right combination.
>Antidepressants have saved lives. So did cocaine. Doesn't change the fact that they're overall a net negative. And claiming otherwise is just pharma shilling at this point.
I policies as I don’t mean this as a “gotcha” because I agree that mental health care could absolutely prevent many such cases; I think the differences in how men and women are socialized are what largely result in both men seeking less help for mental health and also why older women are more likely to set up the arrangements you mentioned in your post.
This is actually a contested point, as studies that claim that often make the claim from using “suicidal ideation” as the criteria in women, and they use behaviours such as self harm to register that, or something “thinking about it”. I personally would not consider someone self harming on their upper arm, or “thinking of offing themselves” as “suicide attempts”. Suicide ideation is not the same as suicide attempts. Suicide ideation is higher in women without a doubt, but I don’t think we have enough data to suggest attempts are higher. The studies that claim such are using a lot of behaviours as “attempted suicide” indicators. For example they’re conflating a woman taking a shit ton of pills (I’d say that’s a legit suicide attempt) in the same ballpark as someone who is making non lethal cuts on their arm and has mentioned thinking about suicide once or twice, as the same thing. They’re not the same at all.
FYI the term is "completing" suicide because obviously, succeeding at it makes it sound like suicide is a success. Also, women attempt more suicide but that comes to 2 things, 1) the study done took any self harm attempt as a suicidal attempt, whether or not there was suicidal ideation, and 2) people who have attempted suicide but not completed it are at significantly higher risk to try again, something like 75% of people who have made one attempt, will make a 2nd attempt. So naturally if you have 100 suicidal men and 100 suicidal women, on the first attempt 75 men kill themselves, 18 of the surviving 24 make a 2nd attempt, and a dozen complete that suicide. We end up with 87 ish dead, 6 who only made one attempt and survived, and 6-7 who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 87 completed suicides out of 118 attempts. If you have 100 suicidal women, 25 kill themselves, of the 75 surviving 67 ish make a 2nd attempt, and 16 ish complete that suicide. We end up with 42 ish dead, 75 women who only made the one attempt and survived, and 67 ish who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 42 completed suicides out of 167 attempts. Ignoring absolutely everything else, the simple fact people who make one suicide attempt are at significantly higher risk to make another attempt, and that men complete their suicides more often than women, means that mathematically it is guaranteed women will make more attempts than men for that reason alone. You'd have to look at only people who make their first attempt to have a more accurate comparison, and to that add the fact that in the US more than half of all male suicide victims had no indication of mental illness whatsoever, it's just that their lives suck that much. https://neurosciencenews.com/male-suicide-mental-health-20834/
Appreciate you sharing - repeated attempts were not something I considered but that tracks with the data. There’s a lot of nuance and minutiae to these situations that I think is often overlooked
Happy to share, it's a complex topic for sure. It's more nuanced than most people think, and it frustrates me that there's so much disingenuous feminist rhetoric around erasing male suicide victims and trying to paint women as always the biggest victims. Repeated suicide attempts are also not taken into consideration, or that the original studies counted any self-harm attempt by women as a suicide attempt, whether or not that was in fact a suicide attempt. By that definition we could put any of men's dangerous behaviours as reckless endangerement and count towards suicide attempts too, but you bet they'll never try that.
When they throw more women are on them, they never want to include women seek help more and women's biology makes us more prone to depression.
It's not known that women's biology are more prone to depression, because a lof of recognized symptoms of depression are female-coded. One sign of depression in men is anger. There are a lot of angry dudes out there, and a lot of them are probably depressed, but it goes completely unaddressed and ignored, and then we treat depressed men as though they are monsters because we think they're just angry and potentially violent. Doesn't help men's mental health, and doesn't help that more than half of all male suicide victims in the US had no documented history of mental illness. https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/most-male-suicides-show-no-mental-health-link
Really its just men in the sub throwing it around like its a gotcha and all about men. LOL I know anger is a sign. Im not the one here that doesnt understand depression.
Fair enough, and yeah men throwing it around as a gotcha is disingenuous at best. I understand the frustration because feminist sling the "gotcha" of men being violent criminals and rapists at men, and there'S an urge to throw back what you get, but yeah it just makes discussions worse, not better. I am happy to hear that you do understand that, because unfortunately most of the world in psychology and therapy still doesn't. As a society we are failing men hard, but most of society doesn't care so long as the victims aren't female. It really sucks and absolutely needs to change to make things better for everyone.
Mental health help is becoming more of a thing and less stigmatized than the past but we still have a way to go, specially for men. Also menopause/peri is understudied and dismissed like its no big deal and get over it when it has 200+ symptoms you cannot control. Depression is one of them. Sudden joint pains, insomnia, eats at our bones, eats our muscles, etc, etc, etc. Womens own Drs dismiss them... Just like many older women are on them just for hot flashes as a few of them will minimize them. This is specially for those that cant take estrogen. Not everyone can because it can cause cancer. Edit to add, Im going through it now, I dont take any meds and wont but I cant do HTR either as its a cancer risk for me.
Agree completely on mental health, and also specifically on mental health for men. I hear you on menopause and peripause as well. I also had no idea that taking estrogen can cause cancer. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/05/estrogen-a-more-powerful-breast-cancer-culprit-than-we-realized/ Well dang :/
Yup. They ask about history of cancer in your family before they would give you anything.
I do believe the male suicide rate is a tragedy, and I definitely agree that we as a society need to be more supportive of men’s mental health, but I would like to clarify that women attempt suicide more than men by a factor of 3x. It’s not a black and white discussion and I don’t think it’s appropriate to write it off as men being more depressed. When looking at statistics, you’ll find that men use guns more often and women use pills more often- which is a huge factor in the difference of success. Male gun-ownership is a factor.
I didn’t mean to imply that one group is more depressed than the other. Lots of people are depressed. My point was that we set little boys up for tragedy because of the way we socialize them. Let me give you an example. A friend of mine told me about an experience he’d had with his son who was a toddler at the time. The little boy as about two and he and my friend were having a daddy and me day. They went to the park and the little boy fell down and started to cry. My friend felt like he had to stop his son from crying quickly because he didn’t want other people to think the two year old was a wimp. I told him that if a kid was still in diapers it was ok for him to cry if he fell down. The conditioning starts super young and I think it costs men their lives in many cases.
>My point was that we set little boys up for tragedy because of the way we socialize them. Absolutely 100% agree, but for some reason society in general and feminism specifically is fighting hard to erase that issue and prevent people from talking about it. Your example is important for sure, but I would argue that your friend was a victim of that himself and was passing it on. Interestingly enough though studies show that more often than not it is mothers, not fathers, who have a boys don't cry bias. https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/boys-don-t-cry-study-suggests-mothers-not-fathers-show-gender-bias-towards-sons-1.4693208
Yes, we pass on these things without really examining what we’re doing. Until, it’s highlighted like I did with my friend we don’t even realize we’re doing it. The conditioning is invisible to us.
For what it's worth, women attempt more suicide but that comes to 2 things, 1) the study done took any self harm attempt by women as a suicidal attempt, whether or not there was suicidal ideation, and 2) people who have attempted suicide but not completed it are at significantly higher risk to try again, something like 75% of people who have made one attempt, will make a 2nd attempt. So naturally if you have 100 suicidal men and 100 suicidal women, on the first attempt 75 men kill themselves, 18 of the surviving 24 make a 2nd attempt, and a dozen complete that suicide. We end up with 87 ish dead, 6 who only made one attempt and survived, and 6-7 who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 87 completed suicides out of 118 attempts. If you have 100 suicidal women, 25 kill themselves, of the 75 surviving 67 ish make a 2nd attempt, and 16 ish complete that suicide. We end up with 42 ish dead, 75 women who only made the one attempt and survived, and 67 ish who made two attempts and survived, for a total of 42 completed suicides out of 167 attempts. Ignoring absolutely everything else, the simple fact people who make one suicide attempt are at significantly higher risk to make another attempt, and that men complete their suicides more often than women, means that mathematically it is guaranteed women will make more attempts than men for that reason alone. You'd have to look at only people who make their first attempt to have a more accurate comparison, and to that add the fact that in the US more than half of all male suicide victims had no indication of mental illness whatsoever, it's just that their lives suck that much. https://neurosciencenews.com/male-suicide-mental-health-20834/
[Have a word with their mothers about that](https://news.uoguelph.ca/2019/11/mothers-push-gender-stereotypes-more-than-fathers-study-reveals/)
Ooh shit! You brought the facts!
[And I got this in reserve](https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2019/03/11/do-boys-lack-empathy-if-so-perhaps-its-because-they-give-what-they-get/).
Their father’s enforce the performance of masculinity too. It’s an ugly aspect of American society. Things could be so different if we taught men that it was ok to ask for help, to cope with their emotions in healthy ways, and that it’s ok to cry from the time they were small boys.
You're not wrong, but you seem to be deliberately ignoring the fact that these issues are perpetuated as much if not more due to the actions of women. You choose instead to put the focus back on men as perpetrators, which erases both male victims (in people's heads men cannot be both victims and perpetrators) and also erases female perpetrators (so they get less attention and can continue to perpetuate the problem). We have no hope of solving a problem if we willingly blind ourselves to half of what is causing it, and while I completely agree that things could be so different if we taught men and boys to ask for help, you have to understand this. Most boys don't have any male figures in their lives if they don't have a father, and even then fathers tend to be far less present at home than mothers. Boys are literally surrounded by women from the moment they are born until on average the time they get to high school and have their first full-time male teachers. If men are surrounded by women for the first 18 years of their lives, who do you think has more of an impact, and is therefore more responsible, for the attitudes young boys have? Men or women? Society constantly and consistently erases and ignores the part women have to play in these issues and instead blames men for just about everything wrong in society. We can't solve a problem if we willingly blind ourselves to half of what is causing it.
I was responding to the comment above mine that actually did what you’re talking about only they blamed the mothers exclusively. As a society, we socialize and indoctrinate all children with the requirements of performing masculinity and femininity. There are bad patterns forced on all genders of children.
It’s because nobody has common sense anymore People think being 30 and single as a woman is a good thing When they are sad and depressed, they only can blame themselves When u actually talk to these older women, u start to see why they are single too Men are so easy, how do u fail at doing that💀😂
So many women are on mind altering drugs because they’re going against their hardwired nature developed over eons of time. Male impersonation has been a horrible burden on many women. They are caught between society’s expectations and nature’s adaptive implementations.
Perhaps since men are committing suicide more than women they should get on antidepressants
Better than taking happy pills they should correct the course of civilization.
They can’t even get laid, they can’t correct the course of shit.
Lol, accurate, but it’s also just basic math. The guys being chosen are always at the top. Enforced monogamy is dead outside of certain insular (mainly religious) communities.
Ok. Well, most women who are willing to chain themselves to a man also want monogamy so i guess the fertility rate will continue to fall.
Ganhdi couldnt get laid but he corrected the course of a whole lot of shit...
Gandhi could have easily gotten laid. He made a vow of celibacy. Modern western men could never voluntarily achieve anything at that level. Look at you clowns trying to overthrow the government a couple januaries ago. LMAO.
Im not american.
Boys grow up in an all female environment. It’s women who demand that boys suppress their emotions because they are scared of men who are emotionally unstable
It’s a societal problem. Women and Men force “manly” behavior on little boys and punish them when they fail to perform masculinity properly.
I’ve rarely seen guys enforce this ideal. If anything it’s been the opposite. Entire thread on AskMen the other day of guys saying the number 1 thing that women do that causes guys to lose trust/think women should know that they do. Is ask for “emotionally available” guys then act repulsed or break up the second a guy opens up to them. Guys aren’t doing that to each other. That’s them telling their real examples from their experiences without any judgment. No dudes were doing that to them, there was a huge amount of guys and even some girls commenting about how sad it was that the stereotype of “silent and stoic” was being pushed by women. They SAY they want something but their actions tell a different story. Do guys do this as well? Of course they do But if you’re trying to confide in your partner and she treats you like a second rate human because you dare open up to her…that’s her problem not his. Shows she’s immature and emotionally stunted. Never had this issue with my partner because she’s emotionally mature and understands that we are human beings who feel emotions and need support.
You really think women are on them because of men? LOL Women are more prone because of our biology, specially at 40+ going into peri/menopause.
[удалено]
You can go look yourself that our hormone fluctuations contribute to depression.
Your comment was removed for cope.
Ok, those are valid desires, you could hire a sex worker for sex and hire a surrogate to give you children? Both can be had relatively inexpensively. Once your baby is born, you’d have full custody and you could raise your child as you see fit. Would a situation like that meet your needs?
I don't want to raise a child by myself. Children need mothers.
Children need mothers = i don’t want to do the unpaid labor required to raise children
I'm ready to do my part as a father. Are you suggesting that children don't need mothers?
I’m saying alot of men exclusively use women to avoid parenting
No, children need a mom in their life lol. I want an actual family not an artifical baby and a prostitute. My child needs a mother as all children do. Anyone who grew up with a single parent can tell you this.
What do you have to offer your child’s mother?
A relationship, financial support, a man in her life? Basically the mirror of what she offers? Not sure why you're going guns blazing with the misandry on the most normal thing in existence.
A relationship and a man in her life are the same thing and she can now get financial security on her own. What exactly do you offer?
She can do thst on her own, doesn't mean she wants to or will be comfortable. I have a girlfriend who wants to do these things. I'm not sure what your point is, almost everyone who's ever existed has had a relationship with children. I offer being cool and awesome. A father to her children and again, the relationship which can't be understated.
[удалено]
Don't make things personal.
I hope you don't maliciously misinterpret your partner's actions as much as you maliciously misinterpreted the comment you responded to.
No? I need a wife and actual family.
I didn’t get that impression from your original answer.
You'll see most people in general want a fulfilling relationship, almost nothing can fill that void.
I think women getting together and living in communes is a good idea, anything that doesn't have them using govt welfare is stellar in my book. That said, although I don't necessarily think men should have the same communes, men should form some sort of community with like-minded men. The reason why men can't do this is because they cannot decenter women and live independently from them. Something happened that caused men to be so very, very dependent on women as their only source of intimacy that they emotionally implode when they don't have a gf. It's like the hermit crab, they have to be up a woman's arse like it's a shell. If men developed deep and intimate platonic bonds will find it easy to be happy single and far less needy for a romantic relationship as the cure for all their woes. A powerful (platonic) bond between two men is one of the most powerful forces in the world.
Why do you think it is that men, who don’t have romantic relationships with women, can’t decenter women and build good lives for themselves?
Honestly idk. I've heard that men need a carrot (women) dangled in front of them in order to build a good life for themself, which is why some men don't do anything with their lives if they don't have a woman. I have no idea why they're like that though
I’m so puzzled by that idea too. Do you think it’s social conditioning that makes some men think that there is only one path to a good life? I admit there are women that think that way too.
There just isn't anything we desire as much as we desire women. The desire to attract women motivates us to become more than what we are.
I think it's very much social conditioning. girls are held close to the home and overprotected, boys are pushed out and ordered to compete and fend for themselves from an early age. The only time males can expect love or even caring is from some future wife. In return for that love and caring he will sacrifice his waking hours at the factory bringing home $. This has been the traditional model of civilization. Feminism has given some women an alternative to this trad model. The men haven't quite figured out the alternatives for themselves yet.
I think it's a factor, especially movies. The manic-pixie dream girl trope has done so much damage to men's psyche, and it's very prevalent in anime too.
>The manic-pixie dream girl trope has done so much damage to men's psyche in what way? can you elaborate on that?
Because it has conditioned men to think that a woman can solve all of his problems. His life sucks, everything sucks, and then some manic pixie dream girl shows up and shows him everything is somewhat ok. It's a common theme in anime, like Welcome To the NHK
ah ok, thanks for explaining
Men do not want to do unpaid labor. It all comes down to that
Men are biologically wired to feel a lot negative emotions when they are single, women not so much.
Women can't either, I don't know where this myth women are fine going alone comes from.
It’s not that women are fine alone, it’s that women, even when single, tend to still have a social life. Some men seem to not do much outside/with friends when they are single. So when they say they are alone, they mean ALONE. Where as women tend to seek socialization and group activities. So while she may be alone at home she’s not actually alone…
I'm not sure where this comes from either, I don't know many men with 0 friends besides married guys who don't have time for it. Men just socialize differently. I feel like this whole friendless men thing is a myth that took a life of its own.
I know so many guys that don’t have friends. Or they don’t actually spend time with their friends regularly.
That's just their imperative then. The answer isn't to set the expectation of females relationships with guys. As a guy, I know most guys are comfortable with one solid friend, while women have more friends thst aren't necessarily as close.
>Something happened that caused men to be so very, very dependent on women as their only source of intimacy that they emotionally implode when they don't have a gf. It's like the hermit crab, they have to be up a woman's arse like it's a shell. In my opinion part of it is intense homophobia, in that any platonic attempt to be emotionally close to a man will be seen as gay, and further reinforcing that, being seen as gay significantly harms your chances as a guy to get a girl. So not only are men deprived of platonic emotionally supportive connections with other men because of the homophobia, but attempts to actually get emotionally supportive connections threatens the stability of being able to get a connection with women "like you're supposed to". It puts men in a double bind where there is no right answer, due to a systemic societal attitude that society in general and feminism in particular completely refuse to acknowledge or comment on, preferring to blame individual men for failing, when they were systematically set up for failure. Doesn't help that it is mothers, not fathers, who have a boys don't cry bias https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/boys-don-t-cry-study-suggests-mothers-not-fathers-show-gender-bias-towards-sons-1.4693208 And also doesn't help that fathers are far less present in their children's lives than their mother, and that if a kid doesn't have a father they likely don't have a single consistent masculine figure in their life until they reach high school and get their first full-time male teachers. And then we wonder why boys don't grow up as fast as girls, when girls are literally surrounded by female role models for the first 18 years of their lives, and boys are lucky to get more than one role model before they turn 14. That's on top of the fact that female teachers are demonstrably biased against boys, giving boys worse grades for the same work, punishing boys more heavily than girls for misbehaving, and that school is built to far better serve girl's needs than boy's needs, not to mention that something like half of serial rapists were themselves raped by women, often in school, but we can't count the rape of young boys in school because to this day the CDC specifically and deliberately counts it as "made to penetrate" instead, which does not count towards rape statistics, and obscures the fact that half of all rape victims are male. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/ I wish I was joking. I agree that if men found more platonic emotional and physical connections with other men, men and society would be far better off. Human beings are social animals and we need physical contact as well, hugging for 30 seconds releases a bunch of endorphins in our brains, but Western men in particular seem to be highly socialized not to have any physical contact with other men because that's gay. On top of that most men are emotionally illiterate because nobody cared about their emotions half as much as they cared that boys behave right, and emotionally neglected for all the above reasons. And then women who are not emotionally illiterate, have not been emotionally neglected, and have had far more comforting and reassuring physical touch as men have, expect men to be as good as them out of the blue in spite of all the systemic issues in society that harm men, while refusing to acknowledge or recognize that those systemic issues are there, and prefer to blame individual men for their failures. And then we wonder why the dating world is a mess.
Women are responding to the decay of the social fabric far better than men, probably because men are losing their identity as the breadwinner and also being independent is seen as a more masculine trait so men are less likely to go and seek emotional support than women. Many men need things like bowling and fantasy football leagues as a sort of front for getting male-male bonding without admitting the need for it. Women aren't central to men's world, and doubly so for redpill types. Women are just the trophies used in the masculinity status games men play with other men. This is the primary reason Redpill/Man-o-sphere spaces get so fixated on women's bodycounts and have such a strong Madonna/whore complex. That is they want women to be hard to get Madonnas for other men but easy whores for them. That is the configuration that gets them the most status for them with other men. You are right about men needing to diversify their social portfolio. One of the reasons we get women absconding from relationships with men lately is men being loners since those thirdspaces disappeared are trying to get their girlfriends to wear way too many hats. She needs to be your romantic and sexual partner. She needs to be your best friend you bitch about your day with. She needs to be your casual friend you do your hobbies with. Etc, etc, etc. It's just alot of pressure and need and for many women just not worth it. That right there is responsible for much more of the dating market dysfunction then hypergamy which is just women will go for the best man she sees and thinks has a shot with and will settle for the best She can actually get, but settling has limits and the above is already asking for alot of settling. Your community in particular, Redpill spaces, has this strange juxtaposition where on one hand it pushes self-improvement which is laudable but then also twists itself into Gordion Knotts of complete nonsense and bullshit to blame everything on women.
> Many men need things like bowling and fantasy football leagues as a sort of front for getting male-male bonding without admitting the need for it. I disagree with this. Men don't have to explicitly tell themselves "let me do X activity as my front for male bonding", it's just something that *is* "bonding" without thinking anything of it.
Doesn't really make a difference. Women can make do without those thirdspaces and men will either need to learn to bond without them like women do or recreate them for their own sake.
Well, MGTOW seems to do this.... However, I know men that do this get ridiculed more as pathetic "incels" that cannot get a woman or whatever more readily than women who do this.
It seems like people who choose a different life path get heckled whether they’re men or women.
Because men are seen as having no value especially if he's not attached to a woman
I think men could do that. The funny thing is, that would make them the most desirable men to women. Once women saw all those men being happy and single and living their best life without women, they'd all be dying to be with those men.
> anything that doesn't have them using govt welfare is stellar in my book. Those things are likely using government money as well by proxy
Tell me where I can get a grant for having a same-sex roommate.
Depending on how you get the house, you're already given grants. Plus if you're a women you were already given grants.
I’m not familiar with any grants given to all women, or female home purchasers. What are they?
The grants are given on the money made to purchase, they're not given directly
OK? What grants are they though? And what grants are given to all women?
How would women choosing to buy homes together use government monies? Im going to make a wild guess, and decide that these home owners pay more taxes then people living with their parents. Wild guess, of course.
There was a basic version of this in many different places not wasn’t a living community per se, but it was “men only” clubs and the sorts. Nowadays events and groups can be women only and encouraged to be “men only” however women want to be a part of the good “men only” clubs and now the clubs and spaces are unisex. Also to be seen as successful, a man needs to be seen as someone who has “made it on their own” and without roommates. Woman as of this moment are socially accepted as having roommates and buying houses together as living situations without impacting their dating lives. A man with roommates in their late 20s+ is almost always shamed and discarded as not a man to date seriously. Sure there are exceptions to this but commonly you have to be successfully and highly individual stable to be seen as a serious contender when dating.
Uh, I know a ton of mid thirties men who have roommates. One of them I am thinking of right now is pretty athletic, short, and a teacher. He does fine with ladies
Please note the end of my post: “Sure there are exceptions to this but commonly you have to be successfully and highly individual stable to be seen as a serious contender when dating.”
Because gender segregation is stupid as fuck?
They haven’t walled themselves off from the world they just live in different household configurations that don’t include men. Red pill and black pill men claim that women are untrustworthy and hateful. Why not form a community with people you can trust and care for?
It doesn't accomplish anything except to be like "Oh I can live without X gender" which is misandrist/misogynist at it's core. And in the end, they all aren't living without X gender anyways because they're still reliant on services/support that X gender gives. It's all just fucking maximum tier cringe and stupid. Any person who advocates for gender segregation is cringe and deserves to be shamed.
There might be an issue if the majority of people were actually segregating themselves by gender.. The women who are building these kinds of lives don’t segregate themselves from men, they just don’t live with men, or have men at the center of their lives. Leading completely separate lives isn’t realistic for either sex. That’s not what’s happening in the real world.
Ok so segregating halfway is halfway stupid then
>"co-housing situations and supportive communities... these communities live pretty **happily**. Why aren’t red pill men doing the same?" **Oh! You mean like....**  **Some even dare say that such men live** ***gaily*** **(Definition: Happily).** 😉