Tagged: Online Dating
This topic contains 52 replies, has 43 voices, and was last updated by 
Anonymous 2 years, 3 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
You pitty the sucker that ended up with this narcissistic arsehole.
I wonder if the sucker knew how he had been ‘selected’, that she was giving this presentation to all those equally deluded, whooping and hollering ‘Bridget Jones’ types and the grinning wally bozos that sat obediently in the crowd? I wonder how much they paid to this listen to this crap? It defies belief how any self-respecting man could sit there listening to it and nodding their head like an obedient dog? I found that quite puke making…It is so unspeakably shallow and really says much about her as a person…me me me me me…myself and I…me me me me me …and unfortunately a lot about the desperate sucker who got her up the duff.
You have to question what the sucker has got out of this relations~~~? …he’s certainly not got a looker (either post or now), he’s got a know-all (yet no nothing) narcissist, a pen pushing number cruncher, full of her own importance and a very catfish devious and highly manipulative c~~~. I bet they don’t communicate as equals, the sucker will be controlled from morning to night, he’ll just be seen as an accessory like the new bag that she bought with the sucker’s money, he’ll just be a provider and a fetch and carrier. He has to be ‘total devoted’ to her…how about allowing him the space, time and freedom to grow as a man…?This will be the order in the…no re-phrase…’her’ house…
1. Her
2. Her Child
3. Her Parents
4. Her Pets
5. Her Friends
6. Her Work colleagues
7. The Sucker….from what I can see…the sucker has got a huge amount of heartache and earache ahead of him. One day he’ll wake up and understand he’s
been a complete fool to be selected by this t~~~ and yet another one of her bollocks ‘stats’. You have to pity him…the fool. There really is one born every minute.I think ‘Steve’ the free lunch man played her at her own game. You could hear the bitterness as she was suckered by that chad…
Anonymous11I had to quit watching after she stated “What’s wrong with me?”.
It has been reported on another thread in this forum that both online dating companies and nightclubs are losing money due to their business model of treating their paying customers, men, like s~~~, and treating those that are there for free, women, like spoiled princesses.
Women believe that magic thinking creates everything. From relationships to the space shuttle. I think that’s thier basis for trying to control how everyone thinks around them.
It’s also from my observation why they’re so easily manipulated by con artists.
They’ll all sit prim and proper usually in front of a corrupt man who says think magical thoughts and a BMW will fall into your lap from the sky. It’ll only cost your husband $29.95.Aroun 10 years ago I saw a movie, I can’t remember the name. In it some slick con talks to an old lady, she responds “well I’ll have to wait till my son get’s home to make the decision.”
That’s always stick with me. A few generations ago women knew they were easily fooled. So thier husbands or adult sons would always make the big decisions. As far as I can observe those ladies didn’t have any problems with that type of arrangement.
Now.in cinema she’d be portrayed as that Angela Landsbury, seeing through the con. Then conning the con man. You go gurll. Tee hee.
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. --Sun Tsu
“True love will find you when you least expect it”.
In every goddam example of female “guest speakers” , seminars, lecturing bitches on TV talk shows, self-help books, female relations~~~ “experts” and even in song lyrics… they always say exactly the same stupid s~~~:
“…..love will find you….”.In my lifetime, I’d say ‘love has found me’ once or twice. And it always a bad sign. I’m not knocking love, just say that if love is acquired by luck and not by logical thought about what makes a good beneficial relationship, they you’re f~~~ed.
Seriously, it’s amazingly stupid thinking. This why women end up in relationships with the worst of men, knowing how s~~~ty these men were when they got into it. “But we love each other!”…not excuse for utter stupidity. It’s why good men fall for she-beasts. It’s just dumb. And I’ve been there and done that.
Again, I’m not even knocking relationships. A good solid relationship is based on commonalities, respect and working at the relationship. Setting solid boundaries…not making excuses for the other’s s~~~ty behavior. This is why arraigned marriages will often work while “marrying for love” will often fail. No one goes into arraigned marriage without logically considering the character of their future spouse and an understand that it’s not about how they feel at that particular moment.
Notice how you fall into a relationship…yet you build friendships.
Ok. Then do it.
You have to question what the sucker has got out of this relations~~~? …he’s certainly not got a looker (either post or now), he’s got a know-all (yet no nothing) narcissist, a pen pushing number cruncher, full of her own importance and a very catfish devious and highly manipulative c~~~.
Great post! I do indeed question this.
hey guys, those ugly fat bro’s need pussy too.
on a serious note, this bitch is thinking too hard. See, her grandmother gave her that advice to just kinda go with the flow and fall in love when you least expect it, because her grandmother was raised in a time where most women weren’t absolute f~~~ing idiots like they are today. People 60 years ago had no issue finding love because you didn’t have women who claimed independence. They agreed to social norms and landing a guy who takes care of them would make them feel lucky and fortunate to be with that guy. Because of that, they help clean the house, raise the kids, etc…
If you’re married to the modern woman, just wait until she decides she’s too good to help at all, and the moment you expect her to help out she will leave you and find a guy who’s willing to do anything for her so she doesn’t have to do s~~~.
You get what you put in. Unless, of course, you’re dealing with a narcissist…
her grandmother gave her that advice to just kinda go with the flow and fall in love when you least expect it, because her grandmother was raised in a time where most women weren’t absolute f~~~ing idiots like they are today. People 60 years ago had no issue finding love because you didn’t have women who claimed independence.
Unfortunately for them, today’s laydeez want all the authority and none of the responsibility.
Men instinctively Know that being in any position of higher authority involves by definition, higher responsibility. There are people that depend on you.
Women, on the other hand, desire to be “queen for a lifetime”; to live in a castle, to dress expensively, to have everyone kissing their asses, but that isn’t how life works, without the legal system hell bent on destroying men. That being reality, we leave. No goodbyes, etc. We’ re simply gone from their skewed system of sovereignty.
"It seems like there's times a body gets struck down so low, there ain't a power on earth that can ever bring him up again. Seems like something inside dies so he don't even want to get up again. But he does."
When did TED talks turn into C~~~ talks?
Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why this video has comments disabled. I could only imagine what beta male gets roped into a marriage with this hag.
Yeah it is a trend that I have begin to notice. Women want all the “privileges” of being a man, yet they don’t want any of the responsibility. In the modern day, women have hardly any culpability. They simply haven’t learned the old cliche, that you can’t always have your cake and eat it too. Well some of these landwhales eat too much damn cake, but I digress
Fuck bitches... literally and metaphorically
High standards… nothing to offer…… Sounds great! Feel for the guy though. Must have been lonely.
-Cheers mate.
Anonymous1It’s interesting to see almost all the male in the audience. They shot looks of distates and probably puked in their mouth so many time. Trapped. I hope that’s their red pill moment.
And oh my this ‘lady’. She’s every reason men went their own way. Hypoclit, entitled, and hamster wheels. Wow such a catch.
I’ve already had two chicks 10x hotter than her, and they nearly threw themselves at me. When they became tiresome, I kicked them to the curb. So some SIMP wants to live their whole life with that? HAHAHAHAHAH!
Sovereignty above all else.
Well being overweight, looking ten years older than your actual age and insisting on a tiny, exclusive, religious minority may be problematic.
I foresee a lonely future for her.
Here is a video by a female about how she “hacked” online dating.
<iframe width=”500″ height=”281″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/d6wG_sAdP0U?feature=oembed” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>
Here are a few things I noticed, courtesy of the red pill:
1) Her stated motivation for finding someone was not to have a companion for life, someone to talk to, or sleep with. Her motivation, as she puts it, was that she saw other women in her family having children. Her “timeline” ends with a child. She ends her “success” story with a photo of her child.
2) Although she does not tell us all of her 75 criteria, you can freeze frame to see some of the ones she wrote on the screen. Two are that the man must always be 20 pounds heavier than her and that he must be a certain height in case she wears heals. In other words, she not just being superficial in the sense of “I’d like to enjoy looking at you.” Worse, she wants to man to be a prop so that she always looks good next to him IN THE EYES OF OTHERS. Once again, the man isn’t important…it’s what he does for her.
3) Her #2 criteria is “Be very good with money. . . Make it work for us.” I think we know what that means.
4) Her #3 criteria is “Career must be important but not all consuming (like me).” I’m not sure what the “like me” means. Either she means that she makes her work all consuming, in which case she is a hypocrite and is admitting that she will not be there for the man. Or she means that she herself must be all consuming, which is control-freak stuff.
5) She says that she is only attracted to 1 in 10 men, yet she is hardly in the top 10% of looks. (Not that she’d get a pass for being better looking, but at least it wouldn’t seem so hypocritical).
Did any of you notice anything else?
1) True that is the only motivation she stated, nothing wrong with being primarily focused on kids, at least she is honest about it which is more than can be said for most women.
2) True enough, although the traits you mention are on her “secondary traits” list, and only worth half as many points as the primary traits. Still, some of those traits are very narcissistic, particularly the “entirely devoted to me” trait.
3) Do we?
4) Neither, she is saying that her career is important to her but it doesn’t consume her life, and she wants the same in a partner. I know this because I watched the entire video, and she explains this word for word.
5) She says she is only likely to be attracted to 10% of men, she didn’t specify that these must be the objective top 10% of men. There is an objective scale of attractiveness sure, but subjectivity can vary wildly. Otherwise how the hell would we explain chubby chasers?
In any case I agree that the man she ended up with made a rather “noble” (read incredibly stupid) sacrifice or he is in a stark minority of very odd subjective taste, we don’t know all the details of his income or financial situation, but if he scored a 1050 then we can assume that he probably has more to offer than she does, and yet he settled.
I really don’t get it, but as I said subjectivity must be taken into consideration to some extent. The real question is why are men as a group more willing to settle for less these days than women are? Even when men risk far more in a ltr/marriage?1) True that is the only motivation she stated, nothing wrong with being primarily focused on kids, at least she is honest about it which is more than can be said for most women.
It’s easy to be honest about it after the fact. The question is whether she told the guy he was just a means to an end beforehand.
2) True enough, although the traits you mention are on her “secondary traits” list, and only worth half as many points as the primary traits. Still, some of those traits are very narcissistic, particularly the “entirely devoted to me” trait.
Why are there narcissistic traits on any part of her “list” secondary or otherwise? It’s not a good thing.
4) Neither, she is saying that her career is important to her but it doesn’t consume her life, and she wants the same in a partner. I know this because I watched the entire video, and she explains this word for word.
Why does his career have to be “important” to him? What if it’s just important to him that he make enough money to enjoy life?
5) She says she is only likely to be attracted to 10% of men, she didn’t specify that these must be the objective top 10% of men. There is an objective scale of attractiveness sure, but subjectivity can vary wildly. Otherwise how the hell would we explain chubby chasers?
I think the comments she makes about height tell us she uses the same standards as most women. But that’s beside the point anyway. If a man says he’s attracted to only 10% of women, do you think women aren’t going to call him names and shout him down? Her admission is an interesting revelation when one considers the Blue Pill message that men are the superficial gender and women aren’t.
The real question is why are men as a group more willing to settle for less these days than women are?
Well, if you agree that women’s expectations are unreasonable, then the answer is that men have reasonable expectations and therefore will settle for less than someone with unreasonable expectations. If you think women’s expectations for men are reasonable, then you have to ask yourself how many women could meet the same expectations themselves? If you think very few, then men have to choose between going MGTOW or settling for less (Because they see it as the only way to achieve a family, have sex, or falsely buy the premise sold to them by the Cathedral that marriage is the only path to happiness). If you think many women can meet those expectations, then I guess there is no need to go your own way, and you can easily find a great woman and enjoy your life together.
It’s easy to be honest about it after the fact. The question is whether she told the guy he was just a means to an end beforehand.
Fair enough
Why are there narcissistic traits on any part of her “list” secondary or otherwise? It’s not a good thing.
Fair enough
Why does his career have to be “important” to him? What if it’s just important to him that he make enough money to enjoy life?
Then he should probably be looking elsewhere, she has every right to seek someone with a certain level of financial security when her goal is to have a child. It’s a free country.
I think the comments she makes about height tell us she uses the same standards as most women. But that’s beside the point anyway. If a man says he’s attracted to only 10% of women, do you think women aren’t going to call him names and shout him down? Her admission is an interesting revelation when one considers the Blue Pill message that men are the superficial gender and women aren’t.
Certainly some women will, though I can’t say what that percentage might be anymore than you can. Odds are many women would keep their disapproval to themselves, or perhaps discuss it anonymously on a forum of some sort, kind of like what we are doing here.
Some percentage of women probably just don’t care, or possess the self reflection to recognize their own discriminatory choice in partners.Well, if you agree that women’s expectations are unreasonable, then the answer is that men have reasonable expectations and therefore will settle for less than someone with unreasonable expectations. If you think women’s expectations for men are reasonable, then you have to ask yourself how many women could meet the same expectations themselves? If you think very few, then men have to choose between going MGTOW or settling for less (Because they see it as the only way to achieve a family, have sex, or falsely buy the premise sold to them by the Cathedral that marriage is the only path to happiness). If you think many women can meet those expectations, then I guess there is no need to go your own way, and you can easily find a great woman and enjoy your life together.
Fair enough.
You’ve forgotten/avoided providing clarification on #3. Pretend I’m just really new to the red pill/mgtow and enlighten me.
If I have to “pretend” that you don’t know the answer, that means you already know the answer and are commanding me to perform for your amusement. If you really don’t know the answer, then I’m not “pretending” you don’t know it, in which case your command makes no sense. Thus, there is a lack of honesty behind your command, in addition to a lack of civility in your tone. There are polite ways to ask questions and make requests, and then there is what you wrote. Also, I found your lack of respect for Keymaster on another thread disturbing. Keymaster is far smarter than you, harder-working, and has done far more good for this world than you ever will.
I will briefly answer not for you but for those who might later read this forum.
Yes, it is reasonable for a person contemplating a family to expect to other to pull their weight financially. However, I’ve seen too many times that women marry with the contemplation of a sizable financial boost to obtain a “higher” lifestyle that goes beyond was is necessary to “support a family,” whereas I don’t know too many (if any) men who hold the same expectation. At least among professionals, it is the man who is expected to do most of the work. If the woman decides to work less, she is a traditional family person. If the man decides to work less, he’s a bum. In too many marriages, there is “her money” and “our money,” but there is no “his money.” There is an article on this website that specifically talks about wage slavery that explains a lot of this better than I can in my few minutes of spare time. When I heard her talk about him making money work for us, it all came to mind. Either I can take her literally, or I decode her words by recognizing a pattern of behavior. Having the red pill mindset means doing the latter. If your experience suggests otherwise, follow your own mind. I wouldn’t risk my future on it and I don’t think anyone else on here would either.Saying “it’s a free country” could be the answer or non-answer to everything. Yes, this woman, as all people, has a legal right to have any priorities she chooses. I would never seek to take that freedom away. Unfortunately, she also has a legal right to extract resources from an ex-husband even if she cheats on him and walks out. Her rights aside, men are given a lot of misinformation by society. The benefit of this forum is that we learn from each other so that when we see a video like this, we can notice the realities that would otherwise be obscured by the fog of misinformation. I suspect that’s why this thread has become highlighted by the website management.
Case in point, let’s go back to the guy who married her. One has to conclude that: 1) He had no idea that she had such a narcissistic view of relationships or 2) He knew exactly what she was like but decided to marry her anyway. If it is #1, then he would have benefitted from having the collective wisdom of the red pill viewpoint so that he could see the patterns that would have informed him of her true nature before he got married. If it is #2, then he probably was brainwashed by expectations that he should devote his life to trying to please a woman. In that case, he would benefit from hearing a different perspective…the MGTOW perspective.
Comments disabled.
That tells me everything.
Fuck this planet.- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
