>
Manosphere men often complain about evil women attempting to drain them of their money. To which there really is a very simple solution: If you don’t want a girlfriend or wife who expects you to support her, don’t seek out women who expect you to support them.
This seems like a fairly common-sense strategy, and one that would simple enough for even the dullest of man boobz to remember. But apparently it has proved a little hard to put into practice.
For evidence of this, let’s return to our good friend Nightstorm — you know, the mousetrap-vagina, leech-women in the food court of doom guy on NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum. He’s back with another posting called “The List,“which is a list — naturally — of
the soul draining demands a woman puts on a man once their together. He MUST do these things to “make the relationship work”
The list is long, loopy, whiny, and filled with ridiculous things that MGTOWs and many MRAs tend to imagine that all women demand of all men (“Open all doors before and after for her”), but which have not actually been a part of any relationship I’ve ever been in. Aside from some complaints that are ridiculously petty (“Go to borning [sic] family out-goings”) and some that are weird paranoid fantasies (“You get your penis size and bed performance revealed to the sisterhood. Oh yes, their not laughing with you!”), the complaints come back, again and again, to money:
Pay for dinner …
Buying her yet another useless item she doesn’t need, like shoes or a brand new car ….
You get to pay for the privledge of being with this woman. …
You get to work while she lays around the house doing nothing. …
She can have the government garnish your wages to pay her just for being the female spouse. … You get to feel like the worthless scum you are and pay her for telling you that you are.
I’m not even sure what the fuck he’s even talking about with half of this shit.
But, again, there really is a simple solution to all these money issues. I’ll say it again, in bold this time: If you don’t want a girlfriend or wife who expects you to support her, don’t seek out women who expect you to support them.
This, evidently, is where Nightstorm’s grand strategy has gone a bit awry.
For, as I discovered from another posting of his from a few days back, it turns out that Nightstorm’s plan to totally avoid evil leech-like women apparently entails spending many hours flirting with women online. Indeed, he included a long transcript of an online chat he’d recently had with an (alleged) 18-year-old (alleged) girl who’d evidently decided after a couple of online chats that she wanted to be his girlfriend, despite the fact that the two of them have never actually met and in fact live in different states. (Hey, women can be idiots too.)
Nightstorm (posting as “shawnz”) decided they needed to set down the terms of their relationship, and began by asking her what she thought she brought to the relationship. She jokingly suggested: herself, her “sexy hair,” and her vagina.
[20:54] shawnz: if you become my GF..
[20:54] shawnz: I will get you, your sexy hair, and your vagina
[20:55] shawnz: and what do you expect out of me …
[20:55] [name redacted]: ur penis ur cuddles and ur texting/calling/being on cam and coming to visit!
[20:55] shawnz: ok, anything else
[20:56] [name redacted]: nope
That seems pretty straightforward. No mention of “family out-goings” or even paying for dinner.
Nightstorm then set out his terms for the relationship:
[20:58] shawnz: First, I want a girl who cooks and cleans the house, I want someone who doesn’t nag, cripe
[20:58] shawnz: bitch, or complain, someone who cuddles and anytime I want sex
[20:58] shawnz: someone who has ambition
[20:58] [name redacted]: demanding arent we lol
[20:58] shawnz: and someone who wants more than just love in the relationship, after all its hard work
Demanding, to be sure, lol, but he offers some things in return:
[20:59] shawnz: and what I offer is romance, a good paying salary for provision, and intimacy
[20:59] shawnz: I also offer you good self-esteem and reliability and faithfulness
Let’s pause for a moment to consider that bit in the middle after “romance”: “a good paying salary for provision.”
The two haven’t even met, and he’s already offering to support her financially.
It appears Nightstorm not only has not only bungled the whole “don’t pursue women who expect you to support them” strategy I have outlined above. He’s actually OFFERING TO SUPPORT A WOMAN WHO DOESN’T ACTUALLY EXPECT HIM TO SUPPORT HER.
It seems to me that if you want a woman who is financially dependent on you — you provide the money, she provides “anytime [you] want sex” — you pretty much forfeit your right to complain about her being financially dependent on you.
Fortunately for Nightstorm, [name redacted], and the rest of us on this planet, he decided that [name redacted] wasn’t serious enough to be his girlfriend. So, crisis averted. For now.
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
>David"Well, not exactly. It's one thing to say "I want to live an independent life" and another to say, "women (or all American or Western women) are evil, moneygrubbing whores, and to show how much I don't need them I'm going to spend all day on the internet talking about what moneygrubbing whores they are."No David, you are trying to cover up the truth. Women practically scream with neon flashing lights “I don’t need a man” and rub it all over your face. It’s done in a fashion that gives the impression that men are useless idiots and they are superior princesses.It’s amazing how sexism that’s so obvious coming from women, feminists will be full of excuses and make shit up to twist the truth. Yet when it’s men acting sexist, it’s misogyny, end of story, no excuses.You can deny being a feminist bigot all you want, David. A feminist bigot is someone who will make up any excuse in the world for terrible behaviour or actions from women but then be the first to call out on sexism within a second when men are acting terrible.Lady Victoria von Syrus"If you feel like you are continually being slapped in the face by women, I'd suggest the problem is not women"Look shit titts, the problem is women when they act in such a sexist and chauvinistic manner as what I have been pointing out. It’s perfectly fine for a woman to feel that she doesn’t need men. On the other hand to shout it out, rub it in a man’s face in the attempt to intimidate men and act like a superior princess is another thing.
>Yohan: So let them demand. There is no law saying that you have to buy them anything. Just like there is no law saying they have to have sex with you. Everyone has their own unique desires. I think so many of the things the MRA types complain about could be solved if they just walked away from people that annoy them. For what ever reason (sex? I suppose) they seem to linger in relationships they hate – and dwell heavily upon not being able to impress the types of women they deplore.I wouldn't call my dating life "luck", really. I just happen to tend to only date who share my values and who seem to me to be sensible.
>Look, yes, I can understand that in your simplistic model of the world, diamond rings are mandatory.But one of the funny consequences of regarding women as people is that you can talk to them about these issues rather than just feeling perpetually aggrieved. So if you for any reason don't want to buy your fiancee a diamond ring, you can tell her so and explain why.But of course you have it in your head that almost any woman would dump you for that. Some women might. I don't know. I don't date women like that. I was very nearly engaged to my first girlfriend (we were young and silly) and she said when I proposed I'd better not buy her a diamond ring. I laughed and said I had no intention of doing so.In that particular case it was because we both personally boycott blood diamonds. (Not that it's hard to boycott diamonds…) There's really no point to this anecdote except that, like everyone else here, I'm kind of hoping that enough examples will eventually get into your head that WOMEN ARE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE.Yeah. I used all caps. Deal with it.
>Look shit titts, the problem is women when they act in such a sexist and chauvinistic manner as what I have been pointing out. And…not a trace or irony there, folks.
>But one of the funny consequences of regarding women as peopleWhat I find funny is that feminists don't see men as people as men are never allowed to disagree with women or have freedom of speech.If men think different to what many women think, they are wrong. If women think different to what many men think, they are not wrong.We live in a society that tells men if you don't shut up and agree with women or do what women want, we will never get laid or we are not good enough for womenThanks to political correctness that always seems to favour women (the so called second class citizens)In a political correct view, women are never wrong
>"And…not a trace or irony there, folks." Telling someone that they have shit titts is not sexist or chauvinistic, dumbass.If women went around telling men they have shit dicks, I can bet my bottom dollar that feminists wouldn't consider it to be sexist. Feminists (the equality police) are full of dumbass double standards
>@ NickoThe fact that you think it's perfectly fine to call me 'shit titts' when complaining about female chauvinism says more about you than I could ever hope to. @ triplanetaryWhen my current boyfriend and I were first discussing living together, he said he'd probably propose if things were going well after a year or so. I told him right then that I didn't want an engagement ring. It's not even blood diamonds that bug me, it's that I think the concept of an engagement ring encapsulates everything wrong about American consumer culture. I'd much rather have a proposal inscribed in a book of love poetry.
>Explain in logical detail how it's chauvinism to tell a woman she has shit titts?Here we have feminists in this very thread telling men that we have to accept the fact that some women think we are too shit to date.I guess these certain women who think I am shit to date are chauvinists too heh
>Straw man is made of straw, Nick. Try again.
>Captain BathrobeYou are not making any sense.Anyway, right now I feel like being a chauvinist.Can feminists please go back to the kitchen and clean my shit up?
>It's not even blood diamonds that bug me, it's that I think the concept of an engagement ring encapsulates everything wrong about American consumer culture.Oh, I agree. It's a wasteful, exorbitant show of wealth. Plus I can't help thinking they're supposed to symbolize bondage (and not in the kinky way).
>Yeah, dude. You have to accept that some women just won't want to date you. Women don't want to date men who are whiny babies… *gasp* *shock* *horror* THE FALL OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION!!!I'm sure there are also men who don't want to date me (why, I've even been broken up with a few times!), but I don't hold all men accountable for the actions of a few, or insist that all men are whiny douchebags just because some are. Nor do I take it personally when someone points out that some men have standards for women they date that I don't personally meet.
>nicko81m:Here we have feminists in this very thread telling men that we have to accept the fact that some women think we are too shit to date.Well yes, women do have the right to decide who is and is not up to their standards. Men have that right too. We all have that right! Yay rights!You're just bitter because you feel like women should give you pussy whenever you demand it and they shouldn't have a right to reject you.We grown-up men can deal with the fact that not every woman on the planet wants our mighty cock.I guess these certain women who think I am shit to date are chauvinists too heh No, they're not. And you're not sexist for deciding you don't want to date a particular woman. You're sexist for a lot of reasons, such as for reducing a woman to her tits just because you can't best her in an argument.
>@ triplanetaryOne of the things that bugs me about engagement rings is that only the woman wears one (at least, traditionally speaking. Two friends of mine just got engaged, and they are both wearing rings. Another couple, she proposed to him and he is the one wearing the ring. They all couldn't be happier). It also does seem to symbolize the sexism that both feminists and MRAs complain about – the man must provide an expensive piece of jewelry to convince a woman to marry him. I don't mind wedding rings so much, since those seem like more of an equitable exchange – they're worn by both. Also, most rings are just gold bands – no blood diamonds to worry about! Either way, I'd rather my boyfriend put his DeBeers-recommended three months' salary to a down payment on a house we buy together… or at least blow it on the reception/honeymoon, if it absolutely must be spent on a luxury.
>We live in a society that tells men if you don't shut up and agree with women or do what women want, we will never get laid or we are not good enough for women And yet quite a few men–not rich, not alphas, just ordinary guys–manage to get laid and have relationships with women every day. And somehow they seem to do it without sacrificing their personal integrity. How do you suppose they do that, Nick? Are they deluded? Just lucky? What do you think, Nick: how do so many men manage to have successful relationships with women every day? Maybe, just maybe, the problem doesn't lie with women, Nick–or even with the cartoonish perception of feminism that you seem to have. Maybe, just maybe, the problem is with you. Is there any part of your situation for which are willing to accept responsibility? Anything at all? Is there anything wrong with Nick's dating and relationship life, or lack thereof, that can be blamed on something other than feminism?
>@ Captain BathrobeYou're forgetting, this is where the convenient term 'mangina' comes in. Any ordinary guy managing to get laid on regular or semi regular basis is obviously a mangina. I'm not even sure what a mangina is, except that it's something bad.
>Lady Victoria:I certainly agree that they're sexist, but like most things MRAs complain about, they're very much a function of the patriarchy. In a patriarchy, one of the ways rich men show off their wealth is by buying expensive things for their wives.That doesn't mean the pressure to buy expensive-ass engagement rings isn't something men face. Of course it is. In this case it's largely because the tradition of buying expensive-ass engagement rings trickled down into the middle class because the middle class is constantly trying to emulate the upper class.But I mean, seriously, MRAs, you're adults. If you don't want to buy a diamond ring, don't. If your partner doesn't understand, clearly you don't share their values, so it's time to reconsider the relationship. The idea that women are all wallet-sucking harpies who won't give you sex unless you buy them expensive shit is just getting trite.
>Re: manginas, from what I gather, MGTOWs are convinced that any man who gets poon must be selling out by suppressing his identity and mindlessly agreeing with his partner's every silly demand.This is how they justify it to themselves, at any rate.
>Lady:I think the logic regarding the term "mangina" runs thusly:Women are bad.Women have vaginas.Therefore, vaginas are bad.A man with a vagina (or who is a vagina, I'm not sure which it is) is bad because he has (or is) something that a woman has. And that's bad, because, you know, women are bad. QED.It's really hard to take seriously any supposed adult who hasn't matured beyond the "girls are icky and have cooties" stage of development.
>Also, I think triplanetary is correct as well.
>Hmmm….So we infer that a 'mangina' is a term for a guy who's getting laid regularly… and, from what I can tell, *not* a practitioner of Game. So we can assume therefore a fair number of these 'manginas' are in relationships. … so the worst thing you can be, according to an MRA (apart from being a woman, of course), is a guy in a satisfying relationship? That reveals quite a lot about the MRA mindset, methinks.
>Women practically scream with neon flashing lights “I don’t need a man” and rub it all over your face.Weird. I've never run into these women. It seems like they would be easy to spot, what with the neon signs and all. We live in a society that tells men if you don't shut up and agree with women or do what women want, we will never get laid or we are not good enough for womenNo we don't. Admittedly, we do live in a society in which guys who use the term "shit tits" might have a harder time than most getting laid.
>I love how the list mentions that men get to watch us "decay" in front of them. Because, you know, men don't age.Also it mentions how the woman took the man's virginity and moves into the man's house. Psh. Right, because women are ALWAYS the participant who're slutty sluts and take the man's virginity while the man has to settle with a used pussy, right?Also, my boyfriend's moving in with me. So… I don't know where that puts that bit of the list.What's the use of opening a door after a person?If Nicko can't figure out why calling someone "shit tits" is sexist, he needs more than lessons on how not to be a jerk.
>[20:58] shawnz: someone who has ambitionAmbition to do WHAT, exactly? Cook, clean the house and have anytime sex??
>LOL!! Have anytime sex after having robbed you of your virginity, of course.