>
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.
>"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 . . ."—DavidShould read, "The list is long fairly astute, and filled with various things that MGTOWs and many MRAs tend to experience that many women demand of all men . . and in David's imagination never happens in his own little world of innocent, angelic women."Fixed.
>"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."—LVvSIncorrect. A mangina (among many things) is someone who tries to get laid and places women of higher sexual value than himself, but does not get sexual attention regularly and doesn't know much Game. You feminists also diagnose him with low self esteem; in this case you would be right with the latter.
>"So we can assume therefore a fair number of these 'manginas' are in relationships."—LVvSThat's if he's willingly taking a backseat to his partner's demands and not standing up for/neglecting his own. Only then the answer is "yes."
>"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."—Captain BathrobeAnd yet, somebody mentioned the "advice" that men should lower their standards in order to have more results. (This would imply compromising their personal integrity).Would that be you, CB?
>triplanetary"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."Really? Even I didn't know that“such as for reducing a woman to her tits just because you can't best her in an argument.”ahuh, I am sure that's the case even though that I know my argument is 100 percent correct. But you femitards are always in denial“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?”I manage to get laid occasionally too. But in a bigoted feminist view, the reason why a man disagrees with feminism and/or has masculine views is because he can't play with the superior puss puss. It’s the only answer isn’t it? It can’t be that men have legitimate problems too and women can do wrong too. noooooooBut this type of crap is basically the chauvinistic argument from feminists a lot of the time. "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."1. Not every woman is an idiot but it's not hard to find one.2. Many men would do anything to get a woman, even give up their own integrity. Such men like David.This is the laughable thing about you extreme feminist bigots. Not all women are perfect princesses who can never do wrong. There are just as many shitty women than there are men. But when a man complains about these shitty women, the typical bigoted feminist argument is that the problem lies within the man and not the perfect princesses who can never do wrong.The feminist argument in this thread says it all. They are so deluded in their bigotry that a man is wrong even when he complains about the wrong things women do. Bigotry really can't get any worse than this. It's absolutely woefulAnyway I've been a bit lazy to make this response and couldn't be assed to respond to the other stuff said about me in here. It's pretty much pointless trying to talk sense into bigots anyway.Oh, I found a good article today that exposes the idiotic hypocrisy of feminism. Enjoyhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8281812/Are-men-victims-of-obnoxious-feminism.html
>Not all women are perfect princesses who can never do wrong. There are just as many shitty women than there are men.Yeah, we know. Don't date them.Look at Nightstorm here, so convinced that all women are shallow, manipulative gold-diggers that he thinks that's just part of the deal in heterosexual relationships. He thinks it's normal to end up in relationships where you argue three times a week, cry yourself to sleep, and have to continually buy cars and shoes for someone who laughs about you to her friends and makes your children hate you. How well is that going to suit him in the future, if he ever does get over some of his issues with women and end up in a relationship with someone? If she treats him badly – well, that's just what women do. If people tell him the world's full of women who won't treat him badly – well, that's just feminist propaganda and lies, all women are like that!I've met shitty men, as well. My first serious relationship, God help me, was with a whiny, lying brat who wanted me to financially support him while he played computer games all day. Did I decide that meant all men were whiny, lying brats who wanted women to financially support them? No – I broke up with that guy, and found one who wasn't.That's the best way to deal with shitty people who want a relationship with you. Don't spend years bitching about their whole gender – just remove them from your life and move on. It's not actually that difficult.
>@ DavidDavid said: "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."And those women that hide their intentions until after the man is married, David?Also, couldn't one say the same thing to women who end up being "abused" by their boyfriends?Random Brother
>“Kratch, I'll get back to your comments later. “I noticed that never happened… Whatever. I didn’t expect it to.Booboo: “Kratch said:"He's a 25-year old virgin, by his own description. "Then he's a twit and deserves to stay alone.sigh, I hate virgin shaming for men.”This, David, is why MRA’s typically won’t say anything to other twits who say stupid stuff. If someone makes a stupid comment, it’s up to them to defend themselves when it gets criticized. As you yourself have said, I am not responsible for what others say. If it truly is a stupid comment, it will not be defendable, except by stuborness. And there is little reason to speak out against it, because even if we do, like I just did, we’ll be seen as some “bad guy” and called names or accused of something anyways. I actually agreed with you, this guy was a twit for making this list. He didn’t have the bad personal experience that I feel could have explained the list, he had simply sworn off women due to stereotyping, and I get SHAMED and attacked for stepping up and calling him on it, LIKE YOU ASK, no DEMAND of MRA’s… And you don’t say a damn thing to booboo. Like you expect of us. Why should I ever do it again? What’s the point? If MRA’s speaking out against other MRA’s is going to be seen as just more bad behaviour, let the twits defend themselves and the feminists mock who they want and I’ll stick to the debates I believe in and leave the rest to who’s interested.
>"Not all women are perfect princesses who can never do wrong. There are just as many shitty women than there are men.Yeah, we know. Don't date them."You're missing the point. We don't date them, and we recomend to others not to date them as well, and are being called misogynists accusing all women of acting that way for doing so. Saying women look for men with money is a generalization that doesn't apply to all women. The generalization assumes enough do to justify leaving out a limiter such as "some", or "the occasional", and the degree of that assumption can be challenged, but coming at it with an all or nothing assumption like David did is not helpful. If you want to make the claim that no women are like that or that very few are, you'r better suited to try actually arguing that point then trying to shame men for acknowledging it exists and telling others to avoid it, like you yourself are doing. No-one is talking about what ALL women expect of ALL men, and yet, that's the accusation David made (not an MRA, let alone all MRA's like many here believe).
>No-one is talking about what ALL women expect of ALL men, and yet, that's the accusation David madeTo quote Nightstorm: 'the soul draining demands a woman puts on a man once their together.'To quote you: 'The generalization assumes enough do to justify leaving out a limiter such as "some", or "the occasional"'So it's just, like, 99% of women, and rounded up to all women for ease of conversation, but hey, that's not misogynistic, that's just The Facts. Gotcha.Most of us who've been badly treated by romantic partners (male or female) manage to get on with our lives without deciding the whole gender is like that. It's a surprisingly relaxing way to live. Try it out some time!
>Yohan said :Basically, MRAs are interested into a long-term relationship with ONE honest woman.In the other thread you said that women that goes in clubs in Thailand do that to have the chance for a lucrative introduction to rich men. You think these women are honest and good for long-term relationship ?Kave said:These mra and mgtow don't seem to have freindships with women. That's the reason they become obsessed by Game and PUA techniques, they are completely alone and the only way for them to find a woman is to approach totally unknown women in clubs or in public places.
>Richard.No one hides their intentions until after they are married male or female. Some people are to stupid to see the very obvious signs. There are exceptions to the rules like head injuries or mentally ill people going off their medications but for the vast amount of people what you see is what you get. You just need to see it. Do you have female friends Richard? Not one mra has answered that question. Do you really think a woman of quality would date a man who doesn’t like women?
>I've tried to feel sorry for MRAs. It's such an ugly, sad and counterproductive way of viewing the world. The men who adhere to it cause themselves so much harm. But I just can't muster any sympathy, because the healthier choices are so obvious and so commonly made.I almost felt just the barest hint of "oh, dear" sympathy reading commenters at the Spearhead talk about the best ways to actually change society to their liking. Because, oh dear, sunshine… you've already lost. That anger you feel is a sense of loss of privilege. And it's never coming back. You're not some noble outliers with truth and reason on your side, you're like Fred Phelps and the WBC showing up to protest soldiers' funerals trying to convince people the soldier died as a punishment from God because our society tolerates homosexuality. Reasonable people find you repulsive. That's not going to change.
>How I met my wife.We were both married to our careers. She’s a real estate investor and I’m in manufacturing. We are both diehard Capitalists from privileged backgrounds.I was casually dating an older woman, no thoughts of a long-term relationship on the horizon. A friend of mine introduced us; he was casually dating her at the time. I didn’t know but he was setting us up. We feel in love over dinner. Our friend was rather smug knowing that we’d be the perfect match.MRA’s just don’t get it…at all.
>nick: ["Where on Earth do you get the idea that respect equals obedience or slavery?"] When feminists talk about "patriarchy" an awful lot.Perhaps that's because in patriarchy, respect does equal a woman's obedience to a man. (See, e.g., traditional marriage vows, covenant marriage, etc.) It's telling that this hierarchical paradigm for relationships is projected onto feminists. Matriarchy is not the only alternative to patriarchy: partnership is, and that is what the vast majority of feminists I know seek (mostly successfully). Also, re: women not needing a man, "But I think women take that concept too far these days and think very little of men. They dig it in and slap our faces with it."Why do you care what women who are cruel and belittling in the way you describe think of you? I stay far away from such people (regardless of gender), and don't find doing so difficult at all, since the vast majority of people are not like this at all. Why don't you? Kratch: "nick noted that women are taking the "reject a man cause he's not needed" too far, for example, claiming men altogether aren't needed (IE, they are a novelty, something to amuse them), and if men considered women like that (using the sexdoll as an example), then there are rampant claims of misogyny."If a woman views men strictly as novelties for her use and amusement, then I would definitely stay far away from such a sociopath. (Putting aside consenting BDSM relationships, obviously.) Such a person would indeed be a misandrist. Curiously, I have never met such a woman. (I guess I've been "lucky"?) But I have known many men IRL and online who explicitly and openly hold this view of women. No feminist/humanist I've ever known would condone objectifying anyone like this. I am wondering where you find all of these women, and whether subconsciously or not, you seek them out? I note that there are plenty of men and women who view ALL other men and women as put on this earth solely for their personal use, amusement, professional advancement, domestic slavery, human ATM, etc. I've learned to stay far away from narcissistic @$$holes too. I am not saying this is easy: I was raised by one, and I was married to one (not a coincidence, methinks…). nick, you said, quite correctly: Not all women are perfect princesses who can never do wrong. There are just as many shitty women than there are men. I would go even further: no women are perfect princesses who can never do wrong, just as no men are perfect, either. We all have flaws, more than we usually care to admit, and I don't know anyone – except the aforementioned narcissists, of course – who thinks otherwise. But then you say this: But when a man complains about these shitty women, the typical bigoted feminist argument is that the problem lies within the man and not the perfect princesses who can never do wrong.I'm sorry, but I just don't see this. When a man frames complaints about shitty people as being about women (and only women) in general, due to something biologically innate and/or culturally ubiquitous to female-ness, then yeah, women are rightly offended, justifiably defensive, and call it sexist bullshit – because it is. You yourself just said there are as many shitty men as shitty women.
>"That's the reason they become obsessed by Game and PUA techniques, they are completely alone and the only way for them to find a woman is to approach totally unknown women in clubs or in public places."—avpd0nmmng Of course, you say that as if it is a bad thing. What is wrong with gaining confidence with dealing with women? I bet you felt self-righteous writing that. So what is your solution that your offer other than your weak observations? And not all MRAs are fixated with Game, btw.
>"But I just can't muster any sympathy, because the healthier choices are so obvious and so commonly made."—Sophia XI can't muster any sympathy for feminists because there are better ways of living, thinking, and behaving. BTW, something that is common isn't always healthy—and feminism seems pretty darn prevalent these days.
>Also, Kratch – in the OP David didn't say "all MRAs," he said "many MRAs." Last, might it not be more productive to discuss, oh, I don't know… how about the ways traditional gender norms encourage and enable @$$holes of both sexes to thrive, and how to stay away from them? Here, I'll start: traditional sex roles have a side effect on many people – unfortunate and ugly, in my view – in that they instill and condone a sense of entitlement in both sexes, for example, males to sex and authority, and females to financial support. This unquestioned sense of entitlement is a problem, especially if it is not a shared value in a complementary way between both parties, and often even when it is. I am not trying to be antagonistic here. I am a very, extremely, deliriously, happily married feminist, yet I know my relationship (a real, honest-to-goodness partnership) may not work for everyone. I am genuinely interested in trying to understand whatever legitimate issues you may have, but failing. Perhaps if any of you attacking feminism here would be so kind as to answer my questions above, something productive – or at least interesting – might result?
>The shear amount of shaming being applied to all MRA's in a thread condemning "all" MRA's for supposedly applying negative attributes that some women DO existent to all women is incredibly ironic. You are doing to all the MRA's out there there very thing you are damning them of doing, taking the actions of an undetermined quantity and attributing it to the whole. That's what we call Hypocritical.I also find it amusing that we're being condemned for seeing negative traits in "Some" women (I myself have already acknowledged repeatedly that I do not believe these things apply to all women, and yet, have been repeatedly personally accused of doing just that" and yet, I'm told, "if I don't like someone like that, don't date them"… how can I not date them if I don't acknowledge those attributes exists? But if I acknowledge those attributes exists, I'm called pathetic and lonely and not capable of having friendships with women and misogynistic etc etc etc. "To quote Nightstorm: 'the soul draining demands a woman puts on a man once their together.'"To quote nightstorm in full, rather then just what David choose to show you:"You may ask "What is the list?" Its the soul draining demands a woman…"IE, it's a list of demands a woman puts out that drains your soul. a woman, not all women, not demands a woman does make. This is a list of demands that can and sometimes are made. But then, I have already acknowledged that many are benign and shouldn't be on the list, and others are rare, and that the guy who wrote the list is a twit… but none-the-less, I have been attacked for both acknowledging that some things on the list are present in women, AND for calling the guy a twit. It seems all you people want to do is attack MRA's, which makes you no better then them.
>"Also, Kratch – in the OP David didn't say "all MRAs," he said "many MRAs." "I never made the accusation David has attributed this to all MRA's, That accusation is reserved for those making the comments. You can claim they are not talking about all MRA's because (most) don't actually use the term "all MRA's", but rather "MRA's are…", but those quoted by David in the OP didn't say "All women" ether. What's good for the goose…
>wytch: I can't muster any sympathy for feminists because there are better ways of living, thinking, and behaving. I suppose it's theoretically possible that I could be happier in life than I am, and I am %100 willing to be shown the error of my feminist ways. What are these better ways I should consider living, thinking and behaving? Please, enlighten me.
>As I’ve said before my brother is mentally ill and he’s a frequent poster on many mra/mgtow boards. The guy hears voices but I’ve never seen anyone call him on his delusions. He’s threatened his ex-wive and children’s lives on those boards (real life is very scary around my brother) and the only feedback he’s gotten besides positive is “ watch the language”.My family financially supports him. And to cover everything up supports his ex-wife and “ex” children in an undisclosed location. His horrible ex-wife’s crime was leaving after he decided the family had to die.He is a victim of mental illness, not a victim of any sort of feminism. He’s learned to blame women for his problems. He started out on Stand your Ground; he got a lot of sympathy and handholding. He’s graduated to mgtow boards and the spearhead. We all have roles in our family to deal with him, mine has been for the last ten years to monitor his online activity. That’s the reality of the “mra” world.
>Knock it off the bullshit, Kratch: What do you mean you "never made the accusation David has attributed this to all MRA's"?Your very first comment on this thread, directed to David: Article: "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"Attributing this guys one opinion with all MRA's? I thought you didn't do this? He didn't do this.
>"how about the ways traditional gender norms encourage and enable @$$holes of both sexes to thrive, and how to stay away from them?"Sorry, Can't do that. An MRA acknowledging an @$$holes of the female gender is deemed to be attributing those attributes to all women, and thus, he is a misogynist. Just look at the accusations against MRA's flying around here. Nowhere has any MRA said all women make the demands on the list. I myself have spoken against parts of the list and the list writer, and I am deemed just as evil and pathetic a man as the writer himself. I have been gien the attributes these people deem all MRA's have. They have placed their prejudices upon me just as they condemn MRA's of doing to women, and It's me you have issue with.
>Iris—-How come nearly every openly feminist in life I've met or in cyberspace has:-Been emotionally combative at times-Wanted to glean both the spoils of traditionalism (sans the role) and still demand equality-Complained about their boyfriends/husbands-Cared little or nothing about men's suffering or acts as if it is lesser than women's-Eschewed responsibility in serious situations-Blamed war as a "menz thang"-Treated men (typically) harder than women in roles of authority on the job-Done little to make laws favoring women impartial-Given little or no credence to reproducive rights for men-Treated white heterosexual men as (generally) the big bad guy in the amalgam-Demonized men that doesn't like their views and placate their egos-Acted as if they are liberated and yet doesn't live their life always accordingly-Claimed they don't need men but always have men doing something for them in their personal spheres-Not respected many men until men don't put up with much shit (or these feminist women) act as if their kindness and respect is weakness-Treated male sexuality as lesser or corruptEtc . . . I could write more. I don't have all the answers, but from what I've seen living a feminist life doesn't have anything positive for me.