Men's Global Failure - it's a feature, not a bug

N

Noir drag freak

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
The bottom 75% of men across the globe have lost to top 25% of men and women. There have been reports in Asia that women are better educated and more likely to hold prestige jobs, even in places like Mongolia. So obviously the problem isn't Western Feminism. Even before feminism, the Industrial Revolution and Globalism were shaping the relations before the sexes. Immigrant women and non-white women were more likely to find work than their husbands. Considering that some jobs that was male dominated were seasonal. I know that it has been documented that black women in the United States are more likely to be employed than black men due to various factors. The ratio of employed males to females made it hard for black families to function as women were the primarily breadwinners. Ironically, black females during the 1900s wrote essays and pamphlets on this subject.

We must have a glorified womanhood that can look any man in the face--white, red, yellow, brown, or Black, and tell of the nobility of character within Black Womanhood.

Stop making slaves and servants of our women. We've got to stop singing--"Nobody works but father." The Negro mother is doing it all. The women are carrying the burden.

The main reason is that the men lack manhood and energy. They sing too much, "I Can't Give You Anything But Love, Baby." The women can't build homes, rear families off of love alone. The men ought to get down on their knees to Negro women. They've made possible all we have around us - church, home, and business.

Written in The Louisiana Weekly, December 23, 1933.

People like to blame women for the reduce status of men in society. But in my view, it's because the nature of work and technology has level the playing field of the sexes. Globalization and the Multi-national corporations have eliminated the successful pathways that would have allowed the majority of men to be successful. For example, the bottom 75% of men were more likely to be successful in finding mates pre-Tinder. But Tinder has changed it so that only the top percentile of men get the majority of women. That goes for other areas of life as well.



Sources
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/24/mongolia-reverse-gender-gap-marriage-rate-decline-career-women
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7dFoCbE5zU&ab_channel=CNAInsider
 
I think you are over-simplifying it as well though you are right that feminism is not the end all.

A lot of problems are just assortment opportunities. Oft pointed out is womens' unreasonable financial expectations during this economic transition period. People say that women are biologically not attracted to men that do not make more money, but money is a recent invention and is mostly just numbers with no tangible change in lifestyle, so that's probably nonsense.

Every reason people give for these modern problems always seem so facile on closer examination.

As for tinder, there are many novel ways for the sexes to commingle outside of trash apps but people don't yet take advantage of them. Tinder and similar apps do give people wacky mirror house self images though.

The real solution to all this is a more virtuous population. Until there can be ground broken there we are just digging a collective ditch to bury ourselves in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bass, Large, lostkeys and 2 others
Those MGTOW types that complain about women all the time are literally the same shit as feminists saying 'where have all the good men gone?'. Take me for example, I don't know shit about women, never dated, was a loner, etc. Didn't hamper me in professional life, got a job just fine. Earn a paycheck just the same as everyone. Sure the dating game is utterly fucked, impossible to get into but you gotta focus on something else, for your own sake.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: IamSpechal, Vril-Dame vom Aldebaran, Homegrown Homophobia and 6 others
Money, as in dollar bills, may be a recent invention, but power and status are not, which is what REALLY attracts women going as far back as our hunter-gatherer days. Money is just the current yardstick for status and is a convenient and transparent evaluative metric.

A poor woman who is anything above a 6 on the attractiveness scale won't be poor or needy for long. There is no such thing as a "beautiful bum". A wealthy man will happily marry an attractive waitress, whereas a wealthy woman, even though her physical and financial needs have long since been met, will still target men above her current station and won't consider the handsome, but poor, guy working in the mail room beyond a short-term fling.

It's just the way we're wired, which unfortunately necessitates that a sizable amount of men will fall into societal cracks and never achieve much of anything. MGTOW individuals aren't evil or pathetic; they're just tired of this biologically-driven game. Low-status men who are threes on their best days and are not wizards in some financially rewarding field are almost forced into a MGTOW-like path in life, even though they desire the long-term companionship of a woman and the family that comes with that.

I've heard that, due to modern advances, successful women should be open to establishing relationships with their own waiters, but that'll never happen. Thinking-Ape on YouTube has an entire channel explaining these sexual dynamics, along with Colttaine and several others.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: trardokont, McSchlomo and Puff
TheBallPit said:
Money, as in dollar bills, may be a recent invention, but power and status are not, which is what REALLY attracts women going as far back as our hunter-gatherer days. Money is just the current yardstick for status and is a convenient and transparent evaluative metric.

A poor woman who is anything above a 6 on the attractiveness scale won't be poor or needy for long. There is no such thing as a "beautiful bum". A wealthy man will happily marry an attractive waitress, whereas a wealthy woman, even though her physical and financial needs have long since been met, will still target men above her current station and won't consider the handsome, but poor, guy working in the mail room beyond a short-term fling.

It's just the way we're wired, which unfortunately necessitates that a sizable amount of men will fall into societal cracks and never achieve much of anything. MGTOW individuals aren't evil or pathetic; they're just tired of this biologically-driven game. Low-status men who are threes on their best days and are not wizards in some financially rewarding field are almost forced into a MGTOW-like path in life, even though they desire the long-term companionship of a woman and the family that comes with that.

I've heard that, due to modern advances, successful women should be open to establishing relationships with their own waiters, but that'll never happen. Thinking-Ape on YouTube has an entire channel explaining these sexual dynamics, along with Colttaine and several others.
Click to expand...
I hear you, I have watched the channels you mention. I just think that this stand back and squint statistical analysis is a flawed method and that solutions to these issues are far more abundant than anyone realizes.

Status is easier to flash than ever and money is the stupidest route that a man can take to status imo. If purchasing power stats are to be believed then money is mostly an instrument for female signaling anyways.

Anecdotal evidence is frowned upon but I am 100% certain that you and stat hounds like thinking ape are wrong about the poor handsome guy rich professional woman dynamic, (provided the guy knows how to play his cards).

Yeah some people are 1/10 slug monsters but goddamn dude
Ethan
fucking
Ralph
I wouldn't want his status if it came with wrapping paper but it still got him china.

If you like thinking ape and them you might check out attar's Cuckstar Bonanza series.
 
blur said:
The real solution to all this is a more virtuous population.
Click to expand...

It's easy to think of our biggest problems as having a single root, like one person or a smaller group of people. But it's never that simple in reality. Although, we could definitively say that they can be a part of the problem.

What you're saying is the real solution. I'm a firm believer in the idea that the leadership is reflective of the people in one way or another. If enough people change themselves at an individual level to the better, then the collective is going to see a brighter future.

We need a strong family unit to solve men's (and women's) failure
Western society is for the most part dominated by people who have complete disregard for the family unit. This is important because the family unit is incompatible with sexual liberation, you can't have both. Sexual liberation implies unchecked hypergamy, which contributes to most men not having any options. The family unit is also incompatible with women chasing a career. Many men have become more incompetent in life, I'd say in large parts due to negligence from parents and society. Single-mother homes (read: broken family units) contributes to this, and more.

I think this leads us to the following questions: Are we as a collective prepared to do what's necessary to reverse these problems? Are we men prepared to swim against the tide and acquire what's necessary to be good husbands? Are women willing to change their attitudes towards patriarchy and be willing to be lead by a husband rather than by a boss in a corporation?

If not, then we're going to keep on suffering.
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Agree
  • Islamic Content
Reactions: LGHDR+, Zero Day Defense, Cowboy Kim and 3 others
Status is practically defined by a person's net worth nowadays. Even the average M13 gang leader is awash in ill-gotten cash, drugs, and guns. A moderately attractive woman is simply not going to target a janitor for a long-term relationship, even if he looks like Fabio.

Regarding Ethan Ralph, there are loads of women in the world who rolled snake eyes on the genetic dice, which makes them accessible to even the Ralph's of the world. Some of these women are also easily swayed by the false bravado that people like Ralph can exude. Even then, these relationships typically have no staying power, as the female is always looking to monkey branch out of the situation, especially a dire one like being paired with Ralph.

Note that I'm not saying poor handsome guys are in the same general boat as poor ugly guys. Having an iron jawline and firm abs is a tall mountain that these men have gloriously summitted and will definitely lead to numerous sleepovers. It's ultimately not enough, though. Women will eventually wise-up and realize that they also desperately need that all-important stable status, which, if they have half a brain, will force them to consider men that they would never have glanced at just a few years ago.

Anyway, none of this is new nor all that enlightening, as it's just observing sexual realities. I personally wish women wouldn't put themselves on such high pedestals when they're young and understand that the wall hits everyone, sometimes at surprising times. I also wish current arch feminism wasn't such an enemy to traditional motherhood and the nuclear family, but that ship sailed decades ago.

I'll take a look at Attar's channel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blur
TheBallPit said:
Status is practically defined by a person's net worth nowadays. Even the average M13 gang leader is awash in ill-gotten cash, drugs, and guns. A moderately attractive woman is simply not going to target a janitor for a long-term relationship, even if he looks like Fabio.

Regarding Ethan Ralph, there are loads of women in the world who rolled snake eyes on the genetic dice, which makes them accessible to even the Ralph's of the world. Some of these women are also easily swayed by the false bravado that people like Ralph can exude. Even then, these relationships typically have no staying power, as the female is always looking to monkey branch out of the situation, especially a dire one like being paired with Ralph.

Note that I'm not saying poor handsome guys are in the same general boat as poor ugly guys. Having an iron jawline and firm abs is a tall mountain that these men have gloriously summitted and will definitely lead to numerous sleepovers. It's ultimately not enough, though. Women will eventually wise-up and realize that they also desperately need that all-important stable status, which, if they have half a brain, will force them to consider men that they would never have glanced at just a few years ago.

Anyway, none of this is new nor all that enlightening, as it's just observing sexual realities. I personally wish women wouldn't put themselves on such high pedestals when they're young and understand that the wall hits everyone, sometimes at surprising times. I also wish current arch feminism wasn't such an enemy to traditional motherhood and the nuclear family, but that ship sailed decades ago.

I'll take a look at Attar's channel.
Click to expand...
If we're looking at it from a purely biological standpoint, the "hot" guys are generally going to be physically fit and thus are displaying what USED to be the provider traits. It always goes back to being a provider.
 
TheBallPit said:
Money, as in dollar bills, may be a recent invention, but power and status are not, which is what REALLY attracts women going as far back as our hunter-gatherer days. Money is just the current yardstick for status and is a convenient and transparent evaluative metric.

A poor woman who is anything above a 6 on the attractiveness scale won't be poor or needy for long. There is no such thing as a "beautiful bum". A wealthy man will happily marry an attractive waitress, whereas a wealthy woman, even though her physical and financial needs have long since been met, will still target men above her current station and won't consider the handsome, but poor, guy working in the mail room beyond a short-term fling.

It's just the way we're wired, which unfortunately necessitates that a sizable amount of men will fall into societal cracks and never achieve much of anything. MGTOW individuals aren't evil or pathetic; they're just tired of this biologically-driven game. Low-status men who are threes on their best days and are not wizards in some financially rewarding field are almost forced into a MGTOW-like path in life, even though they desire the long-term companionship of a woman and the family that comes with that.

I've heard that, due to modern advances, successful women should be open to establishing relationships with their own waiters, but that'll never happen. Thinking-Ape on YouTube has an entire channel explaining these sexual dynamics, along with Colttaine and several others.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. Men are expendable and always have been. Over the course of the species history, women were able to reproduce much, much more reliably than men. It has always been a tendency that the top slice of men get the lion's share of the action while the lesser majority are stuck fighting for table scraps. A situation where most men can reliably expect to find a young wife and reproduce in a stable family unit is probably an aberration from the norm, historically speaking. So the trends we see now are really just a reversion to the human mean.

blur said:
Anecdotal evidence is frowned upon but I am 100% certain that you and stat hounds like thinking ape are wrong about the poor handsome guy rich professional woman dynamic, (provided the guy knows how to play his cards).
Click to expand...

The numbers don't lie. Women very rarely marry and stay with men who earn less than them. It does happen, occasionally, but not often. The overwhelming majority of marriages are ones in which the woman is marrying "up" or at least "across," not down.

blur said:
Yeah some people are 1/10 slug monsters but goddamn dude
Ethan
fucking
Ralph
I wouldn't want his status if it came with wrapping paper but it still got him china.
Click to expand...

Ralph does have status within his "sektur," or at least, he did. I guess you could dispute that claim these days. But for a lot of the Killstream's history he would most certainly come across as a high status individual within his little corner of the Internet. Women being women, obviously do not choose mates logically, they don't have a capability to sit there and think "okay, he's gross, and an alcoholic, and a felon, and has a lot of obvious personality issues," and all the rest. Well, not all of them do anyways. I shouldn't imply that any woman could fall for the Gunt, as this obviously isn't the case.

But yeah, their lizard brain doesn't necessarily distinguish between fake Internet grifter social status and something more "real" like the status that would accrue to a man with a successful legal or medical practice. Some women fall for serial killers and the like, and you will be hard-pressed to find any incels among career criminals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trardokont
There’s a lot of focus on marriage in these comments, but more people than ever don’t get married anymore. Male and female. Which is unfortunate.

I’m curious if anyone here works with lots of women or deals with them on a regular basis. Because in my experience in a female dominated workplaces, plenty of women in the real world are in serious relationships with men who make less than them. Some of these women even support chronically unemployed male partners.

There’s a big disconnect in what men on the internet say about their perception of women’s willingness to “date down” and what’s going on in the real world.
 
Most normie women are ok irl but become certified kiwifarm tier autist when they are online. Just like most people tbh.
 
Something I think bears mentioning is that I think 'high-status' can be on a smaller scale. If a man is the leader of a local hobby club of 3-4 people, for example, I wager he still gets the mental health and attractiveness boosts that come with being 'high status.'

Plus, for the rest of the group, if every man has a niche skill and other members of the group rely on and respect him for it, I bet every man will seem to have a decent status.
 
Spiny Rumples said:
Something I think bears mentioning is that I think 'high-status' can be on a smaller scale. If a man is the leader of a local hobby club of 3-4 people, for example, I wager he still gets the mental health and attractiveness boosts that come with being 'high status.'

Plus, for the rest of the group, if every man has a niche skill and other members of the group rely on and respect him for it, I bet every man will seem to have a decent status.
Click to expand...

Correct. This is why even the Gunt is still able to acquire female attention. Someone outside the "sektur" with a detached viewpoint might see him as a weirdo/loser, but within his little sphere, he was relatively high status before his descent into lolcow status really got underway
 
Part of the reason why articles like these exist is because everything women are doing is to the benefit of the clown-world system we are in.

While I'm not sure if this outcome is what they were aiming for at the beginning of suffrage, but the effects of the feminization of society is apparent.

  1. Men/boys encouraged to be in touch with their feelings as well as putting women on a pedestal - creating the soyboys
  2. Gossip culture being king as well as consumerism - women are the most likely to buy the stupidest of things due to fee fees.
  3. Women discard 75% of regular men and go for the top 15% men... never mind those 15% of top men will go for someone "newer"
  4. Women voting for every nation wrecking idea there is. Welfare state and open borders until we hit full-on dystopia. (1984, Brave New World, Idiocracy, Mad Max, Battle Angel Alita, pick your poison)
  5. Women being prioritized in all kinds of jobs (except physical) because they are less likely to challenge the status quo and are ultimately subservient to those in power or people who they perceive to have power. (See rage pig)
What we are seeing today is female nature being put in the hamster wheel of the current system and is happily chugging along. Never mind if the hamster ends up getting discarded by the system once it becomes too old to turn the wheel or break down when their other biological desire never gets fulfilled - to have a family.

Considering that last desire is a major one, I won't be surprised if the next step of this is people paying women to be surrogate mothers or a business deal to be a wife. Kind of how it worked back then, interestingly enough.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Cowboy Kim, Ingmar Aspergman and SouthernBitchBob
ZazietheBeast said:
Part of the reason why articles like these exist is because everything women are doing is to the benefit of the clown-world system we are in.

While I'm not sure if this outcome is what they were aiming for at the beginning of suffrage, but the effects of the feminization of society is apparent.

  1. Men/boys encouraged to be in touch with their feelings as well as putting women on a pedestal - creating the soyboys
  2. Gossip culture being king as well as consumerism - women are the most likely to buy the stupidest of things due to fee fees.
  3. Women discard 75% of regular men and go for the top 15% men... never mind those 15% of top men will go for someone "newer"
  4. Women voting for every nation wrecking idea there is. Welfare state and open borders until we hit full-on dystopia. (1984, Brave New World, Idiocracy, Mad Max, Battle Angel Alita, pick your poison)
  5. Women being prioritized in all kinds of jobs (except physical) because they are less likely to challenge the status quo and are ultimately subservient to those in power or people who they perceive to have power. (See rage pig)
What we are seeing today is female nature being put in the hamster wheel of the current system and is happily chugging along. Never mind if the hamster ends up getting discarded by the system once it becomes too old to turn the wheel or break down when their other biological desire never gets fulfilled - to have a family.

Considering that last desire is a major one, I won't be surprised if the next step of this is people paying women to be surrogate mothers or a business deal to be a wife. Kind of how it worked back then, interestingly enough.
Click to expand...

Surrogacy is definitely on the rise both because of all the fag couples that want to "have kids" and also because women are terrified of pregnancy and don't want to have to go through it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZazietheBeast
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back