Have you considered traveling to the World of Fiction? There are volumes written about these women. I’ve heard that’s where they exist.
The Destruction of Modern Women
- Thread starter Let God Arise
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cultural marxism women
You're just looking for that unicorn.
In my experience, when a woman likes a man, she becomes a decent human being with morals. When she stops liking that man, she goes right back to being the cold indifferent person she was before.
There are are exceptions, but they are not the rule. 95% of women all behave according to their emotions. So perhaps focus more on trying to make them like you from the onset, aka game, and it will improve your perception of them.
Good women still exist everywhere, but the sticking point (I’m speaking from my experience in the US, so it may or may not apply to you / other men here) is that the numbers of them are low. There’s that and once you’re past certain life milestones, it becomes harder and harder to meet them.
The main reason is very simple imo, and despite all the complaints and reasons discussed on here, it boils down to proximity and just being around good marriage-minded women.
Proximity is always the key, but let’s say you don’t meet anyone in high school, college, or graduate school. Either because they are too woke infected, you’re not anttractive enough, whatever the reason, it doesn’t matter.
Where do you meet them? Ok, church or your job? That’s really industry and church specific and takes a lot of time. It may or may not work. People say meet people organically, sounds great, but hard in practice.
Then there’s online, it’s mostly trash, but some people have success.
So what we’re dealing with in the US is that you have to make dating and courting a near full time job, to find one of the small number of marriage-minded good women out there.
And when I mean full-time job I mean:
1) Online apps.
2) Prospecting at work, church, gym, hobby groups.
3) Getting setup with single women your friends, relatives, or coworkers know.
4) Nightlife scene maybe?
5) The odd cold approach here or there?
All for hoping you meet a good one because so many have been woke infected or are just not suitable.
Most men, even if they have tried, this realize it’s just a ridiculous proposition and investment when they look back to their parents/grandparents who just met and that was that.
Then add in the emotional investment to the commitment. Rejection, flaking, dating her for a few months and realizing she’s not who she said she is, etc. Most guys have decided to sit it out.
That would all change if the economics of the situation were better, i.e. good attractive marriage minded women were the norm.
None of this applies to casual hookups. There are several women who just want that and don’t care, because they were programmed to act like unethical men.
Last edited:
That's not always truly moral behavior though. Often that's just pretending to be moral, isn't it? Being moral for the sake of personal gain. Yes, sometimes a man can inspire a woman to change truly. But women will put up all kinds of facades for a man they really like.
Man is not the ultimate source of good, all that is good in us comes from God. So if we want a woman to behave morally, the best thing we can do for her is pray. God can enlighten her heart. The man is the head of the family and thus has a huge responsibility on his shoulders. He must do for the family what the priest does for his parish. And I'd say that even goes during courtship, we can pray for the woman we are courting.
Of course, it's a bit nonsensical to speak of good to an agnostic. For him good is just his personal opinion. A woman's personal opinion of good is equally valid in that worldview. What epistemic basis has the agnostic to say that a lying, promiscuous woman is less good or more good than a chaste woman, for example?
It's hard to square the circle of best wife, or most possible/realistic connection, being someone who is physically meh when you're a man (as in when Fr. Moses indicated that St John Chrysostom basically said to marry a basic woman). Women say this but they aren't aware of many things, including how flexible they are, so it's not really a similar situation.
I think the sticking point now is that you can be crazy high percentile and women also either a) don't know or b) don't care. There is just too much optionality and they think far too much about possibilities, and almost never really think of the future beyond just a year or two. Again, as I've said, hormonal and low IQ are very common high time preference characteristics.
I've talked to Joe about this, since the truth is also combinatorial with proximity - early in life is both the proximity time AND the time in which you'll actually try or be stupid enough with hormones and boners to listen to elders that you should get married. That couldn't happen once women in general were encouraged to not pick a man and stand by him, live and win/progress with him, but rather chase their own whims and then maybe figure it out later. Oh yeah, Martha, they forgot to tell you that later men have all the value, will be ascending and have what you want, but you won't have what they want. Yay for all
If a woman likes you she may be a decent human being in regards to how she treats you but she will still usually behave in a garbage manner towards other people in general which is still frustrating. Even if your girlfriend treats you well but she behaves dishonorably towards her friends or family or work colleagues, etc you will still notice it and if you are a good person it will still bother you greatly. Unfortunately when you take the red pill and see the true nature of women you can never unsee it.
I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with you on anything about women. Yea there are many who will treat you like a king but then go and disrespect the hell out of you outside of your relationship with no shame, those ones are some real snakes. It's a form of narcissism and self indulgence "look how good I am to you" which is all bullshit because as soon as anyone else pops up there is no loyalty or consideration because she needs everyone to think that way of her. You will never have all of her because she gives herself to everyone, essentially making herself worthless.
It's not about unseeing it, it's about appreciating the good qualities people have, women or men. But yes, you are correct, even if she's nice to me I can still see her behavior towards others and I can see it's all a mirage. Very true. There are very few women who are genuinely nice people.
Shaquilleoatmeal
Protestant
A big problem is our society which tells women they don’t need to respect men, so even if she’s nice to you she still has a general disrespect for men which will eventually manifest in the way she treats you in the relationship it just becomes a matter of when.
If we're honest, I don't think many of us care big picture about the reason why she treats us or others well, as long as she does it. I wish I had the luxury to think it mattered, but it's become increasingly obvious that the only thing that really makes any difference is if the woman is in line or not. All that other principled stuff, virtue, leadership, sacrifice, etc - that's for men. You think I'd complain if I had a young wife who "didn't otherwise know better" and basically just did what she was supposed to do, for any reason to be honest, but mostly (hopefully because she listened to parents, good society, and elders) who cared about her loved ones and others? Of course not. That's what old salty women complain about, yes, the ones that don't have a man because they don't do the right things and/or they think they deserve some guy well beyond their level, especially at advanced ages. It's almost like a reenactment of eden where somehow having knowledge gives this idea that your life will somehow be better, or more aware, but in reality it just mires you.
I haven't come across people that treat some people well and others poorly, since that seems quite schizophrenic to me and perhaps if I did, I'd just look at it like "there is honor among thieves" and understand the truth of the matter.
I guess the bigger point is that in the modern/developed world, everyone seems to be "a man" even though there are all these reminders that that's the dumbest idea anyone could have ever thought up, or even wanted, for most.
Every woman treats men who they consider chads completely differently to men that they consider average..... The problem is women are fickle. Just because she has the vagina tingles for you today it doesn't mean you will still give her the tingles in 5 years time. The only long term solution to this problem is a Taliban style society. Women have no innate morals. They only way to control their base animal instincts is severe societal and legal repression.
History often swings from one end of the pendulum to other extreme. And when the day of reckoning finally comes for women (who knows if its in 100 years, etc) the retribution will be severe. The Taliban will look positively lenient. Think a modern equivalent of Genghis Khans hordes roaming around raping women by the millions is not out of the question (maybe the modern equivalent will be roaming refugee rape gangs and warlords after western civilization finally collapses).
I am just curious. I am an agnostic but from the Christian perspective do any of the Christians here think that god will enact severe divine retribution on modern women in the future for their wickedness?
Iakobos
Orthodox
If you want to understand the Christian perspective, you need to understand that "women have no innate morals and are basically animals" is an unChristian statement and that there are countless examples through history of saintly women who the Holy Spirit (aka God Himself) indwelt. After Christ Himself, the most venerated human is the Theotokos, the Mother of God, Mary. She chose a Godly life without sin, which is impossible without abusing them according to you. Christianity has much more respect for women than you do, sorry but you have serious woman issues on the brain and are not at all in touch with reality. Your bitterness handicaps you more than actual women do.
Shaquilleoatmeal
Protestant
Not all Christians believe Mary was sinless or a perpetual virgin. There are more biblical arguments against this doctrine than for it.
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God
Matthew 1:24-25
Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus
But of course. If a reckoning doesn't happen in this life, then it will after it. The day of judgement will come and everyone will have to answer for their sins. The fact of the matter is, we will all be kind of screwed on the day of judgement and will need to rely on Christ's mercy.
That said, my understanding is that the Just Judge will take everyone's circumstances into consideration. We all know this is a world where some people really are just screwed from birth.
This being the case, since women are innately much weaker than men (both mentally and physically), as well as disconnected from reality to some extent, and since they were born in an inverted society which completely fails to protect them and lead them, and which in fact goes out of its way to foment and encourage all of their worst instincts and to ensure that there is not a smidge of humility within them, there is no doubt in my mind that God will show them some kind of leniency. How much of it, I do not know.
Last edited:
Iakobos
Orthodox
It's a pointless and off-topic discussion to open as it boils down to Sola Scriptura vs. Holy Tradition which are entirely different frameworks to approach the faith.
Mary was the woman so blessed (or full of grace) as to carry God in her womb and care for Christ throughout His life, who the Bible says not a single bad word about, who clearly was deeply spiritual, close to God and not a slave to animalistic impulses. Do you not hold her in high esteem as a paragon of a woman who lived her life for Christ rather than the material things of this world? If you do esteem her as such, then the point of my post stands.
Don't get all worked up like this, it's ugly. Finger-wagging has never changed anyone's mind on anything.
His views are completely reasonable from a purely secular perspective, which is the perspective he has, because he is agnostic.
If I was not a Christian, I too would believe that women have no innate morality or agency and are basically just automatons who mimic what their societies have taught them. The reason is simple: That has been my experience in life. The women I have met throughout my life have either been completely amoral sociopaths, or moral but only because a man hammered that morality into them, usually their fathers. Meanwhile, I have met men who were raised by incredibly cruel single mothers, who yet behaved morally and honorably, and were good friends to me.
I've been mistreated quite a lot by many women of all ages and backgrounds throughout my life, for no reason other than the fact that I have Asperger's syndrome and therefore I am a bit eccentric. Meanwhile, men have unfailingly treated me fairly.
If I did not believe in these Saintly women that Christianity teaches us about, my life experiences would be all I would have to go off of. And my life experiences would very much tell me that women are physically incapable of possessing transcendental morality, unlike men, who actually appear to be born with it. In fact, my life experiences would tell me that women are innately inclined to be sadistic and cruel. If I was not a Christian and did hold these views, I promise you that berating me for it would not change my mind.
Last edited:
You don't need Taliban. A regular Christian society is more than enough to keep women in check, worked for thousands of years.
Why are you ignoring the obvious?
He said "Taliban-style", not "Taliban." I think he just means restricting women's behavior and role in public life, and punishing whorish behavior harshly. Which is what a traditional Christian society would do.
I don't think Australia Sucks wants to declare Islam the state religion, outlaw Christianity and force women to wear DIY ghost Halloween costumes. Let's interpret his words charitably.
That wasn't what the discussion or issue was, however. I am sure that women treat certain men different for others but that doesn't mean that the same women treat others "poorly" which was what I was commenting on. Even if it is mean through indifference, or ignorance, or some such thing, not being aware of men or not giving them any attention is far different than treating someone poorly during active engagement.
Even when Europeans had women in defined roles they still had greater latitude and choice, relative to other groups. This is one of the reasons why they advanced more than other groups. I don't think what you state will ever happen, but compared to now it'll certainly seem that way. But when will women ever stop complaining? Not gonna happen. Even when things are better than ever for them, it continues! Pretty funny when you think about it.
Since I deal in probabilities and empirical reality, I don't have a high estimation of "agency" for women (which I define as reacting with responsibility and accountability), so my view is generally that by nature they are in the category of relatively "easier" judgment, so to speak. But even that's a comparison, which is not all that informative, since all we can do as men is try to understand the world from the way we think - logically and responsibly, if we are normal. To the extent that this word, "rebellious" encapsulates what it means to be on the other side of faithful, and they are accountable (only God knows, whatever that word actually means), it's possible they could be in a world of trouble. We could be too, and even be unaware, which is why we all should repent. That way we can at least try to have some humility.
I'll defend Australia here. He's just trying to be honest and call it as he sees it. It is a forum after all with text and direct comments to prove a point. By the way, giving the greatest among the Saints as an example to in any way speak on female nature or what we experience now, or seems possible, is amusing, I'll just say. I think it's more an exception proving the rule.
All the early Christians did believe in perpetual virginity, and without exception (your point wasn't a thing until the protestants and RCs started dookie slinging 16-18 centuries later). There's always been a definitional thing regarding the "sinless" part, but I think most when pressed just say they are probably talking about her knowingly sinning. As Iakovos said, no need to derail, though.
Either way, we have all sorts of people falling away, and of course if that happens that means more women will, since they need to be led far more than men do. Let's pray that we are starting to all come back now. It sucks for the last generations, but hey, there's a lot about our being born, and when, that has nothing to do with anything of our choosing.
Shaquilleoatmeal
Protestant
Was Mary A perpetual Virgin?
When I typed in the title of my post into Google to see what answers would come up, I was surprised to find that reputable, academic affiliated, Catholic sites were still espousing the idea that Mary was a perpetual virgin. It should be no surprise that traditional Catholic sites still push this the
dustoffthebible.com