5 Ways Exclusive Relationships Are Better Than Spinning Plates

[mrgoodstuff]

is this a parody thread?



putting you in the perfect position to become completely cucked by the woman.



would love to see a source on that. all it would do is teach your daughters their place and your sons how to be a man.

the real issue is how much more money and time it would cost you to have kids without a wife to support you or something, and also how you might lose them in a court battle.



a long time ago a friend of mine was telling me about how he regrets getting a girlfriend, because he used to fool around with all the girls on his block and now that he has a gf, he only gets that one girl, who apparently didn't put out as much anymore, and he had to actually do boyfriend stuff with her like spend time together.

unless your gf happens to be a sex maniac who loves sex for the sake of it (this is the kind of girl most people would next because she'd likely have many many partners and be a total slvt when she is single), it's extremely unlikely she could or would give you more sex than having 3 plates would get you.



this one doesn't really make sense, how exactly is there a greater potential for improvement there?

a better argument would be than in an LTR you can get the kind of sex that you normally wouldn't get from a plate since she's more invested it'll be easier to get her into the freaky **** you saw on pornhub



but once she has gotten you to get rid of your side girls, you both equally have something to lose, it's hard to leverage that unless you don't really care about her which would contradict your point #1

last time i threatened to dump a girl for not giving me what i want, she called my bluff so i had to actually dump her, then i had no girls so i was up sh!t creek without a paddle. if i had two side girls at the time it wouldn't have been a problem[/QUOT

@sazc

You are making an argument for style over substance.

Who cares about his language? His content is good.

You are also being a hypocrite, because you have called me names plenty of times. And I have yet to add anything to my game from your content.

Cause your not running LTR game. However in some of the "mini relationships" that you do in your plates system I'm sure you can incorporate bits and pieces of the LTR concepts.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Some of you guys are getting way to into SS hahaha. sazc don't you know that now you have showed that it bothers you in some way, PK is only going to do it more?
========================================================================

What does sex have to do with bonding?

You're saying you can only bond with ONE woman you f*ck at a time?

Try again.

It is a lot harder to fully bond with say 4 different women. It still takes time to do so. Not many people have that time though whether it be school, work, or other things. The little things would allow you to bond with your partner. You wouldn't notice these things with trying to balance out multiple women at a time which would prevent the 'true ecstasy' bigneil has mentioned before.

You can have kids with ONE woman without committing ONLY to that one woman.

Try again.

Well of course. But doing so would be bad for your kids.

Guess what? When you have plates you don't have to give a sh!t if ONE woman loses interest.

Why should a man spend his days kissing ONE woman's ass to "keep her interest high"?

Try again.

Kissing ass isn't attractive and won't keep a woman around. We all know that. If anything, she will keep you from becoming a beta by forcing you to strengthen your frame.

Bullsh!t.

Becoming a better and stronger man and devoting yourself to ONE woman has no connection whatsoever. NONE.

Try again.

Oh, but is it really? Hypergamy says that women want the best man. If you aren't the best man, then she will indirectly let you know that. This can allow you to improve yourself. This is why self-improvement is strongly tied into the manosphere.

If you are committed to only ONE woman she is basically leading you.

Why do you think kings had harems? Its a man's natural state to want access to multiple women. Its only society's brainwashing that has men believing ONE woman is better than many.

If a man is dumb enough to get married.. then his wife has "nothing to lose". She has already won the game. If divorce happens.. she gets cash and other resources.

Try again. Keep trying.

The power to lead is a choice. It is inherent that men are leaders and that women serve them. With all the knowledge we now have from websites such as these, why would you ever let a woman lead you? It is natural for a man to lead his woman, not vice versa.

And it is not a man's natural state to love multiple women, it's our natural state just to love women in general. We are ABLE to love more than one woman, but that doesn't mean that it is unnatural for us to love one woman.

And I agree that marriage in the West is a death sentence. Like I've said before, it does at least partially void #3, #4, & #5.

 

[Serenity]

@ImTheDoubleGreatest! This is great.

Relationships with power struggles are interesting. It's a problem occurring on both sides, but both people only see one side. This often leads to also blaming one side, could be oneself or the other without recognizing the fact that both are to blame. Some say that a man loses power in relationships, I'll explain why this isn't accurate to say.

In an unbalanced relationship there's one person giving control and the other person taking advantage of that. For the sake of my example let's say a woman is taking advantage of a man, who's to blame? Some will say she's to blame because taking advantage of someone is wrong, some will say he's to blame because he lets her do it. In fact both can be blamed, there's nothing preventing a problem from having several causes.

Blaming doesn't actually solve anything though, but it identifies the sources of the problem. To solve the problem we need to look at the sources and what we can do with them. Blaming the woman will probably not work, getting her to stop taking advantage of the man won't be easy (for anyone who's tried it). Blaming the man puts him in a much better situation, because a man can simply not let her do it. It will end in one of two ways, she'll stop being a b!tch or she'll walk away in which case it's a good riddance.

What prevents men from setting boundaries and enforcing them? Fear! A man who fears the end of a relationship will be a doormat, he might have boundaries but will bend them to avoid a break-up.

Taking advantage of someone is still unfair and immoral, but with boundaries she is forced to either respect it or walk away. The other side of the solution is to not control the other person, which is a line the man can't cross either to maintain the equity of a relationship.

BUT, some men have unrealistic expectations, especially when they've given their power away before and got burned. They not only control themselves, but does the exact same thing they were subjected to. Try to control the woman too. This brings it out of balance the other way and will eventually lead to her drawing her lines and straight out disobey.

Nobody wins in a power struggle, if you guys find yourself on either side I advise you apply the appropriate solution. If taken advantage of, draw the line and enforce it by refusal (without reason if needed). If taking advantage, limit control to yourself.

So anyone saying a woman wins in a relationship are deluded and fail to recognize their power to refuse.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

I actually field test things. I know who talks sense, and who doesn't.

I don't need stories about elves and pixies from women. That's not what I come here for.

I'm only here to challenge this post:

I have a challenge for you babe..

Can you list five ways men benefit from being in an exclusive LTR that you can't get with plates or open relationships?

Its about what is SMART for men. Tell me why LTR's are a smart choice for men. Tell me how they elevate a man's life in ways not possible spinning plates or being in an open relationship.

Remember.. anything you list has to be something that cannot be gained with plates or open relationships. Again.. something that cannot be gained with plates or open relationships. One more time: something that cannot be gained with plates or open relationships.

It has to be a benefit you can only get by being 100% exclusive. One more time: 100% EXCLUSIVE. One sexual partner forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever. Tell me why this is SMART. Not why it "feels good" or "looks cool". I want to know why this is SMART.

Keep in mind.. I am trying to help you LTR trumpeters prove YOUR point, because clearly I'm giving all the wrong advice here.

And PK definitely knows this too. I came up with 5 reasons so I want to see how he responds.

 

[RangerMIke]

LOL! Thanks for the laugh.

Yea.... I was thinking the same thing.

1. Bonding is not important to men. We do not have an emotional need to bond.

2. Children are born everyday out of marriage and long term commitments. Anything that happens in nature is normal, marriage and LTR are man made creations not natural. Marriage, by and large is a REALLY bad deal for men. 60 years ago, men got married and he got respect and privilege for surrendering his freedom and resources in the interest of raising a family. Today all you get is the responsibility and financial obligation, and in return you get treated like garbage by society. Today men are expected to 'man up' and 'do the right thing', and in exchange we just get blamed for all the ills of our country. FVCK THAT!

3. This is funny. Anyone that has EVER been married knows this is utter and complete BVLLSH!T. I get more sex now, then when I was married, and it isn't even fvcking close... Not only that, but it is with a variety of women, which for ME is more enjoyable. The only down side is condom use which is a minor inconvenience compared to the train wreak of trying to keep a women 'happy' in a LTR.

4. I have no idea what you mean here, improvement? For who? To make her life better or yours? I'm serious I don't have a clue what you mean here. I will agree that a guy in a LTR is better controlled, and therefor is kept safe to service his b!tch. But how is this improvement?

5. Like a master cares for her slave.... until the slave not longer services the master's needs.... then she will toss out the old used up slave, and replace him with a new one, until she destroys his will and she molds him into something she can no longer stand... and that slave is gone.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

So anyone saying a woman wins in a relationship are deluded and fail to recognize their power to refuse.

This is the point I am trying to make. Men still have power in an exclusive relationship. Just use it!

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Do they have the power to go out drinking with their mates all night?

Do they have the power to go away on trips willy-nilly?

Do they have the power to move home?

Do they have the power to make expensive purchases based solely on their own judgement?

To all these, yes. Why wouldn't you? Your partner may be worried about you, but then she feels like she has to work harder for your attention then. The only thing you can't do is shag a bunch of dofferent women, hence exclusive. But you still could, just don't let her know

 

[zekko]

Kissing ass isn't attractive and won't keep a woman around. We all know that.

You're right, we all know that. This is some " first day on the forum", kindergarten-level sh!t. We all know it, it's easy to understand.

SO unless you are emotionally immature, you shouldn't need to keep five plates in the air to keep you from doing it. Nor should you require an exclusive woman to strengthen your resolve. Just have the tiniest bit of self respect, and you should be good.

You're not a worm that crawls on the ground. Internalize that frame, and make it a part of you. Then, no matter what dating strategy you choose to follow, your actions will be congruent and have authenticity. I value those traits, while the PUAs push psychopathy.

 

[zekko]

The only thing you can't do is shag a bunch of dofferent women, hence exclusive. But you still could, just don't let her know

You lost me here. As I've said, I value honesty and authenticity. Cheating is neither.

 

[Poon King]

I disagree. If you are committed to one woman that doe NOT automatically mean she is leading you. There are plenty of couples who are true partners, there are penty of couples where the man leads the woman and there are plenty of couples where the woman owns the man. This site is all about how to maintain your frame so that, when you get into any relationship with a woman (LTR OR PLATE) you can lead as a man.

Says who?

You have made it very clear that you arent looking to be vulnerable with a female, so sex doesn't equate to intimacy or bonding with you but I can assure you, when we dive off into a psychological viewpoint, sex creates/enhances intimacy and that, in turn, creates/enhances bonding. It's not the only element, but definitely a piece of the puzzle.

I've done the LTR and "bonding" thing before in my teens and early 20's.

It was a great Disney ride but at some point we all have to grow up.

Tell me how being "vulnerable" with a female benefits a man? Bonding? Is that it? What do I need to "bond" to ONE woman for?

I am also disappointed that you continue to attack the characters of the men here, ad hominem style, when they post that they are looking for a one man, one woman, relationship, instead of trying to sensibly guide them into being mindful of the things that can go wrong.

Men who are looking to get married are not dumb. Some people WANT to get into committed relationships with females and there are a thousand ways to do it without loosing personal and financial leverage. Understanding what Rollo was communicating is one way to understand if the female you are with is marriage material. Pre nuptual agreements are a way to ensure you dont loose your ass if a divorce happens.

You CONSTANTLY call posters out about trying to 'control what you post' and 'how dare they' yet YOU continue to disrespect ANYONE who has a viewpoint that differs from yours. It's ridiculous.

Men who want to get married in 2017 are blithering idiots. There are some exceptions, but few.

I'll tell you the same thing I tell my plates when they get "uppity" with me. If you don't like it.. LEAVE. In this case.. don't read my posts if you don't like them.

I really dont understand why everyone doesn't simply ignore your completely attention seeking posts.

Because I make sense.

BTW, your name calling tactics reveal a TON about who you are, on many levels, I know you are smarter than that. Post smarter.

If you were "smart" you would know by now that I don't respond to "lectures". I respond ONLY to logical arguments.

 

[Poon King]

Some of you guys are getting way to into SS hahaha. sazc don't you know that now you have showed that it bothers you in some way, PK is only going to do it more?
========================================================================

It is a lot harder to fully bond with say 4 different women. It still takes time to do so. Not many people have that time though whether it be school, work, or other things. The little things would allow you to bond with your partner. You wouldn't notice these things with trying to balance out multiple women at a time which would prevent the 'true ecstasy' bigneil has mentioned before.

Explain why "bonding" with ONE woman is important and how it benefits a man's life "big picture" wise.

Well of course. But doing so would be bad for your kids.

Not necessarily.

Kissing ass isn't attractive and won't keep a woman around. We all know that. If anything, she will keep you from becoming a beta by forcing you to strengthen your frame.

If you are "afraid" to f*ck other women because you might "mess up your LTR" then you're already a beta.

Oh, but is it really? Hypergamy says that women want the best man. If you aren't the best man, then she will indirectly let you know that. This can allow you to improve yourself. This is why self-improvement is strongly tied into the manosphere.

Don't need ONE woman to achieve this.

Self-improve for the purpose of power, leverage and access to hotter, younger, sexier poon is the purpose. Don't self-improve to become ONE woman's wage slave.

The power to lead is a choice. It is inherent that men are leaders and that women serve them. With all the knowledge we now have from websites such as these, why would you ever let a woman lead you? It is natural for a man to lead his woman, not vice versa.

And it is not a man's natural state to love multiple women, it's our natural state just to love women in general. We are ABLE to love more than one woman, but that doesn't mean that it is unnatural for us to love one woman.

And I agree that marriage in the West is a death sentence. Like I've said before, it does at least partially void #3, #4, & #5.

If you can love more than one woman.. why choose just one?

Do you eat only at one restaurant? Do have only ONE pair of underwear? Do you have only ONE friend?

Try again.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Ah, I see the sort of 'exclusivity' that you mean.

Well in that sense, why do you need the exclusivity at all?

Here's what many ltr minded guys don't seem to understand. You can treat plates like girlfriends. You can have the best of both worlds.

Alright, it doesn't last forever, but what does?

These same guys don't accept that all relationships are time-limited (everything in life is time-limited). So they try and drag things on forever. They've got their head in the clouds.

I have no idea who seems to have come up with the "plate spinning rules" that plates can only be a pump and dump scenario.

That's often not how I do it, anyway.

I see what you mean. It does take a little bit more time and effort to manage multiple women though, hence why being exclusive shouldn't be completely thrown out the window.

You lost me here. As I've said, I value honesty and authenticity. Cheating is neither.

It was meant with satire.

 

[TheProspect]

Men who see no benefits, or are afraid of potential risks, will always rationalize against relationships.

Men who prefer, or are open to LTRs, can always rationalize for them them.

Both are correct. Do what works best for you.

The success of a relationship isn't measured by the duration of it. If my 2 year relationship ended tomorrow, I would do the same thing I'm doing today simply because I don't live my life for anyone else. It's an assumption that you become an emotional slave in a relationship. And if it ended, I would never consider it a waste of time because I enjoyed it while it lasted... I lived those 2 years on my terms and didn't even come close to losing myself in the process. I don't understand why people assume that just because you're in a relationship that you always become some lazy cuckold with no backbone or standards. Regardless of spinning plates or LTRs, it's simple - don't compromise who you are or what you want for a woman (or anyone)...

Avoiding a LTR because you're afraid you'll be cheated on or you'll get your feelings hurt or that it won't last is no different than getting in a LTR solely because you are afraid of being alone and having no access to sex. Fear is fear.

Men who don't have any fear about LTRs and still choose to exclusively spin plates their whole life are just enacting their personal preference. Men who don't have any fear about LTRs and still choose to be open to relationships are also just enacting personal preference. No one who makes his decisions confidently, on his terms, is necessarily wrong.

Our goal as individuals on this forum shouldn't be to dictate who's right and wrong in regards to relationships vs spinning plates ... Do whatever satisfies your appetite, but live and let live ... Our goal should be geared towards NOT letting fear control the actions of ourselves and each other, whatever those actions or choices may be.

 

[fastlife]

Just something to think about: IME (and I'd love to see what other posters' who actually go out would be) the girls who are most receptive to being gamed (and other things ) according to relationship status & life circumstances would be in the following order:

1. Single girls on vacation or who recently moved.
2. Girls in stable, committed relationships.
3. Girls who recently broke up with their boyfriends.
4. Single girls who live in your same city.
5. 'Single' girls who are 'involved with someone'--probably plates vying for commitment.
6. Girls who are still 'in love' in newer relationships.
   
7. Girls whose boyfriends just broke up with them.

That said, I imagine there are still girls & circumstances that would enable 'good, solid' monogamous relationships...but I've only witnessed a minuscule handful (literally, I could count them on one hand) from my generation.

 

[Trump]

1) Bonding
When you are in an exclusive relationship, you can bond with your partner on a much stronger level than with random babes you just bang. There is more emotion with it. Don't get me wrong, barbaric ape sex is hot and fun, but doing it off of pure lust isn't the same as when you do have emotions for a woman. Read this quote by bigneil:

Some of you may think "I don't need to have feelings towards a woman, only betas do that". That is complete and utter bullsh!t. If you say this, you are in denial. We as humans do long for companionship whether we like it or not. This is how we were able to build the most complex social hierarchy out of every creature on the planet. The strong emotional bond you get in exclusive relationships cannot be found very easily with women who you just sleep with and go home. "ITDG, only doing what FEEELZ good is for faggots". It is, huh? Well why the **** do you even want to have sex then?

2) Kids
If you ever plan on having kids, you better believe that sticking with one woman is the right thing to do. Having more than one woman walking into your house (sometimes at the same time!) will definitely fvck with your kid's psychology. They won't be normal and will be societal deviants. Not to mention that your baby momma will likely be having sex with other men too. If this happens, your kids are ****ed. No ifs, ands, or buts, about it. I've said this before: women are only able to love one man at a time; if she no longer loves this man, she will no longer love his offspring anymore even if they are also hers.

3) Sex whenever you please
You might think that you can have sex whenever you want if you have multiple plates, but if that was really the case, then you wouldn't need to have so many women in the first place. NEXTing wouldn't even be a thing. You don't have an urge to have sex with every single woman you see, you just have an urge to have sex with women in general. In an exclusive relationship, you can have sex whenever you are so inclined (only if you play your cards right; if you are being a fvcking wuss then you're doign it wrong). This ties into point number 1—bonding. It's apart of the empathetic connection you two have for each other. When you want to fvck, so does she.

4) Greater potential for improvement.
Power plays. They will happen. No matter how subtle they may seem, they will happen. It's just how women are. She will slowly try taking more and more control of the relationship. Why though? Because you have made it possible for her to do so. If a woman tries taking more control of the relationship, it's because you flaws within your character allow her to. If you play your cards right though, you can continue to keep her extremely infatuated with you which means she will submit to you. She won't even attempt a power play at all. This ties into my next point.

5) She will care for you more so than other plates
You all are thinking "Bullsh!t, I've had women completely change face after I got with them". This meant that you had a flaw within your character. A woman in an exclusive relationship will care for you more than your plates will because she actually has something to lose. If a woman suddenly changed in a negative way, she did not feel like she had anything to lose. This means that you messed up, not her.

Bonus: Public image
The reason why I put this as bonus instead of having 6 points is because I myself did not come up with this one. It is not societally acceptable to have more than one woman, so in the case of a politician, you may want to only have one woman at a time.

Endnotes:

• How much value everything above has is subjective for each person and what their goals are. E.g. If you don't want to have kids, then #2 doesn't apply to you and you may not feel a need to bond with a female either.
• The phrase I used is 'exclusive relationship', not 'marriage'. Marriage at least somewhat voids #4 and #5.

Bro sorry to say but most of these are assumptions, what men like to think.

1) Assumption. Emotional bonds are for suckers. You get sick or run out of money the girl will laugh at you, spit in your face and play the victim to her family friends and society

2) Assumption. LTR and kids benefits her and the kids, not you. Kids won't necessarily take care of you when you older. If you don't have money/inheritance for them they will tell you to go to hell.

3) Assumption. It's up to her. You are committed to HER so why should she give in if it's not on her terms?

4) Assumption. Improving yourself and being in a LTR have nothing to do with each other.

5) Assumption. She won't take care of you if she doesn't have to. She wouldn't mind if you get wiped off the face of the earth if she could get your resources.

I can only somewhat agree to public image. Society loves it when you commit emotionally, financially, legally and physically to one woman for the rest of your life.

 

[BeExcellent]

One thing to keep in mind with regard to the having of children is that marriage (which I realize @ImTheDoubleGreatest! does NOT want) actually confers more rights to you as a father in the event of divorce.

A parameter in the divorce decree will almost always stipulate a radius within which both parents must remain in order to retain their custody privileges. It's called a residency restriction. The other parent cannot just up and move your children away without your consent unless you have been stripped of your parental rights altogether.

The courts do NOT recognize full parental rights in the same way for non-marrieds. I think they should, but they don't.

So your ex gf could pick up and take your kids to a faraway state without your consent, which I've seen happen & its awful. Very little recourse for you there. Your ex-wife however would be restricted from this & if she did it anyway there are laws where she would then be kidnapping essentially.

The family courts are tasked with looking out for the kids first. But non married parents aren't yet granted the same rights.

My dad practiced family law for many years & he saw this a lot & found it sad for the dads & kids in non married unions.

Not saying it's a reason to marry...but it's something to consider since you want to have children one day.

 

[Killakittie]

I would honestly say do the opposite of what most people post, at this point. And you won't go far wrong.

The game-denial is rife. The most popular posters (relative to their contribution) are women.

Tells you exactly what kind of frame most of the men are operating in.

When I say my mum could be a 'most popular member' here, I wouldn't be joking. It's absurd.

I wanted to respond to this thread but had to laugh at the irony of it. I can say I agree with you and others. This place is being cucked and the leg humpers are going right along with it.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Explain why "bonding" with ONE woman is important and how it benefits a man's life "big picture" wise.

Because of this:

Human's are social animals and other people will always effect us emotionally.

If we will always be emotionally affected, then why must we always close ourselves off to possible ecstacy? I created a way-too-long thread on Maslow's Heirarchy of needs not too long ago. In it, there are certain aspects of our lives to be met before we can self-actualize (the state of just being, not acting or thinking). This is that blissful state of mind that makes you think to yourself "I've made it". One of those aspects is our "Love and Belonging" needs. Everyone wants to feel like they are loved and belong somewhere in society regardless of what people may think. MGTOW had to become an actual movement before it actually existed.

But more than that, let's say you actually have done everything in your life that you wanted to do and have that inwardly feeling of pure euphoria because of your achievements. What next? The highest level on Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs is self-transcendence. When one is no longer needing anything, it is at this point that it becomes natural for humans to be altruistic and give with others, to share and connect with others. In order to be able to achieve this state of mind, you must open up all facets of your life with others who CAN help you to transcend.

Not necessarily.

But the chances are sure as heck not one you would want to take when comparing stats of kids with divorced parents vs parents who are still together.

If you are "afraid" to f*ck other women because you might "mess up your LTR" then you're already a beta.

Obviously. If you are a strong man though, you would not be afraid. And this woman would create someone she would be afraid of leaving.

Don't need ONE woman to achieve this.

Self-improve for the purpose of power, leverage and access to hotter, younger sexier poon. Don't self-improve to become ONE woman's wage slave.

As I have stated with bonding, you and your partner may notice little things about each other that will help you to truly connect with each other. And because it is practically impossible to achieve this connection with multiple women, you won't be able to improve all the small subtleties and nuances of yourself that are only seen when exclusive.

If you can love more than one woman.. why choose just one?

Do you eat only at one restaurant? Do have only ONE pair of underwear? Do you have only ONE friend?

Try again.

Because having multiple women uses up more of your time and energy than having just one woman. Call it lazy, but a law of nature is that all living organisms strive to conserve energy. You can better use this energy elsewhere if you deem it necessary (i.e. if you need to focus more on work for example). If not, you can go ahead and do as you please.

The examples you provided above are not very good comparisons. You cannot live very long eating the same exact food over and over again so that is why you eat a variety. You buy different clothes depending on the weather and level of comfort you desire. You have multiple women over just one because.... well why? The reasons for picking a side in relation to women and men depends almost purely on social issues, not on anything that directly affects your state of being.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

One thing to keep in mind with regard to the having of children is that marriage (which I realize @ImTheDoubleGreatest! does NOT want) actually confers more rights to you as a father in the event of divorce.

A parameter in the divorce decree will almost always stipulate a radius within which both parents must remain in order to retain their custody privileges. It's called a residency restriction. The other parent cannot just up and move your children away without your consent unless you have been stripped of your parental rights altogether.

The courts do NOT recognize full parental rights in the same way for non-marrieds. I think they should, but they don't.

So your ex gf could pick up and take your kids to a faraway state without your consent, which I've seen happen & its awful. Very little recourse for you there. Your ex-wife however would be restricted from this & if she did it anyway there are laws where she would then be kidnapping essentially.

The family courts are tasked with looking out for the kids first. But non married parents aren't yet granted the same rights.

My dad practiced family law for many years & he saw this a lot & found it sad for the dads & kids in non married unions.

Not saying it's a reason to marry...but it's something to consider since you want to have children one day.

Yeah, you get more rights than in divorce without kids but that still isn't saying much. And I still do want to get married, I'm fairly certain most people here still do at least somewhat (save for for deesade). But the thing is, I'm just salty that the system sucks in the West and that most women don't have ANY desire to become the woman a man wants her to be.

ALL women know what a man desires in other women. That's why there is such a thing as 'female competition'. The thing is though, they don't strive to actually BE that woman. Then they blame the man when things go south even though SHE is the one who knows what she had to do to keep the relationship alive and keep her man happy. That's why threads on boundaries are stupid. Everyone knows what boundaries to follow, it's common fvcking sense. Sure, go ahead and tell your partner about your pet peeves so they don't do them, but you having to tell a broad not to go drink too much and fvck another guy at a nightclub is absolutely ridiculous.

Women know what men want. They just don't give it. And I am almost clueless as to why. That is another reason why I created that thread asking what Pook said was so black about women. Perhaps that could have told me why.

 

[BeTheChange]

But the thing is, I'm just salty that the system sucks in the West and that most women don't have ANY desire to become the woman a man wants her to be.

Why would they need to be when guys who should know better make phaggot threads about how awesome exclusive relationships are.

The irony is probably lost on you though.