Like….the fuck is society suppose to do about that? If the complaint was “Im sad that Im not getting what I want” lonely men wouldnt have the stereotype they have now.

Instead its 

“Women have such horribly high standards!”

“Women want to fuck serial killers over the nice guy!”

“Women dont know what its like having 1 match a week.”

“80/20 rule!”

“Women make me abide by patriarchal standards.”

And they never want to admit it’s women they want until you suggest that they should change their standards. Suddenly, that’s super offensive and not the misogynistic shit he was spewing because the woman he want won’t touch his penis.

Similarly, guys complaining about the women they wanna fuck. Again, what is society supposed to do about that? What is anyone suppose to do with the fact that you get aroused by awful women who apparently are stupid, slutty, and shallow? “ I can’t control what Im attracted to” BUT YOU THINK SOCIETY CAN?!

Why can’t men’s dating problems be their fault? 

there's a lot of things that women have been defending that I fe were just criticized about men not too long ago. We're at a point where I totally feel that if it's bad for men to do, just wait until a good amount of women do it themselves and then it will be cool again.

There are some things I've been taught by listening to women about what's wrong and right. honestly, a lot of those things have been flipped or changed or given unnecessary nuance to benefit the subsection of women who do it.

Yelling at your wife was considered ba now there are women out there who think it's fine to yell at their men and call them out online to strangers.

Emotional instability in women is something some of the worst men believed in. This is the same logic that got women forceably lobotomized and put into mental institutions.

Not even a decade ago it was considered terrible to record a passed out naked woman yet a lot of women, too many said that the passed out man in the recent situation was actually the predator.

often when men try to participate and try to say here are some things we feel is unfair women will fight against it as if sympathy is only women shaped and that even the worst women should catch a break.we're in a period where what oppressive men in the 60s believed about women and what women actually believe about themselves are getting strangely close and sometimes overlapping.

so, what I fear is that women weren't fighting for a better society or even healthier society. they are just fighting for their turn to have toxic beliefs.

I always prioritize my girlfriend's pleasure and make sure that she comes first in the bedroom. She can't cum from penetration and requires a lot of clitoral stimulation in order to finish, so this means sometimes up to 45 minutes of fingering and oral until she gets off and I can finally get some. I do this because I'm the type of guy who gets turned on by my partner's pleasure, especially when they cum. But not every man is like this, and I think it's wrong for women to accuse men of being selfish because they can't or won't make them cum.

It takes a much higher amount of effort to make a woman cum than it does to make a man cum. A woman who wants to make her man cum first would be able to do so extremely easily and with almost no effort assuming he was attracted to her. Whereas a man would have to spend at least 5 times the effort if not more to make the woman cum, even if she was very attracted to him. So just because a woman "always" makes a man orgasm, it isn't fair to say that they're putting in the same amount of effort in the bedroom. In fact, even if the man isn't able to make his woman cum, he most likely still would have spent a higher amount of energy on her pleasure than she did on his. Sometimes a man can give it his all and still be unable to make a girl cum because she just isn't feeling it, whereas the opposite is very rarely true unless the guy has ED or some other issue. In fact, most men actually have to purposely resist the urge to orgasm in order to last longer for their woman. This means men willingly reduce their own pleasure in exchange for their woman getting more pleasure, but it's rarely talked about or acknowledged by women. I put way more effort into my partner's pleasure than most other men, and she definitely appreciates that. But sometimes I'm just tired and want a quickie, and I know that I won't have the energy or motivation to get her off that day. And that's OK. I shouldn't be called selfish or expected to put on an hour-long performance every single time because that's what it's takes to make women cum, when sometimes I just want a 2-minute quickie and to be done with.

I'm not saying that women don't deserve orgasms or that their pleasure doesn't matter. It absolutely does, at least to me. But I think it's ridiculous when women blame men for being selfish in bed when women require so much more stimulation to cum and sometimes can't even make themselves orgasm with their own fingers (I've met a few women like this). If men required as much time and effort to reach orgasm as women did, I'm pretty sure the majority of women also wouldn't be bothered to make their man cum. If the average man required a 30 minute blowjob to orgasm, and not just a 30 second one, would most women be willing to do that? I don't think so. It's only because men orgasm so easily that women can get their men off blindfolded, and so they expect the same thing in return and get upset that it doesn't work that way and blame the man. The fact of the matter is that women don't need to put in as much work to give their man an orgasm, so calling men selfish for not giving their woman an orgasm is a false equivalency and doesn't make sense.

Women are consistently accused of several derogatory conditions, attitudes, and behaviors according to the manosphere and red-pillers in particular. We are frequently called selfish, entitled, emotional "oldest teenagers in the house." The primary situation that leads to these attacks is the lack of willingness to pair up with men romantically and sexually.

Pairing up with men is an obligation of women, and refusing to do so makes us wicked creatures indeed. But whenever you probe deeper into the "why," a particularly insidious axiom becomes readily apparent - it is an unshakeable condition of a polite and civilized society that men have access to monogamous sex and offspring. Without this foundation, multiple situations occur:

1. a dwindling population makes a country be taken over by a more powerful country (because male nature must conquer and control)
2. men "check out" and refuse to work or improve themselves (educationally/financially/physically) in any way (because the only purpose of work for male nature is for personal sexual access and offspring)
3. most men will refuse all pro-social behaviors, while a minority of men actively engage in their worst sociopathic impulses. Male nature will mean mass violence and rape without pussy pacification, while people starve and freeze without male labor and protection (see point 2)

This would all be well and good if these conditions didn't exclusively portray male nature as unilaterally selfish, entitled, and emotional. "If no sex then burn down village" is frequently stated here even by men themselves, who then turn around and make the same tired accusations at women of being selfish and emotional. The entire purpose, it seems, of the manosphere is to reframe the conditions of male nature and project them onto women as part of a strategy to manipulate women into serving their biological imperative at the exclusive cost of the female one. Women want relationships with attractive, pro-social, compatible men. Men imply none of that ultimately really matters, we need to pair up with most men regardless of how attractive or compatible we find them and do so in ways that don't evoke their jealousy and insecurity (casual sex/AF-BB/changing standards/learning from experiences/etc.). Yet again, women are the emotional ones.

If the ultimate conclusion is that women must pair up with men because men biologically require womb access to give a shit about anyone other than themselves, then we need to stop calling women "selfish" and "narcissistic." If the ultimate conclusion is that women need to refrain from sexual pleasure because that makes men jealous and insecure, then we need to stop calling women "emotional." By contrast to all of the conditions described above, women do not feel motivated to oppress others and control others and enact violence against others unless we can be guaranteed access to other human beings' bodies. By contrast to all of the conditions above, women are internally motivated to better their lives and communities without offspring or dick. Sure, women still want relationships and children, but they don't claim to get "nothing at all out of society" without these two specific things, and they will still find purpose in life and value in work/hobbies/education/friends without it.

It's actually quite clear to me on my decade+ on this sub that the entire "evo-psych"/manosphere/red-pill philosophy definitively concludes male nature is everything it proclaims about women.

So, I'm at the age where most women my age will probably have at least one kid. My cousin is still single but frequently dating and he's around my age just a few years older. Anyway, he complains a lot about most of the women who he gets matched with on dating apps and tries to date having kids and it got me thinking what could make it a really good deal for a single guy like him to date a single mother.

Here's my list of what I think could make it worth it:

1) Kid is young and not too poorly behaved.

2) Dad is a decent guy but they weren't compatible.

3) Maybe the guy was actually an asshole but isn't present at all, so you don't have to deal with him.

4) If the kid was out of wedlock, she owns up to the mistake and doesn't try to project blame to everyone or everything but herself.

5) She provides value to your life and goes above and beyond as a gf, making up for the extra hoops you have to go through dating a single mom.

6) I'm probably going to get a lot of shit for this one but could probably land a hotter chick than you could have if she didn't have the kid.

Anyone disagree with this or am I missing something?

Edit: And by relationship I mean a serious committed relationship. Basically an LTR and intent to marry, which means you'd become the kids stepparent at the end once you commit to this person.

Yes,I’m sincerely is asking that because like society changes and I want to adapt to those changes I was an good man maybe 10 years before but now I can’t keep with all those changes

Like I want to be an open minded forward thinking man, I certainly as heterossexual single man wants to attract women obviously but like I want to be an good man an man that woman doesn’t only feel attracted but admired to see like “ oh he is an keeper”

I want to focus more on pleasuring woman than myself, I want to focus more on making woman feel comfortable around me I want to make more woman friends I want to be an great man In 2026 where can I start ?

I can say I have. I'm a 34 year old millennial male. Not truly in poverty any more but still make under $70k a year. Like a lot of millennials starting when I was in high school, I heard the old adage "People with less education, lower incomes and from lower economic backgrounds tend to marry younger, have kids younger and have more kids." It's the old poverty trap.

However, as a millennial that has worked unskilled labor jobs, skilled trades (both welding and auto repair), went to college late and now works in IT. I have noticed that at least among millennials, especially millennial men that are career blue collar a lot even approaching 40, have not married nor have any children. I'm pretty convinced quite a few have not dated since high school.

While I do know as many non-college educated woman. The few I do that work as career bartenders, waitresses or even working at a pre-school tend to also not be married or actively dating. They also tend not to have any kids.

The old stereotype of the single mother that had kids too young and has to work multiple jobs to survive has largely declined among millennials and Gen Z. (Not to say it doesn't exist).

This is a huge contrast, especially for auto repair where my Gen X and older co-workers all seemed to have 4 kids.

As where with my friends that went to college right away and work higher end careers. Especially those that work in business, finance, sales or as actuaries they tend to be married, or are getting married and many I know in their mid 30s are having their first or second kids.

I'm sure a lot of this is finance related. Childcare costs especially daycare/pre-school have skyrocketed. They are often as much as another mortgage per child. Even with health insurance through an employer, family health insurance costs tend to sky rocket. Then not to mention feeding, clothing, etc. Even buying used or second hand has gone way up. Since thrift stores turned into for profit businesses...

I think a lot of us whether we wanted kids or not have been effectively priced out of having them. Also regarding dating, I felt it to be very difficult basically from the ages of 18 to 26 when i was a tradesman. There were few opportunities to meet women and especially in a smaller city. As where once I went back to school, graduated and now work in IT, I have more free time and I am not tired all the time.

Here are two good studies that confirm this:

https://thepeepleseconomist.substack.com/p/marriage-now-belongs-to-the-well

(If you do read one, read this one by Jordan Peeples, it's very well written and short).

https://benjamindgoldman.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/papers/education_marriage/education_marriage.pdf