Men don't really need "love" (it's bullsh!t), but rather to be RESPECTED!

[manfrombelow]

To sum it up:

Men don't need the so-called bullsh~t named "love". It's a MEANINGLESS concept anyway.

But rather, what men truly need is to be RESPECTED.

Let me elaborate.

When do you feel most happy with a woman?

Of course, this is very easy to answer: When she obeys you, acts obedient, cooks you good meals, fvcks your brains out, ... etc ... Anyone can says this.

But, WHEN does a woman do all of these willingly?

When she LOVES you the most, you might answer. However, let me dig a little deeper:

But when does she actually love you the most???

Can you answer this? Have you ever really thought this far?

The answer is: She can only love you the most when she's already RESPECTED you the most.

So, gentlemen of SS, it's not "love" that we need, but rather RESPECT. It's the respect from our women that mean the world to us, not love.

As long as the women still treats you with respect, and looks up to you, your relationship is fine.

But, the moment she stops respecting you, or stops looking up to you, your relationship is in jeopardy and has a 99,9% risk of going straight to sh!t, no matter how sweet and caring and loving she treated you in the past.

Too long, didn't read version:

1. Love is dog sh!t and means nothing in a relationship with women, only RESPECT matters!

2. Respect is the highest form of love a woman can offer you. In other words: When a woman loves you, she actually respects you without even knowing it.

3. Fvck love. It's ALL ABOUT RESPECT! (@EyeBRollin )

Your input, please?

 

[EyeBRollin]

Well done, OP.

Fvck love. It’s all about respect! Respect and a woman’s interest level are linked. I would add that her respect has an element of fear in it. Afraid to lose you…

 

[manfrombelow]

Well done, OP.

Fvck love. It’s all about respect! Respect and a woman’s interest level are linked. I would add that her respect has an element of fear in it. Afraid to lose you…

Thanks bro, I learned this the hardest way possible.

Love is meaningless when it comes to building & maintaining a healthy & functioning relationship with a woman. Because we don't really need it. The only thing we need from a woman, especially when she's in a relationship with us, is RESPECT.

 

[Plinco]

I've been saying this for a long time already. Respect is one of the most essential basis for relationships.

 

[Kotaix]

Women cannot love a man that they can't respect. And women also can't love men who don't respect themselves. This is why simps, betas and other assorted doormat men get no female attention.

 

[Atom Smasher]

‘Tis true. Respect is the bedrock upon which her love rests. Take away the respect and love comes crashing down.

I have always believed that contrary to popular opinion, it is men who are truly capable of authentic, sacrificial love, and that most women are not. That’s what gets us into so much trouble and emotional turmoil.

 

[DonJuanjr]

I have read that men commit suicide when a relationships ends more so than women, for this very reason.

Which is why you should realize that a guy wanting you to remain monogamous, while he's banging women on the side is not a risk to his investment in you.

 

[DonJuanjr]

I am not worried about his investment in me, that's not the issue and never has been. The issue is he took a vow to remain faithful and when he breaks the vow and cheats, I lose respect for him. This is not a conscious decision, it's organic. It goes to his character and integrity.

A man making and keeping the commitments he makes reflects a level of integrity that is of the utmost importance to me. If fosters my trust and respect.

And as has been mentioned previously, a woman cannot love a man she does not respect nor trust.

Is that vow a requirement for you? I bet it is. I don't think you would entertain a man for long term commitment that required you to remain monogamous while he has sex on the side. Like you said, you don't know why it bothers you. At the same time you realize that guys love harder than women, and should realize that it's not a problem if he wants to do that. I hope you don't devolve my point to nit-picking of the meaning of words, when you know what I'm saying. If that vow isn't a requirement, touche.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Women are more resilient I think (generally speaking) and while initially extremely hurt and sad when a relationship ends, are able bounce back and find love again. This has been true for me and women I associate with.

Women have no choice but to be resilient on this because of biological imperative. Women cannot survive in nature without men.

This means that if rival clan comes in and conquers an enemy village, the women will quickly forget their slain husband and procreate with the new men. Her survival depends on it.

 

[DonJuanjr]

You are attempting to justify cheating DJ but your argument is weak because in today's society, cheating is considered very low level and weak and I am certainly NOT the first person to think so.

No, you're framing it under the premise of verbal vows already being taken. You say that's why it bothers you, but that doesn't make sense, because you already state that you wouldn't consider a man for ltr commitment if he didn't take that vow. Which shows there's a different reason as to why it bothers you.

 

[EyeBRollin]

No I wouldn't you are correct. I would not entertain a man for long term commitment if he wanted sex on the side.

Every man wants sexual variety. It’s how we are wired. To think your beau is an exception is delusional.

 

[ThisIsSparta]

Man..... i havent loved a woman after my first 1-2 girlfriends...... i´d go as far as i just relearned to love when my kid was born.

I doubt very much that i ever will love a woman again. But then, i dont need to love a woman. I´am totally fine with her "keeping my belly full and my balls empty" as Kevin Samuels put it. RIP

 

[DonJuanjr]

I can't imagine any man thinking like you, saying to himself "I am going to promise fidelity, promise I won't cheat, but cheat anyway."

You keep framing it under the premise of taking the monogamous vow...

So why wouldn't I enter into a commitment with him?

Why wouldn't you enter into a commitment with a man who says he wants to sleep with women on the side? Please answer this.

You already acknowledge men kill themselves more after breakups than women(implying stronger bonding), it shouldn't be a problem for you, if he sleeps with women on the side that he has no bond with, because it's with you.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I know it's how men are wired, even my own fiancé (we are getting married next month). I am not so delusional to believe otherwise.

I can only hope my fiancé is one of these men. I TRUST him and have no reason to believe he would lie or cheat.

Men, look at the contradiction. This is incredible.

If you know men want to fvck other girls, why do you require him to be sexually monogamous? Setting yourself up for disappointment…

 

[DonJuanjr]

See below.





.

You didn't answer what I asked.

"Why wouldn't you enter into a commitment with a man who SAYS HE WANTS TO SLEEP WITH WOMEN ON THE SIDE".

I didn't ask "why wouldn't you enter into a commitment with a man who wanted to break a vow of monogamy".

You keep framing it under the premise of the man taking the monogamous vow. Let me phrase it this way, so you can understand...

Why do you require a man to be monogamous, if you realize the stronger bonding of male nature, and he's bonded with you?

 

[EyeBRollin]

I don't "require" him to do anything. He's a grown man, it HIS choice.

Wrong. You said a man has to be upfront about his intention to not be sexually monogamous. This is so you can screen him out for a man that will lie to you by “choosing” monogamy. That is a false choice.

If you guys want to disagree with me, that's fine, I only ask that you read my posts in their entirety. I have already explained my position on this but to repeat there are men, despite their desire to have sex with a variety, choose monogamy.

They “choose” and fail.

Men, how many times must women be cheated on before they wise up and stop this faux requirement from their men?

 

[DonJuanjr]

Lol, I feel like I am living in the Twilight Zone today.

Please see my response to @EyeBRollin , I don't "require" him to be monogamous. It's HIS choice.

The rest of your question has been asked and answered, if you are still confused I cannot help that.

It's obvious to all that you can't comprehend the question.

Men, The answer is, she doesn't consciously know why it bothers her. She realizes men's stronger bonding nature, yet can't accept a prospective long term situation with a man who's bonded with her, but wants to sleep with women on the side. It's because her subconscious lizard brain is afraid that she'll be left alone in the woods without protection or provisions.

 

[DonJuanjr]

If a woman secures the commitment of a high value man, nuking his options, then she’s won (and then she gets turned off).

Then loses her bond, cheats, and blows up the relationship taking half his shjt in the process. All the while blaming him for his "faults".

 

[EyeBRollin]

And I take that information and make MY decision whether to move forward with him or leave.

Information is power and I use to my advantage regardless of whether it means staying or leaving.

Translation: If he does not commit to being sexually monogamous, I will move on to another sucker who will.

Men, straight from the woman’s mouth. It cannot be anymore clear.

 

[DonJuanjr]

And it's equally baffling that YOU cannot understand why, after promising a vow to remain faithful, you believe you are within your rights to BREAK that vow and cheat because you are emotionally and physically incapable of being faithful and remaining true to your own convictions.

I don't know what to say.....

You keep framing it under the premise of taking the monogamous vow...

No, you're framing it under the premise of verbal vows already being taken.