I know it’s unrelated to the thread, but I’d personally never go to a country that doesn’t treat, women, gays, apostates etc as equals, I think these countries are absolutely terrible and I’m not fooled by them having “show cities” where they pretend that they’re not that way.
A country that still has a medieval mindset in the third millennium is not getting a penny from me.
You make good points. You’re getting the wrong end of the stick but I don’t think it’s worth trying to explaine myself further.
I know I generalised but I think what I said is mostly true and I’m just as entitled as you are to put my point of view forward, sorry that I have a different opinion.
I’d like to make it clear that I’m not saying it’s OK to be pushy but making a distinction about showing sexual interest that can sometimes be a grey area and a fine line to tread.
If you want to go on a hundred dates with the same person before you’re OK with sexual escalation to make sure someone has pure intentions or whatever, you do you, but it’s not typical and I expect that they’ll move on after enough time of wondering why they’re dating someone that appears frigid or un-interested in sex.
One of my best friends said “if I’m on a third date with a guy and he’s not made a move, he’s probably got a tiny penis”. I know that’s a horrible thing to say and to hear, but it’s true. Most women expect men to make a move at some point and if they don’t, she’ll be wondering what’s wrong.
There’s no need for the hostility, though given the election I understand you’re probably just lashing out and it’s not personal. I hope you feel better soon.
It’s factual. The source is Tinder, 80% of women are only swiping on the top 20% of men and I believe that extrapolates to real life, I also don’t think it’s surprising, I understand why anyone would want an attractive mate. Sorry that upsets you.
There’s a clear difference between showing sexual interest and being pushy that I don’t think your post considers.
If you’re dating a women and don’t show any signs of sexual interest she absolutely will be thinking “this guy isn’t interested” and move on.
I don’t think it’s surprising to say that women also are often uninterested in being friends, but it’s still often an expectation that the men will make the first move.
It’s one of the fine lines and grey areas that needs to be trodden in life if you want a satisfying relationship.
Being too nice can definitely be a turn off for women, all though you’re never supposed to say it, if you put them on a pedestal it can lead them to think that they can do better. I know that sounds horrible to say, but it’s mostly true.
A lot of women like “manly men”, in a world where gender roles are being broken down it’s another thing you’re not supposed to say, but it’s objectively true.
Natural beauty is pot luck, although it’s true that “ugly” guys can do a lot to scrub up and become attractive in other ways. Statistically speaking, 80% of women want the top 20% of men, from that you can extrapolate that their are a lot of people in relationships that are settling. Another harsh truth, but that’s life.
So in short, that’s what happens to most of us. Women chase the top 20% which most of us aren’t, then when they start getting worried about getting older and becoming a spinster, they settle. You’re probably a lot less ugly than you think and a lot more normal!
Yep, it also doesn’t consider the 46% of women that voted for Trump or the near 50 million women that couldn’t be bothered to vote at all.
This is a minority movement that is probably not much more than ineffective virtue signalling.
If you’re wife doesn’t want sex then that’s usually a big problem for the relationship and could even end it. How many guys are going in to the ballot box in four years time and voting differently because they decided to get a divorce? It could possibly even entrench their views.
I’m probably going to get bored of saying this, but people that disagree with you need to be engaged not derided.
I’m not being facetious, but how many countries that were part of the Arab spring are now not effectively Islamic dictatorships?
It was a great thing at the time but it seems to me to have not paid off.
Fair enough. If you were making the post in good faith and starting or continuing a discussion, it sounds like you shouldn’t have been banned.
I got a perma ban from r/worldnews for being a “covidiot”, I can’t remember exactly why, but I wasn’t saying COVID is a hoax, being antivax or telling people not to wear masks or anything else like that, I just had a point of view that was slightly off kilter from the echo chambers narrative. The post was on topic, I was being civil, making the argument in good faith and had written it well. I told the mod that banned me what I thought of them. Good riddance.
What’s the crime? Honest question, I’m not being facetious.
Presumably (if I had access to Putin) I could phone him and ask him to not escalate the war. Why is that illegal?
What for lol?
Seeing the same old predictable jokes and pun threads as top comments with thousands of upvotes in serious posts was one of my least favourite things about Reddit.
Any post related to WWII - Top comment “I did Nazi that coming!” 5000 upvotes
The circle jerk was truly shit.
I’m getting tired of the comments that imply not stupid = smart.
I understand that intelligence is on a scale and that is not a black and white issue. I also understand that wealth ≠ intelligence, however in this case I do believe that he has at least average intelligence.
This is the last “Elon Musk is not a genius” type comment that I’m replying too, I’ve said all I have to say on the matter.
The royal family costs the UK tax payer 77p per year, most people aren’t outraged by that.
It can be argued that they attract a considerable amount of tourism, people that travel to the UK to see the Tower of London, the King’s guards, Buckingham palace and all the rest of it. There is also the “soft power”, people around the world are for some reason obsessed with the UK’s royal family and it does help with influence whether you’d argue that is for better or worse.
I understand that the obscene wealth they hold during a cost of living crisis is an image problem to say the least and I don’t defend that. Such obscene wealth is awful no matter who you are and according to the times rich list, there are at least 257 residents in the UK that are more wealthy than the Royals, some of them considerably so.
For the record, I’m not for or against the UK monarchy, I’m somewhere in-between and see validity in both sides of the argument.
I think everyone knows it’s ridiculous.
For some the monarchy is a living museum, they don’t have to like it, they just find it interesting.
Whatever the source, I don’t think it’s surprising that women are a lot more selective than men, it makes a huge amount of sense in evolutionary terms.
And given that a small percentage of men are getting chased by the majority of women, it’s unsurprising that they’re used to getting screwed over, causing all men to get cast with the same aspersion.