Why Modern women expectations are too high and unrealistic?

What realistic solutions or advice would one give to men? Young men, teens, men in their 20s/30s that were too socially inept. I wind up talking to plenty of these due to my hobbies and extended family. I have zilch experience in dating and I don't like restating "common sense" adages I hear because it doesn't work on a lot of these dudes.
My unironic genuine advice? Go overseas. Work out, get some money, and go overseas. Even if a guy doesn't wind up doing the passport bro thing, it's worth leaving Burgerland and dating women in other places. Generally what I've come to find is that even the extremely left women of another country are still more pleasant to be around and open to new ideas than American women. I don't really know what it is but there's just something about the culture of America that enables a type of behavior other cultures, even Western ones, simply don't have. Like I said, even if the men you're talking about ultimately don't decide to do the passport bro thing, it's worth trying at least once. There's plenty of reasons to do it, but equally plenty of reasons not to. That being said, it's eye opening to see how other people behave vs. how Americans behave. In some ways, they're a lot better and in others they're worse.
 
I dunno if you're going to demand a woman to drop her pursuit of education and wanting to have a career (thus her own income) so her and eventually your children rely only on your income (absurd request btw), then I think she deserves to have high standards, woman without her own income that just depends on a man financially faces so many risks.
The only part of that request that's absurd is the notion of married women having a career and their own income. A married woman is supposed to maintain the home and raise the kids.

As far as the high standards well...
If you want to put a woman through your "trad" vanity project inspired by AI sludge or feelsguy edits then you better have the resources for it
...maybe people should put family and children before luxury and frivolous spending. You don't need a fancy new purse. You don't need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on make up and other such vanities. You don't need a massive wardrobe of clothes you hardly ever wear anyway. You don't need a new dress for every social function. You need to raise the kids and maintain the home and...
doesn't see any issues while their wives are the ones feeling immense pressure from doing everything
...if fulfilling that purpose is too much "pressure" for you then become a cat lady spinster. Household chores are not "doing everything" and you'd still have to do them if you didnt have a family unless you're content to live in filth.
 
And yet, it's western women that are childless and a genetic dead end.
Even abduls 9th wife and two other goats in their mud shed have more kids than average western femcel.
It is ironic, that westoid women don't have enough foresight that if white men are gone, they are gonna get raped day and night by the hordes.
Somebody hasn't checked the latest demographic data. Iran , tunisia, turkey and Lebanon are way bellow replacement. Iran had this problem for decades now and they beat women for not wearing scarfs properly.

Sorry bud this theory is failing in real time.
 
And yet, it's western women that are childless and a genetic dead end.
Even abduls 9th wife and two other goats in their mud shed have more kids than average western femcel.
It is ironic, that westoid women don't have enough foresight that if white men are gone, they are gonna get raped day and night by the hordes.
GdmCYJ5XYAAoA6R.jpg
 
can we ban virgins from this site lol :optimistic:
:optimistic: :optimistic: :optimistic: :optimistic: :optimistic: :optimistic:
Fuck no, I require homegrown entertainment.
The only part of that request that's absurd is the notion of married women having a career and their own income. A married woman is supposed to maintain the home and raise the kids.

As far as the high standards well...

...maybe people should put family and children before luxury and frivolous spending. You don't need a fancy new purse. You don't need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on make up and other such vanities. You don't need a massive wardrobe of clothes you hardly ever wear anyway. You don't need a new dress for every social function. You need to raise the kids and maintain the home and...

...if fulfilling that purpose is too much "pressure" for you then become a cat lady spinster. Household chores are not "doing everything" and you'd still have to do them if you didnt have a family unless you're content to live in filth.
How often do we have to repeat this exact same conversation? You don't have a family. You don't know the amount of labor involved in managing a household and raising children. It's not the same as taking care of your bachelor pad. Stop telling women to abandon all their hopes and ambitions in return for the great privilege of bearing your children.
 
How often do we have to repeat this exact same conversation?
How often do you insist on being wrong about it?
You don't have a family. You don't know the amount of labor involved in managing a household and raising children.
Imagine thinking that being raised in a family and witnessing these things first hand as a kid/teen/young adult isn't adequate experience to gauge how much work it takes. Also this argument is a two way street. You don't know how fulfilling it is to raise children, how important they are to their parents. You have no concept of the level of love a good parent has for their kids.
Stop telling women to abandon all their hopes and ambitions in return for the great privilege of bearing your children.
What hopes and ambitions could possibly be more worth while than fulfilling their God given purpose of bearing and raising children? Do you think men aspire to have a career? No. Careers/jobs/working to generate income is a means to an ends, not a life goal. If you have enough money to retire and spend all your time focusing on your wife and kids you should do so.

This ridiculous notion that women are "forced" to not have a career is retarded modern bullshit. It's a privilege that they get to devote their life to their children and family. Why would you want to trade being the most important person in your child's life for being yet another meaningless cog in a corporate machine that doesnt give a shit about you?

I'll say it again because it's important, working for a living is a sacrifice men make to afford having a family. Any man who says he would rather be at work than at home with his wife and kids is soulless corpo stooge, not a real father.
 
Somebody hasn't checked the latest demographic data. Iran , tunisia, turkey and Lebanon are way bellow replacement. Iran had this problem for decades now and they beat women for not wearing scarfs properly.

Sorry bud this theory is failing in real time.
Part of it is because the iranian goverment did some programs to reduce their population's birthrates back in the 80s and 90s, like subsidizing contraceptives for married couples and the like. Of course, like all countries where this has been tried, the falling tfr continued even after the program ended and now they are desperately trying to raise it back to replacement levels. And both Tunis and Turkey are far more secular than the average islamic country (the tfr of ethnic turks is also lower than of other ethnic groups in the country, kurdish-majority areas for example have a tfr like 50% higher than their neighbouring turkish-majority counterparts)
 
I hate this quote. Rogers almost certainly never said it. She claimed that the first time she ever saw it was in this 1982 newspaper comic (by a man).
rogers.jpg
It was probably in circulation before that, but this comic strip (by a man) is probably what popularized it.

This stupid quote flies in the face of reality. The idea that Astaire had an easier time than Rogers is pure fantasy. In most of their movies together, Astaire had at least one solo number, many of them quite physically demanding. Top Hat, White Tie, and Tails took 20 takes to get right because he kept breaking the cane toward the end. IIRC, Rogers only ever had one solo number in all their movies together, Follow the Fleet, though I admit to not having seen all of them yet. Astaire also had a solo routine in that same movie. A more accurate quote would be, "Ginger Rogers did about 80% of what Fred Astaire did, backwards and in high heels." But even that flies in the face of reality, because it minimizes their unique contributions.

Astaire worked on the choreography. Rogers helped with the wardrobes. Astaire famously hated the iconic dress from Cheek to Cheek, but Rogers insisted on it. After seeing the daily, Astaire begrudgingly admitted that she was right to insist on it. Her choice of dress and stubborn insistence on using it were major contributions to what is arguably their most iconic scene together, as was the choreography by Astaire and Hermes Pan, as was Astaire's singing. They weren't doing the same thing, they were each doing different things that all contributed to the whole.

The idea that she always danced until her feet bled is greatly exaggerated. The most famous example, the first one anyone will point to, is the stairway scene from The Last Dance in Swing Time. This took so many takes to get right that her feet were indeed bleeding by the end of it. When you see Rogers glide out the door at the end, she was heading straight for a chair they had waiting for her. Nobody forced her to do this, and in fact the producers suggested they stop filming for the night so she could rest. Rogers and Astaire both insisted they keep going until they got it right. People tend to point to this as an example of her unique female suffering, but her suffering was intensified because she pushed past people trying to persuade her to minimize her suffering. Also, people exclusively focus on Rogers and her feet with respect to this scene, but do you suppose Astaire was ready to go run a marathon afterward? No one talks about him, but he was almost certainly dead on his feet, as well.

I can't speak for the ladies in this thread, but the people I've known IRL who love this quote really wish it were true that all women worked harder than all men at the same things for less recognition. They do this by minimizing the contributions of men like Fred Astaire. That Fred Astaire guy? Pfff, he had it easy! He wasn't even wearing heels! Try being a woman! (I will not try being a woman, thank you.) This is as much a miscarriage of reality as overlooking Rogers' contributions or the unique difficulties of doing this shit in heels. The reality is that men and women, like Astaire and Rogers, generally fill complementary roles. Rogers and Astaire complemented each other. They brought different things to the table and both made significant, different, contributions to the whole. I hate this quote because I think people should look at the Astaire-Rogers movies, and male-female relations in general, as a collaboration between complementary halves, not a zero-sum competition over who's got it harder.

I realize all of this is off topic, but this thread hasn't been on topic since page 1

Is it Autism Day today?

Ginger Rogers didn't say it, and I didn't suggest she did. Ann Richards made it famous. The comic precedes her quip but didn't make it famous, and the comic was lightly mocking the woman character for saying it. Richards - a homemaker mother of 4, hot meal on the table every night for her husband devoted wife, and later Governor of Texas - owned it.

P.s. It's not a slight on Astaire or anyone else.
 
Is it Autism Day today?
This is Kiwi Farms. Every day is Autism Day.
Ginger Rogers didn't say it, and I didn't suggest she did.
Your exact words were, "as phrased by a woman who did exactly that." I don't think Ann Richards did exactly what Fred Astaire did except in high heels, so my thoughts naturally turned to Ginger Rogers, as they so often do. Clearly I misunderstood you. It's still a stupid quote.
 
Gender wars combatants go home. And maybe join an adult pottery class.

Answer the to thread, as stated, is that women with average/ normal expectations find people to date, but the 7' tall millionaire is never coming for the single mother of three. It warps what people see on dating apps, etc, which are trash anyway.
 
Last edited:
Why the fuck did I read this train wreck of a thread?
I can only assume because you wanted to know why Modern women expectations are too high and unrealistic? Do you finally feel enlightened on the subject? This thread has some of the greatest minds this side of the internet. ( A little bit too much motorcycle hate, but they will learn in time.)
 
Gender wars combatants go home. And maybe join an adult pottery class.

Answer the to thread, as stated, is that women with average/ normal expectations find people to date, but the 7' tall millionaire is never coming for the single mother of three. It warps what people see on dating apps, etc, which are trash anyway.
Be still, my child. Look closer. Do you see what's going on? They're laughing. All of Null's children, are laughing as they fight. Sure they're arguing, but they're having fun and kind of, sort of getting along while making fun of each other. This is what Christmas is all about.
 
Back