Perhaps, I'm idealistic but really when it comes to families I think the ideal family is one in which the man and woman truly love each other with all their heart. I don't see the modern social structure and dynamics as one that promotes this. All I have to go on are my experiences.

When you state for example in your previous post that it's terrible for a woman to fear having to put so much emphasis on dating or else they can't support themselves, how I interpret that is like this: If a woman needed a man to support herself she would put far more effort into trying to attract a man. Since a woman doesn't need a man she puts in very little effort to attract one. When your life depends on something, you tend to try really hard for it. From the male perspective, what good has this independence done men? Supposedly this is better for women but this appears to have only negatively impacted men. Are women aware of this or care? No, most see the history of men as oppressing the woman so this is now "fair", except men, myself included, want to work hard to take care of women. That is in our biology so when you take this purpose away from men and then have women who treat men like they don't need them, it's a double-negative for men. We are no longer valued by women for trying to do the things we value in ourselves; provide for women.

In terms of attractiveness, I value innocence, kindness, compassion, empathy, elegance and natural beauty in women. This is what attracts me to them. When women are challenging, crass, and dominant I find them wholly unattractive. The average modern woman rejects the personality traits I find attractive because they see it as a symbol of weakness and in order to become equal to men many women have adopted masculine traits. This makes for women being good friends but not attractive lovers.

I would agree with you that the past was not ideal. Things can always be better. I just question the direction things have gone in as they don't appear to be better for men, at all, nor do I truly think they are better for women but a lot of women refuse to accept this conclusion that because they'd have to admit that perhaps some of the old morality with regards to gender roles had merit. Some women do believe this but the mainstream collectivist mentality will not allow this discussion to happen without everyone divulging into sexist misogyny insults. I do get women from time-to-time who feel comfortable around me given my extremely traditional beliefs to open up and say they wish they could just not work, have children and have a man take care of them but they're scared of telling people that because they think men will value them less and women will barrage them for demeaning women. We pretend everyone has a choice to do whatever they want but then we implement educational curriculum, government regulations and reject christian morality from influencing children that make it incredibly hard for women to do anything other than pursue a life as a wage slave.

I think comparing the elites to the average person doesn't do much good. Ivanka is a princess. We had queens hundreds of years ago but that didn't mean the average woman was commanding legions on the battlefield.

I do think women are more susceptible to voting toward socialist ideologies which is a problem and if women were seen as helpers of man in a traditional family structure then their need to vote is questionable because their views would live through their husband/fathers that would vote on behalf of them. Like I said, I know this belief is too traditional and extreme. It'll likely never happen again anytime soon if it ever happens again. I was just pointing out how traditional my beliefs are. I also was never like this 10 years ago. I only begun to become like this the more I interacted with women and tried to find a suitable partner. The more I do that the more I think society actually had a lot more things right 150 years ago than we do today. I mean Plato even says women are as capable as men in anything that doesn't require physical strength including politics over 2000 years ago. Just because someone is capable of something doesn't mean that they should do it. What is ideal isn't necessarily what is possible.

Lastly on the part of STEM influencing women and whether it matters. Actually it does matter because it does impact me. Remember how I said I like insert traditional feminine personalities in women? Well, say your job is a saleswoman. In sales you stop trying to be a "nice person" and "care about what they're thinking or doing". You lose that feminine touch and you develop a masculine one. Saleswomen start to become very challenging and loud in conversation. They become almost confrontational and over confident, traits that are appealing in a man but not a woman. This impacts and shapes a person's personality. Where a woman might not have been able to do a morally/ethically questionable act because it would go against her character, the sales role might convince her to go against her core feminine personality and start to accept these unethical acts. All of a sudden her genuine kindness is subverted to be manipulative. I see this all the time and the struggle in people all the time. Careers shape people's personalities immensely so yes, what a woman does for work does in fact matter in regards to how it shapes her personality's attractiveness. I would argue too that women don't separate career/personal life nearly as well as men and that women often get much more anxiety as well as being emotionally drained from work than men do. The last thing any man wants when he comes home from work is a wife who's stressed out from work. Let the man bear the burden of providing while the woman nurtures the next generation because that is the role each sex is better suited for. That's my belief anyway.

Perhaps, I'm idealistic but really when it comes to families I think the ideal family is one in which the man and woman truly love each other with all their heart. I don't see the modern social structure and dynamics as one that promotes this. All I have to go on are my experiences.

When you state for example in your previous post that it's terrible for a woman to fear having to put so much emphasis on dating or else they can't support themselves, how I interpret that is like this: If a woman needed a man to support herself she would put far more effort into trying to attract a man. Since a woman doesn't need a man she puts in very little effort to attract one. When your life depends on something, you tend to try really hard for it. From the male perspective, what good has this independence done men? Supposedly this is better for women but this appears to have only negatively impacted men. Are women aware of this or care? No, most see the history of men as oppressing the woman so this is now "fair", except men, myself included, want to work hard to take care of women. That is in our biology so when you take this purpose away from men and then have women who treat men like they don't need them, it's a double-negative for men. We are no longer valued by women for trying to do the things we value in ourselves; provide for women.

In terms of attractiveness, I value innocence, kindness, compassion, empathy, elegance and natural beauty in women. This is what attracts me to them. When women are challenging, crass, and dominant I find them wholly unattractive. The average modern woman rejects the personality traits I find attractive because they see it as a symbol of weakness and in order to become equal to men many women have adopted masculine traits. This makes for women being good friends but not attractive lovers.

I would agree with you that the past was not ideal. Things can always be better. I just question the direction things have gone in as they don't appear to be better for men, at all, nor do I truly think they are better for women but a lot of women refuse to accept this conclusion that because they'd have to admit that perhaps some of the old morality with regards to gender roles had merit. Some women do believe this but the mainstream collectivist mentality will not allow this discussion to happen without everyone divulging into sexist misogyny insults. I do get women from time-to-time who feel comfortable around me given my extremely traditional beliefs to open up and say they wish they could just not work, have children and have a man take care of them but they're scared of telling people that because they think men will value them less and women will barrage them for demeaning women. We pretend everyone has a choice to do whatever they want but then we implement educational curriculum, government regulations and reject christian morality from influencing children that make it incredibly hard for women to do anything other than pursue a life as a wage slave.

I think comparing the elites to the average person doesn't do much good. Ivanka is a princess. We had queens hundreds of years ago but that didn't mean the average woman was commanding legions on the battlefield.

I do think women are more susceptible to voting toward socialist ideologies which is a problem and if women were seen as helpers of man in a traditional family structure then their need to vote is questionable because their views would live through their husband/fathers that would vote on behalf of them. Like I said, I know this belief is too traditional and extreme. It'll likely never happen again anytime soon if it ever happens again. I was just pointing out how traditional my beliefs are. I also was never like this 10 years ago. I only begun to become like this the more I interacted with women and tried to find a suitable partner. The more I do that the more I think society actually had a lot more things right 150 years ago than we do today. I mean Plato even says women are as capable as men in anything that doesn't require physical strength including politics over 2000 years ago. Just because someone is capable of something doesn't mean that they should do it. What is ideal isn't necessarily what is possible.

Lastly on the part of STEM influencing women and whether it matters. Actually it does matter because it does impact me. Remember how I said I like insert traditional feminine personalities in women? Well, say your job is a saleswoman. In sales you stop trying to be a "nice person" and "care about what they're thinking or doing". You lose that feminine touch and you develop a masculine one. Saleswomen start to become very challenging and loud in conversation. They become almost confrontational and over confident, traits that are appealing in a man but not a woman. This impacts and shapes a person's personality. Where a woman might not have been able to do a morally/ethically questionable act because it would go against her character, the sales role might convince her to go against her core feminine personality and start to accept these unethical acts. All of a sudden her genuine kindness is subverted to be manipulative. I see this all the time and the struggle in people all the time. Careers shape people's personalities immensely so yes, what a woman does for work does in fact matter in regards to how it shapes her personality's attractiveness. I would argue too that women don't separate career/personal life nearly as well as men and that women often get much more anxiety as well as being emotionally drained from work than men do. The last thing any man wants when he comes home from work is a wife who's stressed out from work. Let the man bear the burden of providing while the woman nurtures the next generation because that is role each sex is better suited for. That's my belief anyway.

Perhaps, I'm idealistic but really when it comes to families I think the ideal family is one in which the man and woman truly love each other with all their heart. I don't see the modern social structure and dynamics as one that promotes this. All I have to go on are my experiences.

When you state for example in your previous post that it's terrible for a woman to fear having to put so much emphasis on dating or else they can't support themselves, how I interpret that is like this: If a woman needed a man to support herself she would put far more effort into trying to attract a man. Since a woman doesn't need a man she puts in very little effort to attract one. When your life depends on something, you tend to try really hard for it. From the male perspective, what good has this independence done men? Supposedly this is better for women but this appears to have only negatively impacted men. Are women aware of this or care? No, most see the history of men as oppressing the woman so this is now "fair", except men, myself included, want to work hard to take care of women. That is in our biology so when you take this purpose away from men and then have women who treat men like they don't need them, it's a double-negative for men. We are no longer valued by women for trying to do the things we value in ourselves; provide for women.

In terms of attractiveness, I value innocence, kindness, compassion, empathy, elegance and natural beauty in women. This is what attracts me to them. When women are challenging, crass, and dominant I find them wholly unattractive. The average modern woman rejects the personality traits I find attractive because they see it as a symbol of weakness and in order to become equal to men many women have adopted masculine traits. This makes for women being good friends but not attractive lovers.

I would agree with you that the past was not ideal. Things can always be better. I just question the direction things have gone in as they don't appear to be better for men, at all, nor do I truly think they are better for women but a lot of women refuse to accept this conclusion that because they'd have to admit that perhaps some of the old morality with regards to gender roles had merit. Some women do believe this but the mainstream collectivist mentality will not allow this discussion to happen without everyone divulging into sexist misogyny insults. I do get women from time-to-time who feel comfortable around me given my extremely traditional beliefs to open up and say they wish they could just not work, have children and have a man take care of them but they're scared of telling people that because they think men will value them less and women will barrage them for demeaning women. We pretend everyone has a choice to do whatever they want but then we implement educational curriculum, government regulations and reject christian morality from influencing children that make it incredibly hard for women to do anything other than pursue a life as a wage slave.

I think comparing the elites to the average person doesn't do much good. Ivanka is a princess. We had queens hundreds of years ago but that didn't mean the average woman was commanding legions on the battlefield.

I do think women are more susceptible to voting toward socialist ideologies which is a problem and if women were seen as helpers of man in a traditional family structure then their need to vote is questionable because their views would live through their husband/fathers that would vote on behalf of them. Like I said, I know this belief is too traditional and extreme. It'll likely never happen again anytime soon if it ever happens again. I was just pointing out how traditional my beliefs are. I also was never like this 10 years ago. I only begun to become like this the more I interacted with women and tried to find a suitable partner. The more I do that the more I think society actually had a lot more things right 150 years ago than we do today. I mean Plato even says women are as capable as men in anything that doesn't require physical strength including politics over 2000 years ago. Just because someone is capable of something doesn't mean the they should do it. What is ideal isn't necessarily what is possible.

Lastly on the part of STEM influencing women and whether it matters. Actually it does matter because it does impact me. Remember how I said I like insert traditional feminine personalities in women? Well, say your job is a saleswoman. In sales you stop trying to be a "nice person" and "care about what they're thinking or doing". You lose that feminine touch and you develop a masculine one. Saleswomen start to become very challenging and loud in conversation. They become almost confrontational and over confident, traits that are appealing in a man but not a woman. This impacts and shapes a person's personality. Where a woman might not have been able to do a morally/ethically questionable act because it would go against her character, the sales role might convince her to go against her core feminine personality and start to accept these unethical acts. All of a sudden her genuine kindness is subverted to be manipulative. I see this all the time and the struggle in people all the time. Careers shape people's personalities immensely so yes, what a woman does for work does in fact matter in regards to how it shapes her personality's attractiveness. I would argue too that women don't separate career/personal life nearly as well as men and that women often get much more anxiety as well as being emotionally drained from work than men do. The last thing any man wants when he comes home from work is a wife who's stressed out from work. Let the man bear the burden of providing while the woman nurtures the next generation because that is role each sex is better suited for. That's my belief anyway.