Have any of you given up on women?

Parmesan

Kingfisher
Other Christian
I'm happy to see this written here, since it resonates very well with my own experiences. Much of my youth was spent with sinful, vain, and materialistic pursuits, and I invested little into my own skills, ethics, and faith.

As a late-bloomer, I did not learn to use common hand tools or cut grass, let alone garden, until within the last 3-4 years. I was a slovenly NEET for a long time, and now I'm too stunted to talk to women, or even try. For now, at least.
And it's entirely my fault for being so nonchalant in the first place.

I like to tell my younger brother, who is still in his early 20s, not to squander those years -- sadly, it seems it's a part of our culture to be ruthlessly idle, and you know what is (or used to be) said about idle hands.
What I realized, being raised by a single mother, is that young men are raised to live like women. Women age 16 - 25 IS the age to go have a but of fun, and maximize your social exposure, for obvious reasons. For men, these are your lowest value adult years, and youthful indulgences should probably be kept to a one night a week type of thing. Most men should pretty much be exclusively be honing themselves, both persoanlly and career wise well into their 20s.

I’m in my late 30s, and feel incredibly robbed from the misguided pleasure seeking I wasted the entirety of my 20s doing. I wasn’t much if a RVF 1.0er, but I was just general hanging out with friends, going to bars, flying to Miami for a 3 day weekend, etc. I don’t even really remember most of my adventures, not because of drugs or alcohol, but the big picture is that it was all just a waste of time and potential. I ultimately have myself to blame, but our culture is completely backwards in terms of how we assume men should grow and prosper.

My generation also grew up the “experiences over material” mantra, and once again, that is female paradigm. A woman with worldly experiences and exciting hobbies will help put her in the company of higher value men, and engage said men. A man can have those things, but unless you are a starving artist heartthrob or surfer Chad type, you NEED a productive purpose both for your own sanity and the attraction of a decent woman.
 
Last edited:

No-Designation Man

Kingfisher
Other Christian
At the same time most young men in their 20's lack any type of masculinity or work ethic, can't change a tire on a car or operate a lawn mower, and are addicted to porn.


I'm happily married with young children in my 30's, but my observation is the generation just behind me has little to no interest in commitment, pride in oneself, the responsibility which comes with marriage and raising kids, nor a real work ethic. They are going to be real miserable in 10 years.

...

So if you're in your early 20's and do little beyond gaming and watching porn, or you're an insta ho in your early 20's most interested in likes, then this generation doesn't have much hope.

Of course that creates massive opportunity for those that get it as much of this generation will not be employable.
I agree with everything you say here, but is the 'new' permeating attititude causing the problem, or a result if it?

Remember that the guarantees of life that were waiting for men of the past no longer exist.

There has to actually be rewards waiting for men, to incite motivation; "be responsible simply because you should" isn't going to cut it.

Not sure how Stardusk is viewed around here. As an atheist, he will never offer the solution to all of this, but his two latest videos (10 mins each) explain the problem better than I can. The comment streams are incredible - so many hyper-intelligent, completly lost, men.
 
Last edited:

Arcite

Sparrow
I'm curious how you got to this opinion. Are you going off anecdotal evidence? Did this happen to you or many of your friends during your 20s? Several years of pounding the pavement rejecting or getting dozens/hundreds of rejections per year? Seriously asking.

It seems to be a common opinion on this thread, and I don't even disagree that there are general problems with women right now, but I also don't see this being the attitude of someone a woman would want to start a family with. Maybe that's the problem...

Seems to me that doing everything you said would have any good girl in 30 miles circling you like a shark.

Population density these days, I'd guess there are probably dozens of eligible women where you live. And doing that stuff would allow you to move to a place with higher numbers...and you only need one.
My own experience is perhaps unusual. In my twenties I was a very shy conservative Christian who was easily intimidated by the secular world. I wouldn't have dreamed of even trying to go out to bars and clubs and fornicate, but I wasn't making a realistic effort to find a Christian wife either, because I was totally consumed by oneitis for this girl I'd met at a Bible study and thus was completely uninterested in even taking any opportunities or putting myself in situations where I might meet other girls.

Maybe my perspective is skewed, maybe it's sampling bias, but that's what I see among the younger generation today. I also have to say that in my early thirties, I was part of a large, active young adults church group, and the pickin's there were slim (in terms of actually attractive, slender girls looking to settle down.) In the conservative Christian subculture, the good ones get taken in college.

While we're at it, though, I also call BS on this idea that young women today are desperate for decent men and are going to flock to older masculine men because millenial/Gen Z men are all soyboys. I have no doubt soyboys exist, but every time I pass through the "hip" areas of my city where the twentysomethings go to "go out," I see no shortage of hot young girls with Chads their own age, square-jawed guys who look like Division I lacrosse players named Brock.

Remember that the guarantees of life that were waiting for men of the past no longer exist.

There has to actually be rewards waiting for men, to incite motivation; "be responsible simply because you should" isn't going to cut it.
When I was a twentysomething virgin whose only desire was to marry a cute twentysomething conservative Christian girl who believed in traditional marriage, I often felt I'd have much, much more motivation in life if I could be assured I was going to achieve that.
 

infowarrior1

Crow
Protestant
While we're at it, though, I also call BS on this idea that young women today are desperate for decent men and are going to flock to older masculine men because millenial/Gen Z men are all soyboys. I have no doubt soyboys exist, but every time I pass through the "hip" areas of my city where the twentysomethings go to "go out," I see no shortage of hot young girls with Chads their own age, square-jawed guys who look like Division I lacrosse players named Brock.


When I was a twentysomething virgin whose only desire was to marry a cute twentysomething conservative Christian girl who believed in traditional marriage, I often felt I'd have much, much more motivation in life if I could be assured I was going to achieve that.

Decent Men and Chad Men isn't mutually exclusive. But as for your situation. All I can recommend is expanding your prospects.

Decent Men like King David was a Chad in his own right.

Work on yourself and pray for help from God. Also this thread is for you if you are still willing:

No point having one-its for any woman who isn't your wife. I have been there and it sucks.

One-its is basically prematurely regarding said woman as already married to you. Not good.
 

infowarrior1

Crow
Protestant
I agree with everything you say here, but is the 'new' permeating attititude causing the problem, or a result if it?

Remember that the guarantees of life that were waiting for men of the past no longer exist.

There has to actually be rewards waiting for men, to incite motivation; "be responsible simply because you should" isn't going to cut it.

Not sure how Stardusk is viewed around here. As an atheist, he will never offer the solution to all of this, but his two latest videos (10 mins each) explain the problem better than I can. The comment streams are incredible - so many hyper-intelligent, completly lost, men.

They are hyper-intelligent. But my attempts to reach them with the Gospel falls flat. I have prayed for Stardusk and the like. So I hope you will join me to in that attempt.
 

Elipe

Pelican
Protestant
When I was a twentysomething virgin whose only desire was to marry a cute twentysomething conservative Christian girl who believed in traditional marriage, I often felt I'd have much, much more motivation in life if I could be assured I was going to achieve that.
It's little wonder the Taliban were so intent on fighting. War brides were the light at the end of the tunnel for them. It's amazing how hard men will fight when they can have the assurance that they'll get something out of it, especially when it's something as fundamentally biological as the desire to have a mate and build a family. It's such little wonder men these days are so unmotivated. The only assurance we are given is that the rat race continues forever and ever, at least until you're too old and used up to do it anymore.

Heck, I'd take living on unemployment welfare over that, especially if unemployment was paying as well as it does today. Little wonder, little wonder.
 

infowarrior1

Crow
Protestant
It's little wonder the Taliban were so intent on fighting. War brides were the light at the end of the tunnel for them. It's amazing how hard men will fight when they can have the assurance that they'll get something out of it, especially when it's something as fundamentally biological as the desire to have a mate and build a family. It's such little wonder men these days are so unmotivated. The only assurance we are given is that the rat race continues forever and ever, at least until you're too old and used up to do it anymore.

Heck, I'd take living on unemployment welfare over that, especially if unemployment was paying as well as it does today. Little wonder, little wonder.

And this is why the ruling Powers of the West hates Male spaces. Men being with Men? Nope must invade women into spaces sanctified for Men only.

Also why Emasculation for Men and Masculinization for women are pushed. This plus the breakdown of sexual morality. And the Judicial system being hijacked by ideologies to destroy families as amply demonstrated by family court injustice and the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence.
 
Last edited:

Cartographer

 
Banned
Gold Member
Decent Men and Chad Men isn't mutually exclusive. But as for your situation. All I can recommend is expanding your prospects.

Decent Men like King David was a Chad in his own right.

Work on yourself and pray for help from God. Also this thread is for you if you are still willing:

No point having one-its for any woman who isn't your wife. I have been there and it sucks.

One-its is basically prematurely regarding said woman as already married to you. Not good.
That's a really good description of oneitis.

I think it is the result of a very self-centered mentality. I've had it too, a few times. It's mentally and physically draining and repels women like a bad smell.

Feeding into an internal demand for what we think we deserve is a gateway to misery and despair. God doesn't owe me a slim, attractive woman and I have failed many times to understand that and probably will again. Sometimes the thought of failing again terrifies me but I get over that when I focus on living a godly life. If you don't spend your energy holding on to your disappointment and anger, the yield is exponential. Not only are you not drained from anger and pain but you have the spare energy to focus on things that lift you up. You can refocus if you try (and ask for help).

Also, most chads are not people anyone would want to switch places with if they knew the reality of their situation. The grass is always greener on the other side and men who have what others covet also have a heavy weight to carry with it.


@Elipe
I'm not sure what you and others here are meaning by "assurance". I get the sense to some it means that we'd live in a society where Sally and Suzie down the block are both leggy blondes who cook and sew and are basically up for grabs when we feel like we're ready. I don't think that world ever existed if that's what you mean, and just wishing for it to exist isn't gonna make it happen.
 

Elipe

Pelican
Protestant
I'm not sure what you and others here are meaning by "assurance". I get the sense to some it means that we'd live in a society where Sally and Suzie down the block are both leggy blondes who cook and sew and are basically up for grabs when we feel like we're ready. I don't think that world ever existed if that's what you mean, and just wishing for it to exist isn't gonna make it happen.
What do you think women did before they were permitted to work in a masculine capacity or go to college? Most women were expected to marry. The few outliers would have been shuttled into a monastery or otherwise religious life path. The expectation for men was likewise that they would become providers for a woman and build a family off of that. Again, unless they were outliers in some form.

Why are you pretending that history before the 1920s didn't exist? And why are you pretending that a healthy society doesn't have any inherent self-interest in promoting marriage and preparing young men and women for propagating the next generation?

Assurance, as we use the word, doesn't mean something like arranged marriage. It means that society tells us: do X and you'll likely get Y. So men do X and a certain, high percentage of men who do X get Y. In this case, X is a prescribed life-path and Y is a stable marriage with children.

But we live in a society that is doing its best to destroy that relationship between following society's prescriptions and bearing the next generation. That is what we mean when we say there is no more assurance. Society's prescriptions no longer reflect an effective method for entering the reproductive pool.

The PUAsphere understood this. They understood that the sexual dynamics of Western society now resembles that of something more like jungle law than a well-ordered civilization. So men started imitating jungle men, and found success whereas generations of men before them were not placed under a similar sexual pressure to behave like jungle men. If you're familiar with how baby boomers seem completely lost on advising the younger generations on courting women, then you'd understand.

The PUAsphere may not have been righteous, but you can't deny that they learned something fundamental that was being intentionally suppressed or hidden.
 

Magnus Stout

Woodpecker
Orthodox
Good discussion.

Some simple takeaways: (1) you can't attract flies with vinegar (negativity is repellent); (2) pedestalizing women is toxic; and (3) the "lucky" person sees possibilities & solutions, rather than problems & limitations.

Not every man should marry. Post 2020 totalitarian coup, I think this is perhaps a hidden blessing for many. Seek God's Will first, remain hopeful (focused on eternal things) and let the chips fall where they may.
 
Last edited:

Cartographer

 
Banned
Gold Member
What do you think women did before they were permitted to work in a masculine capacity or go to college? Most women were expected to marry. The few outliers would have been shuttled into a monastery or otherwise religious life path. The expectation for men was likewise that they would become providers for a woman and build a family off of that. Again, unless they were outliers in some form.

Why are you pretending that history before the 1920s didn't exist? And why are you pretending that a healthy society doesn't have any inherent self-interest in promoting marriage and preparing young men and women for propagating the next generation?

Assurance, as we use the word, doesn't mean something like arranged marriage. It means that society tells us: do X and you'll likely get Y. So men do X and a certain, high percentage of men who do X get Y. In this case, X is a prescribed life-path and Y is a stable marriage with children.

But we live in a society that is doing its best to destroy that relationship between following society's prescriptions and bearing the next generation. That is what we mean when we say there is no more assurance. Society's prescriptions no longer reflect an effective method for entering the reproductive pool.

The PUAsphere understood this. They understood that the sexual dynamics of Western society now resembles that of something more like jungle law than a well-ordered civilization. So men started imitating jungle men, and found success whereas generations of men before them were not placed under a similar sexual pressure to behave like jungle men. If you're familiar with how baby boomers seem completely lost on advising the younger generations on courting women, then you'd understand.

The PUAsphere may not have been righteous, but you can't deny that they learned something fundamental that was being intentionally suppressed or hidden.
I grew up reading 19th century literature so I don't think there wasn't a society where women were expected to marry and be chaste. Emily Post's 1922 Etiquette is a must-read, imo. That doesn't mean it was easy to get married to a good woman, though. And once married, the path forward was no cake walk. Life was hard back then, and often short and uncomfortable too. Just because they didn't have time to sit around navel gazing about their woes on the internet doesn't mean they didn't have the same complaints men have always had. Life is hard now in a different way, and yes it's insidious and horrifying. That's our challenge like the challenge for our ancestors was physical survival.

I know you don't mean arranged marriage, I assumed you meant "do x and get y". That's not and never has been a thing. As many of the married posters have pointed out, it's not like leave it to beaver.

I agree, boomers are shockingly unequipped to raise their children well. That's another thing that proves my point. I know so many boomer parents who are dealing with children committing suicide, dying from drugs, becoming internet whores, a few going trans, or are just plain ungrateful. It may have been easier for them to get married but I don't envy them one bit.

I think most of us got here through the pua or manosphere. I was never into the full-on pua stuff which was pretty gay, but I did plenty of cold-approaching. I appreciate it as having provided some of the answers I was looking for but it also was a springboard for a lot of destructive behavior for me and other guys.
 

Parmesan

Kingfisher
Other Christian
What do you think women did before they were permitted to work in a masculine capacity or go to college? Most women were expected to marry. The few outliers would have been shuttled into a monastery or otherwise religious life path. The expectation for men was likewise that they would become providers for a woman and build a family off of that. Again, unless they were outliers in some form.

Why are you pretending that history before the 1920s didn't exist? And why are you pretending that a healthy society doesn't have any inherent self-interest in promoting marriage and preparing young men and women for propagating the next generation?

Assurance, as we use the word, doesn't mean something like arranged marriage. It means that society tells us: do X and you'll likely get Y. So men do X and a certain, high percentage of men who do X get Y. In this case, X is a prescribed life-path and Y is a stable marriage with children.

But we live in a society that is doing its best to destroy that relationship between following society's prescriptions and bearing the next generation. That is what we mean when we say there is no more assurance. Society's prescriptions no longer reflect an effective method for entering the reproductive pool.

The PUAsphere understood this. They understood that the sexual dynamics of Western society now resembles that of something more like jungle law than a well-ordered civilization. So men started imitating jungle men, and found success whereas generations of men before them were not placed under a similar sexual pressure to behave like jungle men. If you're familiar with how baby boomers seem completely lost on advising the younger generations on courting women, then you'd understand.

The PUAsphere may not have been righteous, but you can't deny that they learned something fundamental that was being intentionally suppressed or hidden.
I know JBP isn't well liked here, but there is a quote where he says something along the lines of: when you remove the cultural influences, you enhance the natural influences. This seems to be where "jungle men" come into play. There probably is some overly rosy views of the past on this forum, but women mostly needed a provider male past high school age until what? 50 years ago or so. For most, there simply wasn't the option of playing the field for even a few years, and certainly not a decade. Having a comfortable lifestyle depended on finding a working man, ideally a rich one of course, but even a lower class one would still suffice if she began feeling desperate. Now, there is no reason for women to settle down at young age. You can stay single and bet on your own career potential to give you an upper-middle class lifestyle, all the while trying to maximize your mate potential by hitting the town 4 nights a week. If all else fails and you get pregnant by accident, the government and likely her parents will give her enough financial support to live a reasonably middle class lifestyle anyhow.. and she can still feed delusions of finding prince charming. If you are an average male making a middle class or lower wage, you pretty much have to play this jungle game with women, because your earnings in their eyes don't represent an upgrade on to their own potential and lifestyle.
 

Thomas More

Hummingbird
What do you think women did before they were permitted to work in a masculine capacity or go to college? Most women were expected to marry. The few outliers would have been shuttled into a monastery or otherwise religious life path. The expectation for men was likewise that they would become providers for a woman and build a family off of that. Again, unless they were outliers in some form.

Why are you pretending that history before the 1920s didn't exist? And why are you pretending that a healthy society doesn't have any inherent self-interest in promoting marriage and preparing young men and women for propagating the next generation?

Assurance, as we use the word, doesn't mean something like arranged marriage. It means that society tells us: do X and you'll likely get Y. So men do X and a certain, high percentage of men who do X get Y. In this case, X is a prescribed life-path and Y is a stable marriage with children.

But we live in a society that is doing its best to destroy that relationship between following society's prescriptions and bearing the next generation. That is what we mean when we say there is no more assurance. Society's prescriptions no longer reflect an effective method for entering the reproductive pool.

The PUAsphere understood this. They understood that the sexual dynamics of Western society now resembles that of something more like jungle law than a well-ordered civilization. So men started imitating jungle men, and found success whereas generations of men before them were not placed under a similar sexual pressure to behave like jungle men. If you're familiar with how baby boomers seem completely lost on advising the younger generations on courting women, then you'd understand.

The PUAsphere may not have been righteous, but you can't deny that they learned something fundamental that was being intentionally suppressed or hidden.
Besides the good points you made, women couldn't have sex without a high likelihood of pregnancy, so unless they were naturally frigid, they were very interested in finding a guy who turned them on, and getting married for love and romance.
 

Cartographer

 
Banned
Gold Member
Besides the good points you made, women couldn't have sex without a high likelihood of pregnancy, so unless they were naturally frigid, they were very interested in finding a guy who turned them on, and getting married for love and romance.
I get why you guys are saying this but I think it's more complicated than that. It's my opinion since I wasn't alive back then either, but women are much more shy and protected by their families back then too. You're making it sound like women were just throwing themselves at dudes, begging to have their babies and that wasn't the case. Women took longer to woo, and it was also common for them to turn down a guy they liked because the guy across the street had more money or their father told them to.

You and elipe are smart dudes, I think but y'all are way off on this one.
 

Blade Runner

Ostrich
Orthodox
What do you think women did before they were permitted to work in a masculine capacity or go to college? Most women were expected to marry. The few outliers would have been shuttled into a monastery or otherwise religious life path. The expectation for men was likewise that they would become providers for a woman and build a family off of that. Again, unless they were outliers in some form.

Why are you pretending that history before the 1920s didn't exist? And why are you pretending that a healthy society doesn't have any inherent self-interest in promoting marriage and preparing young men and women for propagating the next generation?

Assurance, as we use the word, doesn't mean something like arranged marriage. It means that society tells us: do X and you'll likely get Y. So men do X and a certain, high percentage of men who do X get Y. In this case, X is a prescribed life-path and Y is a stable marriage with children.

But we live in a society that is doing its best to destroy that relationship between following society's prescriptions and bearing the next generation. That is what we mean when we say there is no more assurance. Society's prescriptions no longer reflect an effective method for entering the reproductive pool.

The PUAsphere understood this. They understood that the sexual dynamics of Western society now resembles that of something more like jungle law than a well-ordered civilization. So men started imitating jungle men, and found success whereas generations of men before them were not placed under a similar sexual pressure to behave like jungle men. If you're familiar with how baby boomers seem completely lost on advising the younger generations on courting women, then you'd understand.

The PUAsphere may not have been righteous, but you can't deny that they learned something fundamental that was being intentionally suppressed or hidden.
Spot on. Good, relevant points.

Ugly women and lazy guys are the outliers. Everyone else, on average, it works out for in a real civilization, because that's what a civilization is.
 

Blade Runner

Ostrich
Orthodox
Good discussion.

Some simple takeaways: (1) you can't attract flies with vinegar (negativity is repellent); (2) pedestalizing women is toxic; and (3) the "lucky" person sees possibilities & solutions, rather than problems & limitations.

Not every man should marry. Post 2020 totalitarian coup, I think this is perhaps a hidden blessing for many. Seek God's Will first, remain hopeful (focused on eternal things) and let the chips fall where they may.

I think the larger issue is that most of us are just frustrated that the world is such a stupid place and we have the tools to explain why, so we do it here. One thing I've thought more about is that even having kids later in life (or not at all, sadly) might be much preferred as to right now when you see all of these idiot parents failing greatly in the raising of their kids with propaganda school systems, the jab, etc. Raising kids in these times might cause more strife and pain, if you open your mind to it, you can easily see how that might be the case. People forget that having children is a blessing, but frequently you can have retards too if the genes don't cross over right, you don't have many kids overall, etc - and that can bring on even greater challenges. Ones that I'd hope would help form you as a more godly person, but challenges nonetheless.
 

No-Designation Man

Kingfisher
Other Christian
They are hyper-intelligent. But my attempts to reach them with the Gospel falls flat. I have prayed for Stardusk and the like. So I hope you will join me to in that attempt.
I don't know, conclusively, what prevents so many of them from taking the next step in their learning phase. Everything else seems to be figured out to such a superlative analytical degree, but that 'next step' is being stone-walled by something. Unwilling, or unable?

I do wonder if the discouragement so many of them are facing has led to not caring anymore even if true relief was shown to be 100% possible - and I would completely understand, for I was in that frame of mind once myself. When you're that down, not only can you not accept the suggested possibility of something better, you can't even accept anything better if the literal/tangible solution is held out right in front of you. Apparently there is an official spirit-breaking/torture terminology used to induce this specific psychology in it's victims (which escapes me now, and it's not the 'Blackpill' term). 'Please let me die' replaces 'please make things better' - a truly horrid existence.

While I don't like life being reduced to "pill" religions by all these various gurus and grifters, I'll use two of them for the sake of easier explanation with this post:

"Black pill" and "God pill" are almost completely identical; the only difference is the foundation and the subsequent end-result of each one, and how a man ultimately surrenders-to and 'carries his cross' for the 'pill-path' he embarks on.
 

infowarrior1

Crow
Protestant
I don't know, conclusively, what prevents so many of them from taking the next step in their learning phase. Everything else seems to be figured out to such a superlative analytical degree, but that 'next step' is being stone-walled by something. Unwilling, or unable?

I do wonder if the discouragement so many of them are facing has led to not caring anymore even if true relief was shown to be 100% possible - and I would completely understand, for I was in that frame of mind once myself. When you're that down, not only can you not accept the suggested possibility of something better, you can't even accept anything better if the literal/tangible solution is held out right in front of you. Apparently there is an official spirit-breaking/torture terminology used to induce this specific psychology in it's victims (which escapes me now, and it's not the 'Blackpill' term). 'Please let me die' replaces 'please make things better' - a truly horrid existence.

While I don't like life being reduced to "pill" religions by all these various gurus and grifters, I'll use two of them for the sake of easier explanation with this post:

"Black pill" and "God pill" are almost completely identical; the only difference is the foundation and the subsequent end-result of each one, and how a man ultimately surrenders-to and 'carries his cross' for the 'pill-path' he embarks on.

Its also because Youtube keeps deleting my comments for some reason too. So when I try to write a response it gets deleted.
 
Top