If you aren't going forward, you are giong backwards

[Gro0ver]

Is this not just hypergamy in action? I don't see the big deal. This is what a lot of women do.

What happened, happened. It doesn't matter if it's right or not, that's the way it is sometimes.

This is why when a woman is in love with you when you're in a relationship, you need to realsie that this kind of loyality is very hard to come by. And it is priceless.

 

[Jitterbug]

You can explain cheating & branch swinging, you can never justify them. Pointing out the difference is not whining, regardless of how enthusiastic you are with such shaming language.

I hope iqqi finds herself at the mercy of those who have the exact same mentality as hers - people with the eternal cravings for the Bigger Better Deal.

 

[iqqi]

You can explain cheating & branch swinging, you can never justify them. Pointing out the difference is not whining, regardless of how enthusiastic you are with such shaming language.

I hope iqqi finds herself at the mercy of those who have the exact same mentality as hers - people with the eternal cravings for the Bigger Better Deal.

You keep mentioning my name, and then twisting my words, do you want my attention now too, little buggy? I don't believe in "bigger better deals", I believe in being the best you can be. Or at least desiring to better your situation if it isn't good. Isn't that what this site is about? Do careers not fit into that ideal? Is 30,000USD in a nonfulfilling career a good goal?

Iqqi, I don't really know you. I never really had any problems with what you have posted in the past. However, you are so full of ****.

Hi upside! I like how you went through all of my awesome posts, so I will take the time to break it down for you. Keep in mind that my one and only point in this whole thread is that instead of b!tching and whining about other people that you should be focused on improving your own life.

Quoting you

Quote:
instead of some stagnant pool of nothingness most relationships drown in. so forget the does he make enough to support my french nail manicure habit trait. i want to know if he can pick up and go at a moments notice! can he take a week off or a weekend, to just go out into the world?

Quote:
i want a companion, an equal, to accompany me on this path. not a provider.

Quote:
How do you own yourself? Easy. You just accept who you are. You have flaws as well as good points, and once you take responsibility for them you may find that they are not flaws at all.

Quote:
Once you own yourself, no one else can. They can’t tell you how to be, how to feel, how to act. They can’t tell you who you are.

Dude, every single thing I have said in this thread goes along with all that. This guy cannot pick up at a moment's notice and do sh!t. He works a 40 hour a week job that usually offers no flexibility, and he doesn't make enough to cover his bills let alone go on a trip! LMAO, seriously.

If your point is fear that I am saying a woman will only be interested in a man who is wealthy, that is not my point at all. And I stick by all my previous points, if you aren't on my wavelength, how far can we possibly go?

I personally want a man who is doing something about his life situation that will give him flexibility and ABILITY to have some fun in this world. I am not interested in private jet trips to Dubai. If I had to choose between my boyfriend now who definitely does not make enough to rent some private charter lol, and oh say the guy who was trying to woo me away from him a few months ago, who owned houses in two different countries... let's just say I wasn't even interested in the latter. It's not about bigger and better and upgrading because those opportunites do come my way.

At the same time I might be able to have fun and even love a cashier at Speedway Gas Station for a year or two, but if that was where his butt was parked for life, then me personally, I'd probably have to move on. I come from a very poor background, and I want better for myself and any family I might start. Not private jet better, lol. But I need to be able to afford to travel, show my children the world, and go see live theater, and go out to nice restaurants more often than once a year because I have become a huge foodie, go out to wine bars, afford concerts, and the such. Also it is important to me to be able to live comfortably especially when I have children, no ghettos because I can only afford the cheapest of rent. Is this bad? Seriously?

You quoted me on saying that I want a companion, an equal to me, not a provider.

All those things I mentioned above, I can do on my own. I have bettered myself, I have strived and worked to make myself something that I have become. And damn skippy I want a man who is at least equal to that. He doesn't need to live in a mansion and drive a Lamborghini. My current boyfriend doesn't even have a car.

The flaws thing I talked about, and own yourself... that is more on some spiritual ideology and it doesn't really have to do with this topic. Owning yourself does not mean becoming one with your obstacles in life, lol. Personal quirks is not the same thing as hurdles in life. Do you understand?

My problem? By all accounts, this is a gentleman that enjoyed his occupation, where he was at, and the companion that he had. He knew who and what he was and accepted it.

Most likely he is lazy. Plain and simple.

I've worked in the restaurant industry all of my life, and restaurant supervisors aren't usually someone I'd describe as fulfilled individuals who are interested in bettering themselves. And I am not a proponent of accepting your situation when it sucks. Does anyone on this forum aspire to making $30,000 working 40+ hours a week? I'd love to get clear on that point since everyone seems to think he is doing great for himself.

Then there are women. A woman who claims that she wants to be in his life not for what resources he can provide, but who wants a man that can be a companion in the strange journey of life. A woman who claims that she will love him through and through regardless if they spend a weekend at the local beach or the one in Spain. Money is no object! She just wanted to experience life with him. And I quote "i want a companion, an equal, to accompany me on this path. not a provider"

I think I answered this pretty well above, but let me know if there is still confusion or objection.

BUT WAIT!!!!!!! Now he is being told BY YOU what he SHOULD be doing, what he SHOULD be aspiring to as long as he is capable of doing in order to maintain the affections of a female who claimed to him that she didn't care what he makes. You are telling us that we should change in order to increase our value in the eyes of society and to prevent branch swinging from happening.

If you are stagnant in a not so good life, then you should improve yourself and your situation. See my question above, does anyone really think that 30,000USD working 40 hours a week is something to accept and aspire to?

Yet, you are quoted as saying not to give 2 ****s about what people think of you. You tell us that no one can tell you how to act, how to be, and that perceived flaws ("bad" restaurant gig) may not actually be flaws at all! Maybe the dude likes what he is doing and it is very valuable to his life!

A bad job is not the same thing as a character quirk, as I've explained above. I'm sad that I have to explain that lol.

See above about what exactly a restaurant supervisor gig entails. Not much freedom. Not much money to decorate and enjoy your cage in life either.

You are so full of ****. And by no means is my intention to be insulting in nature, but rather you have absolutely no business telling people how to live their lives WHEN YOU SAY ONE THING AND THEN SAY ANOTHER THAT IS CLEARLY A CONTRACTING STATEMENT.

Hmmm, maybe now you understand the way you were perceiving what I said versus what I was actually saying? Or maybe you just really identify with the supervisor so you are subjectively defensive?

And you actually have the audacity to put the blame on HIM???? HE had to be BETTER, HE had to have AMBITION, HE had to have the DRIVE.

SHE wasn't a SLUT. SHE wasn't DECEIVING. SHE wasn't to BLAME.

I've mentioned a few times that any point I have made here has nothing to do with the cheating GF. It's all about not stagnating, and improving yourself, instead of blaming others. Seems like you are in the camp that would rather point fingers at the girl? I mean someone, anyone but him. Or you.

And yet you tell us he doesn't have to listen to any of it because "flaws" can actually be attractive qualities and that you need to be "free" and "own yourself" because in doing so is attractive and will get the womenz.

But in this thread you tell us he had to be better and his flaws weren't attractive. He had to live up to some certain standard of living law in order to keep his woman haaapppppyyyyy and entertained and fulfilled.

This man doesn't seem very free to me. Plus you keep reiterating previous points, like a religious nut. Let's make one point and keep it clear from here on out, lol.

This bro caught an absolute break. I hope he lives his life the way he wants to. I hope that he enjoys whatever in the hell he does and finds a women that will appreciate who is as opposed to what.

Yes, yes, I agree. Maybe a front desk clerk at a hotel who makes $8 an hour would be good for him. This whole situation would have been A-OK for me.... when I was 22.

But Iqqi give me a break. Be freaking consistent. Either flaws can be attractive or flaws are only a hindrance and you must always improve yourself or you stand to lose out in the game of life. Either you need to be your own person and be free, or you need to take the advice of others and change yourself in order to be a "better" person in society.

You don't need to change. But you should always be trying to improve until you have reached satisfaction. No? Or yes? Isn't that what you are doing here? Or are you here just to b!tch and whine and point fingers at anyone else?

 

[iqqi]

I actually do not like Eminem, but now, because of this pathetic thread, his verse from Airplanes is stuck in head dammit.

"allright lets pretend Marshall Mathers never picked up a pen
lets pretend things would have been no different
pretend he procrastinated had no motivation
pretend he just made excuses that were so paper thin they could blow away with the wind
marshall you’re never gonna make it makes no sense to play the game there ain’t no way that you’ll win.....
he’s gon’ have a hard time explaining to Hailey and Laney these food stamps and this WIC sh-t
cuz he never risked **** he hopes and he wished it but it didn’t fall in his lap so he ain’t even here"

I am almost afraid to even post that because now instead of receiving the message, there is another target to point fingers at and deconstruct.

The message once again, is to step up to the plate. If you want to park your butt on the bleachers you have every right but don't expect anything to fall in your lap. If you don't expect much from yourself, you can not expect much from others.

 

[betheman]

The message once again, is to step up to the plate. If you want to park your butt on the bleachers you have every right but don't expect anything to fall in your lap. If you don't expect much from yourself, you can not expect much from others.

and what type of work/career do you have? are you qualified ?

 

[iqqi]

and what type of work/career do you have? are you qualified ?

Before I answer that, what does it have to do with the point I have made about stepping up to the plate and not stagnating? About having goals and motivations to make yourself and your situation the best you can?

Or are you just curious about me personally?

And qualified? To do what?

 

[betheman]

Before I answer that, what does it have to do with the point I have made about stepping up to the plate and not stagnating? About having goals and motivations to make yourself and your situation the best you can?

Or are you just curious about me personally?

And qualified? To do what?

Im not interested in you in the slightest.

"Originally Posted by iqqi [again]
The message once again, is to step up to the plate. If you want to park your butt on the bleachers you have every right but don't expect anything to fall in your lap. If you don't expect much from yourself, you can not expect much from others."

have you stepped up to the plate personally? are you stagnating or improving yourself, basically...are you living what you preach or are you a hypocrit?

 

[iqqi]

Im not interested in you in the slightest.

"Originally Posted by iqqi [again]
The message once again, is to step up to the plate. If you want to park your butt on the bleachers you have every right but don't expect anything to fall in your lap. If you don't expect much from yourself, you can not expect much from others."

have you stepped up to the plate personally? are you stagnating or improving yourself, basically...are you living what you preach or are you a hypocrit?

I think I already answered that question.

Ummm... yeah, lol.

Glad you aren't interested in me in the slightest though, now that you have taken it to me personally and answered the question of if I follow my own advice...

You have really progressed the discussion here, lmao.

 

[Atom Smasher]

Guys should never expect women to act on morals. No more than you would expect an animal to act on morals... If you enter a cage with a lion unprotected and it tears your leg off, will you really get upset and start discussing the lack of morals on which the lion acted? Of course not, coz you don't expect it to act on morals in the first place. Neither should you expect women to do so... But most guys can't deal with this thought, they WANT to believe that the world is good. They WANT to believe that people in general, and women in specific, will treat you good if you treat them good. The very fact that I just basically placed women on the same level as animals with regards to moral behavior, is too much to handle for most guys.

You are absolutely right about this, and it took me a long time to learn it. We were brought up to believe that women were the bastion of morality, and that we poor men were morally lacking. At around age 50 it finally dawned on me that women are completely, 100% amoral. To them "morality" is relative to the emotion of the moment, and nothing more. I'm sure the fact that I never married is due to the fact that I was searching for a needle in the haystack who lived by principle and integrity. I was chasing after a creature that does not exist.

It's very hard for men to finally and fully comprehend that morality and principled living mean absolutely zero to any woman. Only the emotion that is expedient for her matters, and while this can sometimes mimic morality and principle, it can reverse in the blink of an eye when it's expedient for her to do so.

 

[hithard]

My interpretation of whining in this case: pointing out how a certain action is morally wrong, while absolutely nothing will change by pointing this out.

It's ridiculous to discuss, judge or get upset about the lack of morality in someone's behavior when you really shoiuldn't even EXPECT morality from this person's behavior.

That's the step many guys on here have yet to make: Guys should never expect women to act on morals. No more than you would expect an animal to act on morals... If you enter a cage with a lion unprotected and it tears your leg off, will you really get upset and start discussing the lack of morals on which the lion acted? Of course not, coz you don't expect it to act on morals in the first place. Neither should you expect women to do so... But most guys can't deal with this thought, they WANT to believe that the world is good. They WANT to believe that people in general, and women in specific, will treat you good if you treat them good. The very fact that I just basically placed women on the same level as animals with regards to moral behavior, is too much to handle for most guys.

I wonder how many of you here really do your homework. These kind of discussions have been done before, and better. People should read up on threads like "All women are devilish wh0res" (started by STR8UP). If all of you had read such threads and accepted the truth that's revealed in it, this current thread wouldn't even have more than one page.

But I guess the truly enlightened people on SoSuave (or the world in general) will always be in the minority....

Exactly, guys on here are worried about trying to change things out of their control. Looking at the deeper reasons of how and why this happened develops your ability to see future problems with this kind of $hit. The majority of women do not run on the same track as men when it comes to moral behavior. The fact we are still talking about if the guy was a loser or not is so far off the point it's not funny.

IQQI pointing out

stepping up to the plate and not stagnating? About having goals and motivations to make yourself and your situation the best you can?

should be commonsense because that is what is in our control (next to ditching all women and complaining about them forever more). I don't care what he does (employment) or what she did to him (out of my control) just how they got to that point for future reference. Understanding the beast not trying to tame one at a time is the idea. Egos should be kept in check as well people.

 

[Jitterbug]

Well I hate to repeat myself again, hithard, but that "deep reason" is flat out wrong. This chick in the OP will cheat on the guy even if he steps up and becomes more successful. She will just find a different reason to do so. Like I said, my female friend's situation is the exact same one (down to the restaurant business) except that her boyfriend was on the track to open his own fine dining restaurant. Even as a restaurant manager, the guy was making close to $100K, far more than us at that age. He was going places. She was a bloody checkout chick. She propositioned nearly everyone of us, then ended up cheating on her BF with the uni student bum in our group.

###

Hey mods, I can see that iqqi has free reign to insult everyone here, but anyone who says anything remotely harsh back to her gets their posts deleted? Nice work, white knights.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

As I pop back in from time to time it's funny how this thread keeps morphing, transforming, degenerating (YOU pick the word that you think is most appropriate) into other things as it goes on.

In a funny way, I think that this old clip from Seinfeld PERFECTLY sums up the whole subject of women ditching guys because of their jobs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyKlJbe1frc

That clip is STILL funny to me...

But on a more serious note, here are two questions for anyone who cares to answer them:

1. For those who think that the guy from Backbreaker's original post is a loser:

WHO do you think the best judge is of whether not that guy's life was STAGNANT and UNSUCCESSFUL------the guy himself, or the girl that he was in a relationship with? And WHY?

2. For those who subscribe to the belief that women are just amoral animals who only have loyalty to their current "feelings":

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

 

[betheman]

I think I already answered that question.

Ummm... yeah, lol.

Glad you aren't interested in me in the slightest though, now that you have taken it to me personally and answered the question of if I follow my own advice...

You have really progressed the discussion here, lmao.

I havent read all your posts, youre too long winded, maybe you gave your career in among them, I wouldnt know. as for progressing the 'discussion'? get over your very inflated self!

 

[Findog]

As I pop back in from time to time it's funny how this thread keeps morphing, transforming, degenerating (YOU pick the word that you think is most appropriate) into other things as it goes on.

In a funny way, I think that this old clip from Seinfeld PERFECTLY sums up the whole subject of women ditching guys because of their jobs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyKlJbe1frc

That clip is STILL funny to me...

But on a more serious note, here are two questions for anyone who cares to answer them:

1. For those who think that the guy from Backbreaker's original post is a loser:

WHO do you think the best judge is of whether not that guy's life was STAGNANT and UNSUCCESSFUL------the guy himself, or the girl that he was in a relationship with? And WHY?

2. For those who subscribe to the belief that women are just amoral animals who only have loyalty to their current "feelings":

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

1) The guy is the best judge of whether or not he is a loser. Nobody knows us better than ourselves. We know what our own potential is and how best we are at living up to it. Professional success is important, and the more of it we have the better access we have to all sorts of good things, but it's not everything. Character and integrity is something that needs to be cultivated as well. I guess what I'm getting at here is that if this site has taught me anything, it's that my self-worth has to come from within, it can't be put in the hands of a woman.

2) Neither gender has a monopoly on bad behavior. There are good women and bad women. Same with men.

 

[hithard]

Well I hate to repeat myself again, hithard, but that "deep reason" is flat out wrong. This chick in the OP will cheat on the guy even if he steps up and becomes more successful. She will just find a different reason to do so. Like I said, my female friend's situation is the exact same one (down to the restaurant business) except that her boyfriend was on the track to open his own fine dining restaurant. Even as a restaurant manager, the guy was making close to $100K, far more than us at that age. He was going places. She was a bloody checkout chick. She propositioned nearly everyone of us, then ended up cheating on her BF with the uni student bum in our group.

###

Hey mods, I can see that iqqi has free reign to insult everyone here, but anyone who says anything remotely harsh back to her gets their posts deleted? Nice work, white knights.

Missed the point of my first post. You doing the solo progression, or just stagnating and totally neglecting having at least some common goals with your partner, will equal weak emotional attachment to you that can be exploited by others.
Not saying you need to babysit, drag her along or supplicate. You should both want to progress along together as well as by yourselves.Relationship does not equate to eat dinner, having sex and do your own thing. Why be in a relationship like that in the first place unless its just to fulfill some kind of security blanket need.
Getting into a routine like that leaves you open and the guys job becomes irrelevant.
Secondly don't just get into a relationship with a girl because she touches your wang ffs. Finding someone that fits your lifestyle makes it a hell of a lot easier.

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

That's a very broad question as men and women will be all three depending on what has influenced them.

WHO do you think the best judge is of whether not that guy's life was STAGNANT and UNSUCCESSFUL------the guy himself, or the girl that he was in a relationship with? And WHY?

The situation they find themselves in.
It should be pretty clear where you are in a relationship.

 

[disgustipated]

Iqqi, why not just keep it to, you have a right to expect at least the same from a mate that you, yourself bring to the table. This dude HAS a respectable job, idc what anyone says. Should he reasonably be able to keep a super model happy? No. But a ****ing receptionist that from all accounts is in his league? Yes.

She obviously thought she could do better, I for one have no problem with that. Seen much worse. But let's not get delusionsl thinking that we might know enough about this guy to assume what he does and does not have. Be it ambition, a 10 inch ****y, wtf ways, a plan to save money to own a house by living with roomates. You just sound ignorant assuming all this ****. And if a guy goes from fry chef to president...then takes a breather...do u dump him because he could win a Nobel prize if he applied himself? Where and when does it end. Ridiculous.

 

[betheman]

2. For those who subscribe to the belief that women are just amoral animals who only have loyalty to their current "feelings":

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

I refuse to believe that women are just amoral animals but I do believe they have a default emotional position which allows them to abandon or abdicate any responsibility when the sh!t hits the fan. they do it because they are more and more allowed to do it. men would probably do it to but throughout history, men get called to account and shamed, even by our own gender.
the legal system, the media, society, mainly western society, buys into the sh!t that were blame needs to be placed, if a man is involved, somehow he is responsible, if there is no man involved, then the feminist agenda kicks in.

men are slightly more loyal in general but not profoundly so, when we make a committment we generally stick to it, but maybe that is because the penalties are obvious and hard hitting

 

[Atom Smasher]

2. For those who subscribe to the belief that women are just amoral animals who only have loyalty to their current "feelings":

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

VU,

I'm not sure anybody is saying that women are "animals". What I see, though, is that in the last 40 years societal influences (the media) have affected that half of the population so drastically that there is almost literally no more societal pressure or expectation of living by principle.

For women, "how you feel" has been glorified as the only thing that matters in perception and decision making. Gone are the days when women adopted a lifestyle based on right & wrong, and based on keeping one's word even at cost to oneself.

Women today have been trained by the media to expect special treatment, to have an open license to vent toward men, to consider themselves universal victims and therefore exact "justice" (special treatment and the right to hit and insult men), and to be almost completely free of the expectation to be responsible for their words and actions. Therefore I observe that they usually say and do based upon what is expedient for them in any given moment.

They will almost universally justify the most horrific behavior by saying it was right because they "felt" it was right at the time. There is very little overriding and overruling guiding protocol that they follow.

This observation is visible in every facet of society. Play a game with a woman and there are no rules. They will make them up as they go (an allegory for life itself). When you go driving for the next few days, observe just who is chatting away or texting on their phones while driving (in states where that is illegal). You'll find that by far, it is women who have no regard for the law and no ability to project and take seriously the possible accident that can occur. Around here (NY), I women outnumber men probably 15 to 1 in this regard. It is expedient to ignore the law and common sense.

As you drive down the highway at 65 or 70 mph, just who is it that is whizzing by you at 80 or 90? In NY, it is women. Five to one by my estimation. The female aggression that has grown over the past 40 years is astounding. We just don't acknowledge how bad it really is because it has happened so gradually.

When the enemy wants to strike at society and mankind, he does not attack the man directly. He does it through the inherent weakness of the woman. The powers that be understand that by molding the easily malleable, society as a whole will crumble.

So in conclusion, are women animals? No, of course not. Are they mass hypnotized and deluded by the media? They most certainly are. Are they encouraged by every facet of society to feel privileged and generally not responsible for their words and actions? I think we all see the free passes they get on bratty, entitled behavior every day. Finally, are they encouraged to "feel" and act on those feelings in lieu of being encouraged to allow overriding principals of rules and morality guide their behavior? I'll let the reader answer that.

Men, on the other hand, are expected to attain toward mastery of emotion and the adoption of principled living. It's not that men always attain this, but it is what we aspire to. There are certain requirements to leadership, and of course mastery over emotion and principled living are at the core of good leadership. This also applies to business, leading a family, and on and on it goes.

Women are not animals. But they are certainly children. They are trained to be so, and it is the onus of the man to manage their volatile, childish nature without the former (40, 50 years ago) reward of nurturing and being taken care of by her. Women were once well-equipped to be a helper to their man, to serve his needs (physical, spiritual, and sexual) while he served hers. They have been transformed by the media (and by man's weakness) to be brats, and brats are incapable of attaining to high standards and principled, moral internal guidelines.

This, in my view, is the very definition of amoral. The weak have been conditioned to be something that is a gross amplification of the more base aspects of their nature. And man's weakness and lackadaisical attitude allowed it. Now we reap what we have sown.

Respectfully,
Atom

 

[Findog]

They will almost universally justify the most horrific behavior by saying it was right because they "felt" it was right at the time. There is very little overriding and overruling guiding protocol that they follow.

Case in point:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/169009/how-out-rapist

This is disgusting. Two wrongs don't make a right. You don't get to be in contempt of court and not follow the directives of a judge because you consider the punishment meted out as too lenient. Anyways, brilliant post. There are still good women out there, but they are fewer and far between, and it's not intrinsic and ingrained genetics that account for the awful behavior of this generation's Western women, but the fact that they are incentivized to act this way. I see a big difference in women my age and my grandmother, mom and aunts.

If the goal of feminism was to give women the same opportunities and freedoms as men, I have no problem with that, but the way it has worked out is that they get all of the perks and advantages of equality, but for them it is optional to live up to the responsibilities and the accountability that goes along with it. Whereas men are still expected to live up to their obligations in the old patriarchal model, for women it has become optional for them to do so.

 

[iqqi]

As I pop back in from time to time it's funny how this thread keeps morphing, transforming, degenerating (YOU pick the word that you think is most appropriate) into other things as it goes on.

In a funny way, I think that this old clip from Seinfeld PERFECTLY sums up the whole subject of women ditching guys because of their jobs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyKlJbe1frc

That clip is STILL funny to me...

But on a more serious note, here are two questions for anyone who cares to answer them:

1. For those who think that the guy from Backbreaker's original post is a loser:

WHO do you think the best judge is of whether not that guy's life was STAGNANT and UNSUCCESSFUL------the guy himself, or the girl that he was in a relationship with? And WHY?

2. For those who subscribe to the belief that women are just amoral animals who only have loyalty to their current "feelings":

If women are amoral, then what are MEN? Moral, amoral, immoral, or something else entirely? And...WHAT, if anything, do you believe that men have loyalty to?

I'll take on your first question, I felt the second one was more rhetorical.

I don't think individuals are always the best judges of their own situations. This is for many reasons. And I don't know if judging is the correct verb here. I think "judgement" is a loaded word honestly, especially in this situation.

Think about a 17 year old who drops out of high school, not because he is pursuing some great goal so he doesn't need to stay within the well defined path of education. But because he smokes weed all day and is tired of waking up to go to school 5 days a week. Is it judgmental to say he should stay in school and graduate?

This guy in the OP isn't so much a loser, as a person who doesn't seem interested in self progression or improvement.

I'm not trying to be mean or condescending, because BB said this was a good guy. He likes the guy. But the guy doesn't appear to be motivated. And the bottom line about that, is that it isn't an attractive quality. Attractive, as in attracting good things into your life, including quality women.

This is a man in the prime of his life, when foundations are being built and solidified. The world is a huge opportunity. It is to do with what he pleases.

It appeared to me, from the information given, that this guy does not please to do much. That is totally his prerogative as it is anyone's here. But the choices you make in life affect the quality of your life, and also the opportunities that come your way. If we take it a step further, I believe that if you are not trying to improve your life, you are chipping away at your character.

Men won't break their word once given, women won't ignore their feelings, once triggered.

Oh, is that a fact?