Successful Women & Lonely Men

[Anonymous 0]

Turd flinging monkey just made a vid where he refrenced a study that stated that employers care more about experience than a degree,it is a very well done vid and I think every MGTOW should watch that vid, especially if you’re young.

[DeepInThoughtParticipant 2710]

@abanana, Link to video?

[KeymasterKeymaster]

sidecar wrote:

As for ‘overeducated’ women, what does that mean exactly?

Here’s your basic “over educated” woman:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2417942/Im-single-50-Why-Men-hate-brainier-says-KATE-MULVEY.html

SO over educated, she has a completely distorted view of herself.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[DeepInThoughtParticipant 2710]

Christ, that woman has a head like a robbers dog.

[DeepInThoughtParticipant 2710]

Imagine what they’d write for the Dove ad when these women hit The Wall?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3021912/Your-face-looks-like-bulldog-Beauty-company-Dove-asked-women-write-body-flaws-new-ad-paid-actresses-repeat-comments-them.html

[LiveFreeParticipant 172]

Kate Mulvey is John Kerry in a wig 🙂

For every man truly going his own way, some woman, somewhere, has to pay her own way through life.

[– Deleted on Request –Spectator 936]

Women, on the whole, aren’t attracted to men because of their education alone.  If they find that a man is educated, they automatically want to know how much money he’s earning as a result of it. But, they may also leave him alone because they know that they might not be able to baffle him with their feminist BS unless, of course, he’s either a white knight or a mangina.

 

I speak from experience.  I’ve got 2 master’s degrees and a Ph. D.  Worse  yet, I have a high IQ and I’m a member of Mensa.  If a woman can’t handle that, she’s not worth being with.

 

However, I remember the early days of women’s lib and one of their platforms was that a woman should be valued not so much for her looks but her brains.  Few have ever demonstrated that what they have inside their heads is remotely of the quality that I’d be interested in.  Most of those who did weren’t being entirely honestly with me, either.

 

I  briefly dated a GP fresh out of medical school.  All she wanted was a husband because, in the culture she was born into, she was rapidly approaching the wall.

 

While I was completing my doctorate, I courted a fellow Ph. D. student.  She pursued me first but it didn’t work out because she was still fooling around with a boyfriend I thought was out of the picture.  Since she was a foreigner, I suspect she was interested in me only as a source of an anchor baby and, likely, the means to finance its upbringing.  Meanwhile she could still engage in nookie with her fellow countryman, who she later married, partly because they decided to play house and she got knocked up.

 

 

 

[AntaresParticipant 208]

FrankOne wrote:

As for happiness, http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2006/02/13/are-we-happy-yet/ — statistically, married people are happier, as are religious people and rich people.

I’m not claiming this is inaccurate, but in my experience many married people have no idea if they are happy or not. I’ve seen people who are clearly miserable say they’re happy to be in a relationship. They’re in a relationship so they must be happy(er) because being alone is terrifying, sad and lonely… right?

As Frankone says, you’d only get meaningful answers from people who have done it both ways.

Price is what you pay, value is what you get. -- Ben Graham

[sidecarParticipant 35874]

– Deleted on Request – wrote:

Women, on the whole, aren’t attracted to men because of their education alone.

“Alone”?  More like at all.  Women view education in a man solely as an indicator of wealth or status she might claim, nothing more, and more immediate indicators of wealth will always trump it.  In the dating game, a high school dropout rap star in a Ferrari with spinning rims always beats a tweed wearing triple digit IQ multiple Ph.D. in a Saab 900.

[– Deleted on Request –Spectator 936]

Sidecar:

 

True, but many, if not all, women see men who actually go and get an education as suffering from prolonged adolescence.  (Unfortunately, TV shows such as Big Bang Theory only reinforce that image.)  The exception, of course, is if it’s in an occupation that is perceived to pay well, such as medicine or law.

 

Yeah, it all comes down to:  “What does it do for me?”

 

[Smacktalk73Participant 296]

This is a great survey that shows the statistical selfishness of women, and the unselfishness of men. Males, as they accumulate earning power, take on dependents. Females who have dependents (or are dependent) don’t make much money; when they make money, they cast off those supporting them, and keep the money for themselves. The story doesn’t focus on that, and the headline is slanted to be pro women (as most media is). But the survey makes the point clear: Males who make very little money tend most often live alone. Conversely, males who make a lot of money usually tend to live with other people — meaning they support others. On the other hand, women who make little money tend to live with others (thus, getting the support of those around them) — and then, when they make a lot of money, they tend to live alone.

[peterfaParticipant 833]

Prolonged adolescence in men? Ha! Should I go into a rant and dissect? Or should I just point out how silly the idea that women aren’t in prolonged adolescence.

I was once working out in a gym and this old woman actually asks me how to change the weight on  machine. I pointed to the little rod and told her how to do it. She expected me to actually do it. This was way back in the day before I knew anything. Talk about adolescence.

A lot of women, even older women dedicated themselves to uselessness and let the man “take charge.” She’d always let him drive, do this and that. Then she remained helpless for the rest of her life.

An adult fixes his or her problems and only gets help if the burden is too much.

What about sleeping with some jerk who treats you like crap, having his baby and crying when he disappears? Then damseling to other men, “He was a jerk.” Well, what about all the nice guys you used for free dinners who proved to treat you well? Take responsibility for your stupid life. You screwed your life up, now you deal with it.

How is it not prolonged adolescence to constantly claim that life is so unfair because of this or that, that you need handouts from the government?

[– Deleted on Request –Spectator 936]

Pascal:

 

I willingly do things for seniors.  I’ve seen my parents grow old and I’ve seen how, sometimes, even simple tasks were difficult for them.

 

Younger women, however, are on their own.  If they use situations like you described to flirt with me, they’re doing a lousy job.  If, however, they think they’re going to get a free ride, they’re sadly mistaken.

 

[experiencedParticipant]

Pascal said, “Then damseling to other men, “He was a jerk.” ”  Tell her, “Lady please don’t insult me. You obviously find jerks attractive and come to me?” “Who will you go to to say that I’m a jerk?”  The gym is the same as the flat tire scenario. They can hire a professional to “”””help”””” them. That means a trainer, or go wait at the front desk until the salesman has a minute, he’s on the clock.  Course there’s always, “watch and learn” that she could’ve employed silently. Or, “when I’m done with my workout, I’ll be happy to explain it to you, but don’t even think…”

"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."

[FrankOneParticipant 1460]

This is a facsinating thread. Since my original comments I’ve read up more on marriage happiness. There ARE detractors and studies that do track personal happiness over time, e.g. — I found the plot where Happiness rises then drops after a time (honeymoon period) believable. In fact it drops back to cohabitation levels. Keep in mind, even if the 0.1 rise over baseline held, that’s on a scale of 10.0, if it’s linear that’s only 1% happier. I also love the term ‘matrimaniacs’ for those pushing marriage…
Quarter Wave Vertical: A very politically incorrect subject is IQ distributions. At the high end, above 130, there are a lot more men than women, reflected not in the distribution alone, but in MENSA membership. http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx — to me that helps explain why there is no female Tesla, Einstein, Edison, or Newton. Socialization plays a role but so too does this distribution. In my opinion, creativity is equally important to invention but harder to measure. As for smart women, to me they’re a turn-on. I’ve met plenty that were overcertified or overcredentialed but few who were extremely intelligent.
Antares: You bring up a good point, these studies typically measure ‘subjective well being’, nobody wants to say, I’m a dumb*ss for getting married and it’s made me less happy… So that may bias studies… But other than self-measuring, how is one supposed to measure happiness?
ComingInHot: When I graduated in ’93, half of us had no job at graduations (I was one of the jobless). I worked as a lab tech for 6 months until I landed an Enginerding position. It is much, much, much worse now — I know 2008 Enginerding graduates who have never held an Engineering position…. Though I tend to disagree about immigrants — GDP grew during immigration. Of course, now, with government comprising 40% of GDP, is an immigrant consumes a lot of services they tend to be a draw on the economy. Congratulations on the bike & finding a decent job!
Sidecar: I like your description of over-educated, I’d call the Women’s Studies graduate INdoctrinated and UNeducated myself.

Forum didn’t like my URL’s & rejected my message for some reason, but googling 2012041412132705.pdf and every-time-you-hear-that-getting-married-will-make-you-happier-read-this will bring them up.

[sidecarParticipant 35874]

FrankOne wrote:

GDP grew during immigration.

Which doesn’t mean a damn thing with regards to citizen STEM graduates being able to find jobs that justify their education expenses.  GDP is a useful metric for comparing economies between different nations, but is absolutely useless for determining how well a particular country’s economy is serving it’s citizenry.

Of course, now, with government comprising 40% of GDP,

Which only shows how worthless GDP is as a metric, because governments don’t actually produce anything.  They are net wealth consumers.

[FrankOneParticipant 1460]

GDP grew during immigration.

Sidecar writes: ‘Which doesn’t mean a damn thing with regards to citizen STEM graduates being able to find jobs that justify their education expenses.  GDP is a useful metric for comparing economies between different nations, but is absolutely useless for determining how well a particular country’s economy is serving it’s citizenry.’

Some STEM graduates can’t find good jobs, just as graduates in other majors can’t.  Education expenses rise in part due to Big Government giving out low interest loans and grants.  Just as health care costs have paradoxically RISEN greatly due to insurance; 80 years ago hospitals posted rates, for, say, child delivery.  There is more competition if you’re paying for something out of pocket.  What do you care if a doctor charges a fortune as long as insurance covers it?  Granted, when I graduated in 1993, my tuition was maybe 20-25% of what students pay now, and I could graduate without debt… Virtually impossible now.  Not really paradoxical — subsidize something and get more of it.

My point about GDP growing as the West was settled and during waves of immigration, was that economics isn’t a zero sum game.  Let’s say a large number of Indian engineers are allowed to come in.  Salaries may drop but that may also mean companies can produce their products for less so you pay less and your cost of living is reduced.  The Indians will need to buy houses, cars, food,  use services, etc creating consumption.  Maybe we should limit the number of people who can enter Engineering per year?  That will help my salary but isn’t good for the economy.

Inflation-adjusted GDP gives some idea of whether people’s lot is improving or not, and the US’s has been flat for the lower quintiles, for 20 years; only the top two quintiles improved. http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Income-Distribution.php

Of course, now, with government comprising 40% of GDP,

Sidecar writes ‘Which only shows how worthless GDP is as a metric, because governments don’t actually produce anything.  They are net wealth consumers.’

Absolutely — I would argue Big Government is a growth destroyers, but ultimately too, a wealth destroyer.  Not only do government workers require taxes to support, but we lose the value they WOULD have added to the economy if employed in the private sector.  Actually, % of total GDP is a good indication of how many extra years I’ll need to work vs if government comprised, say, 10% of GDP.  If I was taxed at 10%, I’d probably be able to retire at 35.. Or my investments and purchases would fuel true job creation.  So I would disagree with the first statement — GDP is a useful metric, when inflation adjusted, and especially, % of GDP expended on government and transfer payments, also a useful metric of economic efficiency.  If government were an efficient allocator of resources, then economic growth in the USSR and China would have been staggering in the 1950’s and 1960’s orchestrated by brilliant planners.  Of course it didn’t go down that way.  I tend to favor 5-10% of GDP, that is anarcho-capitalist levels.  Of course, over-regulation also destroys growth too.

 

[KingOfTheSeaParticipant 1270]

– Deleted on Request – wrote:

I’ve got 2 master’s degrees and a Ph. D. Worse yet, I have a high IQ and I’m a member of Mensa. If a woman can’t handle that, she’s not worth being with.

Damn, son.

However, I remember the early days of women’s lib and one of their platforms was that a woman should be valued not so much for her looks but her brains. Few have ever demonstrated that what they have inside their heads is remotely of the quality that I’d be interested in.

I don’t know how many of you have read the Book of Pook, but I love what he said about this. To paraphrase: Feminists scream all the time “Love me for my brain, not my body!” but ignore the white knights/blue pills/manginas that are compliant and smart like they want because they’re not 6’2″ gods with abs like a cheese grater.

[Solid SnakeParticipant 255]

Went to an accountant today to go through the fine details of setting up a business with a partner (not as in relationship partner, business partner).

Found out the family court can override any company structure (company is its own entity in law) in place to limit liability, so say if my business partner gets married and it goes south, the family court can come after his half of the business and chase him personally regardless.

Where as if we got sued by another company they wouldn’t be able to come after us personally they would go against the company.

Thats pretty f~~~ed up how the family court has the power to do that.

[MikeParticipant 0]

Anonymous wrote:

“Men who live alone are also far less likely to want to continue living solo.” Ha Ha HA HA, what a crock of s~~~! I love being alone, wouldn’t have it any other way! It’s just more feminist propaganda to help them feel better about their endless loneliness. Men live much fuller lives alone than women.

It’s not a crock of s~~~, it actually makes perfect sense.  I’ll explain, but first let me fix the article:

“Men who live alone are also far less likely to want to continue living solo, compared to men living with women who are more likely to want to become solo.”

Sure, you want to stay solo.  Me too.  Statistically, there are a bunch of solo men wishing they had a live in gf/room mate with benefits/wife/whatever – these are the low income/beta blue pill AFCs who haven’t dated enough to realise that being solo is better.  Meanwhile there are a lot of men living with women thinking OMFG I need to live by myself, red pill candidates.  So, yeah, the article put a feminist spin on the data but nonetheless I see the truth behind the statement.

[Author]

Posts