In the context of a romantic relationship, does respecting a woman mean the same thing as respecting a man?

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

I agree that this is happening, it's just delusional. And the people who told them this are retarded at best and nation-crushing sociopaths at worst.


Being a man does come with burdens. It's just how it is.


Equally delusional. The same thousand generations of selective pressure that made women want Providers & Protectors instead of male gal-pals, also made men look for youthful, fertile women who can Care & Nurture, and that masters degree in administrative powerpoints just doesn't scratch the itch.

Excuse me, I have a PhD, MBA, JD, and MD in Administrative PowerPoints, tyvm.


...All you said was nuh-uh and denied some reality, but since you're apparently not interested in a thoughtful discussion, we can end it here. Imagine being proud of not having intrinsic worth or denying respect for achievement on paltry principle. Couldn't be me!

 

[JohnnyG]

Imagine being proud of not having intrinsic worth or denying respect for achievement on paltry principle.

There was no pride in my statement, it's just an observation of reality.
- Men can demand that women "love me for me" until they're blue in the face, but it won't make it happen, so they'd be better advised to do something worthy of admiration.
- Women can demand that men be lovestruck by their corporate-approved #girlbossery, but again, they'll just end up neurotic and alone.

 

[Inside your walls]

For example, in one case a guy after he lost his job and became miserable made his girlfriend completely lose respect for him.

I don't really buy it that she instantly lost respect for him after he was let go. I think what happened was that he was let go and became depressed, the ex tried to support him during his depressive state but that support didn't got him to start moving again rather extended his sulking which if you've been around people in this phase, you probably know that they can easily start emotionally draining you real quickly whether it's on purpose or not. I think the loss of respect was due to the woman in that relationship seeing that the image he sold to her of a metal singer, someone that would just keep on trucking despite the obstacles didn't exist outside of his job. The loss of respect was result from issues that were already piling up due to the boyfriend's sulking and not showing that he wants to keep going.

I also know a woman that divorced her husband in a pretty mean way; she lined up a house to move to, had told two of their three growing up children about her plans about 6 months in advance, and after she had spent a year doing almost nothing but spending the inheritance from her dad, moved out in a complete surprise move to him. Now that's how I first heard the story from his side. Of course there was griefing and depression involved. But having been over frequently I also knew the other side of the story: he was treating her impossibly. He wasn't listening to the things she cared about. They were on opposite ends of Covid, with her disagreeing with the whole mainstream narrative and him agreeing to it. Two of their three children were vaccinated, but as a surprise to her when she came home. Their marriage was in complete shambles with him just doing stuff and never discussing it, never resolving disputes together. I think more than anything what wrecked their marriage was him not looking out for her best interest as well. How she ended things was pretty shitty, but considering how I imagine he would have blown up (verbally) and her generally being a very go-along kind of person, I kinda understood why to a small degree. I guess you could call it not respecting her, but it's not really the same thing is it?

Do you know on what she exactly spend that inheritance on? From the looks of it, given she found a house it's very likely she might had used that inheritance money to find a house and was just preparing to have a safety net/pillow for her and the children. Given that she chose to do this in the secret, it's very likely that if she announced it to him upfront he would prevent her from leaving not in an abusive husband way, but in a very downplaying way of "You're overreacting" or "Let's compromise way" and she probably didn't want to have none of it due to her already feeling that he doesn't care what she thinks or feel, hoping that empty promises from him would shut her up.

Women don't need respect. They need love. Men need respect.

By that logic men don't need love even if most of men insist that men want love actually.

A love without respect no matter whether it's directed to a man or a woman is just condescending compassion.
It will get you nowhere.

Women do not respect men nor have they ever. Feigning submission is not respect

But I though all women are actually submissive in nature and they were designed to subservient to men. Which one is it?

family court somehow rules against men 90% of the time at a minimum

If we're talking about custody cases, the reason why women win custody cases more is because they actually seek custody more than male parents because if they do not they get judged more harshly, but when male parents do ask for custody they're ones that usually get it. There's many nuances to this topic, such as the fact that often at times when parents seperate, the male parent is more likely move out somewhere far to start over while the female parent is more likely to stay behind. In these cases judges give custody to women because if a child has already grown up in that area where his mother is staying and developed friendships, it would make more sense for them to stay somewhere familiar than to move out somewhere far without knowing anybody plus moving out from a familiar place to somewhere unknown can very risky and traumatic for the child.

There's so many things to consider in these cases and to just reduce it "Courts wants to felt the males n' shiet" is really stupid.

 

[Wuornos]

Women do not respect men nor have they ever. Feigning submission is not respect. Women do not respect anything, respect is a male concept. Just as women have no concept of morality or justice either. Refer to Schopenhauer.

Laws are written gender netural too yet somehow family court somehow rules against men 90% of the time at a minimum. Its almost like neutrality and equality are again male fantasy concepts that vaporize the minute a vagina becomes present.

Curious then that the majority of rapists, paedophiles and serial killers are not women if, as you claim, women have no concept of morality or justice? And, yes, I'm aware my username is the surname of an infamous female serial killer, but the point still stands.

In regards to family court, sticking your dick in a woman is not the equivalent of growing a baby for nine months, or going through life-risking excruciating childbirth and being potentially left with lifelong health issues nor is it the equivalent of providing the 24/7 breastfeeding and childcare while dealing with the vaginal stitches, postnatal depression and mastitis.

Men played no significant role in childcare for thousands of years and for many centuries children seldom interacted with their fathers.

I think both parents are important and child custody should ideally be split 50/50 unless there are mitigating circumstances (e.g., child neglect, substance issues, etc), but the claim by misogynists that mothers don't have a right to custody is complete and utter horseshit. In my experience, fathers who lose custody is because they were either a shit parent or the guilty party responsible for destroying the relationship in the first place.

 

[Justa Grata Honoria]

somehow rules against men 90% of the time at a minimum

source?

 

[Otis Mallebrok]

source?

The source is probably his giant victim complex and intense bitterness at being a failure. That would be my guess, at least.

 

[Otis Mallebrok]

Women do not respect men nor have they ever. Feigning submission is not respect. Women do not respect anything, respect is a male concept. Just as women have no concept of morality or justice either.

A man who has no women in his life, and who has less irl experience with women than with nuclear engineering, tells us in no uncertain terms how women work amd how they think. Pathetic as usual.

 

[Justa Grata Honoria]

The source is probably his giant victim complex and intense bitterness at being a failure. That would be my guess, at least.

I am just going to leave this in

Most divorcing or single fathers (roughly 90 percent) never ask for custody. In contested divorce and parentage custody cases, however, the father wins 60 percent of the time.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/1994/08/22/do-you-think-mothers-automatically-get-custody-think-again/

"A well-recognised source of systems abuse includes the family law system, in which perpetrators attempt to drain the resources of victim-survivors through protracted and incessant legal proceedings; insisting on care arrangements which are unsafe and do not reflect the wishes of a child and, as research indicates, undermining the mother-child bond by coaching children to view their mother in a negative light."

Studies conducted in both the US and Australia have found perpetrators of family violence are commonly granted contact with their children.

A 2020 US study found in that judicial system "women who allege abuse – particularly child abuse – by a father are at significant risk (over one in four) of losing custody" of their children.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-06/family-court-family-violence-training-david-mandel/104183698

Its well known fact that abusers use the court system to punish and harrass exes for daring to leave. The parental alienation was invented by a man to shut up women and children about abuse when divorses started to pick up.

I am just going to remind kiwis that a convicted pedophile who tried to kill his son because he witnessed the sexual abuse he did to his sister managed to convince the court to force his teenage son to reconciliation therapy and throw the mother in prison for opposing it.
hoo boy the story is even worse they asked her to pay up to 1500 dollars a month for reunification therapy as a punishment even though she openly told them that she makes only 2800 usd per month purely from child support and no joke the judge told her she is lying and making money under the table. I genuenly wanna know who is this judge?


And know pedophile and degen Krys tyson still has child custody and unfettered acess to his son, which he dressed in heels btw, due to using lawyers as a weapon behind scenes confirmed by multiple parties in the company he worked in.

 

[isalaide]

There was no pride in my statement, it's just an observation of reality.
- Men can demand that women "love me for me" until they're blue in the face, but it won't make it happen, so they'd be better advised to do something worthy of admiration.
- Women can demand that men be lovestruck by their corporate-approved #girlbossery, but again, they'll just end up neurotic and alone.

Men seek career advancement in order to acquire access to women they desire more. This is the sole motivation for men to do anything.

Women seek career advancement in order that they and their children are not dependent for survival on the boner-feelings of a man.

Do you seriously not fucking understand this? Women are not working for their career goals to get someone to fuck. That's why men are doing it. Women's motivation is completely different. It's to secure a means of survival independent from a man, and women have fought for this throughout recorded history because total dependence on a man generally works out extremely fucking badly for women in all societies.

No woman cares that career advancement "doesn't attract men" because that's the fucking point. It's not some kind of mating display.

 

[The Ugly One]

At a high level, respect is understanding who the other person actually is and accommodating that in your actions. That's fundamentally the same on both sides. Men and women are different people, so that includes understanding how your spouse is not the same as you and has different needs and wants.

Do you seriously not fucking understand this? Women are not working for their career goals to get someone to fuck.

There are way too many lonely women on social media crying about how they're great partner material (nobody says "wife" any more, what an outdated concept) because they have good careers for this to be right. Lots of women think men will find the same things attractive that they do. Maybe you, personally, don't, but plenty do.

 

[JohnnyG]

Women seek career advancement in order that they and their children are not dependent for survival on the boner-feelings of a man.

My comment was replying to a series of claims that men do or should feel loved for who they are (too bad, they aren't) and that women do or should be valued by men for their career achievements (lol).

And regardless of the perverse incentives Modern Society creates for both men and women, I think it's as silly to claim that women have ever achieved security through "independence" from men, as it is to claim men can be happy "going their own way". Neither of those things has ever endured in a functional civilization...we are not more clever than the accumulated wisdom of the hundreds of generations who built the world we inherited.

 

[Justa Grata Honoria]

There are way too many lonely women on social media crying about how they're great partner material (nobody says "wife" any more, what an outdated concept) because they have good careers for this to be right.

Anegnotal evidence buddy, statistics , polls and research show otherwise. Many lonely men crying about not having partners.

B) why you always parade attention seeking narcs as a proof women down bad? They are basically looking for attention and signaling they are single in the hopes they string another simp in dms or sell you only fans. Fucking hell I should be parading here nick fuentes and another retard shorts/stuff they said to get attention as a proof men are evil .

 

[isalaide]

I think it's as silly to claim that women have ever achieved security through "independence" from men, as it is to claim men can be happy "going their own way".

Being able to house and feed your own children when a man deserts you is not the same order of need as "being happy".

If a man chooses a partner who "doesn't make him happy", well, he can leave any time, or pull the "my wife doesn't understand me" shit in a bar. Either way, he will readily obtain the sex that he desires. Regular sexual access to a woman is all he requires to "be happy".

If a woman is shackled to someone who forces her into sex into return for the money to feed her children, that's a much bigger fucking problem for her than not getting her Nat King Cole.

Women in 2024 are the daughters, granddaughters, great-granddaughters of women who have plenty stories to tell of the "bad husband" who drinks all the family money, or uses his economic power as the sole wage earner to coerce and abuse his wife and family. Every woman currently alive has been sat down and told these stories by her elders at some point, and even in 'conservative' communities, she has been given the advice about having a little bit of secret money of her own. Every woman.

You are completely at the mercy of someone who is the sole support of your children. This is the thing that girls and women all understand and speak of openly, and it is the reason that "traditional marriage" is a fucking terrifying proposition in current year. In current year, you would have to be absolutely fucking mental to stake not just your own health, welfare and survival, but that of your children, entirely on the whim of a man. Any man. Not being able to scrape up just-about-enough money for you and the kids to live is the difference between being able to leave him the first time he hits you, and becoming a domestic homicide statistic.

The risk of abandonment and abuse is just too fucking high to run. The majority of marriages fail. Not even long term relationships involving children, these are actual marriages, the highest level of legal security a non-working wife and mother can obtain. And most of them collapse.

I adore my personal nigel. I have spent my entire legal adult life with him. I have never once at any time during those decades been financially dependent, let alone solely financially dependent, on him. I would not enter into such an arrangement, not even with him. If he took a runout powder on me tomorrow, then, in a purely material and economic sense, the children and I would be absolutely fine. That's my fucking duty as a mother. I have to make sure my babies would be alright. I need to know that and have that arranged to be able to fucking sleep at night. It is my absolute highest duty to protect and care for them.

It's not even just about abandonment. You can marry the finest and most loyal nigel ever born, and next week he can die in a car accident, or those headaches can turn out to be an inoperable brain tumour. How the fuck are you going to look after your kids when your sole provider is in the grave. This has happened to women throughout history and continues to happen. You have to have a safety net. You cannot trust to man's goodwill and the plan of God above for you. Especially the latter.

I think that the risk involved in becoming a dependent SAHM and the fear of how that can (and sadly often does) go wrong is one of these things that seems to be less and less generally understood in common discussion. You cannot as a sane adult woman trust your entire survival to the continued goodwill and indeed existence of a man. Any man. It's fucking nuts. You have to pack a fucking parachute, and an education and career is that parachute. Even if you choose not to use it, even if you don't have to use it, it needs to be there.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Respect in a healthy marriage means Biblical standards are applied; your wife shows you respect through her wifely duties while you show yours through your husbandly duties, which are different. It's pretty simple.

 

[The Ugly One]

Anegnotal evidence buddy, statistics , polls and research show otherwise. Many lonely men crying about not having partners.

B) why you always parade attention seeking narcs as a proof women down bad? They are basically looking for attention and signaling they are single in the hopes they string another simp in dms or sell you only fans. Fucking hell I should be parading here nick fuentes and another retard shorts/stuff they said to get attention as a proof men are evil .

You can deny it all you want, but whether it's profiles on dating apps, crying on social media, histrionic blog posts, or just the story from my single friends still engaging with the shit-tier marriage dating pointless sex market the USA has become, "Guys should like me because I have a good career" is a common sentiment among young women.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

I don't really buy it that she instantly lost respect for him after he was let go. I think what happened was that he was let go and became depressed, the ex tried to support him during his depressive state but that support didn't got him to start moving again rather extended his sulking which if you've been around people in this phase, you probably know that they can easily start emotionally draining you real quickly whether it's on purpose or not. I think the loss of respect was due to the woman in that relationship seeing that the image he sold to her of a metal singer, someone that would just keep on trucking despite the obstacles didn't exist outside of his job.

I thought the same and I thought that was clear from what I wrote that it wasn't just the job loss, but the response to it as well. Though I think what also happened is that she was taking too much charge of what he should do about it, and instead of not taking that too seriously, he tried to follow where she led him for a bit. It's one of those instances where women think they're helping, but they end up sabotaging the relationship by bitching up their guy. I mean he took the bait... but still. That's what it looked like to me from their stories. I obviously didn't hear everything from both sides. Neither of them were really looking for advice so I don't know what they would have said if I shared this perspective. But it's one of those perspectives that's kinda taboo and people don't want to hear anyways.

Do you know on what she exactly spend that inheritance on

yes. She quit her job and spent afternoons having drinks with her friends.

From the looks of it, given she found a house it's very likely she might had used that inheritance money to find a house

She's renting. He gave her a third of his lifetime savings so she could furnace the place.

if she announced it to him upfront he would prevent her from leaving not in an abusive husband way, but in a very downplaying way of "You're overreacting" or "Let's compromise way" and she probably didn't want to have none of it due to her already feeling that he doesn't care what she thinks or feel, hoping that empty promises from him would shut her up.

Oh 100%. He was unbearable in general back then. I almost cut contact with the guy. Their separation made him re-evaluate and made him a better person. For her the opposite, she's become very bitter, tries to turn the kids against him and ends up turning them against her instead. They rarely want to go to her. She used to be one of the sweetest people I knew.

 

[David Brown]

She's renting. He gave her a third of his lifetime savings so she could furnace the place.

I'm sure you meant to write "furnish" but I still laughed

 

[isalaide]

You can deny it all you want, but whether it's profiles on dating apps, crying on social media, histrionic blog posts, or just the story from my single friends still engaging with the shit-tier marriage dating pointless sex market the USA has become, "Guys should like me because I have a good career" is a common sentiment among young women.

You cannae have it both ways, though.

I understand that young men are saying they don't want a dependent, they don't want to be a paycheck or a simp or a beta cuck or whatever, and they want a life partner who earns well now and who will also not "sit at home on her ass not working once we have kids" blah blah. You know the exact kind of chat I mean.

But young dudes can't insist on that and also insist that whether or not Cindy can find the money to go to Taco Bell is irrelevant. Because either it is relevant in looking for a life partner, or it's not. Either way has consequences. If you don't care whether or not a lass can earn a decent sum, that's fine, but yes that is going to keep you a wageslave until death and also going to cost you mightily in the divorce.

On the other hand, if you do select a partner for having a decent career, you can't be crying into your Miller Lite fagwater five years later that wifey no want to tradwife and no want stay home with kids and expect you do own laundry. And you also know exactly the kind of whinging I mean here too.

And what I see is people trying to have it both ways. It either matters or it doesn't. But the young woman cannot be in two places at once, and she can't simultaneously not be an economic millstone and not go to work.

I think honestly there is a heavy amount of kool-aid drinking going on amongst the young folks about the economic reality of them pairing off and having a family in the next few decades. The tradwife SAHM is the ultimate luxury belief and the overwhelming majority of dudes can't afford her. They certainly cannot afford to divorce her once they have her.

 

[David Brown]

Men played no significant role in childcare for thousands of years and for many centuries children seldom interacted with their fathers.

Are you talking like prehistory? There have been thousands of cultures through time and space, surely such a generalization can't hold without some evidence.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

Are you talking like prehistory? There have been thousands of cultures through time and space, surely such a generalization can't hold without some evidence.

I'm not sure, but I think it's roughly correct. Feel free to cite examples that prove the opposite. This is one of those things that should be easy to disprove if it's false.