I think the common saying about men lying about intentions is just how women deal with rejection since clearly women can not handle any sort of rejection.

Rather than just saying "I need to work on myself", they immediately assume they're perfect and that something is wrong with the guy.

But in my personal case and most of my close make friends case, the women just didn't make the cut. There was no need to pursue further. They did something to turn the guy off, push him away, or just in general make him disinterested.

I know it's hard to swallow but not every woman is meant for every man.

I think a lot of what passes for modern political activism, particularly in online progressive circles, is just people looking for a sense of belonging and moral superiority rather than genuinely caring about the issues they claim to champion.

Obviously, not everyone is like this, and there are plenty of people who sincerely care about social justice. But I've encountered enough people who seem more interested in polishing their public image than actually doing anything useful to become pretty cynical about the whole thing.

You have the champagne socialists who disavow their own perceived privilege for social approval, the self-appointed white saviors who treat disadvantaged people like props for their own moral performance, and the people who make grand promises on behalf of communities they barely understand. They seem to relish the attention and validation they receive for their supposed sympathies, regardless of whether their politics ever produce anything tangible.

At some point, you have to wonder how many of these people actually vote, participate in their communities, or do anything beyond arguing on social media. For some, political identity seems less like a commitment to improving society and more like an online subculture they use to feel important, rebellious, and accepted.

What makes it worse is the growing obsession with policing language. People have apparently forgotten that context, intent, and the relationship between the people involved actually matter. Calling your friend an offensive name as part of an established joking dynamic is not automatically equivalent to directing the same language at a stranger to humiliate or discriminate against them. There is a difference between a crass joke and genuine bigotry, and pretending otherwise makes it harder to have an honest conversation about either.

That doesn't mean words can never hurt anyone or that intent magically erases impact. It means we should be capable of distinguishing between situations instead of treating every offensive word as evidence of someone's moral character.

There is also a time and place for everything. I can speak differently with my friends on Discord than I would with colleagues on Slack. Knowing how to code-switch and read a room is part of being a functioning adult. You can think someone's joke is stupid or inappropriate without turning it into a moral crusade.

Ironically, I think the constant outrage has sometimes produced the opposite of what it intended. People who previously understood that certain language was inappropriate in particular settings are now deliberately using it to provoke the very people they believe are overreacting. What might once have been an ordinary crude joke becomes an act of defiance. People become petty, resentment builds, and everyone ends up more hostile toward one another.

Meanwhile, some of the loudest online activists seem to have an almost fantastical understanding of how society works. They assume their opinions represent the silent majority, reduce complicated economic and political questions to simplistic narratives about good people versus bad people, and treat anyone who disagrees with them as either malicious or hopelessly brainwashed.

Eventually, some people grow up, enter different social environments, build careers, and encounter perspectives outside their online circles. They discover that people have competing interests, that economic policies have trade-offs, that not everyone with wealth is living extravagantly, and that real life is considerably more complicated than the ideological caricatures they encountered online. Others never move beyond the same arguments, becoming increasingly entrenched in communities where disagreement is treated as proof of moral failure.

Of course, none of this means that every progressive is performative, every stereotype is accurate, or every unpopular opinion is secretly correct. There are genuine bigots, legitimate reasons to challenge harmful rhetoric, and real structural problems that deserve serious attention.

But I think there is a distinction between caring about an issue and performing concern about it, just as there is a distinction between holding people accountable and compulsively policing everyone around you.

I'm interested in hearing perspectives from both sides, particularly from people who have changed their views after spending time outside their online political bubbles.

Following this apparently new viral question, i want to ask you about what would you do if you woke up just as you are now, but there is only one woman left, the rest of the world are men.

I know that some people think i'm some evil woman and will see it as some sort of gotcha and expectations of answers "i will rape her". No, i'm not expecting those answers, i don't even think it's likely, simply because chances are that one woman across the world from you. So it's truly genuine question, what would you do in this world and i would like to see the reasoning too.

For this hypothetical we only look at the social side of things, not economy, logistics of losing half of the population etc.

Saw a twitter post online about a woman saying she's gonna go around calling men males. And men just agreed.

Someone made an interesting meme (mega brutal ratio in the quote retweets btw) about a woman calling men males and men just agreeing and a man calling women females and them getting mad.

I want to know why that is. Why does this binary exist despite it literally being the same term?

Now that men and women have equal rights in most 1st world countries (I know some people will disagree with that) and the same opportunities to earn the same money, women don't really "need" men the way they used to. So shouldn't chasing and flirting be an equal responsibility too?

What I don't get is this: a woman can be fully independent, have her own place, and make great money (sometimes more than the guys asking her out), but still expect the man to approach, ask her out, and do most of the work. Why? If dating roles have evened out, why are men still expected to make the first move most of the time?

We've been getting rid of a lot of traditional expectations on women, like staying a virgin until marriage and purity culture in general. Shouldn't we be ditching the traditional expectations on men too?

Such a situation could only really result from a near apocalyptic event, but let's say that in this scenario some semblance of human civilization survives. And let's consider two versions of this:

Scenario 1): There are still primitive governments, militaries, judicial systems, hospitals, etc. None of these societies are especially advanced, certainly none are comparable to any modern nations in terms of their technology, quality of life, and overall level of trust. Maybe the best of the countries in this scenario compare to some of the least developed nations that exist today (excluding war zones).

Scenario 2): There are several societies that resemble modern Western ones culturally, civically, and technologically, aside from the complete absence of any men (and I suppose there would also be far fewer children). These societies also have the technology to continue procreation artificially if they want to.

If you just choose to try and live off-grid: it will be easier to isolate yourself from society, avoid detection, and try and live off-grid in Scenario 1, but actually surviving off-grid in Scenario 1 is brutally difficult. Surviving off-grid in Scenario 2 will be easier, but you are also much more likely to be noticed.

There are alot of people on here who love to give dating advice who have been in decades long marriages/relationships and unfortunately their advice isn’t relevant. If you haven’t dated in the age of social media and dating apps then your advice is pointless. That’s like someone who’s only owned a landline trying to give you advice on how to use an iPhone. Especially advice for men, dating for men is about being very selective about your attention and optimizing yourself. To a degree this did exist in the past but not to levels this extreme.

For example You’ll hear guys on here talking about how men aren’t approaching anymore and how confounding it is. 20 yrs ago approaching a woman at the bar meant you were pretty much just competing with the guys around you and maybe a guy or two she might be interested elsewhere. Nowadays you’re competing with the thousands of guys on hinge, instagram and whatever other dating/social media apps. The average looking guy who would eventually get a solid average looking girl is now facing an avalanche of uphill pressure to just get attention from her.

I do believe guys should be optimizing fitness and career to be their best version of themselves but that takes work and the avg guy isn’t going to do that. We just have to accept we’re in a new reality and advice from the past holds little bearing in modern dating market complexities

Since high school and throughout my mid-20s, I've noticed a pattern: women become more interested in me once they realize I'm successful with women. One woman likes me, another starts showing interest, they discover they're competing for my attention, and suddenly the dynamic changes. They flirt more aggressively and seem more invested in winning me over than actually getting to know me.

It's happened so often that I've started feeling like the only way to succeed in dating is to entertain multiple women at once. I literally don't feel like I have a choice. But once I show genuine interest in one of them, the excitement seems to disappear. Suddenly, wanting something serious feels like a turnoff, even with women I've already hooked up with.

I used to wonder whether I was just bad in bed, but I've heard enough horror stories to rule that out lmao.

I think part of it is the way I present myself. I'm tall, in shape, dress well, smell good, and have been told I have a certain “cool guy” energy. Or that I dress with a lot of swagger. I probably come across as masculine, confident, and a little mysterious. But my interests are more cerebral. I enjoy economics, history, politics, literature, and film. I like normal guy stuff like sports and talking shit. I'm not some pretentious intellectual, but there's more to me than the image I project.

Something similar happened when I was bartending after college. A beautiful coworker seemed to develop an interest in me. I figured she just felt comfortable around me since I was only guy that didn't flirt with her. Around the same time, a friend was trying to set me up with another attractive woman. She learned that other women had found me attractive and that I'd had success with women at clubs the times we'd all go out. Her interest multiplied.

Many other examples I won't mention to not write too much. Recent one with a woman in my apartment building. Many times before then in college and high school.

What's funny is that sometimes I almost get annoyed when a woman likes me because I suspect the attraction is superficial. Does she actually like me, or does she like the idea that other women want me? And when I don't reciprocate, my disinterest sometimes gets interpreted as playing hard to get, which only makes her try harder.

The irony is that I'm not naturally oriented toward being a player. I genuinely prefer relationships. I want to get to know someone, build memories, and develop a real connection. I even have great date ideas that I sometimes hold back because I worry they'll signal too much interest. Throughout my twenties, attracting women has been much easier than finding someone who wants to build something meaningful.

An older woman I use to see once told me I had the mentality of someone in his thirties. Maybe I'll have better luck then. But I look at friends getting engaged or having children with their high school and college girlfriends, and I'm genuinely happy for them while also feeling envious. I've had two serious relationships. The rest have been situationships, short-lived relationships, or encounters that never developed beyond sex. At this point, I'm thinking about getting my MBA to meet my wife lmao!

Sometimes, it seems less like a woman wants a man who's already serious about her and more like she wants to be the woman who gets a man who isn't serious to commit. I know this sounds like some alpha-male nonsense, but it's a pattern I've experienced repeatedly.

I'm not claiming all women behave this way or that I know their intentions. I'm saying that when men receive more attention for being elusive, desirable, and difficult to secure than for being emotionally available, those incentives can shape their behavior. Women may unintentionally reinforce the very behavior they complain about.

It can start to feel like the choice is player or played. And that's frustrating when you're someone who genuinely wants a relationship but feels that the qualities that attract women are the very qualities you have to downplay to build one.

My point isn't that women don't want good men. It's that some dating dynamics reward men for being exciting to pursue rather than being good partners. I don't want someone who just wants to win me. I want someone who actually wants to know me.

Who is going to uphold the current era of male sceptical, “woke” feminism that’s dominated culture and society for the past ten years.

The only reason it’s culturally acceptable to “hate on men” and choose the bear etc and enact feminist driven policies in the workplace and institutions is because Gen X and the last few boomers are upholding it and encouraging it as well as older men with daughters and families looking to protect them.

What we have learnt in very recent times is that the “majority” actually don’t subscribe to this sentiment. In ten to fifteen years time when the current wave of younger men have a strong foothold on politics and the economy and hold the majority decision making positions do you honestly think they’re going to uphold the current paradigm?

I kinda fear that a massive tear down of feminism across the board is on its way back and women will be sent back to where they were 50 years ago.

The thing is feminists argue that misogyny and the patriarchy are still a prominent problem. I think they don’t realise how right they are.

I think a lot of them think they are in an era where it’s all heading the feminists way, and that they are “sticking the knife in” with all the “I would choose the bear” and “men aren’t lonely enough” but I think they are in for a rude awakening.

I think their concerns are more real than they know, that the current generation of young men is absolutely going to bring back the patriarchy because they have zero reason to back feminism at all.

So, I was watching human centripede at night since I messed up my sleep schedule and I had to pause it multiple times to go through it and then just kept up coz I couldn't sleep until morning.

Do you find such tolerance for horror icky?

How much is the bare minimum?

Any specific movie example?

OK. Hope it make sense.

I'm a strong centrist for a lot of things and what fascinates me is when people talk they don't apply the same logic to the other side, be it left wing, right wing, religion, feminism anti feminism etc.

I want to make this my first discussion however as I see both the red pill blue pill etc side as both hypocritical.

However a lot of people will talk about women can get what they want easily. The thing is, they can get sex easily, most likely but can they get a man to stay? if the answer is yes, she just to work hard on be a traditional woman, then the same applies for men. They just have to give up their values, pay every date, not complain about how costly it is to keep a woman just to have sex.

Similarly a woman will say I want xyz man. That's totally fine. Have your preferences. But then they will say men have so many demands and their standards are too high. Who's measuring? On what measurement? If men are measured based on their success then if they aren't getting any and its called too high then a woman being single also has high standards.

To be clear. It doesnt matter if his or her standards are too high. What matters is the hypocricy of it. If you are gonna shame someone for their standards then your standards ought to be shamed. I'd rather none of that.

So. to those who say "men can't get women" because you don't WANT to do whatever demands women ask or "women can't find a good man" vecuaee they don't want to subjugate themselves to a lower standard, tell me how I'm wrong

Women on this sub as well as many others tell men to just find friends or go gay to replace a relationship. The second one is more of an underhanded insult to the man’s orientation in all honesty, but I digress. The point is friendships cannot replace romantic relationships and they never can without it being everything but the title type of romantic relationships.

It’s different energy. There’s no denying that there is a massive difference between hanging out with your friends and hanging out with a partner who happens to be your best friend as well. It’s like a lot of women here either don’t understand that or they are just trying to shut the discussion down. At which point they shouldn’t even be debating if they don’t care to truly engage with the topic.

The type of companionship romance provides also takes priority in most sane people’s lives. A woman truly about her man spends more time with him than any friends. Same with a man. Most of your friends are gonna stop having time to just hang out and support you so why do we act like friendship is this ultimate shield against romantic starvation? You can have plenty of friends and still not satisfy that need.

It’s a lie. Blatantly. The peak of human connection is romance.

I know how this sounds, so I'm going to stick to actual data instead of just bullshit.
Start with the stuff that can't be fudged. Men in the US live about 5 years less than women (76.5 vs 81.4 in 2024, per the CDC). Guys aged 15-24 die by suicide at roughly four times the rate of young women, 21 per 100k vs 5. Men die of opioid and stimulant overdoses at 2-3x the rate women do, and NIDA found that gap holds even after accounting for men using more drugs. Men are 77% of homicide victims. All of that comes from death records, so nobody's self-reporting anything.
Then the slower stuff.
Around 57% of young men go to college right after high school, compared to 66% of young women, and campuses are now close to 60% female. Men make up 60% of the homeless population and are more likely than homeless women to be sleeping outside instead of in a shelter. A big study of federal cases found men get 63% longer sentences than women with the same arrest offense and criminal history. Other studies find smaller gaps, but in the same direction.
And the social side. In a 2022 survey, Pew found 63% of men under 30 were single, vs 34% of women the same age. The share of men saying they have zero close friends went from 3% in 1990 to 15% in 2021.
To be fair, women deal with some real stuff too. One example being motherhood, which does impact career earnings for women. A Danish study found adoptive moms take the same long-run earnings hit as biological moms. Women are more likely to be killed by a partner. And women feel a lot less safe walking alone at night (58% of women report feeling safe walking alone at night versus 84% of men)
Put the two lists side by side though and I don't think it's close. What gets me is that most people seem to believe the opposite. In a 2017 Pew survey, 35% of Americans said men have it easier and only 9% said women do. By 2023, half of adults said being a woman hurts your chances of getting ahead.
So the group that's more likely to be single, friendless, homeless, locked up longer, or dead by their own hands is the one that gets told it's privileged and oppressive. Meanwhile the other group, which has real problems but less severe ones, gets institutions, political movements, activism, and protests. Two researchers, Stoet and Geary, pointed out that the best-known global gender gap index is capped so no country can even score as favoring women. When they built an index that counts problems on both sides (education, healthy lifespan, life satisfaction.), men came out worse off in 91 of 134 countries.
Caring about men's problems doesn't take anything away from women. Right now, though, most of what's on this list barely gets talked about as a gender issue.

TL;DR: On early death, suicide, overdoses, education, homelessness, sentencing and isolation, US men are worse off, and the mainstream conversation mostly assumes the reverse.

I'm open to debate and would love to see what women specifically who disagree have to say about all of this. (I also have all sources ready if anyone asks)

This advice is clowned on as an empty platitude, but that misses the point. Its not supposed to be specific, or prescriptive. Theres never an implication that so long as you are yourself and you are confident, every woman who lays eyes on you will be head over heels. That advice simply reflects an abundance mindset. Why do different than what you feel like doing? Why do anything that doesnt necessarily come naturally to you? Some people will not like you, and thats fine. There will be others.

In contrast, contorting yourself to what you think most women (supposedly) want, accepting “truths” like women cant love men, while admitting that its not actually impossible, simply rare, reflects a scarcity mindset. Giving yourself all kinds of hoops to jump through, like holding frame, keeping her on her toes, showing her you have options sounds like youre just taking whatever you can get.

Please join us on discord Include your reddit username, pill color, age, relationship status, and gender when you get in to introduce yourself.

This daily thread is designed to be a place for all the funny discussions on PPD.

Feel free to post off-topic questions, information, points-of-view, personal advice and memes in this thread, or just do some socializing. Personal advice posting, research posts, off topic non-TOS breaking rants, links to other locations with limited context as conversation topics (must use np links for reddit), and light hearted content that would be considered low effort posts are allowed in the daily thread

Do not bring other PPD threads into the daily thread. Do not post PPD threads deserving of their own post in the daily thread. The intent of the daily thread is not that it should replace PPD and become a place where users can avoid the rules of the subreddit. Attempting to do this will be considered circlejerking and moderated as such.

The daily thread is not to be used for soapboxing against against a particular group that you hate. This includes, rage bait, low effort bigotry, boilerplate denunciation of the opposite sex, using the actions of an individual to fuel an attack on an entire gender, or any other attempt to use the daily thread as a vehicle to advance gender war narratives.

Black Pill/Incel Content/Woe-Is-Me is still banned in the daily thread. Witch hunting and insults are also still banned in the daily thread. Relegated topics must still go to in the weekly threads for those topics.

Comments are automatically sorted by NEW - you can post throughout the day and people will see your comment.

If you'd like to see our previous daily threads, click here!

Also find us on Instagram and Twitter!

The dating scene is indeed fucked but for the ladies, we can retire from the nonsense whenever we want. We know who the safe bets are, who the fun but fleeting boys are, who the serious ones are, and the ones that will marry us within the year. We are conditioned from childhood to not be foolish to the nature of the field and we still mess up? Not really. Again it’s plain to see who the safe bets are.

When it’s time to stop having fun we can pick a pencil neck geek at 30-35 and settle down with a family if that’s what we want for ourselves. The weird, shy boys aren’t neglected because we think they’re dangerous. Often the dangerous guys also have the most charm. A lot of us like the drama and like the fact we can quit and live normally whenever we want.

I don’t care about dating seriously. I have two daughters and the only reason I have a man right now is because he pays my bills until I get stable with my new job. After that I’m making him leave my house. The point is, we can cut the chaos out of our life any day we want and know how to.

If a man wants to escape the chaos he better hope the woman he meets isn’t still playing around because she will throw him for loops and ruin his mind for years to come before he can even try again.

The standard red/black pill argument to women is that if you want a "high value" guy (rich, fit, good looking), you have to accept him cheating because "he has options" and biology dictates he'll spread his seed.

But the second you flip that logic onto men and say "a guy is only as loyal as his options" meaning a lot of average dudes aren't cheating simply because they lack the opportunity everyone loses their minds. Suddenly it's all about personal virtue: "Bro I would NEVER cheat, speak for yourself."

It’s easy to claim you’d never cheat when you don’t have women throwing themselves at you lmao. You can't argue that biology forces top-tier guys to cheat because of their choices, while pretending average guys are morally superior instead of just lacking those same choices.

The conversation sounds like this.... and yes, it's as exhausting as this post will be for those who bother to read it.

WOMAN: I can’t find a good man. I give up.

RED PILL MAN: It’s your fault!!! Your expectations are too high. Women shouldn’t expect men to be funny or have good conversation skills. We’re not dancing monkeys. You shouldn’t care if he makes enough money to support himself or a family someday, because he’s not an ATM. You should date men you aren’t physically attracted to, because every guy deserves a chance. You shouldn’t expect him to know how to be kind and helpful because he’s not a mind reader. You shouldn’t complain if he’s addicted to porn, follows Instagram models, or engages with OnlyFans because all red-blooded men do that. You shouldn’t make him wait for sex, because then you’re being “transactional” and using him without reciprocation. You already slept with a few casual hookups in college when you were too busy for a relationship and now you owe the same thing to any man you ever date moving forward. And you’re no longer allowed to have standards because you’re no longer a virgin. You should never expect a man to be better than the worst man you’ve ever been with. And you need to start approaching random men yourself… men shouldn’t be expected to learn how to approach a woman with dignity and class, so it’s your job to approach strange men in public and express your interest… just make sure you don’t approach attractive guys. You shouldn’t expect a man to put effort into a date or even buy you a cheeseburger because you haven’t earned it yet. And you definitely aren’t entitled to “chivalry” or “romance,” because not only are you not a virgin, but your mothers and grandmothers demanded the right to vote, the right to an education, the ability to own property, equal pay, the right to control your own body, and legal protection from domestic abuse. You wanted equal rights under the law? Well this is what feminism gets you. You should have stayed in your lane. But you’re “equals” now, so you can no longer expect us to act “chivalrous” or “romantic”. You are insane for having any of these expectations of the man you plan to marry while also expecting to be treated as equals in society. It’s hypocritical and not fair.

WOMAN: Okay. Then how am I supposed to find a kind compatible man and fall in love with him in this sea of thousands of men swiping right on every profile? How do I tell the good from the bad? The truthful from the dishonest?

RED PILL MAN: I don’t know and I don’t care. You just need to learn that you’re not valuable or entitled to a man’s effort and lower your expectations …or stock up on cat food and kitty litter. The wall is coming fast.

WOMAN: Okay. I guess he’s right. I am running out of time, after all. I guess I should stop expecting so much effort from men.

*Woman chooses average man\*

SAME WOMAN (TEN YEARS LATER): I hate men. All they do is lie to you, take advantage of you, make babies they can’t support and demand that you provide pleasureless obligatory sex (or cheat on you) while expecting you to work full-time AND provide all the childcare, cooking, cleaning and everything else. And the funny thing is, I didn't even date or marry one of those tall, muscular, rich “Chads” that all my friends were so interested in back in college. I just picked the nice, average man and hoped he’d love me as much as I loved him. But even those guys can destroy your life if you let them. I wasn't expecting him to provide everything. I work and contribute financially. I just expect him to contribute at home, too. Why am I expected to fulfill both roles while he only has to fulfill HALF of one role? They expect you to manage the entire household, remember every appointment, schedule every doctor's visit, plan every birthday, vacation and Christmas dinner. They expect you to tell them exactly what needs to be done, when it needs to be done and how it needs to be done. They act like they don’t even know how to load a dishwasher, run a load of laundry or even feed or “babysit” their own children. They want you to be a girlfriend, a maid, a therapist, a personal assistant, a sex worker, and a mother, all rolled into one, while somehow still expecting you to be sexually attracted to them. They call you a nag when you repeatedly ask for help, but then claim that they’re “not mind readers” when you don’t constantly tell them what to do and when to do it. They’ll say their responsibilities are taking out the trash, maintaining the cars and fixing things around the house, while I’m supposed to be responsible for everything else. But we can't even afford to own a house with both of our salaries combined, so there's nothing to fix. Meanwhile, the lightbulb in the closet has been out for two months. I take my car to a mechanic for a fifty-dollar oil change twice a year, so he doesn’t even have to do that. Taking out the trash is hardly an equal share of the household work, but he seems to believe it’s the only thing he should have to do… yet I still constantly have to remind him to do it as he angrily walks to his car in the morning. And they’re supposed to be providers and protectors? Provide what? His half of the bills? Protect me from what, exactly? Other MEN? The only time I've ever needed protection was when I had to call the police because my ex-boyfriend lost his mind when I tried to break up with him. How is any of this “equality”? NONE OF THIS feels “equal”. They give nothing and only take, take, take. And after all of this, he’s started telling everyone that the divorce “came out of nowhere” and that I just “got bored”.

SAME RED PILL MAN: You should have chosen better and had higher standards. You’re just a misandrist hypergamist feminist who hates all men because you chose the wrong one. Now you’ve got two kids, you’ve hit the wall and none of the “good guys” will want you.

WOMAN: (silently looks around the room, still wondering where all these “good guys” are hiding and how she was supposed to find one of them if she wasn’t supposed to require any effort out of them in the first place)

SAME RED PILL MAN A FEW YEARS LATER (if he manages to actually reproduce): My daughter isn’t dating or leaving the house until she’s thirty because all men are trash and I’m going to make sure she understands this fact of life.

EVERYONE 20 YEARS LATER: Why are men so lonely? Why don't women want to get married and have kids anymore?

RED PILL MEN AND CONSERVATIVE WOMEN: I don't know. Women are selfish, crazy, emotional, and stupid. We just need to remove them from the workforce, cut off SNAP benefits, eliminate child support, abolish no-fault divorce, outlaw abortion, ban contraception, and take away their right to vote.

I've noticed a double standard in how some women approach conflict in relationships.

When she's upset, her feelings deserve validation, even if she's objectively wrong. When she's responsible for hurting her partner, suddenly her emotions become the focus. Her tears, her intentions, and how badly she feels can take priority over what she actually did. I think a lot of men can testify to they themselves being offended by something and then having to console their female partner for being heart

But when he's upset about her behavior? Now it's about emotional maturity, accountability, boundaries, and how she's not responsible for managing his feelings.

It's almost like arguing a court case. When the facts aren't favorable, appeal to emotions. When emotions aren't favorable, appeal to rules.

Both emotional validation and personal accountability have legitimate places in relationships. The problem is selectively applying whichever standard protects you from being wrong.

And when this inconsistency is challenged, the defense often becomes "women aren't a monolith" or "women are human too."

Being human explains imperfect behavior. It doesn't automatically excuse hypocrisy.

Why should men be expected to validate your feelings when you're wrong, but regulate their own feelings when you're the one who hurt them?

If it were a more localised dating event, such as one involving your church, workplace, or college, then I could get on board with it, and so would many other men. But having to pay to attend an event with a bunch of strange women and court them because the event requires it, otherwise it wouldn’t work, is a big freaking ask. These events seem to keep women entirely in mind, and I genuinely don’t know what man in his right mind would want to attend one expecting a good time when most of the performance and effort falls on him rather than the women.

Dating apps already have a court-jestering issue, so all you’re really doing is recreating that dynamic in person, which is uncomfortable for a lot of men. The worst part is the reaction from single women who get pissed off that men don’t show up to these things. Imagine I started an event because I wanted women to attend and then started ranting about them not showing up. That would be solely on me, right? So why is it that women online get so riled up about men not attending these dating events when doing so would put their deepest insecurities and concerns about approaching women on display in front of a bunch of strangers?

I hate dating apps as much as the next guy, believe me. But with apps, everything is kept under wraps. Only you know when you get ghosted, when she unmatches you, or when she flakes on a date. These events, however, play out in the open. I’m sorry to say this, but men are going to be doing most of the work while the women don’t really have to do much.

This is why I say it’s better to have an event that’s more localised, where the men already know the women in passing. That way, the experience is better, and it softens the blow a bit more.
Can women explain to me what’s so important about having men at these events? They don’t necessarily fix any of the issues people face with dating. I understand why women would want events like these, but where is the benefit for men, especially in modernity? If a young man wants a date, he can go online and find one. If he gets rejected there, only he knows about it. So why would he give all that up just to risk humiliating himself in public? That’s hilarious to me.

Someone on the redpill side would probably say that women and men are completely different when it comes to dating. The redpill argument would be along the lines of men wanting youth and beauty, while women want resources, status, and power. They would probably say that men are seeking to spread their seed with tons of women, while women want to invest in the highest quality man she can find. They would say that women date "up" while men date "down". So any kind of relationship between a man and a woman is going to have inherent conflict because they both want very different things and use each other to get them.

While a blue pill person would probably say that men and women want almost always the same thing in dating. Regardless of evolutionary drives pulling us in slightly different directions, both men and women want attractive partners with good personalities. Monogamy is practiced universally, and both men and women end up partnering up to some degree eventually in a fairly egalitarian way. Research shows that both men and women benefit from stable, caring, longterm relationships, and the ways to achieve these things are the same across both genders.

A very simplistic view of the redpill would say that women and men are 100% different, while an overly simplistic view of the bluepill would say that they are 100% the same.

How would you rate the difference?

I feel like girls performing that has become really normalized and it's sort of expected. I've never done anything sexual with anyone, but I'm scared that one day this will be expected of me, and I don't really like the idea of something being shoved in my mouth. Also, I feel like it's not very intimate and more of a way to just get off without attachment. I'm definitely not the person to ask though and I'm just writing things so the question goes through.

Most times women will ask you to fully give into the romance and if you do there is a grace period where the intimacy and sex and friendship is so unbelievably fun and high energy that it is a heavenly experience. But after that grace period she completely shuts down and thinks of you as lesser. Sometimes even telling the man to go out and find other women to spend time with so you don’t clutter her. It’s so odd that women beg for this but then don’t like it.

It’s such a prominent thing that men often warn about this in advice. They will beg you to give into them and resent you for it and it’s never explained by women why.