How some women “commit” in an LTR

[sazc]

it was clearly directed. no need to be coy with me

I have no problem tagging members when I am speaking directly to them.

You are mistaken. It was a general comment to the readers.

Stop trying to save face

 

[guru1000]

Hypergamy is the better deal at any given time, which changes over time, which I've been saying throughout the last page or so.

Nope, that's YOUR definition of hypergamy. Fortunately, we have something called "language," where we use words with specific meanings to communicate accurately.

I defined hypergamy and shown how hypergamy in many cases is inapplicable. Any counters to the "Needs Theory" or anything I actually wrote as it deals with hypergamy (defined)?

 

[exhausted]

Let's just face it women are NEVER happy.

Even if you are doing everything right they still make a problem out of NOTHING.

This is an absolute fact.

They are too selfish and entitled for it to even dawn on them that they have responsiblitites as partners as well.

 

[guru1000]

Here is why I say women have no clue what "loyalty" means.

A woman stops putting out, the man gets blamed because he isn't doing it right. He isn't connecting with her emotions. He doesn't spend enough time on foreplay. Blah blah blah. Its all his fault, yet he is expected to stay loyal to her and does so many times.

A Woman gets fat, cuts her hair off and turns into a nag. The man is expected to remain loyal to her.

A woman doesn't get her "needs" met and she cheats or demands a divorce.

Yet men stay committed when their nagging wives don't put out. You see the difference? That's why I say you women have no clue what loyalty means.

Loyalty is marrying a woman and staying with her long after her looks faded and she has nothing to offer him.

Loyalty is unconditional love. The only time a woman shows unconditional love is for her children. Both of you women dumped your husbands for things that were "conditional". So should a man dump you when you don't meet his conditions regarding beauty?

I wouldn't marry either of you after hearing the trivial reasons you gave for divorcing your husbands. Sounds like you could have hired a nanny or a maid to alleviate some of the stress?

If a guy listed those reasons you two gave for why he divorced his wife he would be ridiculed.

It's two-way Howie. If she doesn't meet your needs, she gets the boot as well.

 

[sazc]

except saving fac implies some type of humiliation

its now clear you talk just to talk

I'm not into this feminine drama you seem to want to pursue/escalate.

Peace out & have a great day

 

[user43770]

My question to you is this then.......why does every definition of Hypergamy say that the theory is based specifically on marrying UP based on money/wealth?

Before I ever heard the term hypergamy, I heard Briffault's Law:

The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

There are a few corollaries:

1. Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

2. Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit (see corollary 1)

3. A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male (which is not bloody likely).

 

[guru1000]

Let's just face it women are NEVER happy.

Even if you are doing everything right they still make a problem out of NOTHING.

This is an absolute fact.

They are too selfish and entitled for it to even dawn on them that they have responsiblitites as partners as well.

You shouldn't be concerned with this. Be concerned about your own happiness. Effectively lead (which encompassing meeting the needs of your audience), and should a member of the audience be ungrateful, disqualify them. Any thinking beyond this doesn't serve you and is thus superfluous.

 

[user43770]

Nope, that's YOUR definition of hypergamy. Fortunately, we have something called "language," where we use words with specific meanings to communicate accurately.

I defined hypergamy and shown how hypergamy in many cases is inapplicable. Any counters to the "Needs Theory" or anything I actually wrote as it deals with hypergamy (defined)?

You failed to reply to several of my posts in this thread. Your ideas mean d1ck

 

[user43770]

No Sir, Hypergamy is specifically associated with a woman marrying or dating UP, based specifically on Money, Wealth, and Class. Anything else is not Hypergamy.

Before there was a definition for it, there was a poster named Burroughs, who Poon King adopted his entire style after. Even though I asked, I'm still not sure that they weren't the same person.

Before Burroughs, there was KontrollerX, who basically tread the way for everything you believe today. I say that because you remind me of him to an extent. This sh1t was way more controversial back then lol

 

[user43770]

i miss those days. i think that was way before i even officially made an account here. i used to correspond with burroughs.i assure u he is not poon king

Then Poon definitely bit his style of using the bold and red.

 

[exhausted]

You shouldn't be concerned with this. Be concerned about your own happiness. Effectively lead (which encompassing meeting the needs of your audience), and should a member of the audience be ungrateful, disqualify them. Any thinking beyond this doesn't serve you and is thus superfluous.

But my happiness is upended as usual once these women start to deteriorate the relationship. Then comes stress and energy trying to improve it. Then comes the discard and moving on and starting anew. All consuming and stressful and happiness killing.

The only way to negate this is to go from one str to the next moving on emotionless once the first instance of stress or negativity occurs and never looking back with a care in the world.

Sadly I am not a robot and can't do this to perfection.

 

[user43770]

Then Poon definitely bit his style of using the bold and red.

Point being, @guru1000 this sh1t has been around way longer than you, and it will continue to

 

[guru1000]

But my happiness is upended as usual once these women start to deteriorate the relationship. Then comes stress and energy trying to improve it. Then comes the discard and moving on and starting anew. All consuming and stressful and happiness killing.

The only way to negate this is to go from one str to the next moving on emotionless once the first instance of stress or negativity occurs and never looking back with a care in the world.

Sadly I am not a robot and can't do this to perfection.

You're placing too many expectations on another to complete your happiness. You should be whole, complete, and happy without another. Herein is your error.

 

[The Duke]

You're placing too many expectations on another to complete your happiness. You should be whole, complete, and happy without another. Herein is your error.

There is no error in what Exhausted is stating here. You can take a "whole, complete, and happy person" and put them in a relationship with a dysfunctional person that starts drama, can't act right, plays games etc and the other person will be effected. After that person has been effected enough, the whole, complete, and formerly happy person will end the relationship. Cause & Effect is what drives change.

Of course you should not expect others to generate your happiness. That is not his concern here. HIs concern is what to do when their actions start to effect his happiness. He is tired of the cycle.

Select better partners with greater skillsets is the only thing you can do.

 

[guru1000]

There is no error in what Exhausted is stating here. You can take a "whole, complete, and happy person" and put them in a relationship with a dysfunctional person that starts drama, can't act right, plays games etc and the other person will be effected. After that person has been effected enough, the whole, complete, and formerly happy person will end the relationship. Cause & Effect is what drives change.

Of course you should not expect others to generate your happiness. That is not his concern here. HIs concern is what to do when their actions start to effect his happiness. He is tired of the cycle.

Select better partners with greater skillsets is the only thing you can do.

Happiness is subjectively created or destroyed as a perception to, not subject to, the whims of the outside. The events themselves matter not insofar as the perception of what these events mean bears relevance.

One could be extremely happy by choosing to invest into an expanded awareness which focuses on the lesson, and not on the person or persons whom to blame or the “violation” one feels. Exhausted's perception of pointing outward in lieu of looking inward is the error, which relies entirely up to him as the sole guardian of a certain interpretation that he continually invests into thus reinforcing a now unmalleable "reality" outside of his control and influence. Within this self-contrived reality arises powerlessness manifesting feelings of helplessness and cynicality in place of personal empowerment.

Remember, one can always choose empowering interpretations irrespective of the circumstance. Your unhappiness is always self-contrived.

 

[BeExcellent]

Here is why I say women have no clue what "loyalty" means.

A woman stops putting out, the man gets blamed because he isn't doing it right. He isn't connecting with her emotions. He doesn't spend enough time on foreplay. Blah blah blah. Its all his fault, yet he is expected to stay loyal to her and does so many times.

A Woman gets fat, cuts her hair off and turns into a nag. The man is expected to remain loyal to her.

A woman doesn't get her "needs" met and she cheats or demands a divorce.

Yet men stay committed when their nagging wives don't put out. You see the difference? That's why I say you women have no clue what loyalty means.

Loyalty is marrying a woman and staying with her long after her looks faded and she has nothing to offer him.

Loyalty is unconditional love. The only time a woman shows unconditional love is for her children. Both of you women dumped your husbands for things that were "conditional". So should a man dump you when you don't meet his conditions regarding beauty?

I wouldn't marry either of you after hearing the trivial reasons you gave for divorcing your husbands. Sounds like you could have hired a nanny or a maid to alleviate some of the stress?

If a guy listed those reasons you two gave for why he divorced his wife he would be ridiculed.

@Augustus_McCrae divorced his wife for the same sorts of things I divorced my husband for. She let herself go, got entitled and very lazy, wouldn't hold her end of the marriage partnership. Interesting how it's fine for a man to do it, but if a woman has her self respect (I stuck in there for 15 years and about 14 of those years were bad since his business blew up in our first year together) and does it then somehow she's disloyal.

I contend that I held up entirely my end of the partnership and then some.

I remained a pretty and sexy hot size 2-4 with long blonde hair, a 36-24-38 figure with an athlete/dancer's body, (in fact I still look like that), created a six figure income, was emotionally stable, financially savvy, never let my appearance go (through 3 pregnancies mind you - I look as though I never had children still today), and was down for whatever/whenever in bed (or out of bed - etc.) with my ex husband. I was traditionally minded and family oriented. That's the holy grail right? That's what men here want to get find...that type woman. I never cheated, was completely loyal. I was generous and I was responsible.

Love is never unconditional. It isn't for men, nor is it for women. The idea that it is? THAT is blue pill fantasy. If you swallow the red pill you come to that understanding. If you want a high value person then you need to be also a high value person. People with high value have much to offer. More than physical appearance in fact whether we're talking about men or women. How this is news I'm not sure.

If a woman exhibits the traits my ex husband exhibited? I'd think you guys would be nuts to stay with such a woman. Yeah it's a financial risk in divorce. Cry me a river. I was the party at financial risk, faced that fire and survived. The improvement in my and my children's quality of life was worth that risk.

 

[Tenacity]

Happiness is subjectively created or destroyed as a perception to, not subject to, the whims of the outside. The events themselves matter not insofar as the perception of what these events mean bears relevance.

One could be extremely happy by choosing to invest into an expanded awareness which focuses on the lesson, and not on the person or persons whom to blame or the “violation” one feels. Exhausted's perception of pointing outward in lieu of looking inward is the error, which relies entirely up to him as the sole guardian of a certain interpretation that he continually invests into thus reinforcing a now unmalleable "reality" outside of his control and influence. Within this self-contrived reality arises powerlessness manifesting feelings of helplessness and cynicality in place of personal empowerment.

Remember, one can always choose empowering interpretations irrespective of the circumstance. Your unhappiness is always self-contrived.

Guru come on now lol. So are you saying if a dude walked up and SOCKED you in the face giving you an instant black eye out of nowhere.......that wouldn't make you "unhappy"? That wouldn't fvck up your mood? Of course it would and guess what? Your mood and unhappiness would have been effected by the actions of another person.

We don't operate in a vacuum where surrounding markets, environment, and other people don't have an effect on us in some shape or form. Hell, it's even noted that the 5 people you spend the most time with, will have a major influence on shaping your personality.

 

[guru1000]

Guru come on now lol. So are you saying if a dude walked up and SOCKED you in the face giving you an instant black eye out of nowhere.......that wouldn't make you "unhappy"? That wouldn't fvck up your mood? Of course it would and guess what? Your mood and unhappiness would have been effected by the actions of another person.

We don't operate in a vacuum where surrounding markets, environment, and other people don't have an effect on us in some shape or form. Hell, it's even noted that the 5 people you spend the most time with, will have a major influence on shaping your personality.

It will piss me off at the moment due to a physiological response, but in no way would affect my overall happiness and well-being thereafter.

Indoctrination and happiness are disparate elements. However, even indoctrination can be controlled, hence, why we have many members here who needlessly invested into the hypergamy theory as part of their indoctrination of the Manosphere, yet, here I am against it. I could have chosen to invest into hypergamy too having read about it thousands of times, but I elected not to.

You were supposed to be a black statistic, whereas many of your childhood peers and family are still broke in the ghetto, no? But you chose to rise against the tide. Did you operate in a vacuum or did you make a conscious decision to go against what you saw, heard, and felt at the time to climb out of that "dungeon"?

 

[Tenacity]

It will piss me off at the moment due to a physiological response, but in no way would affect my overall happiness and well-being thereafter.

Okay well let's say the extent of the attack was far greater. So not only did the guy SOCK you in the face, but he also took out a knife and stabbed you a couple of times in the stomach, causing you to have to be rushed to the hospital.

You were supposed to be a black statistic, whereas many of your childhood peers and family are still broke in the ghetto, no? But you chose to rise against the tide. Did you operate in a vacuum or did you make a conscious decision to go against what you saw, heard, and felt at the time to climb out of that "dungeon"?

It was a combination of market forces (external forces) and my own personal choices (internal forces). Internally I had talent, I was smart, and I had drive to work hard along with the passion to want to be well off financially. Externally, the marketplace had various openings in the Finance industry for individuals like me to come in, bust their a.ss, and completely change their financial situation.

You needed both the external and internal forces to be aligned to create Tenacity as he is today.

We don't operate in a vacuum Guru, for you to even be on this forum typing right now, some other external market force had to setup the forum, create the forum, pay for the forum, and moderate the forum.

 

[guru1000]

Okay well let's say the extent of the attack was far greater. So not only did the guy SOCK you in the face, but he also took out a knife and stabbed you a couple of times in the stomach, causing you to have to be rushed to the hospital.

Are you mad yet lol?

This happened to me when i was young. And yes I was furious for a couple days. Then it passed.

It's normal and healthy to feel emotion. But it does not serve you to dwell on a deleterious emotion.

It was a combination of market forces (external forces) and my own personal choices (internal forces). Internally I had talent, I was smart, and I had drive to work hard along with the passion to want to be well off financially. Externally, the marketplace had various openings in the Finance industry for individuals like me to come in, bust their a.ss, and completely change their financial situation.

You needed both the external and internal forces to be aligned to create Tenacity as he is today.

Were those same marketplace openings available to your ghetto friends had they looked with you? What was the main difference between you and them, if both of you could have found various Finance openings IF you both looked?

We don't operate in a vacuum Guru, for you to even be on this forum typing right now, some other external market force had to setup the forum, create the forum, pay for the forum, and moderate the forum.

Guru chose the forum, and if the forum were unattainable, Guru would have chosen other manosphere forum. It always boils down to volition.

Your counter as I would hope to see it is: If there were no market, your volition in the market would be fruitless and thus the market shapes the volition. This is true for many. However, history is also replete with examples of people who created new markets (see Steve Jobs) and revolutionized the needs of the market.