It is very clear from your words that a man's resources are important to you. Now, is it the most important to you? No. And I never said it was. Nor did I say that all women are the same when it comes to resources. You have some insightful posts and are obviously passionate about what you write since it is descriptive, detailed, etc. And that is respectable, as is your success in business and other life endeavors. But you're just not being honest when you make bold statements claiming that a man's resources are not important to you. There is nothing wrong with you having a standard about a man's resources. There is obviously a threshold for you. It appears that you, like most women, prefer your man to earn at least as much or close to what you earn. So why not just say something along those lines?
Perhaps what we have here is difference in definition. I define "resources" as financial means. That is all.
If you currently have too many women chasing you, calling you, harassing you, knocking on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning... then I have the simple solution for you.
Just read my free ebook 22 Rules for Massive Success With Women and do the opposite of what I recommend.
This will quickly drive all women away from you.
And you will be able to relax and to live your life in peace and quiet.
Divorced and nearing fifty. Sorry, but if we're being honest, most would agree that those two criterias alone disqualify the vast majority of women from being considered "high quality".
I wonder who the "MOST" are that BeTheChange is referring to? Perhaps in his mind, "MOST" people in society represent the one-dimensional, anonymous, toxic, bitter, Manosphere guys on this forum who sit around all day talking about how they are going their own way.....yet.....still can't seem to stop talking shyt about how bad women are every 5 seconds?
On HERE she might be "bang"........but this is a fvcking mental hospital. So any SANE person would be BANG in a room full of insane, extreme, one-dimensional, anonymous, bitter, "dudes".
Look how WEAK these guys arguments are? They can't refute the individual points and arguments that are presented, so instead....like any typical religious cult worshipper....they just call the person the equivalent of "the devil" to discredit their "character".
Yes, I was referring to money. Your posts basically reflect what I believe to be the modus operandi of most women -- it's hypergamy. You will only marry up, and you are attracted to men who have a frame that exudes leadership qualities. You may neither want nor need a man's financial resources, but you simultaneously do not respect a man who cannot fulfill the role of provider. Your posts make this very clear. I'm not going to pass any judgment on whether this is right or wrong. We all prioritize our values differently for different reasons.
If you currently have too many women chasing you, calling you, harassing you, knocking on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning... then I have the simple solution for you.
Just read my free ebook 22 Rules for Massive Success With Women and do the opposite of what I recommend.
This will quickly drive all women away from you.
And you will be able to relax and to live your life in peace and quiet.
This is true. However this is not "hypergamy". Hypergamy comes from the Indian caste system. A woman is hypergamic if she married up to a different caste level.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Yes, many words on here are used loosely. I'm not going to get into specifics about where the term hypergamy came from and the Indian caste system and then force myself to apply it so strictly. Most men on here just use the term to explain the tendency for women to not get into relationships with men who they see as being "beneath them", whether it's social status or income. I don't mean to suggest that women are so shallow as to dump a man if he makes $75k/yr and she makes 80K/yr. You have said yourself that you don't want to get married and be responsible for another adult. And you don't want to be the breadwinner. I'm pretty sure that if you met a man you developed strong feelings for, and he was filthy rich, you'd have no problems marrying him. That was what I meant by saying you're hypergamous. But I highly doubt you would marry him strictly for his money. You are blessed to be in a situation where you can be as choosy as want to be, within limits, because you very self reliant. As for the leadership qualities you and other women seek, there is still a link to hypergamy in the context which I use the term. The reason I say this is because a man who leads is a better candidate for attaining power, wealth, and higher status. With these things, a woman feels more security. So we can say it's just a personality trait that women seek simply for attraction, but in actuality it's the reason for the attraction to that trait that makes it a hypergamous instinct. There is also just the general relief from not having to date the man who can't keep his life together and has no direction. As men, we too don't like the burden that comes with women who are like this.
Well, let me ask you a question?
Okay, but they are using the term inaccurately.
The definition is basically: the practice of women marrying up. So my guess is that people have used the best word they could find to define a similar situation for which there is no definition. BLM changed the definition of racism with ill intent. I don't see how using the word hypergamy to explain how women tend to seek the most resourceful provider possible to be an example of ill intent. MGTOW guys who hate women certainly put a negative spin on the word though. Languages and vocabulary are always changing.
The wordy righteousness of it all. One's adoption of an elevated philosophical tone betrays a note of familiar feminine sadness.
Meh, no sadness. Tired sometimes perhaps. I really am a fortunate person. I hope others can benefit from what I share. All that typing is a lot of work!
