This is interesting. As, talk to you partner and talk if they really see you that way. I has talk to friends becuase they say "DONT CALL ME CUTE", They explain it let them feel week, small, a pet. Like you arent seeing them as a person in the same level.
Yeah, when women are unwilling to date someone below their financial range, or below their education level, they're putting themselves in their own "undateable" category.
@cablecow15 I've always loved that line, found it humorous. Every woman I've ever heard say that has always come across as being miserable as sin and has always born an expression like everything around them thoroughly disgusts them whereas I've known plenty of men over the years who "don't need no woman" and they're about the chillest dudes I've ever met. I know from who I am at my core that I'll never be one of those guys and I can tell they're much more levelheaded and much less tightly wound than I will possibly ever be for as long as I live.
@@daggern15 The trick to "don't need no woman" is to be able to seduce women imo, when I was not it felt super important to be in a relationship, but thats just me.
I've heard women complain about dating "broke" or like "poor" guys about 5x as often as I've heard men talk about not wanting to date women who make more.
They did make that movie. It's called Aladdin. A poor robber chases the future CEO of Akrabah Corp. I'm not sure how realistic it was though. Sometimes the wealth- /class-gap doesn't matter, but all the guy literally had was some boyish charm and kind heart. Not sure I bought the conclusion. The flying rug also took me out of it.
Did anybody else think it was super weird that she got angry at him when he is attempting to give her an option out of the oppressive system that holds the both them down?
"I can't get a guy because I'm too smart" has the same energy as "I can't get a girl because I'm too nice." Either way, if your biggest problem in life is that you can't get laid, and it's conveniently "society's" fault, I can't find it in me to have sympathy for you.
As someone who has had drinking buddies in the past who have said that they are too nice or too sane to get a good woman, who I've actually slapped in the side of the arm for saying such stupid crap, I agree. There is this narcissistic vanity reaking through such a statement that also demonstrates a complete lack of self awareness. There are many reasons that, in my early 20s, the women that I were interested in were not interested in me. it had *everything* to do with me and my problems, little to do with them. Wish I could go back in time 14 years and punch myself in the face and tell myself all of these things, but such is life. My 30s are going to kick ass compared to my 20s because I have a clue, but it would have been cool to have that clue in my 20s. Here's one certainty I've found; not just in dating, but life generally. When someone implies it's everyone's fault but theirs.. guess whose fault it usually is?
especially since a female can literally ask and someone will be thirsty enough to bang her, no matter how ugly or fat. Does not work the other way around
Go ask a disabled man what he thinks of this take. Actually, I'm right here and I think it sucks. Nobody can hold any individual other than themselves responsible for their failure, but society and the values it impresses on people are an absolutely valid target for complaint.
I am someone who blames society for my inability to get laid, I totally agree with you. I've been rejected by everything from 300lb gas station workers to 80lb crack whores, but later on in life, I find it's more of a God send. As my sexual desires go down, my happiness has gone up. I now only have to focus on what I like instead of trying to impress other people. I don't have to walk around the house turning off lights that other people leave on. And best of all, I don't have to clean those long hairs out of the rollers on the vacuum cleaner. I never met a couple that wasn't always fighting anyways.
Ask them to do something menial then. Common life problems. Fix your car, sew up a pair of pants, cook dinner, figure out why your furnace is broken on a cold day, fix a flat tire. See how smart they are then.
Ya, I've literally had a woman who graduated an Ivy League school, but at the time was not working, and went on to work as a dispatcher for a courier company, tell me that I was, "Really smart for someone who didn't go to college." as if the one thing has anything to do with the other lol.
"like a pet" I got it so many times. 99% of times from someone who just happened to be born into money. People who work hard to make themselves into somebody are not blind for a value of a human potential.
Yeah, it doesn't even matter what gender they are, most of the time people from rich families talk down to people who were not born into a rich household
@@Cruznick06 True. In a culture with no community and insane levels of materialist greed, its hard to see other humans as anything other than commodities.
@@Cruznick06 except it’s only one gender the article claims is the problem. This isn’t a competition, but rather a need to acknowledge that all relationship problems are blamed on men, regardless of whether he was actually the problem.
@@i-never-look-at-replies-lol I recommend the book "The subtle art of not giving a F*ck" by Mark Manson. Just give an F about things that affect you. In the great scheme of things, who cares? I don't care what a twisted society thinks about me or my masculinity, I don't care about the opinion of people I'm not seeking approval, specially people with hypocrital & self servings opinions so flimsy that change at their convinience. I stopped giving an F about everything that doesn't directly affect me, because ultimately only me cares about me, only me can save me. But if they think that I can be shamed, stigmatized or forced into compliance because it suit them, without any push back or rebuttal, they are VERY wrong. Society & it's laws/rights are a social construction, and can easily collapse when reality knock it's door. The Ukraine War put things into perspective, THEN "toxic/fragile masculinity" & gender roles are required, I say, F them all, those who can save themselves (there must be a lot of killing/torture/rape there, and there will be no punishment, no one is going to save you but you).
One of my friends in HS got married an joined the Navy, right out of HS to support his new wife while she studied, and when he finished his tour of duty, she was supposed to then do the same for him. He held up his end, she got her degree and began working as a paralegal, he finished in the Navy and was working AND taking college courses to become a fire fighter. She blows up at him one day, about how she can't be with someone whose life is going nowhere, leaves him and immediately starts dating her boss at the law firm. Then there's the famous Reddit thread from the woman who wanted to know how to break up with the guy who had taken her in when she had nothing, and supported her through getting her degree, because now that she was a lawyer, she was "too good for him." Ya, it's not usually the guy.
You’re spot on, Louis. I remember a few years ago I dated a girl for a few weeks; she was smart, stunningly beautiful, but also terribly mean, and I got the same feeling as far as “being a pet to her.” She was a political science grad student of some sort, basically guaranteed to make more money than I’d probably ever make. I didn’t particularly understand what exactly she was aspiring to do in life, but she came from a well off family and would go on about how she got into the field because she wanted to boss people around, as if I should find that amusing as opposed to dark and mildly unsettling. I remember on one of our first dates, she ranted about Nietzsche and master/slave morality, and I couldn’t help but think it felt like a flimsy but smart-to-your-average-person sounding justification to make the point that most people were below her and deserved to be told what to do. I was a broke musician, college dropout, but she said I had “great style,” that’s the only compliment I remember getting from her. I eventually ended things with her, admittedly over something fairly petty, because I felt a need to get the fuck out of there and didn’t have the heart to tell her it was actually because I thought she was an obnoxious megalomaniac. Immediately I see my social media feed filled with posts about how she’s never dating stupid, broke, uneducated men again, and we never talk again. The thing is, I don’t really consider myself outright stupid, uneducated maybe, but I’m fairly skilled in a wide variety of practical things, can hold conversations easily with people well beyond and below my pay grade, and I don’t need a formal education to do what I love; I consider myself very lucky that I can live doing just that. This is probably a fairly extreme version of the dynamic you’re explaining, but I feel what you expressed mirrors my experience to an extent. There’s a larger issue when it comes to gender, class, and perception that goes far beyond simple masculinity. I’d argue what this article is talking about is much, much more about classism as a whole than pure gender dynamics.
Based on your description, it seems that she wasn't as smart as you- and herself -give her credit for. Maybe I'm wrong, but one thing is for certain, people like her should be kept from the levers of power as far away as possible. Sadly, these well connected old money elitists always seem to have the levers of power given to them with no consequences.
Society teaches men theyre worthless until they prove otherwise. Even someone as successful as louis thinks his job is low end, but goes on to apply the opposite standard to the women he talks about. People also tend to blame men when they arent able to find a partner, telling them they need to improve themselves or they did things wrong; while women in the same situation receive emotional support and are told its not their fault.
Hypothesis time! I think women are getting to the point where they are much more educated but that comes with an arrogence. The same kind of aroggance a child has after learning a topic for the first time. Someone like Louis has probably been humbled a couple times in life and has more likly mellowed out when it comes to estimating his abilities and intelligence overall. Sorry for the sloppy thesis
In part both are causes on how a society focus on capital work. You arent WORTH unless you have Succes, Succes is not emotional, spiritual, or even mentally, its monetary. And with how gender roles still persist, not eveyone is ofllowi g them now but they still are present today, with woman being cwring and emotional, specially with each other, and man having to keep themselves emotionally close and dietant, be the stoic who suffers inside, and iss uposed to gain more. And this even affect stable relationship now, like even if the woman has higher studies, both end up relying more on the man as no matter the job man win more in general. So you have someone capable with little to support and someone over charge with responsability and no outlet.
the thing is purely on a economical standpoint you want women higher in priority in hopes that they would have more kids. you can kill 80% of guys and still have a baby boom but if 5% of women disappear you will have extreme societal problems cropping up sooner or later
It's the strangest thing, that the article comes so close to reaching a solid conclusion...and then shies from connecting the dots. The problem isn't masculinity - it's that we're placed on a hierarchy based on success. If Men date women of "lesser status," it might be to preemptive the jackknife maneuver women employ whenever Men aren't "as successful" (be that as they once were, or as their peers). It's one less garbage reason for a relationship to fall apart, so it makes sense. We get sold the idea to look for love, to find mates that we're attracted to...but rarely informed that the "love" is rocked in proportion to how well off we are. And then here comes this article: "Men aren't trying to court female CEO's, they're afraid we're too smart, they're dating their LESSERS. REEEE." It's the dying thralls of harpies removing themselves from the dating pool. I can't say I'll miss them.
@@EyePatchGuy88 Because women get pregnant. That's literally the only reason. Unfortunately we don't procreate asexually, so the trade off for not getting pregnant is all the bullshit ideas that come along with it, vice-versa for women. Not saying it's right to oppress people with bullshit ideas, but I can see why they came to be. It'd be a lie to say that it didn't get us to where we are now; it's just that oppressive ideas can only last for so long until they start to become openly degenerate.
@@yeahgirl11 You can blame men alot of things, but that men in general are choosy is beyond wrong. There is a cup for every tea there is. There are whole books on the idea that alot of woman try to get men above their social rankings, not the other way around. Why there are many theories, and of course with everything: Not every woman is like that. But to take it and turn it around because these woman on top want a man actually that is at least their equal is the only problem that exists, because there are not that many spaces on top, and woman conquer every day more of them. Meaning. The more woman are on top, the less men they can find if they choose to not change their behavior.
I think if both, males or females start with how much their salary is or what position they fill it is a red flag, for example, I say what is my field, not exactly what I do or how much my income is, that is not relevant,the field is relevant because common interest, to be honest, I dont even use my full degree when they ask me, for me the parts that distinguish me from a technician are not relevant, even when the difference is 2 years of college for a technician and 6 for my degree, I know even self taught people can do what I do, the difference is that I also can do and understand a lot more things and with a lot more depth. But at the beginning those details are irrelevant, "what you studied" "electronics", "what do you do", "machine learning", the fact I am an engineer (is 6 years because in my country they add another extra to the title that is administrative knowledge so we are able to make a company) and that I am the lead in some projects while support in others is irrelevant before going into specifics. That is for when you already are comfortable with each other. If a woman did began with the full title I would get the same vibes I got from teachers that began their introduction with their doctorates before their name (seriously, one didn't said his name until the second week), an incredible egocentric person that I can tolerate, but never be friends, much less partners.
@@thomask5434 Dude, she never said anything about men directly, some women dont want to get pregnant, so they are in that category also, and she only pointed out biological and psychological factors that affect the general of the population, the oppressive ideas she pointed out are held by women as much as by men, so, one of two options, or you are in a timezone where is night and late or you felt alluded and tried to defend yourself by putting words on someone else's mouth.
To quote @BASSFZz Men aren't attracted to doctors, Lawyer, CEO.They're attracted to women. For the most part they don't care what a women's occupation is. They're not interested in careers, they're interested in the person.
It's amusing listening to the call-ins on Kevin Samuels get stuck in an infinite loop listing their credentials: college they went to, degree they got, name of the business they work for, the position they hold, type of car they drive, etc. It's like they think they can get married by submitting their resumes to some sort of husband company.
And the sad reality is that a lot but NOT ALL women in such high valued positions have little to no personality to go with the position. They’re so dedicated to their work that they make no time for developing social interests.
I've posted to this effect a few years ago all over the internet. I am not a goddamn HR manager hiring a potential spouse based on her fricking resume. I want to be close to a person of the other sex. A friend and a romantic partner. Degrees don't impress me. Your attitude however does.
ive had someone in my past cheat on me with a heroin addicted alcoholic, subsequently marrying them and having kids together. sometimes people just arent into you LONG before the end of a relationship and people just dont know how to get out. one thing i have learned in my journey is people are infinitly more complex than people realize and sometimes relationships end that should have never began.
Women will almost always be attracted to the bad boy. Drama makes their juices flow. A good guy dries them up. The only way to save women from themselves is to give authority back to the fathers so they can pick good mates for their daughters. But that won't happen any time soon.
Not the car wash, unless this is a super smart, super nice, ethical, self educated person of integrity with deep social.values who likes the zen escape.of mindless labor This could.be an intellectual,.an artist, a.writer, etc.. (I knew a truly awesome person of this sort). Still, car wash would be pushing it unless we had a just society where every sort of labor earned a living wage. There are some sorts of work that only people with significant problems would do, and which would not be able to lift them out of those problems. That's not about the type of work. That's about the abuse of laborers in many societies.
Absolutely, knowing someone who's a) confident b) knows what they're talking about c) hardworking, it's super attractive. Especially when they know a lot about the topic
I’ve never personally seen a man’s spouse, “have their back” if the man loses his job / money. I suppose it’s possible, but I’ve never seen it or even heard about it. I have seen many men get destroyed financially in divorce court though….LOL
My God mother is a realtor and works for herself. Well because of that and her lack of drive she will do a few big sales and take it easy for large portions of the year. This can result in her running low or out of money when she times it wrong. Well husband #3 worked in the oil field and he had no problem taking care of the family when her money dried up. When he lost his job and tried to get into a new career which had a bit of a lag time before he'd make good money she left him very quickly. She told my mom "She didn't marry him to take care of him". He took care of her plenty, but the moment he needed her to do the same she bailed. Now I love this woman to death, but this was such a clear example of how cruel women can be and how much status of their partner matters to them
I had my husbands back 100% his mother died unexpectedly and it took a toll on his mental health. He lost his job and I held us down for 2 years. After therapy and some time he went back to work and then many years later I received a terrible health diagnoses and I actually felt guilty that I couldn’t work and he reminded me we are a team I held him down it’s time for him to take care of us.
I know a top nyc cancer doctor, he told me that a majority of men who get cancer, their wife stays with them and supports them.. a majority of women who get cancer, the husband left and or was not supportive at all..so men need to stop playing the victim 😴
@@barneystinson2781 It's biology. Pregnancy leads women to be more selective than males, is simple, the time and resources invested. Women have a limited reproductive capability, the energy and time inputs are immense, where men, if the opportunity is available, can get hundreds of women pregnant in the time it would take a woman to be ready to have another child. This is simply biology, males that had many children were more likely to have their genetics spread. Women who were more selective with males that could ensure their survival as protectors/providers, were more likely to survive, have multiple children, and have their genetics spread. This is the same for most mammals. This is true no matter how much society and its PC social constructions try to fight it.
How many women in your life will lower their standards or date down? The more successful you are, the more limited your dating pool will be unless you’re willing to compromise and expand your dating options.
That only counts to women the more successful a man is more options for dating. The more successful a woman is the more door she will close on her own. She'll no longer consider lower income men as an option.
@@AppleMenace well that depends, if the dude has a perfect body and is hung like a horse, she may very well overlook the money issue, cause then she gets a boy toy.
@@libertyresurrected7406 That works during the party girl phase. When she approaches 30 she starts looking for someone to settle down with. If she had the boytoy before she'll be looking for the boytoy but millionaire version.
My wife's father once told her about how the class (and by extension education) divide causes a lot of people (in his example often women) to end perfectly healthy and stable relationships. He was a professor at a college in Chicago years ago, and taught small classes seeing the same students for multiple years as they worked towards their Certs or Degrees, and got to know many of them well. He told my wife back when she was a teenager about how in his experience, college ruins most relationships. He knew a girl who was a student of his who was dating some other girl, about the same age, who supported her while she went to college. From what he learned, the student's girlfriend worked a shit job with lots of hours to support the both of them for years while the student focused on her studies. Finally after a few years all that focus paid off, and the student got her diploma. She immediately broke up with her supportive girlfriend, because she was now in a higher social strata/class than before, and could do better. According to my wife's dad this happened all the time, like clockwork. As soon as the woman gets the degree and elevates her status with a nice job, she leaves her old blue-collar partner because in her mind she could do much better now, whereas before she was more or less equal in the relationship. Now personally, I didn't go to college, my wife is also a dropout, and out of all my friends I have only one who has completed college, so I don't have much first hand experience with the college life. However, do clearly notice people rarely date below their "class". Don't believe me? Think about anybody you know in a relationship, and think about their partners. How many people with degrees and well paying careers stay with a partner who works in retail, or at mcdonalds? Now, how many of them are men who are the supporting partner? How many women support their man?
@@j7704 women outnumber men on college campuses don't they? So from a class perspective, there are more women who consider themselves upper class than men. So therefore, there aren't enough "upper class" men to go around. And even if you do go to college women who go to college don't consider you on their level unless you hold a job with a title higher than theirs. If you're both on the same level, you're still not an attractive mate.
@@j7704 I'm urgently in college. Met a woman in her late 30s to early 40s and she told me that she went to college to find a husband. She found one and had 2 maybe 3 kids (it's been a while). Women don't go to college to find a husband anymore. They go to get a degree to work the rest of their life.
@@j7704 I'm not really sure that's it. Arrogance seems to play a huge role here. Where there's arrogance one tends to loose every chance at happiness. Many of these "successful" women would be better off marrying folks at a "lower class" than themselves in most cases as this would bring them happiness but they're not willing to let go of their ego and that's the problem.
Men have mostly chose their careers over family just so they can provide for their family. It shouldn’t be an ultimatum when it comes to career success or family success for women or men. To frame this as a masculinity problem is propagandistic
We really should go back to the old way of doing things and have multiple generational houses. Have Grandma and Grandpa live with the family and they can look after the kids when the parents have to work. And the parents and kids can look after the grandparents when they are sick. Many places still do things that way and honestly, it's a pretty smart and efficient way for a family unit to take car of eachother.
@@jonathanwilkinson4299 I was just going to mention this. The paradigm is shifting from hiring Nannie’s to having family members be in care of children, keeping multigenerational family structures from the old world.
Men's only choice is to try to have a career, they don't have the option of getting pregnant and letting someone else earn a living. Women still have that option.
I am a retired pharmaceutical research scientists with 2 PhD’s, yes, I am a little ashamed considering what has happened to the industry. My husband is a retired Professional Firefighter, and we have been married for >25 yrs. We discuss everything, and I have never even thought about money in our relationship. Our relationship started out as friends, and developed into love. Also, sex wasn’t introduced for 2 years. I think tooooo many relationships are based on physical attraction, and not on mutual respect. JMHO
Completely agree! I have a BS in electrical engineering emphasizing computer chip design but graduated during that Tech Bubble Burst. So I've never been able to work in the field. I am now a statistician in the insurance industry, low six-figures. My wife was raised from a single mother who was a raging alcoholic living in the ghetto wrong side of the tracks. They had to stress every month about how they were going to pay the water bill. We've now been married 32 years and are very happy. I married my wife, not her family background. My wife is not educated but she is certainly not stupid. She did not go to college, she did get her GED because in her family history nobody graduated from high school, they were all expected to quit school and get a job to help support the family. And that's exactly what she did. But in her defense, she stayed away from all the addictive behaviors that her family has had for generations. I married a fine lady and I'm very happy!
I wonder if your relationship got around the whole hierarchy thing because you started as friends and weren’t looking at each other as possible partners. Interesting.
I think you're 100% right. Especially about sex. I waited until marriage to have sex and it weeded out ALL the assholes; my husband is 15 years older than me and was raised in a Mormon family (I'm not Mormon), so he found it easy to respect me and respect my decision to wait. People nowadays lack discipline in general and that's what leads to all these bullshit problems. It's really not hard to wait for the right one and the right circumstances.
Ashamed for what? Pharmaceutical researchers have done a marvelous job during the past few years, to finally have a possible vaccine for HIV is amazing, to get 60 years of research and made vaccines that work so much better than the old vaccines in a matter of months was fantastic, what is there to be ashamed? The prices on the us are not representative of the world at large.
@@alenasenie6928 I work in big pharma as a Ph.D. Not ashamed in the slightest for banking on that sweet, sweet, dirty pharma money. And you're right. With all the bad of how exploitative pharma can be, there is still a lot of good being done.
"where are the romantic comedies of men who romantically pursue women CEOs?" Or maybe a CEO protagonist isn't that relatable for the average viewer, romantic comedies are written mainly for women and the thought of dating a poorer man isn't that interesting as an escapist fantasy for women? Edit: Okay, so there are millions of movies where a rich woman is charmed by a poor man. I don't watch rom-coms, so that's new and useful info to me. I was just trying to find an explanation to the argument "no rom-coms about woman CEOs because of men" in the article.
There are just as many romance stories centered around women pursued by poor, yet charismatic men, as there are women being pursued by men in positions of power. The escapist fantasy isn't exclusively about finding someone in a power role, it's about finding someone charming.
I wouldn't mind having someone more intelligent than me, I would mind someone who looks down on me for not being as intelligent. I think many guys (and people in general) feel the same way. She can teach me new things and I can maybe teach her something too, win win situation as far as I'm concerned.
I supose is comes in with gender roles? Man are supose to be proudfull and independant. Woman subservient and complaint. So when you switch the positions thee roles dosnt quite work out the same way, after all, goes against the set role structure, and thus works diferent of what we are teach to expect. Can also be just personal capacity and personality. Some people are very proudfull or even egomaniac, and that affect their relationship. Not to mention how someone egomaniac with someone complaiant can easily devolve in a toxic and harmfull situation.
@@jsgdk ibiously is more clompex than that, just exploring the part gender roles play on it, asis the most subtext we are expose to from birth. Thus having influence in a lot of aspect of society.
"As the stereotype goes, successful men used to marry their secretaries [....] But smart, successful women still have to navigate enormous landmines in their romantic relationships with men." -> Nowadays, there are definitely no enormous landmines for any man trying to get in any sort of a relationship with any of his female subordinates, right?
@@ericquiabazza2608 It doesn't. I bet if you asked the author of this article what masculinity means, she couldn't define it. It's just a way of putting all men into one category and attacking them. I'm not suggesting that men are faultless. It's just interesting that in discussion of most social issues, there seems to be no shortage of blame assigned to men or "masculinity" and yet there is rarely any accountability put on women. This article is a classic example of men being blamed for what is largely a result of women's own choices. If I'm wrong, I stand ready to be corrected.
@@arontesfay2520 i can support that. There is also issues like abusive woman on man. People dont belive it or just plain make fun of the victim. If we want a trully equal gender society (or as much close to one we can) things have to go both ways.
@@jsgdk not necessarily, yes, man still (i general) find a better paining job than woman, has familly to corroborate. But i wasnt always acepting the whole Macho man role wholeheartedly, is very dumb and restrictive. Not to mention that as someone rise in a big familly and the eldes was made to help on all kind of chores and thing concider feminine. More so now that i am going independant, you need allt his skills. Basicly what i mean is oublicly reject the old Macho idea and come with a new more mature idea. That way not only help go over restriction and abuse the old way inprints. But also takes away the subject. People call out Machismo because it was genuinly toxic, now a big part is more to gather atention or use as excuse. So taken the old machismo away you adress the original problem and take away the trigger word. Ashole would still use it for drama, and toxic behaviour wont entirelly stop. But will be reduse and make society more conscious.
I've never been intimidated. I just know the consequences. One of the most annoying things to me is when I know that I'm wasting my time doing something, especially when it's costing me money. I've had to turn down a young good looking woman because I knew as soon as she left college she'd bounce. That's exactly what she did, graduated and left town. That's not a negative masculine trope, it's called dodging a bullet.
Don't you understand? If you don't prostrate yourself and fill whatever role women want in the moment something is wrong with you. You are not allowed to be a human being you are just a checkbox in their life.
Nha, that sound more like insecurity and doubt. Doubt that they would stay with you or concider dragin you with them. Everyone also has its own standar, some want thing on they term, other just wing it and see what happen. Do you even talk to that person? Comunication is important for a long and healthy relationship.
@@ericquiabazza2608 You don't spend years at college only to turn around and take a small job at a local office or diner. Which you wouldn't know, judging by your way of writing and erratic logical leaps.
@@ericquiabazza2608 if he's only something that "drags her down" then maybe cutting the problem at its nub was the solution? And thats exactly what the guy did lol???
@@sid6645 that is the point, isnt "Both going together", if she even offer he would thinkthat way, that is "dragin her down". He even asume she would "bounce", not "move outside" or "go forward and move", its clear dude has issues and already set his mind that the relationship wont work, so it didnt work, is a self made professy.
I dated an influencer that was really well off from native advertising. I was a foreigner in her country so even though I was broke I got the feeling that she saw me like a novelty, almost like Paris Hilton's chihuahuas. It did sicken me how she was taking advantage of her followers for a stupid amount of money. It was weird, but really nice, being on the receiving end of having dates paid for. My current girlfriend makes more than me which I really don't mind but most of my female friends would never date a guy that makes less than them and would never pay for a single thing for the guy. If any women read this, ask yourself, when was the last time you got a guy something for Valentines Day? Out of the last 14 years, only two ladies have ever done something for me on that holiday (2 out of 10, 3 single V-Days).
Funny thing. In Japan the guy normally doesn't give anything on valentine's day. He just receives. Though usually with the expectation he gives something in gratitude on white day
hot take: without hesitation men will be solely blamed for a whole raft of things (sometime legitimately, sometimes not) very rarely will women be blamed for any like problems, the media will just say 'society' or 'people'
not unlike when a man cheats it's because he's a terrible person but when a woman cheats it was most likely the man's fault for driving her to do it. Society has a lot of double standards that both benefit and harm both genders but right now it's all about trying to blame men which won't help anything. It's all interconnected.
Oh they have a clue. They know exactly what it is, but to admit what's going on would be admitting they actually have to do something about it, which would be as good as admit that they're the problem and NOBODY wants to admit that especially successful people. Both because it lowers their ocial standing, and that then puts the pressure on them to comply rather than do what the 'nice guy' eequivilant does and blame everyone BUT them.
This reminded me of a study that caught my attention about a year ago (I'll provide a link to it if I can find it). The basic gist of it was that women, even in many non-human species, tend to be hypergamic, meaning that they desire men who are either at or above their own hierarchical level (whether that be an economic, social, physical success, etc.). On the other hand, men tended to care less about the female's hierarchical status and more about their own.
Yeah, but hypergamy can also express in the form of "he is fit, strong, has a stable job and society tells me this is good" (basically what happened when men were of higher status than women just because they were male, and masculine traits were seen as something good rather than bad). But now only matters how much money you make and how many women are chasing you.
Women have serious issues when it comes to dating down. You can't displace men in society and then expect prince charming to be there waiting for you. Men mostly don't care as long as we are treated well. Too much of a woman's self-worth is based on what kind of man she has.
@@oliviacarolinanogueira7769 Did you even watch the video or read the article? As women gain status they become more and more contemptuous of lower status partners. Massively shrinking your dating pool. And then you blame men for what you do to yourselves. Men don't really have that problem because we don't place that much value on a woman's social status or resources.
@@oliviacarolinanogueira7769 here's the thing about that, a male that's making the same as her *will* date someone who is a part time cashier at Walmart, or even unemployed. We're not programmed by either nature or society to care what our partners make. It's not even a factor in the male decision making process for selecting a partner. We're interested in emotional connection, physical attraction, compatibility, and a host of other things. What a woman does for a living or how much she makes are so far down the list as to be non existant. So given that there are a (very) limited amount of men making significantly above average salaries, and a not insignificant number of them are going to be happily settling with someone who makes less than them, by stubbornly insisting that a partner make exactly the same - or more - these women are effectively pricing themselves out of the dating market entirely and the older they get the more this will be exacerbated because more and more men will be in committed relationships. And that's entirely their decision to make, they don't *have* to do otherwise. But it would make sense to make some concessions in the interest of finding a compatible partner before 'with some difficulty' becomes 'completely impossible.'
To women a man is just a status symbol. A thing. Like a McMansion, an SUV, a kid and all the other crap their waste money on. Think about how depraved that is. They see their own children as another status symbol. You watch. The second they can they dump the kid at daycare and go back to working at Noseberg corporation in their fake HR job. I can forgive the way women look at men. It's just how they are. I have an equally low opinion of women to be honest but how modern women treat their own children is to disgusting to forgive.
I think they’re forgetting that it’s women who are raised to believe they need to “marry up” in society. So when I hear “guys aren’t marrying women more successful than they are, women most affected”, I’m inclined not to believe it.
Nah, only going to speak from personal experience, there are plenty of men who wouldn't date a woman who makes more than them. Women are socialized to want to marry a man who makes more than them but men are equally socialized to think that they have to be the bread maker and to not be makes them a failure as a man.
@@totha098 I just find that surprising. Not saying you are lying, but I haven't yet encountered anyone like that. Maybe it is a thing where it occurs more often around specific ages or in certain demographics? (Like Rural versus Suburb, North versus south etcetera.)
The one thing I tend to notice with a lot of these examples that are quoted in these kind of relationship articles, is they tend to focus on people who have achieved wealth through being specialised experts in their given field (to use these examples of Supreme Court nominee, academy award actor etc)...I feel like I may be stating something that is highly obvious but often not want to be included as a variable in these studies, is that often people who have a capacity to become specialised experts in any given domain are neuro-divergent...deficits in relational and social capacity are kind of in the diagnostic criteria...I think communication and problem resolution skills are far better predictors of relationship success than annual earnings, after all, ‘hypergamy’ is redundant when accounting for the variable of ‘height’....Basically the fun with statistics as you can make them say whatever you want them to say, so it’s always best to at least account for a wide range of variables particularly at the start
@@adamlucas4753 very surprised you knocked down neurological medical science for not being ‘hard’ (#pseudoscientificbullcrap lol) then went on to provide a sociological and philosophy based argument argument....kind of confused by that... yes unfortunately it is still not possible to treat all areas of medical health research as a ‘hard’ science, which means you will often come across terms with what is called an ‘operational definition’. Something you may be familiar with given your penchant for sociology. Health research is still not a perfect system and the more you learn the less you realise you know. Obviously the more we learn about different disorders, systems, mechanisms etc the more we will be able understand and test for them. So for now we are stuck with diagnostic categorical labels that fall under the colloquial name of ‘neurodivergent’ including ASD and adhd. If you look up the medical or psychology diagnostic manuals then you will find that these deficits are cited within the taxonomy frame that practitioners use. Still not as ‘hard science’ as a blood test but none the less quite useful for practice and research purposes and Ihope it improves over time. What I am referring to is a type of statistical test called a ‘multivariate analysis’ and my belief this type of testing is more useful at answering the question than a ‘univariate’ approach would be. I do believe that philosophy is useful at providing the framework and theory to inform the use of the tests, but that testing should DEFINITIVELY occur in order to confirm or rebuke these philosophical notions. Essentially this means that I am advocating for the use of a multivariate analysis to confirm whether or not the variable of cognitive functioning explains a greater proportion of the variance in answering the question of if the cited relationship problems experienced by individuals with expert performance in a given domain than other commonly cited variables from the literature do. Variance is the explanatory power of a variable. So I am referring to what approach to use if you find, or can theorise, a ‘confounding variable’. Look up posthoc and planned comparisons analyses. But that is based on my theory that it would have a large enough explanatory power to deem the other variables redundant or to justify the removal of these variables from the model. For example, thinking that matchsticks cause emphysema becomes redundant well accounting for cigarettes, like you can still keep the matchsticks in your model but it would have a lower explanatory power than if you removed the matchsticks as a variable. My extremely short-hand half-sentence example from my prior post regarding hypergamy is that ‘hypergamy’ is a ‘theory’, but a posthoc one. It was used to theoretically explain a ‘trend’ people were seeing in the relationship selection data available at the time. Recently (and this is why I am a strong advocate for replication studies in science), some of the original variables were placed in a multivariate analysis along with more of the study participants demographic and biological data including the new variable of the participants’ height. The model with the greatest explanatory power simply stated that women prefer men with greater height to themselves. Thus, once again, scientific grant money was spent on confirming the obvious....not saying these other factors do not contribute to a good relationship but if women were to have one vs ten of the other factors they would basically choose height almost every time. After all in most studies women give ‘social’ greater salience in decision making then their male counterparts (hope you picked up on what I did there, it’s of use for one of you examples). Although I am well aware this changes at extreme ends of the bell curve where, which is why I think my intitial question becomes more interesting because, with most individuals scoring in the average across an array of quality of life outcomes my question references individuals that have scored in the highest referential category and thus you would more likely to find extreme scores in other areas such as cognitive ability. Like I definitely enjoy listening to much of the political, psychology, sociology rhetoric here on CZcams. I know people are looking for answers as to why so many aspects of the world are screwed up. But I worry that this new sociopolitical-theory-of-the-gaps (as an obvious play on the god-of-the-gaps conundrum) is removing people’s ability to search for answers, at least ones that don’t conform to prior ideology, or bear some semblance of an ability to critically view multiple sides of a theory without so much bias. Not saying bias can’t be fun, after all, engineers bias us, we bias psychology, who biases sociology that biases the working class lmao
@@lunar686 I didn't knock down neurological medical science. You posited a condition with strictly behavioral criteria. That's behavioral science. Does your inability to communicate precisely and clearly mean you have a neurological condition? No. If you've got PET or EEG data categorically demonstrating inferior problem-solving capabilities, that would be neuroscience. But you don't have that and I know you don't because IQ and intelligence researchers have been searching for it for decades and still haven't definitively found it (being clear: they can identify neurologically-retarded people but they can't distinguish neurologically eloquent speakers from merely functional or adequate ones or people who are otherwise brilliant problem-solvers.) Before getting into the rest of it let's get one thing clear; despite current social fads with regards to sex and marriage, in a definitively binary reproductive construct (which human physiology is), women _definitively cannot_ be any more choosy than men when it comes to reproduction. We aren't saying that hypergamous females biologically define the species like could/would/is true of other species. We're talking about strictly social constructs of marriage and non-reproductive sex. Moreover, you say redundant when you mean covariant, you then go on to suggest I learn multivariate analysis (Again? I've only been doing it for 20 yrs.) while, seemingly ignoring that it's been done for decades and, paradoxically, suggest a single variable, which agrees with the overarching classification that you say it refutes. Yes, the variable that accounts for the most variance has the most explanatory power but, unless it explains all the variance, and height doesn't, it doesn't have the explanatory power of multiple variables that can/does include the singular variable itself. Chiefly, this is the power of multivariate analysis/mixture experimentation. You know that water, flour, butter, sugar, eggs, and chocolate chips are all important variables in a given recipe but unless you measure and control all of them together, you don't get cookies. Various ingredients may have correlated function, sugar contributes to the flakiness of cookies similarly to flour, water and eggs both make mixing easier, and chocolate chips are sweet like sugar and may be the one ingredient that generates the most preferred cookie but when you combine them all, you get something that isn't adequately described by any given ingredient and even if you have a cookie with the maximum amount of chocolate that generates the maximum amount of desirability unless it's got the other ingredients in the roughly correct proportions, it's not a good/preferred cookie. Also, as I said, it doesn't refute the over arching classification. Yes, height is an important variable but if women prefer men over 6 ft. tall and only 1% of men are over 6 ft. tall and even fewer than 1% of women are, that's hypergamy. Doubly so if men 'only' prefer women in the upper 50th percentile of height. And again, you say '1 in 10' and throw the other 9 variables away, you've explicitly reduced a multivariate analysis to a single variable. Which is unusual because, as I indicated, height doesn't explain all the variables and the studies on the other variables have been done. Chocolate may be the preferred ingredient and sweet, but we all know you don't get a cookie without the other ingredients. Height is correlated with income. Height isn't the single factor when it comes to income but it's a factor. Height and income are not redundant. When you control for height and ask women which men they prefer, they'll choose men with more income (or men who present themselves as having more income). Again demonstrating hypergamy, where they prefer men who make more money than they do while men are more income agnostic about their partners. Just like saying water or chocolate chips is the primary ingredient when it comes to making good cookies. Water or chocolate chips may get you the most bang for your buck but they are not redundant with flour or butter. Chocolate chips, being largely milk fat, may correlate with butter, but they aren't redundant. With regard to theory and neuro-divergence, none of this is to say that hypergamy is any sort of pathology or explicit condition in any given woman any more than their preference for chocolate chip cookies. Even quite the opposite, there are many benefits to women being choosy about their partners, not the least of which is their partners striving to meet higher standards. Just like a cookie with chocolate chips is, or may be, better than one without. Divergence explicitly indicates a separation and to assert it's typified by an inability to communicate or problem solve explicitly indicates a pathology or dysfunction. To assert it's neural suggests a predictive path from a given neurological condition to a pathological inability. Hypergamy isn't a theory, not nearly as much as 'neuro-divergent' is a theory. It's an objective classification. The researchers conducting the multivariate analysis didn't set out to bake cookies. At its most theoretical, they noticed cookies in nature and sought to elucidate the ingredients. Closer to reality, they noticed mixtures of just flour and water or just butter and sugar, or chips of composite elements of milk fat, sugar, and cacao (etc.) in nature and said that this one with all of them together is a chocolate chip cookie. It doesn't strive to explain why women are hypergamous any more than explain why chocolate chip cookies are better and doesn't intrinsically project any/all expected outcomes of hypergamy, let alone good/bad outcomes, as much as just acknowledge that they are. The opposite, even going so far as to say that a cookie composed entirely of chocolate chips isn't a cookie. When someone says, "Why can't I find my/a good chocolate chip cookie?" the answer of "Your cookie doesn't have chocolate chips." or "Most cookies recipes don't have chocolate in them." isn't a theory, it's a statement of the fact that most chocolate, while maybe the most preferred ingredient in chocolate chip cookies, isn't a necessary one. It doesn't state that the woman is hypergamous, just that her standards are too high. Unlike neuro-divergent which strongly suggests that there is some diagnostic neurology which confers her standards, hypergamy merely asserts that she's engaging in a behavior that many other women engage in. Women preferring chocolate chip cookies and men preferring any cookie is an example of hypergamy just as much as women preferring men over 6ft. tall while men preferring any woman who has sugar and eggs (if even that) is. It's not a theory, it's an observation.
Women seem to have a problem admitting that they are picky. Too picky. That's somehow wrapped up in who initiates divorces, who cares about being seen as "promiscuous", and more. We men are somehow always the problem. IMHO somebody needs to understand that it's impossible for one half of the relationship to be the whole problem all the time. Where are the articles written by men about relationship problems? Are we writing articles like this mansplaining how modern feminism is making dating hard? From what I hear, we are more likely to be incels, complaining that 80 percent of the hookups are going to 20 percent of the men. I'm not confusing hookups with relationships, I'm saying other than platonic relationships, a long term intimate relationship doesn't get established at all if it doesn't start, and women are the ones saying yes or no...they have the control, and it appears they aren't happy with how that's working out. Puzzling isn't it?
@@ShaferHart This society is truly confused. I'm all for equality, but in my experience, while Westerners are coddled in general, it's the women- especially the White ones- who are coddled the most. People will say that's racist, but I have seen it my whole life with my own eyes. I know a Bulgarian dude who actually told me that he will not date a White American woman because "they're crazy and don't know what they actually want". Even my own husband said, "What the fuck was I thinking???" It is what it is, but general coddling in our society has made people unwilling to practice introspection and unwilling to listen to other viewpoints.
women are biologically hardwired to be picky; if they chose a bad date, not only is 9 months of their lives lost by giving birth to the child of someone who very well might abandon them, but it might actually result in the woman and the kid passing away in a survival situation, especially if the male is pathetic and incapable. This would naturally create an evolutionary pressure for women to select for competence, which is unfortunately being correlated (correctly? Incorrectly?) with your annual income
I think that, in general, it's women who don't like to date men who earn less. In a marriage, as soon as a woman starts to significantly outearn the man, that marriage is in danger of falling apart. The reason is 90% the woman: she starts to feel she is carrying the guy, and as long as she still has her looks, she feels she can do better. I think this is really harmful in the long-run - it is counter to the (relatively) recent "career woman" ethos.
My Wife earns 3x what I can. We're a complimentary pairing. When we had kids, we've took turns working and looking after the kids. I see life is a game, and right now I feel like I'm winning. As long as you can try and meet each others needs, screw what the world thinks. I'm definitely not a woke man, so I find this nonsense they print about relationships is stupid. Thanks for your input Louis!
Man, you're so right about this. Especially the pert about being treated like a pet. Most women feel like a man should make more than them, not the other way round.
Because that’s what society thought them from the very beginning. Structures are just starting to change. I’m looking forward to how it will be in 10 or 20 years. Hopefully that way of thinking won’t be as prevalent then.
@@DieFarbeLila88 No, what's being described here is 'hypergamy' and has been a part of female nature since forever, and has little to nothing to do with social structures. Here's a quote from an article about the science behind hypergamy "it's evolutionarily adaptive to engage in hypergamy, because it increases the likelihood that you’ll have children who live long enough to reproduce" "Hundreds of thousands of years ago, you wanted a man who had more resources, land, or his own watering hole. A man with resources is better suited to help you raise your children"
@@shmeegol Women were not allowed to have land and watering-holes back then. So I wouldn't really call it "nature" but more like "the only option they had". There is a difference. Everything belonged to the men. So pretty much ALL partnerships were hypergamy. There was pretty much no there option. But the situation is different now. Women are allowed to have land and watering holes. Which makes me think, that your argument is not really applicable to our current situation.
I don't think even man with 10 in looks department but a garbage collector will even be enough for these female CEOs. "but he is garbage collector". anyone below 10 in looks department will be called a creep, then she call the police or security on him, just like awkward student in UK who got jailed for saying "hi".
The only CEO & lowerlevel employee romcom i've watched is The Proposal - and even then, she's the CEO. I literally cannot think of one where the man is the CEO and the woman is the lowerlevel employee
I love how she can just say "it's up to men"; the tremendous privilege of taking no responsibility for success in your own relationships, that can only come from being a woman in the west.
I don't think a lot of people believe it consciously, but there are examples about how the media we consume do have an affect on us. If things we see didn't affect us at all propaganda wouldn't even be a concept which exists :P
I can only really speak from experience, but I was once broken up with because she made more than me. She never directly admitted it to me, but it was forwarded off to me through mutual friends that she felt she'd have to 'take care of me' and despite her career and education, still wanted the old school 'man takes care of me' type relationship. I dunno. It is what it is.
Meanwhile I'm disabled so know that I'm basically screwed on finding any sort of relationship because quite literally and biologically I am damaged good. To say nothing of the fact that disability and the issues that come along for the ride, basically fuck over my employment chances. NOBODY is gonna want that.... So my dating options are simple. 'Slim, and None. Slim found someone years ago.'
My dad picked my mom because he liked her personality. Her amputated leg and body full of scars dies not bother him. He called me a nice bonus, as many don't like raising another's "trash"... or did not like my ginger hair. Have hope, there are people out there that don't care how you look or what disability you have.
In the great scheme of things, you must be self sufficient and your happiness (and mental health) shouldn't depend on someone else. A partner is a luxury, a plus, an accessory, it's not indispensable, just like having children. If people stop been so needy about having a partner, toxic & abusive partner wouldn't have so much leverage.
Sounds like this article was written while hopped up on soylent. I have never had any problems with a woman earning more. If anything, it means I can pursue my hobbies and dreams more since there is less risk if things go wrong.
One thing I found interesting about this article is how it asked for rom-coms (a genre men generally don't even watch) with men pursuing female CEOs... as in MEN doing the pursuing. If they really wanted to flip the gender roles, why wouldn't they make it about the female CEO pursuing a man?
The only way a men would watch such a movie was if the CEO was Elexis Sinclaire, but then there would be complaints that they made the CEO too sexualized.
My ex wife is a HW engineer, and I'm a low life despicable SW guy. Why she's an ex is beside the point. When she did her bachelor's thesis I wrote the software to prove it because the HW design tools at the time couldn't cope with integers large enough to do it. The morale of the story is; SW complements HW. And also, we fix all your damn bugs and design flaws.
She saw herself as above you. Equal marriages, or ones where women see themselves as the greater always fail for one reason or another. In the show "All in the Family" that Louis mentioned, as far as I can remember, Archie and Edith did not divorce. Mike and Gloria did. Mike and Gloria were equal partners. That show was spot on. Males form groups to help protect their resources and women. Women join groups and will always be on the lookout for something better. What is happening right now in our society is the breakdown of the nuclear family, which is a group. They are "Dividing and Conquering us" Women need to respect a man more than they love them or they will find an excuse to move on. It is by design, and it works if not meddled with by tyrants who are attempting to push forward a GREAT RESET. Would you like the blue pill or the red?
Real title: _How masculine tropes are used to continue damaging men and women by creating the idea men and women must remain in conflict for an ideal that ignores that individuals are unique people that must find out how to best interact in their own places in society._
Being treated "like a pet", brought back some bad memories of a time when I dated a woman briefly who definitely made more money than me, there wasn't even room for conversion because my opinion would not even be listen to. Although we were at different points in our lives, this is no way to treat someone and I have never done it regardless of where I've been in life...
Woman tend to want to date higher status mates. And men tend to went to date attractive mates. I could phrase it better and ofcourse everyone is different but this is a really basic breakdown of the different evolutionary preferences men and woman have while dating. This whole article is the mentality of "woman most effected" meme. Like every problem is never a woman fault and they are always the biggest victims. My favorite example of this is when Hillery Clinton said, 'woman are the biggest losers in when because they lose there sons and fathers and husbands". She literally said it's worse for a woman to lose a loved one then for a man to die.
Yes, it has to do with testosterone. It makes males more willing to fight. Males fight over territory and females. This is easily observable in nature shows. In some cases, the male has many females. Females are less muscular and tend to be physically smaller. They tend to look for protection. It is one reason why jails have more men. They tend to do riskier things. It is one reason why there are less men than women even though more men are born. They tend to do riskier things. Even when it comes with language, women are ok with being called girl while it seems that men don't like being called boy.
@@Chris-vx5kp 80% of woman initiate divorce most on basis of "irreconcilable differences" and than jsut cash out on alimony there aren´t many dead beat dads out there but a lot fo single mom welfare queens
I agree with Louis on this topic. I do wonder about the influence the media has on gender roles and long term relationships. The author seems to suggest that all of this would not be an issue if there was a sitcom about a dishwasher man pursuing a billionaire CEO woman. Maybe children who watched that growing up would change their mind as they get older. I would assume most people would form their own ideal romantic interest and long term relationships based upon the adults who grew up around them rather than a sitcom or movie. I find it hard to believe that a string of sitcoms and romcoms can have that much influence on attraction and long term relationships for a whole generation of people. Culture goes deeper than television. I would assume most television mirrors real life relationships rather than shaping what a real relationship will be. Representation matters for many things. However, I think it would be delusional to think so many marriages would have survived if only there were more Romantic Comedies about struggling marriages. Hollywood is not going to save everybody's marriage with a slew of TV shows and Movies, life is more complicated than that.
These sorts of influences seem to have more of an impact on women than men. When you look at entertainment products that target female audiences and what types of fiction women prefer it very often revolves around fantasy relationships and contrived social conflict. Where men love violence, dark humor and stoic adventures. Essentially. Suggesting men can be programmed by these things is projection. Men are increasingly turning away from TV and mainstream entertainment anyway. A lot of people are.
@@carbonstar9091 Except that you're wrong about music media. Music is extremely powerful in influence, and males are so obviously brainwashed by the bullshit today. Just look at rap music; don't sit there and say only women are so weak that they're the only ones influenced by media. Most PEOPLE are weak as fuck in general and are too easily brainwashed. If they weren't we wouldn't have problems in the first place.
What fairytale was it that a poor man married a princess? Oh right that doesn't exist. The invese does though. It's so culturally ingrained because it is biological. It makes sense why to; having a child is a far greater risk for women. In the day and age where everyone is encouraged to work and discouraged from being stay at home parents the number of higher status women rise and as women have a biological prerogative to seek out the highest status partner possible the dating pool for women gets smaller. Personally I think it is just another side affect of telling everyone to go to college.
Media absolutely destroyed gender roles. It made women all to be girlpower super heroes, and men to be complete brainlets (especially fathers). I wonder what the motives of the producers of this media were.
Lmao, it's all about hypergamy. Women only date on the same level or upward. So the higher they are, the smaller the pool of men they are interested in. Men do not have this limitation.
Persuant to the first pause point Louis made: Advertisers and show writers have a disturbing and destressing habit of making men out to be stupid, gullible, raging dickheads with fragile egos. Now then I have personal anger issues, but that is wholly unrelated to 'getting a date.' I honestly love being around people who are both smarter than me, and at the same time try explaining these things in a way that it isn't completely over my head rather than someone going 'i'm smarter than you what do YOU have to offer to ME' But like.... I know i"m in no kind of place in my life financially, emotionally, or capacitywise, that would ALLOW for a relationship. Edit: My hot take here based on a LOT of anecdotal evince, the declining birth rates in east asianic countries and cultures, hearsay and please keep in min I'm just some schlub on the internet. Women who activly earn a decent amount of money, are less INTERESTED in a traditional relationship, and those that are, can afford to be more picky. Under normal situations guys have to work their ass off because women get pick of the litter anyhow. Add ont othat someone who's more selective because they have a career and life and most guys are going to go like Rossman here and 'she's treating me like I treat my cat. I'm out, because i was never really in the running to begin with.' I say all this not to blame women who want a career. I say this to put blame squarely on the article writer tryign to act liek 'men bad men evil Hiss. Death to Men we don't need you.'
There are some rare cases where the woman is not smarter. For example, All in the Family. Edith was less intelligent than Archie. Married with Children.Bug (the son) was the intelligent one and Kelly (the sister) played the dumb blond. Al seemed slightly more intelligent than Peggy.
@@Blox117 While i can sooorta agree with the sentiment? That does feel a bit harsher than necessary to the point of it turning into a rant on how horrible women are. Which to me is just as not cool as what the lady writing this article is doing. So can we... Not do that please?
@@singletona082 No, his comment was so verbally abusive that he needs to be staked to a cross (sarcastic). plz that was just an example of a double standard that some women have nothing personally targeting.
At the same time? I've seen that sort of rhetoric immediately slide into far worse far more toxic. What he said right htere is a fair criticism. Women get to a point where unless it tics EVERY checkbox? Garbage. Part of that though is wiring. They are looking fora provider and protector. And if they're already successful on their own they don't see 'settling' as filling that need.
I disagree entirely that women with a career don't want children and a house with a traditional relationship to boot. Top CEO women might not, but most career women either do want these things openly and lament their "options", blaming men....or they actually want these things but hide it from themselves. A major drive of biology is procreation, if someone lacks a sex drive that is a symptom of there being a mental issue. Women DO want traditional men, which is why the wealthy, smart, handsome, and big burly men tend to have the most options. Women just grew up being lied to and don't want to admit it to themselves. Men grew up being lied to as well, but around puberty we get a wake up call when people start to show how little society cares about men. The smart ones notice this and wake up...the idiots don't, and the mentally ill become male feminists that prey on women.... look up the stats.
We are now dealing with several generations where it is more usual than not for kids to come from broken homes. I grew up in a stable home with two parents who got married at 20 and are still together. Once I hit the dating scene, I was dealing a non-stop string of guys from divorced homes who were totally f'd up from the experience. I was playing by the rules and they were playing games and had no idea how to communicate, be a gentleman, be responsible, make sacrifices, compromise etc, etc. and I am sure it is the same when the genders are reversed.
Exactly. My fiance and I both have intact families and intend to create one for our future kids. Too many people are broken and won't do the work to fix themselves.
Men are not ready date strong successful women. Ok. We're ready. I don't want to date a bum/man child/not successful enough. Uh... See men can't keep up with us.
6:00 thank God someone finally said this. I can't believe you have the balls to go against this narrative. It's frustrating having the media constantly paint men as a villains. You don't think I'd date a woman making my salary or more? But women not only aren't interested, I now realize they ask me probing questions to figure out my salary. I've had women straight up say "I don't think you make a lot of money" and just walk off. Media couldn't care less. But God forbid if you flip those scenarios and a man said he wouldn't date a woman for any reason. You're a phobic or ism. For all the things society has asked us to accept while dating, the standards for men have only gotten higher. Make more money, be taller, more in shape, more charismatic, spontaneous and if you're not? That's fine, you're one tinder swipe away from being replaced. Instead the narrative is men don't accept women and have too insane standards for women. The media has created a completely false narrative. Even the beauty standards thing is bs. 80% of men are below average in looks to women whole its 50% for men. Yet Men's standards are too high. Women file 80% of divorces. But it's men who are blamed saying "if only you had been better, less abusive, less toxic." Dating and relationships is a lot harder than ever before for a normal dude.
The issue is innocence by association. Criticism will see you painted as the enemy. This article is trying to avoid that and taking the easy road. But it keeps many in the dark, and their world view is shaped to believe men are bad or have power way way more then a women could ever dream of.
The problem isn't often that men won't date women who make more than them, it's waaaaaaaay more often that women won't date men that make less than them. See also: thousands of articles of 'where have the good men gone?'
Bloomber telling you to fight stereotypes while using stereotypes… typical. I would love a woman that has computer, linux and privacy knowledge. She would be my desired type of woman. Where to find them? Lol
I'm at a point where I couldn't care less about womens grievances in the first world even if I got paid. If you want equality with men you either gotta realize shit's tough or make life easier for men. You can't call something equal if you need extra privileges to get there.
Remember guys,"equality"is a must & your masculinity is toxic/fragile, unless your country needs defending; then traditional gender roles are enforced into you & you get the "male privilege"of dying in war, so politicians can negotiate over your corpse. I say F them all.
Part of the problem is that these women that make a lot of money feel like that adds to their worth as a companion. It does to someone who doesn't have much money and would see his quality of life improve vastly, but they solely seek out men who make even more money than they do. Those men want a trophy wife. They don't care about someone who's going to make their life slightly more extravagant than it already is.
My husband and I are more the "equal footing" type match. We met our first week in college with similar engineering career goals and have been together for over 20 years. I make less than him, but it's more because of the fields we went into. I went down the Civil path and he the tech & computer path. But we're usually within 20k of each other, and it doesn't really matter since for us, it's just one pool of income. We "grew up" into real adults together. My sister, however, is textbook what Louis is talking about. Career woman, highly specialized field in education and was very picky about who she dated. She could be...she could support herself and really had no reason to find someone else except for companionship. Throughout her 20s and early 30s she went on dates but never more than 2-3 before realizing she had nothing in common with them. She did find someone a few years ago and just got married last year at 37. But, he was a 6-figure earner as well with multiple income streams and high education. From my limited group of family and friends (nearly all of which has some sort of college education and middle class salary) I feel that it quite often is about the woman (assuming hetero relationship) and their preferences whether or not something proceeds from meeting to dating to marriage. And honestly, I don't know that I teach my children any different. My daughter in high school is very academically ambitious and her "nerdy" gaming friend group (who are all boys) is the same. I doubt she would want to be with someone very long that she can't relate to. Things change of course, but if she does well for herself, i can see her being inclined to want a true partner in all aspects of life like I feel I am with my spouse. Salary is only one of those aspects, but I think it's one that can be reflective of many others.
@@yeahgirl11 because she got married 37, likely out of rush, for money. If she has children they will be genetic abominations at that age. Statistically speaking she will also divorce within the decade and her children will hate her. She will die alone.
The thing is, more often than not, men who make over 6 figures as described have their choice in women and are wayyy less inclined to seek out an over 30yo career woman as a wife. Your sister got lucky to even get married to such a guy. Normally those men look at younger women around 21-27 and don't even bother with older women. Why? Because they can. They got enough money to not care about what she earns and go for the most attractive and fertile woman they can. A lot of women like your sister end up being completely alone their entire life due to their own standards.
She like most of the political class is literally clueless - someone just about smart enough to be indoctrinated into far left ideology at university and to sell out and do whatever special interests tell them to. In Kamalas case smart enough to get on her knees for the occasional powerful man to win promotion. Not intelligent enough to do self study or to conduct their own logical or moral decision making. Any number of conversations in dissident political or economic corners happen on CZcams livestreams every day that most politicians would be completely incapable of understanding because it doesn't fit their ideological framework.
"I can't get a man because they are intimidated by me" reeks the same vibes as "I can't get a girl because I'm too nice". If everyone else is problem, then YOU are the problem. And nobody but YOU acknowledgeing that problem & solving it, will fix it.
@@Jose04537 Yes and no. Some people just lack any amount of mentally compatible people (or even sane people that are not crazy) in their area and are thus unable to find someone.
Intelligence is subjective and even more complicated in relationships. You wouldn't date a girl who is smart but use it against you right so just to say "the more intelligent a woman is the sexier her inner values are" is sort of too generalized. And how about the opposite end? Why are they not promoting women picking guys who they think are smarter? We live in a feminized society where a man's intelligence is worth less because we are told to value intelligence of women, but not the other way around! It is subtle but slowly men are trained to take the traditional role of women! Why, because feminists want women to be like men and then women can control the world. Remember they couldn't contain themselves when they say "the future is female"?
Whatever that is supposed to mean@@lickalotlickalot2210 . Noone trains me to be the way I am. In fact, in real life people tend to yell at me for behaving feminine at times, which in turn just makes me want to resist the clichés even further. I am a result of resistinf the drill, not a result of doing what society wants me to do.
As a very masculine man, 6'3" 240 lbs, relatively fit, I would have no problem dating a woman CEO who was making couple mil a year. Did I mention I currently make around 40K a year?? The thing is, I doubt very much if any of these woman CEO's would bother to give a guy like me making what I do the time of day let alone date me.... She would probably look at me, what I make, my "status" in life and think "I can do better" NOT because I'm a terrible person, unattractive, anything like that but because other variables that people think of. I'm ok with that. Have your standards. Date who you want but this article is bull and is trying to take a very complex situation with MANY variables and simplify it down to this ONE reason....as all these type of BS articles do....
Awesome video as always, Louis! Although it's still disparate among men and women, I think there's a harsh game leveler: aging. If you realize you're getting old and you're getting lonelier, you even consider lowering your standards by desperate measures. Still, some women can't even do that, so they get a bunch of pets, grow plants and call it a life without knowing there were some men just trying to get noticed.
I have no doubts that at least someone will be more than happy with that, there are billions of people in this planet, too many to just stereotype everyone into the same bag
As a guy in mid twenties just starting to get his shit together thinking about dating right now just makes me depressed. Social media hyper-inflated women's perspective of themselves across the board and now I'd argue at least half of young men are outright ignored by young women like they don't exist.
And young women are feeling increasingly sexualized and just like pieces of meat by young men due to dating apps and social media, that half of them don't feel like they exist and are ignored by men unless they wear super tight tops and stick their chest out like a twitch streamer. The problem is the decent people of both sexes don't fit into how modern society functions and can't find each other in natural settings like in the past.
@@gauloise6442 all depends on who these women chase. The data shows women on dating apps are Insanely selective and only go after 15% of the men on the app (men will talk to most women on average). OK cupid and other dating sites have published this data. Women on apps simply need to pick different people. To suggest it's men as a whole who are sexualizing women on apps is a false narrative. Another creator did the economics of tinder. For the average guy using a dating app, he's lucky to get 1 match a day. In fact, the average number of matches for a normal dude is extrmely low compared to the average woman. But I mean, men have been saying this for ages online. Doesn't matter. The media will run with your narrative that it's young men sexualizing women rather than the truth which is women chase the same small group of men which allows those men to be complete jerks because there's another 10 ladies lined up.
@@gauloise6442 I have zero sympathy there. It's 100x harder for men on dating apps. Unless you are rich or a Chad you get almost no engagement because of how selective women are. Why bother with anything other than sex if she has 50 other suitors and is going to dump/cheat on you in a week anyway? Might as well keep it transactional.
Speaking from experience, I've been in great relationships that failed because girlfriend started making more than me. Initially the relationship worked but as her career took off and mine didn't I felt comfortable and secure with where I was at that point in life, and she was more interested in a more successful man. We need to teach young men they need more masculinity, and not fully embrace their feminine side as their entire identity
I totally agree with everything you say here ...I make more than my husband, so what? I love the guy to death and we are secure in our bond. These kind of studies seem like desperate efforts to prop up cultural norms from the last century.
It's not that these articles are designed to prop up old cultural norms, it's that they're designed simply to shit on them and make it seem like they were completely wrong. It's meant to divide the family unit and keep it from coalescing in the first place, that's it.
"Cultural norms" that have been the same for all of human history are not cultural norms, it's human nature. Now we're a few decades into breaking "culture norms" and woopsie! Big surprise - society is declining, morality is declining, happiness is declining, birthrates crashing, divorces rising, family structure is breaking down, mental illness and loneliness skyrocketing. It may work for some people, like you and your husband, but for the large majority of people it does not. There is a reason why every civilization on the face of the Earth regardless their differences in geography, beliefs, circumstances has followed essentially the same "cultural norms" for thousands of years... It's because they're the only way a society will exist.
Probably less to do with men rather than its women that won't lower their standards. If they move up professionally and only accept guys at or above their level then that pool dramatically decreases and they only have themselves to blame, but instead in true women fashion they blame all men for this. And it also kind of illustrates that its always about money, when guys date down they just want a partner.
I mean, in age of "I need no man" and high divorce rate(what i know mostly requested by women but i might be wrong) how i'm supposed to not be afraid that "normal" woman will left me without will to work out problems and each other imperfections , let alone woman that earns x times more than i and is couple steps higher in social hierarchy.
Tell someone about Gender Double-Standards and most are going to think about Toxic Men and almost undressed Women with no personality... This world has equality, but women still cling on old Romantic ideas...
Most women earn just as much as most men, yet they still want a guy who makes more money. Fortunately there are also exceptions when it doesn't matter.
I gave up on finding a mate close to 4 years ago. Monk mode, focus on work, business and I can buy "socksual" satisfaction if I want. And I am not the one to blame, I did everything to the best possible, money wise, qualifications wise, and I don't look bad at all .... solong society, I am eating popcorn, drinking strawberry lemonade while watching all of it collapse.... and I wouldn't care the slightest any more.
@@c.c.l.9139 Does that include and OnlyFans? Because they don't seem to care if men pay for that? At least men get something out of paying for a prostitute.
@@dougdimmadomeownerofthedim5376 truth! and the other day I found a friend of my ex wife who does rhe same in disguise of "nubu massage and happy ending".... I was shocked but not entirely shocked.
The issue is with being poor. Seems like the people who wrote this never ever felt like that. Id love my girlfriend to make 3x my salary because we are broke af
I tried man. But the look on a woman's face when she does or thinks she makes more than you, it's something I can't unsee. The complete turn off. Not for lack of trying, I'd love to make decent money with a partner and not struggle in life. But the article assumes men just can pick women as we please. We can't. We pick from the options handed to us, and the options handed to most men are women who earn less than us. Women who earn more will openly say "I can do better than you." it's not even a secret, so I don't knoe why the articles and media never point this out.
I personally think takes like this article's are partly why some feel unwelcome in left leaning circles and retract to right leaning circles. This idea (that's majoritarely online, thought its seeping into IRL conversations) that nothing is the fault of women and everything is because of men is so toxic that it's legitimately putting more stress on men than they already have to deal with. It's damned if we do, damned if we don't. Masculinity seems to have become the number one scapegoat in online conversations about anything related to women. And it's insanely infuriating because the only people that seems to recognize this are majoritarely other men. Being a decent man, has become an issue of feeling like you belong no where, go to the right and you'll have a bunch of biggoted and sexist men and women, go to the left and you'll be seen as the biggoted and sexist man whatever you do.
You don't have to belong to any group, left, right, etc. Just do you, support the issues and causes you want to. Start just talking to people without having an end goal in mind, like dating or a relationship. And, Do Not Talk about what you do, make any excuse, even just " I don't talk about work ", and be ready to be attacked over this, just say there are more interesting things to talk about, if they still persist end the convo, period, they are not for you. ( They really don't want to hear about your work, they want to know how much you make ). There are decent people out there, you will find them if you keep looking.
I recommend the book "The subtle art of not giving a F*ck" by Mark Manson. Just give an F about things that affect you. In the great scheme of things, who cares? I don't care what a twisted society thinks about me or my masculinity, I don't care about the opinion of people I'm not seeking approval, specially people with hypocrital & self servings opinions so flimsy that change at their convinience. I stopped giving an F about everything that doesn't directly affect me, because ultimately only me cares about me, only me can save me. But if they think that I can be shamed, stigmatized or forced into compliance because it suit them, without any push back or rebuttal, they are VERY wrong. Society & it's laws/rights are a social construction, and easily collapse when reality knock it's door. The Ukraine War put things into perspective, THEN "toxic/fragile masculinity" & gender roles are required, I say, F them all, those who can save themselves (there must be a lot of killing/torture/rape there, and there will be no punishment, no one is going to save you but you).
You have one if the Samsung heiresses who married his driver's son and the press called him "Cinderella Man" and another married an ex catholic priest ( who give up on his calling for her) but those are women who ( even if they struggled to assert their position) they have been born rich.
your response was very sensible and i could tell you were choosing your words wisely, but unfortunately the type of women who write articles like these don't actually care about being accurate and they'll dismiss you offhandedly solely on the basis of your gender. they're just bitter, spiteful, and looking for statistics to back up their toxicity. it's kind of sad, really.
The vast majority of successful career women are successful due to behaving in a masculine way: competitive and ambitious and striving personalities aren’t attractive to a lot of marriage minded men. I know this video is probably scripted loosely, but if it isn’t, Louis’ commentary is chock full of sociological cues about how we are completely unaware of our blind spots in how others experience the world. Would recommend to any students of sociology to watch this video! Incredible!
@@justanoscar ... he did admit that it might be his social circles which is the problem there so I think your quote are pretty close to taking something out of context, I would at least not call it a quote written in good faith 😛
It's crazy how they blame men "not pursuing female CEOs". I've never heard of a woman in a position like that looking for Blue Collar men. The reason there is no romantic comedy with this concept is because women would see it as a horror movie.
@@lightly-red-huedmaleindivi6266 Uhh no. That is factually incorrect. I'm pretty sure the men in uniform thing is for male strippers in costumes or a saying from the 20s about military men. Women have blogs, magazines, music, newspapers etc, talking about the men they like and the #1 common factor among all the women no matter the age, race, or location is that they find men who work 9-5s to be utterly disgusting.
The last paragraph - the second last sentence is open - this is related to toxic masculinity - and then puts everything on males to solve the issue. Issue is larger than men not wanting to date better earning women. Mostly society viewing such arrangements not so favourably - just viewing male as lesser men or even leaches living off women income. Same time pushing on women with "you could do better" attitude. This is one of those toxic masculinity cases where both sides need to solve it and not just "men do better".
I'll agree when I got married my wife made more, I was ok with it at first, but I wanted to go get a new computer, and she made double what I did, and she went "thats fine here take my debit card because I know your account can't cover it and you deserve a new toy sometimes" the tone and her words made me feel more like a toy than anything else, and that was pretty normal, she insisted on paying for things because I made 35,000yr and she was making 82,000/yr when we got married. It's not the situation anymore, she got injured on the job and doesn't work anymore from medical complications and I'm now making significantly more but yea at the time it got to me because she acted like i was more a pet and as she said deserve rewards.
Louis: I work in repair as an AASP and had a question that Apple wouldn’t answer (even our “contact” sent us a templated email). I just wanted to talk to a person who knew what they were talking about (a senior tech) but nobody would transfer me to one. This was over several days, while a customer was waiting on their MacBook to get repaired. I decided to give your company a call and they transferred me to a tech (Shane) right away, who was very helpful. I sent him some pictures over email and he helped me sort out this issue within a matter of hours. I want to thank you again for your great work and it’s good to know that you’re there to help when Apple isn’t. Thanks a ton and keep up the right to repair work! p.s. we love showing your videos (especially board repair) on our Apple TV display demo 😁
I agree with most/a lot of what you say and I appreciate that you don’t necessarily impose ideologies in your videos but rather explore ideas and try to logically put why one is better for certain reasons and not for other reasons.
Dude you gotta quit talking like "pour flux on motherboards and heat them up" is somehow a bullcrap job. You have a skill that very few people do. I can build a gun like nobody's business, but I could never do microsoldering. Ever. My hands are too shaky. Hell, I enjoy shooting, but my targets look like the before image of a Proactiv commercial.
The article didn't touch on how either man or woman is raised. What you learn and view as a child into adulthood as examples of relationships, broken homes, marriage, etc. Has a significant impact on your view of the world specifically when seeking a suitable mate. I have a cousin who makes less than his wife by around 40% to 50% less. His parents had a similar dynamic. My cousin wife was in the military and came from a broken home, where her parents were separated. I spent several years with them and at no point did she throw finances in his face at least not infront of me or there children. Both had regular jobs but also were entrepreneur's able to help each other's business in a symbiotic way which didn't offset their finances, but both simply made more together. Also if considering intangibles, he's definitely higher on the scale. He's far more family oriented and she more career oriented. Not perfect by any means but they've made things work where he became a step father to her two children and they eventually had a child together. I think they've been together over 15yrs and have had many ups and downs. I wonder if the majority or minority of US women specifically think outside of the prototypical marriage lifestyle or if the majority are going into it based on their own upbringing and what's been known as the standard. One of the most difficult aspects is getting a genuine answer out of a women. No offense but they typicality lean toward a PC response whereas men lean toward an adaptive response.
It is not my fault that women can't compete with men. Women want everything in life but sadly you can not. Don't get mad if you want equal rights with equal consequences.
Since we're speaking anecdotally, I'll add my own: 1) First marriage - I was stay-at-home wife and mom with a reasonably successful man. Since he was abusive it didn't go so well. Among other things, he used to abuse his status as the breadwinner by withholding money for food and bills to "punish" me. After that I decided I wouldn't EVER be in that position again. (insert college and first post-college job here) 2) Serious, almost-marriage boyfriend - since my job involved long hours and travel, I asked him if he would be open to being a stay-at-home dad for my kids and his daughter. He enthusiastically agreed. About 6 months later, he was resentful of me being the breadwinner and jealous that my career was started and his wasn't. So even though he liked the idea of me being the breadwinner, he DID feel emasculated by it. Ultimately we broke up, because you see - he was unhappy and it was all my fault. (These are all direct quotes from him, by the way - I'm not assuming anything.) 3) Second marriage - found the guy that actually wanted to be a stay-at-home dad and loves it, 13 years and counting. His only complaint is that everyone ELSE in his life tries to hard to get him to feel emasculated, but he's happy to tell them to f@#$% off. TL/DR: There absolutely are guys that are intimidated and emasculated by women that earn money. But even for those guys that aren't emasculated by women earning more money, there appears to be some social pressure that they have to wade through. Anyway, that's been my experience.
Thank you for saying this. Yes, there are men who are abusive and use the social status crap too, and there are men who genuinely feel emasculated by staying at home. But thank you for recognizing underneath all of that, there is a genuine social norm for men being the breadwinner that kind of browbeats men into working to support a family. Like, even if you walk the walk, then there's external pressure proving men deal with gender role social norms too, and its not just all the fault of muh patriarchy. Even my feminist mother who constantly compains about gender roles is herself a stay at home mom (and was a really good one), supported by a hard working spouse (he's going to work overtime till he dies sadly), and complains about my brother in law being a deadbeat father, when he stays home to take care of the kids and my sister works a bunch to support them (dont get me wrong, he sucks for other reasons, but the fact that he's good with kids when he's out of a job, is about his only redeeming quality). Im glad you did a trial period with your second relationship before marrying. I feel like thats a good idea in this day and age where people dont actually know what they want anymore. And I'm happy for you that both you and your current spouse are both able to GENUINELY be above gender norms, and mean it, rather than just talk about it. Youre a model for true gender equality, and it's the rest of society that needs to catch up.
This comment should be pinned! It shows how important it is for women to be I financially independent but also how f-d society is, that stay-at-home-dads have to go through all this sh*** Also, what the person in that 👆 comment said. Absolutely true!
This video, in 20 minutes, explains why I no longer subscribe to any more "mainstream" magazines...even supposedly business focused ones. Every one of them pushes the victim hierarchy, and of course, women (who now make up the majority of high earning college graduates), are still near the top of the victim totem pole, as if it was 1950.
This channel features: - board repair - real estate - politics - dashcam video - cats - life advice - j o u r n a l i s m - drunk streams - dota 2 - way too many videos for someone who supposedly has a job
Louis's videos require very little editing due to how well spoken he is. That makes a world of difference in terms of how much work is required to produce content. He could certainly balance all of this with his job. Also let's be real here, Louis is a machine.
"I'm not a cat" - Louis
So he SAYS...🤔😂
It seems that he has a filter on. 😉
This comment wins! 🤣🤣🤣
That's EXACTLY what a catboy would say!
This is interesting.
As, talk to you partner and talk if they really see you that way.
I has talk to friends becuase they say "DONT CALL ME CUTE", They explain it let them feel week, small, a pet.
Like you arent seeing them as a person in the same level.
"Men's salaries and education levels are decreasing steadily. Women most affected."
Yeah, when women are unwilling to date someone below their financial range, or below their education level, they're putting themselves in their own "undateable" category.
That is a multilayered statement right there.
Modern women are the most entitled things to ever exist.
@cablecow15 I've always loved that line, found it humorous. Every woman I've ever heard say that has always come across as being miserable as sin and has always born an expression like everything around them thoroughly disgusts them whereas I've known plenty of men over the years who "don't need no woman" and they're about the chillest dudes I've ever met. I know from who I am at my core that I'll never be one of those guys and I can tell they're much more levelheaded and much less tightly wound than I will possibly ever be for as long as I live.
@@daggern15 The trick to "don't need no woman" is to be able to seduce women imo, when I was not it felt super important to be in a relationship, but thats just me.
I've heard women complain about dating "broke" or like "poor" guys about 5x as often as I've heard men talk about not wanting to date women who make more.
Only 5x more? I have never had a male friend say anything but positives about a woman who made more as long as she treated him well.
@@carbonstar9091 I've heard about 30 women complain and probably about 5-6 guys.
@@sawyerbass4661 That is indeed 5x. Great math!!
Men want a woman. If he wanted his girlfriend to be "the man of the house" he'd just cut out the middleman and get his own boyfriend.
@@mariokarter13 What do you mean by this?
They did make that movie. It's called Aladdin. A poor robber chases the future CEO of Akrabah Corp. I'm not sure how realistic it was though. Sometimes the wealth- /class-gap doesn't matter, but all the guy literally had was some boyish charm and kind heart. Not sure I bought the conclusion. The flying rug also took me out of it.
She inherited it though, not the same!
@@rossmanngroup He also had a magic genie and convinced everyone he was an even richer "CEO" for a good part of it
The answer to the any and all questions about why there aren't more romcoms with men pursuing female CEOs is: 'Pretty Woman'.
@@adamlucas4753 Hitch? part of it.
Did anybody else think it was super weird that she got angry at him when he is attempting to give her an option out of the oppressive system that holds the both them down?
Women date up in financial status and station in life.
Men date women who will date them.
Let’s not ignore the obvious.
Jordan Peterson said something similar, women date across and up.
The only cheat code it's being a 9+
"I can't get a guy because I'm too smart" has the same energy as "I can't get a girl because I'm too nice." Either way, if your biggest problem in life is that you can't get laid, and it's conveniently "society's" fault, I can't find it in me to have sympathy for you.
As someone who has had drinking buddies in the past who have said that they are too nice or too sane to get a good woman, who I've actually slapped in the side of the arm for saying such stupid crap, I agree. There is this narcissistic vanity reaking through such a statement that also demonstrates a complete lack of self awareness.
There are many reasons that, in my early 20s, the women that I were interested in were not interested in me. it had *everything* to do with me and my problems, little to do with them. Wish I could go back in time 14 years and punch myself in the face and tell myself all of these things, but such is life. My 30s are going to kick ass compared to my 20s because I have a clue, but it would have been cool to have that clue in my 20s.
Here's one certainty I've found; not just in dating, but life generally. When someone implies it's everyone's fault but theirs.. guess whose fault it usually is?
especially since a female can literally ask and someone will be thirsty enough to bang her, no matter how ugly or fat. Does not work the other way around
Very nice of you to make broad blanket condemnation of people very reasonable and understanding.
Go ask a disabled man what he thinks of this take.
Actually, I'm right here and I think it sucks. Nobody can hold any individual other than themselves responsible for their failure, but society and the values it impresses on people are an absolutely valid target for complaint.
I am someone who blames society for my inability to get laid, I totally agree with you. I've been rejected by everything from 300lb gas station workers to 80lb crack whores, but later on in life, I find it's more of a God send. As my sexual desires go down, my happiness has gone up. I now only have to focus on what I like instead of trying to impress other people. I don't have to walk around the house turning off lights that other people leave on. And best of all, I don't have to clean those long hairs out of the rollers on the vacuum cleaner. I never met a couple that wasn't always fighting anyways.
there's a group of people who think having a degree means they are better than everyone else.
Ask them to do something menial then. Common life problems. Fix your car, sew up a pair of pants, cook dinner, figure out why your furnace is broken on a cold day, fix a flat tire. See how smart they are then.
nerrrrds!
@@marcogenovesi8570 Knowing stuff doesn't require having degrees. xD
The arogance of idiots with credentials.
I got my degree out of boredom. There is nothing special about a diploma.
Ya, I've literally had a woman who graduated an Ivy League school, but at the time was not working, and went on to work as a dispatcher for a courier company, tell me that I was, "Really smart for someone who didn't go to college." as if the one thing has anything to do with the other lol.
"like a pet" I got it so many times. 99% of times from someone who just happened to be born into money. People who work hard to make themselves into somebody are not blind for a value of a human potential.
Yeah, it doesn't even matter what gender they are, most of the time people from rich families talk down to people who were not born into a rich household
For many women, getting a man is like getting a new outfit or a car or something.
@@1x93cm Same for a lot of men. It goes both ways.
@@Cruznick06 True. In a culture with no community and insane levels of materialist greed, its hard to see other humans as anything other than commodities.
@@Cruznick06 except it’s only one gender the article claims is the problem. This isn’t a competition, but rather a need to acknowledge that all relationship problems are blamed on men, regardless of whether he was actually the problem.
"I don't care how men are portytayed in the media, I care about myself."
Truer words have never been said
You seem to not take into account just how much media dictates/influences zeitgeist & culture
@@i-never-look-at-replies-lol I recommend the book "The subtle art of not giving a F*ck" by Mark Manson. Just give an F about things that affect you.
In the great scheme of things, who cares? I don't care what a twisted society thinks about me or my masculinity, I don't care about the opinion of people I'm not seeking approval, specially people with hypocrital & self servings opinions so flimsy that change at their convinience. I stopped giving an F about everything that doesn't directly affect me, because ultimately only me cares about me, only me can save me. But if they think that I can be shamed, stigmatized or forced into compliance because it suit them, without any push back or rebuttal, they are VERY wrong.
Society & it's laws/rights are a social construction, and can easily collapse when reality knock it's door.
The Ukraine War put things into perspective, THEN "toxic/fragile masculinity" & gender roles are required, I say, F them all, those who can save themselves (there must be a lot of killing/torture/rape there, and there will be no punishment, no one is going to save you but you).
One of my friends in HS got married an joined the Navy, right out of HS to support his new wife while she studied, and when he finished his tour of duty, she was supposed to then do the same for him. He held up his end, she got her degree and began working as a paralegal, he finished in the Navy and was working AND taking college courses to become a fire fighter.
She blows up at him one day, about how she can't be with someone whose life is going nowhere, leaves him and immediately starts dating her boss at the law firm.
Then there's the famous Reddit thread from the woman who wanted to know how to break up with the guy who had taken her in when she had nothing, and supported her through getting her degree, because now that she was a lawyer, she was "too good for him."
Ya, it's not usually the guy.
I would burn down her boss' house while she's inside if I was your friend.
Women are just as shallow as men, just in a different way.
I don't understand how more people don't snap when things like this happen. I would honestly consider that to be borderline evil.
@@dougdimmadomeownerofthedim5376 The law cvcked them in the old days a woman like that would end up a corpse and no one would care
@@cyberninjazero5659 how quickly they forget
You’re spot on, Louis. I remember a few years ago I dated a girl for a few weeks; she was smart, stunningly beautiful, but also terribly mean, and I got the same feeling as far as “being a pet to her.” She was a political science grad student of some sort, basically guaranteed to make more money than I’d probably ever make. I didn’t particularly understand what exactly she was aspiring to do in life, but she came from a well off family and would go on about how she got into the field because she wanted to boss people around, as if I should find that amusing as opposed to dark and mildly unsettling. I remember on one of our first dates, she ranted about Nietzsche and master/slave morality, and I couldn’t help but think it felt like a flimsy but smart-to-your-average-person sounding justification to make the point that most people were below her and deserved to be told what to do. I was a broke musician, college dropout, but she said I had “great style,” that’s the only compliment I remember getting from her. I eventually ended things with her, admittedly over something fairly petty, because I felt a need to get the fuck out of there and didn’t have the heart to tell her it was actually because I thought she was an obnoxious megalomaniac. Immediately I see my social media feed filled with posts about how she’s never dating stupid, broke, uneducated men again, and we never talk again. The thing is, I don’t really consider myself outright stupid, uneducated maybe, but I’m fairly skilled in a wide variety of practical things, can hold conversations easily with people well beyond and below my pay grade, and I don’t need a formal education to do what I love; I consider myself very lucky that I can live doing just that. This is probably a fairly extreme version of the dynamic you’re explaining, but I feel what you expressed mirrors my experience to an extent. There’s a larger issue when it comes to gender, class, and perception that goes far beyond simple masculinity. I’d argue what this article is talking about is much, much more about classism as a whole than pure gender dynamics.
Based on your description, it seems that she wasn't as smart as you- and herself -give her credit for. Maybe I'm wrong, but one thing is for certain, people like her should be kept from the levers of power as far away as possible. Sadly, these well connected old money elitists always seem to have the levers of power given to them with no consequences.
@@EyePatchGuy88 if she was smart she wouldnt go and be a political scientist whatever the fuck kinda feel good make believe science that is.
@@karambiatos
It studies the structure of states, big companies and other similar organisations. Not a science but still, not useless.
I bet she's into some kinky shit.
@@anhquannguyen8190 she probably likes stepping on testicles and pegging
Society teaches men theyre worthless until they prove otherwise. Even someone as successful as louis thinks his job is low end, but goes on to apply the opposite standard to the women he talks about.
People also tend to blame men when they arent able to find a partner, telling them they need to improve themselves or they did things wrong; while women in the same situation receive emotional support and are told its not their fault.
you born as man - you are s**t by default
you born as wowan - you are good person by default
I hate this so much
Hypothesis time!
I think women are getting to the point where they are much more educated but that comes with an arrogence. The same kind of aroggance a child has after learning a topic for the first time. Someone like Louis has probably been humbled a couple times in life and has more likly mellowed out when it comes to estimating his abilities and intelligence overall. Sorry for the sloppy thesis
In part both are causes on how a society focus on capital work.
You arent WORTH unless you have Succes, Succes is not emotional, spiritual, or even mentally, its monetary.
And with how gender roles still persist, not eveyone is ofllowi g them now but they still are present today, with woman being cwring and emotional, specially with each other, and man having to keep themselves emotionally close and dietant, be the stoic who suffers inside, and iss uposed to gain more.
And this even affect stable relationship now, like even if the woman has higher studies, both end up relying more on the man as no matter the job man win more in general. So you have someone capable with little to support and someone over charge with responsability and no outlet.
Good point. Lewis has built a very successful business and is a huge part of why right to repair is so big.
Louis hella down plays his worth.
the thing is purely on a economical standpoint you want women higher in priority in hopes that they would have more kids. you can kill 80% of guys and still have a baby boom but if 5% of women disappear you will have extreme societal problems cropping up sooner or later
It's the strangest thing, that the article comes so close to reaching a solid conclusion...and then shies from connecting the dots. The problem isn't masculinity - it's that we're placed on a hierarchy based on success. If Men date women of "lesser status," it might be to preemptive the jackknife maneuver women employ whenever Men aren't "as successful" (be that as they once were, or as their peers). It's one less garbage reason for a relationship to fall apart, so it makes sense.
We get sold the idea to look for love, to find mates that we're attracted to...but rarely informed that the "love" is rocked in proportion to how well off we are. And then here comes this article: "Men aren't trying to court female CEO's, they're afraid we're too smart, they're dating their LESSERS. REEEE."
It's the dying thralls of harpies removing themselves from the dating pool. I can't say I'll miss them.
Women wanting to marry up is biological. For men, that is not as much of a concern.
@@EyePatchGuy88 Because women get pregnant. That's literally the only reason. Unfortunately we don't procreate asexually, so the trade off for not getting pregnant is all the bullshit ideas that come along with it, vice-versa for women. Not saying it's right to oppress people with bullshit ideas, but I can see why they came to be. It'd be a lie to say that it didn't get us to where we are now; it's just that oppressive ideas can only last for so long until they start to become openly degenerate.
@@yeahgirl11 You can blame men alot of things, but that men in general are choosy is beyond wrong. There is a cup for every tea there is. There are whole books on the idea that alot of woman try to get men above their social rankings, not the other way around. Why there are many theories, and of course with everything: Not every woman is like that. But to take it and turn it around because these woman on top want a man actually that is at least their equal is the only problem that exists, because there are not that many spaces on top, and woman conquer every day more of them. Meaning. The more woman are on top, the less men they can find if they choose to not change their behavior.
I think if both, males or females start with how much their salary is or what position they fill it is a red flag, for example, I say what is my field, not exactly what I do or how much my income is, that is not relevant,the field is relevant because common interest, to be honest, I dont even use my full degree when they ask me, for me the parts that distinguish me from a technician are not relevant, even when the difference is 2 years of college for a technician and 6 for my degree, I know even self taught people can do what I do, the difference is that I also can do and understand a lot more things and with a lot more depth. But at the beginning those details are irrelevant, "what you studied" "electronics", "what do you do", "machine learning", the fact I am an engineer (is 6 years because in my country they add another extra to the title that is administrative knowledge so we are able to make a company) and that I am the lead in some projects while support in others is irrelevant before going into specifics. That is for when you already are comfortable with each other. If a woman did began with the full title I would get the same vibes I got from teachers that began their introduction with their doctorates before their name (seriously, one didn't said his name until the second week), an incredible egocentric person that I can tolerate, but never be friends, much less partners.
@@thomask5434 Dude, she never said anything about men directly, some women dont want to get pregnant, so they are in that category also, and she only pointed out biological and psychological factors that affect the general of the population, the oppressive ideas she pointed out are held by women as much as by men, so, one of two options, or you are in a timezone where is night and late or you felt alluded and tried to defend yourself by putting words on someone else's mouth.
To quote @BASSFZz Men aren't attracted to doctors, Lawyer, CEO.They're attracted to women. For the most part they don't care what a women's occupation is. They're not interested in careers, they're interested in the person.
It's amusing listening to the call-ins on Kevin Samuels get stuck in an infinite loop listing their credentials: college they went to, degree they got, name of the business they work for, the position they hold, type of car they drive, etc. It's like they think they can get married by submitting their resumes to some sort of husband company.
And the sad reality is that a lot but NOT ALL women in such high valued positions have little to no personality to go with the position. They’re so dedicated to their work that they make no time for developing social interests.
I've posted to this effect a few years ago all over the internet. I am not a goddamn HR manager hiring a potential spouse based on her fricking resume. I want to be close to a person of the other sex. A friend and a romantic partner. Degrees don't impress me. Your attitude however does.
ive had someone in my past cheat on me with a heroin addicted alcoholic, subsequently marrying them and having kids together.
sometimes people just arent into you LONG before the end of a relationship and people just dont know how to get out.
one thing i have learned in my journey is people are infinitly more complex than people realize and sometimes relationships end that should have never began.
you must be horrible... sorry just kidding!
I think you are right rejecting people can be hard
@@opinionsarelike3852 😆
Women will almost always be attracted to the bad boy. Drama makes their juices flow. A good guy dries them up. The only way to save women from themselves is to give authority back to the fathers so they can pick good mates for their daughters. But that won't happen any time soon.
I know, right? People are way more complex than I can ever hope to understand.
Hope you have moved on to a better place.
Competence is attractive. Whether that's running a major corporation, designing houses, or working at a car wash.
mmh yeah, soak that sponge in water bebeh
Not the car wash, unless this is a super smart, super nice, ethical, self educated person of integrity with deep social.values who likes the zen escape.of mindless labor
This could.be an intellectual,.an artist, a.writer, etc.. (I knew a truly awesome person of this sort). Still, car wash would be pushing it unless we had a just society where every sort of labor earned a living wage. There are some sorts of work that only people with significant problems would do, and which would not be able to lift them out of those problems. That's not about the type of work. That's about the abuse of laborers in many societies.
Intelligence, too. It even makes sense from a biological standpoint since it's more likely to result in more intelligent offspring.
working at a car wash, hahaha
Absolutely, knowing someone who's a) confident b) knows what they're talking about c) hardworking, it's super attractive. Especially when they know a lot about the topic
I’ve never personally seen a man’s spouse, “have their back” if the man loses his job / money. I suppose it’s possible, but I’ve never seen it or even heard about it. I have seen many men get destroyed financially in divorce court though….LOL
My God mother is a realtor and works for herself. Well because of that and her lack of drive she will do a few big sales and take it easy for large portions of the year. This can result in her running low or out of money when she times it wrong. Well husband #3 worked in the oil field and he had no problem taking care of the family when her money dried up. When he lost his job and tried to get into a new career which had a bit of a lag time before he'd make good money she left him very quickly. She told my mom "She didn't marry him to take care of him". He took care of her plenty, but the moment he needed her to do the same she bailed. Now I love this woman to death, but this was such a clear example of how cruel women can be and how much status of their partner matters to them
I had my husbands back 100% his mother died unexpectedly and it took a toll on his mental health. He lost his job and I held us down for 2 years. After therapy and some time he went back to work and then many years later I received a terrible health diagnoses and I actually felt guilty that I couldn’t work and he reminded me we are a team I held him down it’s time for him to take care of us.
I know a top nyc cancer doctor, he told me that a majority of men who get cancer, their wife stays with them and supports them.. a majority of women who get cancer, the husband left and or was not supportive at all..so men need to stop playing the victim 😴
@@barneystinson2781 It's biology. Pregnancy leads women to be more selective than males, is simple, the time and resources invested. Women have a limited reproductive capability, the energy and time inputs are immense, where men, if the opportunity is available, can get hundreds of women pregnant in the time it would take a woman to be ready to have another child. This is simply biology, males that had many children were more likely to have their genetics spread. Women who were more selective with males that could ensure their survival as protectors/providers, were more likely to survive, have multiple children, and have their genetics spread.
This is the same for most mammals. This is true no matter how much society and its PC social constructions try to fight it.
How many women in your life will lower their standards or date down? The more successful you are, the more limited your dating pool will be unless you’re willing to compromise and expand your dating options.
That only counts to women the more successful a man is more options for dating. The more successful a woman is the more door she will close on her own. She'll no longer consider lower income men as an option.
@@littlejackalo5326 The point is that it works that way for women. Because of their own psychology. Not for men.
@@AppleMenace well that depends, if the dude has a perfect body and is hung like a horse, she may very well overlook the money issue, cause then she gets a boy toy.
@@libertyresurrected7406 That works during the party girl phase. When she approaches 30 she starts looking for someone to settle down with. If she had the boytoy before she'll be looking for the boytoy but millionaire version.
My wife's father once told her about how the class (and by extension education) divide causes a lot of people (in his example often women) to end perfectly healthy and stable relationships. He was a professor at a college in Chicago years ago, and taught small classes seeing the same students for multiple years as they worked towards their Certs or Degrees, and got to know many of them well. He told my wife back when she was a teenager about how in his experience, college ruins most relationships. He knew a girl who was a student of his who was dating some other girl, about the same age, who supported her while she went to college. From what he learned, the student's girlfriend worked a shit job with lots of hours to support the both of them for years while the student focused on her studies. Finally after a few years all that focus paid off, and the student got her diploma. She immediately broke up with her supportive girlfriend, because she was now in a higher social strata/class than before, and could do better.
According to my wife's dad this happened all the time, like clockwork. As soon as the woman gets the degree and elevates her status with a nice job, she leaves her old blue-collar partner because in her mind she could do much better now, whereas before she was more or less equal in the relationship. Now personally, I didn't go to college, my wife is also a dropout, and out of all my friends I have only one who has completed college, so I don't have much first hand experience with the college life. However, do clearly notice people rarely date below their "class". Don't believe me? Think about anybody you know in a relationship, and think about their partners. How many people with degrees and well paying careers stay with a partner who works in retail, or at mcdonalds? Now, how many of them are men who are the supporting partner? How many women support their man?
I've heard that before and it proves out. Bluebirds fly with bluebirds and eagles fly with eagles.
@@j7704 women outnumber men on college campuses don't they? So from a class perspective, there are more women who consider themselves upper class than men. So therefore, there aren't enough "upper class" men to go around. And even if you do go to college women who go to college don't consider you on their level unless you hold a job with a title higher than theirs. If you're both on the same level, you're still not an attractive mate.
@@j7704 well they can date men on a different level they just choose not too
@@j7704 I'm urgently in college. Met a woman in her late 30s to early 40s and she told me that she went to college to find a husband. She found one and had 2 maybe 3 kids (it's been a while). Women don't go to college to find a husband anymore. They go to get a degree to work the rest of their life.
@@j7704 I'm not really sure that's it. Arrogance seems to play a huge role here. Where there's arrogance one tends to loose every chance at happiness. Many of these "successful" women would be better off marrying folks at a "lower class" than themselves in most cases as this would bring them happiness but they're not willing to let go of their ego and that's the problem.
Men have mostly chose their careers over family just so they can provide for their family. It shouldn’t be an ultimatum when it comes to career success or family success for women or men. To frame this as a masculinity problem is propagandistic
one of them has to do it you cant have your nanny raise 2 kids instead of the parents
We really should go back to the old way of doing things and have multiple generational houses. Have Grandma and Grandpa live with the family and they can look after the kids when the parents have to work. And the parents and kids can look after the grandparents when they are sick. Many places still do things that way and honestly, it's a pretty smart and efficient way for a family unit to take car of eachother.
@@jonathanwilkinson4299 I was just going to mention this. The paradigm is shifting from hiring Nannie’s to having family members be in care of children, keeping multigenerational family structures from the old world.
Men's only choice is to try to have a career, they don't have the option of getting pregnant and letting someone else earn a living. Women still have that option.
well who else to blame? Blaming woman is not accepted in society so blaming men is the only option left
when you ask her to talk dirty and she whispers efficient hard drive sector math in your ear 🥵🥵🥴🥴😵
Nutted but she still 'splainin
I am a retired pharmaceutical research scientists with 2 PhD’s, yes, I am a little ashamed considering what has happened to the industry. My husband is a retired Professional Firefighter, and we have been married for >25 yrs. We discuss everything, and I have never even thought about money in our relationship. Our relationship started out as friends, and developed into love. Also, sex wasn’t introduced for 2 years. I think tooooo many relationships are based on physical attraction, and not on mutual respect. JMHO
Completely agree! I have a BS in electrical engineering emphasizing computer chip design but graduated during that Tech Bubble Burst. So I've never been able to work in the field. I am now a statistician in the insurance industry, low six-figures. My wife was raised from a single mother who was a raging alcoholic living in the ghetto wrong side of the tracks. They had to stress every month about how they were going to pay the water bill. We've now been married 32 years and are very happy. I married my wife, not her family background. My wife is not educated but she is certainly not stupid. She did not go to college, she did get her GED because in her family history nobody graduated from high school, they were all expected to quit school and get a job to help support the family. And that's exactly what she did. But in her defense, she stayed away from all the addictive behaviors that her family has had for generations. I married a fine lady and I'm very happy!
I wonder if your relationship got around the whole hierarchy thing because you started as friends and weren’t looking at each other as possible partners. Interesting.
I think you're 100% right. Especially about sex. I waited until marriage to have sex and it weeded out ALL the assholes; my husband is 15 years older than me and was raised in a Mormon family (I'm not Mormon), so he found it easy to respect me and respect my decision to wait. People nowadays lack discipline in general and that's what leads to all these bullshit problems. It's really not hard to wait for the right one and the right circumstances.
Ashamed for what? Pharmaceutical researchers have done a marvelous job during the past few years, to finally have a possible vaccine for HIV is amazing, to get 60 years of research and made vaccines that work so much better than the old vaccines in a matter of months was fantastic, what is there to be ashamed? The prices on the us are not representative of the world at large.
@@alenasenie6928 I work in big pharma as a Ph.D. Not ashamed in the slightest for banking on that sweet, sweet, dirty pharma money. And you're right. With all the bad of how exploitative pharma can be, there is still a lot of good being done.
"where are the romantic comedies of men who romantically pursue women CEOs?"
Or maybe a CEO protagonist isn't that relatable for the average viewer, romantic comedies are written mainly for women and the thought of dating a poorer man isn't that interesting as an escapist fantasy for women?
Edit: Okay, so there are millions of movies where a rich woman is charmed by a poor man. I don't watch rom-coms, so that's new and useful info to me. I was just trying to find an explanation to the argument "no rom-coms about woman CEOs because of men" in the article.
Pretty women
There are just as many romance stories centered around women pursued by poor, yet charismatic men, as there are women being pursued by men in positions of power. The escapist fantasy isn't exclusively about finding someone in a power role, it's about finding someone charming.
@@ObliviousCrow "charismatic" "Charming" You mean physically attractive.
@@carbonstar9091 being physically attractive is a charm, yes. So is having a good personality. Very good, you get a gold star.
@@ObliviousCrow Just say what you mean instead of trying to sound less shallow.
I wouldn't mind having someone more intelligent than me, I would mind someone who looks down on me for not being as intelligent. I think many guys (and people in general) feel the same way. She can teach me new things and I can maybe teach her something too, win win situation as far as I'm concerned.
I supose is comes in with gender roles?
Man are supose to be proudfull and independant.
Woman subservient and complaint.
So when you switch the positions thee roles dosnt quite work out the same way, after all, goes against the set role structure, and thus works diferent of what we are teach to expect.
Can also be just personal capacity and personality.
Some people are very proudfull or even egomaniac, and that affect their relationship.
Not to mention how someone egomaniac with someone complaiant can easily devolve in a toxic and harmfull situation.
@@ericquiabazza2608 Its alot deeper than societal taught gender roles.
@@jsgdk ibiously is more clompex than that, just exploring the part gender roles play on it, asis the most subtext we are expose to from birth. Thus having influence in a lot of aspect of society.
"As the stereotype goes, successful men used to marry their secretaries [....] But smart, successful women still have to navigate enormous landmines in their romantic relationships with men." -> Nowadays, there are definitely no enormous landmines for any man trying to get in any sort of a relationship with any of his female subordinates, right?
Bloomberg: "we need to radically rethink our conceptions of masculinity."
Translate: It's always the men's fault.
If masculinity means its always the man's fault, then lets change that.
Fuck it, i am gonna be a house husband and be happy.
@@ericquiabazza2608 It doesn't. I bet if you asked the author of this article what masculinity means, she couldn't define it. It's just a way of putting all men into one category and attacking them.
I'm not suggesting that men are faultless. It's just interesting that in discussion of most social issues, there seems to be no shortage of blame assigned to men or "masculinity" and yet there is rarely any accountability put on women. This article is a classic example of men being blamed for what is largely a result of women's own choices.
If I'm wrong, I stand ready to be corrected.
@@ericquiabazza2608 Thats not how this works... unless you get a wealthy woman to marry you without a prenup.
@@arontesfay2520 i can support that. There is also issues like abusive woman on man. People dont belive it or just plain make fun of the victim. If we want a trully equal gender society (or as much close to one we can) things have to go both ways.
@@jsgdk not necessarily, yes, man still (i general) find a better paining job than woman, has familly to corroborate.
But i wasnt always acepting the whole Macho man role wholeheartedly, is very dumb and restrictive.
Not to mention that as someone rise in a big familly and the eldes was made to help on all kind of chores and thing concider feminine.
More so now that i am going independant, you need allt his skills.
Basicly what i mean is oublicly reject the old Macho idea and come with a new more mature idea. That way not only help go over restriction and abuse the old way inprints.
But also takes away the subject.
People call out Machismo because it was genuinly toxic, now a big part is more to gather atention or use as excuse.
So taken the old machismo away you adress the original problem and take away the trigger word.
Ashole would still use it for drama, and toxic behaviour wont entirelly stop. But will be reduse and make society more conscious.
I've never been intimidated. I just know the consequences. One of the most annoying things to me is when I know that I'm wasting my time doing something, especially when it's costing me money. I've had to turn down a young good looking woman because I knew as soon as she left college she'd bounce. That's exactly what she did, graduated and left town. That's not a negative masculine trope, it's called dodging a bullet.
Don't you understand? If you don't prostrate yourself and fill whatever role women want in the moment something is wrong with you. You are not allowed to be a human being you are just a checkbox in their life.
Nha, that sound more like insecurity and doubt.
Doubt that they would stay with you or concider dragin you with them.
Everyone also has its own standar, some want thing on they term, other just wing it and see what happen.
Do you even talk to that person? Comunication is important for a long and healthy relationship.
@@ericquiabazza2608
You don't spend years at college only to turn around and take a small job at a local office or diner. Which you wouldn't know, judging by your way of writing and erratic logical leaps.
@@ericquiabazza2608 if he's only something that "drags her down" then maybe cutting the problem at its nub was the solution? And thats exactly what the guy did lol???
@@sid6645 that is the point, isnt "Both going together", if she even offer he would thinkthat way, that is "dragin her down". He even asume she would "bounce", not "move outside" or "go forward and move", its clear dude has issues and already set his mind that the relationship wont work, so it didnt work, is a self made professy.
I dated an influencer that was really well off from native advertising. I was a foreigner in her country so even though I was broke I got the feeling that she saw me like a novelty, almost like Paris Hilton's chihuahuas. It did sicken me how she was taking advantage of her followers for a stupid amount of money. It was weird, but really nice, being on the receiving end of having dates paid for.
My current girlfriend makes more than me which I really don't mind but most of my female friends would never date a guy that makes less than them and would never pay for a single thing for the guy.
If any women read this, ask yourself, when was the last time you got a guy something for Valentines Day? Out of the last 14 years, only two ladies have ever done something for me on that holiday (2 out of 10, 3 single V-Days).
Bingo
I baked my husband a cake for v day.
I mean... I don't exactly have a guy to get Valentines gifts for...
I don't know what kind of country you live in, but here doing 50/50 is the general expectation, and it doesn't necessarily have to be money.
Funny thing. In Japan the guy normally doesn't give anything on valentine's day. He just receives. Though usually with the expectation he gives something in gratitude on white day
hot take: without hesitation men will be solely blamed for a whole raft of things (sometime legitimately, sometimes not) very rarely will women be blamed for any like problems, the media will just say 'society' or 'people'
not unlike when a man cheats it's because he's a terrible person but when a woman cheats it was most likely the man's fault for driving her to do it. Society has a lot of double standards that both benefit and harm both genders but right now it's all about trying to blame men which won't help anything. It's all interconnected.
the fact that such a lukewarm take could be predicted a hot one pretty much corroborates the claim.
Yeah, it isn't men that have a problem dating "up". It's women having a problem dating "down". It's well known. These writers have no clue.
Oh they have a clue. They know exactly what it is, but to admit what's going on would be admitting they actually have to do something about it, which would be as good as admit that they're the problem and NOBODY wants to admit that especially successful people. Both because it lowers their ocial standing, and that then puts the pressure on them to comply rather than do what the 'nice guy' eequivilant does and blame everyone BUT them.
This reminded me of a study that caught my attention about a year ago (I'll provide a link to it if I can find it). The basic gist of it was that women, even in many non-human species, tend to be hypergamic, meaning that they desire men who are either at or above their own hierarchical level (whether that be an economic, social, physical success, etc.). On the other hand, men tended to care less about the female's hierarchical status and more about their own.
Yeah, but hypergamy can also express in the form of "he is fit, strong, has a stable job and society tells me this is good" (basically what happened when men were of higher status than women just because they were male, and masculine traits were seen as something good rather than bad). But now only matters how much money you make and how many women are chasing you.
Woman fails at basic introspection, men blamed.
Women have serious issues when it comes to dating down. You can't displace men in society and then expect prince charming to be there waiting for you. Men mostly don't care as long as we are treated well. Too much of a woman's self-worth is based on what kind of man she has.
Why would a woman date "down" when she can find people, albeit with some difficulty that are in the same level as her
@@oliviacarolinanogueira7769 Did you even watch the video or read the article? As women gain status they become more and more contemptuous of lower status partners. Massively shrinking your dating pool. And then you blame men for what you do to yourselves. Men don't really have that problem because we don't place that much value on a woman's social status or resources.
@@oliviacarolinanogueira7769 here's the thing about that, a male that's making the same as her *will* date someone who is a part time cashier at Walmart, or even unemployed. We're not programmed by either nature or society to care what our partners make. It's not even a factor in the male decision making process for selecting a partner. We're interested in emotional connection, physical attraction, compatibility, and a host of other things. What a woman does for a living or how much she makes are so far down the list as to be non existant.
So given that there are a (very) limited amount of men making significantly above average salaries, and a not insignificant number of them are going to be happily settling with someone who makes less than them, by stubbornly insisting that a partner make exactly the same - or more - these women are effectively pricing themselves out of the dating market entirely and the older they get the more this will be exacerbated because more and more men will be in committed relationships. And that's entirely their decision to make, they don't *have* to do otherwise. But it would make sense to make some concessions in the interest of finding a compatible partner before 'with some difficulty' becomes 'completely impossible.'
To women a man is just a status symbol. A thing. Like a McMansion, an SUV, a kid and all the other crap their waste money on. Think about how depraved that is. They see their own children as another status symbol. You watch. The second they can they dump the kid at daycare and go back to working at Noseberg corporation in their fake HR job. I can forgive the way women look at men. It's just how they are. I have an equally low opinion of women to be honest but how modern women treat their own children is to disgusting to forgive.
@@oliviacarolinanogueira7769 yeah, why would a woman care more about a man,'s character and personality than his wallet??
I think they’re forgetting that it’s women who are raised to believe they need to “marry up” in society.
So when I hear “guys aren’t marrying women more successful than they are, women most affected”, I’m inclined not to believe it.
Nah, only going to speak from personal experience, there are plenty of men who wouldn't date a woman who makes more than them. Women are socialized to want to marry a man who makes more than them but men are equally socialized to think that they have to be the bread maker and to not be makes them a failure as a man.
@@totha098 I just find that surprising. Not saying you are lying, but I haven't yet encountered anyone like that. Maybe it is a thing where it occurs more often around specific ages or in certain demographics? (Like Rural versus Suburb, North versus south etcetera.)
Your probably lying about that I have never met a guy older or younger then me to think like that.
I tend to agree re " marry up" esp in nyc. Gals looking for wall street warriors.
@@totha098 I’ve never met a guy, me included, where a woman earning more was a deal breaker.
The one thing I tend to notice with a lot of these examples that are quoted in these kind of relationship articles, is they tend to focus on people who have achieved wealth through being specialised experts in their given field (to use these examples of Supreme Court nominee, academy award actor etc)...I feel like I may be stating something that is highly obvious but often not want to be included as a variable in these studies, is that often people who have a capacity to become specialised experts in any given domain are neuro-divergent...deficits in relational and social capacity are kind of in the diagnostic criteria...I think communication and problem resolution skills are far better predictors of relationship success than annual earnings, after all, ‘hypergamy’ is redundant when accounting for the variable of ‘height’....Basically the fun with statistics as you can make them say whatever you want them to say, so it’s always best to at least account for a wide range of variables particularly at the start
THIS
Marriages with female partners earning more are more likely to end in divorce. The "communication and problem resolution skills" would be the same.
"neuro-divergent...deficits in relational and social capacity are kind of in the diagnostic criteria"
@@adamlucas4753 very surprised you knocked down neurological medical science for not being ‘hard’ (#pseudoscientificbullcrap lol) then went on to provide a sociological and philosophy based argument argument....kind of confused by that...
yes unfortunately it is still not possible to treat all areas of medical health research as a ‘hard’ science, which means you will often come across terms with what is called an ‘operational definition’. Something you may be familiar with given your penchant for sociology. Health research is still not a perfect system and the more you learn the less you realise you know. Obviously the more we learn about different disorders, systems, mechanisms etc the more we will be able understand and test for them. So for now we are stuck with diagnostic categorical labels that fall under the colloquial name of ‘neurodivergent’ including ASD and adhd. If you look up the medical or psychology diagnostic manuals then you will find that these deficits are cited within the taxonomy frame that practitioners use. Still not as ‘hard science’ as a blood test but none the less quite useful for practice and research purposes and Ihope it improves over time.
What I am referring to is a type of statistical test called a ‘multivariate analysis’ and my belief this type of testing is more useful at answering the question than a ‘univariate’ approach would be. I do believe that philosophy is useful at providing the framework and theory to inform the use of the tests, but that testing should DEFINITIVELY occur in order to confirm or rebuke these philosophical notions.
Essentially this means that I am advocating for the use of a multivariate analysis to confirm whether or not the variable of cognitive functioning explains a greater proportion of the variance in answering the question of if the cited relationship problems experienced by individuals with expert performance in a given domain than other commonly cited variables from the literature do. Variance is the explanatory power of a variable. So I am referring to what approach to use if you find, or can theorise, a ‘confounding variable’. Look up posthoc and planned comparisons analyses. But that is based on my theory that it would have a large enough explanatory power to deem the other variables redundant or to justify the removal of these variables from the model. For example, thinking that matchsticks cause emphysema becomes redundant well accounting for cigarettes, like you can still keep the matchsticks in your model but it would have a lower explanatory power than if you removed the matchsticks as a variable. My extremely short-hand half-sentence example from my prior post regarding hypergamy is that ‘hypergamy’ is a ‘theory’, but a posthoc one. It was used to theoretically explain a ‘trend’ people were seeing in the relationship selection data available at the time. Recently (and this is why I am a strong advocate for replication studies in science), some of the original variables were placed in a multivariate analysis along with more of the study participants demographic and biological data including the new variable of the participants’ height. The model with the greatest explanatory power simply stated that women prefer men with greater height to themselves. Thus, once again, scientific grant money was spent on confirming the obvious....not saying these other factors do not contribute to a good relationship but if women were to have one vs ten of the other factors they would basically choose height almost every time. After all in most studies women give ‘social’ greater salience in decision making then their male counterparts (hope you picked up on what I did there, it’s of use for one of you examples). Although I am well aware this changes at extreme ends of the bell curve where, which is why I think my intitial question becomes more interesting because, with most individuals scoring in the average across an array of quality of life outcomes my question references individuals that have scored in the highest referential category and thus you would more likely to find extreme scores in other areas such as cognitive ability.
Like I definitely enjoy listening to much of the political, psychology, sociology rhetoric here on CZcams. I know people are looking for answers as to why so many aspects of the world are screwed up. But I worry that this new sociopolitical-theory-of-the-gaps (as an obvious play on the god-of-the-gaps conundrum) is removing people’s ability to search for answers, at least ones that don’t conform to prior ideology, or bear some semblance of an ability to critically view multiple sides of a theory without so much bias. Not saying bias can’t be fun, after all, engineers bias us, we bias psychology, who biases sociology that biases the working class lmao
@@lunar686 I didn't knock down neurological medical science. You posited a condition with strictly behavioral criteria. That's behavioral science. Does your inability to communicate precisely and clearly mean you have a neurological condition? No. If you've got PET or EEG data categorically demonstrating inferior problem-solving capabilities, that would be neuroscience. But you don't have that and I know you don't because IQ and intelligence researchers have been searching for it for decades and still haven't definitively found it (being clear: they can identify neurologically-retarded people but they can't distinguish neurologically eloquent speakers from merely functional or adequate ones or people who are otherwise brilliant problem-solvers.)
Before getting into the rest of it let's get one thing clear; despite current social fads with regards to sex and marriage, in a definitively binary reproductive construct (which human physiology is), women _definitively cannot_ be any more choosy than men when it comes to reproduction. We aren't saying that hypergamous females biologically define the species like could/would/is true of other species. We're talking about strictly social constructs of marriage and non-reproductive sex.
Moreover, you say redundant when you mean covariant, you then go on to suggest I learn multivariate analysis (Again? I've only been doing it for 20 yrs.) while, seemingly ignoring that it's been done for decades and, paradoxically, suggest a single variable, which agrees with the overarching classification that you say it refutes. Yes, the variable that accounts for the most variance has the most explanatory power but, unless it explains all the variance, and height doesn't, it doesn't have the explanatory power of multiple variables that can/does include the singular variable itself. Chiefly, this is the power of multivariate analysis/mixture experimentation. You know that water, flour, butter, sugar, eggs, and chocolate chips are all important variables in a given recipe but unless you measure and control all of them together, you don't get cookies. Various ingredients may have correlated function, sugar contributes to the flakiness of cookies similarly to flour, water and eggs both make mixing easier, and chocolate chips are sweet like sugar and may be the one ingredient that generates the most preferred cookie but when you combine them all, you get something that isn't adequately described by any given ingredient and even if you have a cookie with the maximum amount of chocolate that generates the maximum amount of desirability unless it's got the other ingredients in the roughly correct proportions, it's not a good/preferred cookie.
Also, as I said, it doesn't refute the over arching classification. Yes, height is an important variable but if women prefer men over 6 ft. tall and only 1% of men are over 6 ft. tall and even fewer than 1% of women are, that's hypergamy. Doubly so if men 'only' prefer women in the upper 50th percentile of height. And again, you say '1 in 10' and throw the other 9 variables away, you've explicitly reduced a multivariate analysis to a single variable. Which is unusual because, as I indicated, height doesn't explain all the variables and the studies on the other variables have been done. Chocolate may be the preferred ingredient and sweet, but we all know you don't get a cookie without the other ingredients. Height is correlated with income. Height isn't the single factor when it comes to income but it's a factor. Height and income are not redundant. When you control for height and ask women which men they prefer, they'll choose men with more income (or men who present themselves as having more income). Again demonstrating hypergamy, where they prefer men who make more money than they do while men are more income agnostic about their partners. Just like saying water or chocolate chips is the primary ingredient when it comes to making good cookies. Water or chocolate chips may get you the most bang for your buck but they are not redundant with flour or butter. Chocolate chips, being largely milk fat, may correlate with butter, but they aren't redundant. With regard to theory and neuro-divergence, none of this is to say that hypergamy is any sort of pathology or explicit condition in any given woman any more than their preference for chocolate chip cookies. Even quite the opposite, there are many benefits to women being choosy about their partners, not the least of which is their partners striving to meet higher standards. Just like a cookie with chocolate chips is, or may be, better than one without. Divergence explicitly indicates a separation and to assert it's typified by an inability to communicate or problem solve explicitly indicates a pathology or dysfunction. To assert it's neural suggests a predictive path from a given neurological condition to a pathological inability.
Hypergamy isn't a theory, not nearly as much as 'neuro-divergent' is a theory. It's an objective classification. The researchers conducting the multivariate analysis didn't set out to bake cookies. At its most theoretical, they noticed cookies in nature and sought to elucidate the ingredients. Closer to reality, they noticed mixtures of just flour and water or just butter and sugar, or chips of composite elements of milk fat, sugar, and cacao (etc.) in nature and said that this one with all of them together is a chocolate chip cookie. It doesn't strive to explain why women are hypergamous any more than explain why chocolate chip cookies are better and doesn't intrinsically project any/all expected outcomes of hypergamy, let alone good/bad outcomes, as much as just acknowledge that they are. The opposite, even going so far as to say that a cookie composed entirely of chocolate chips isn't a cookie. When someone says, "Why can't I find my/a good chocolate chip cookie?" the answer of "Your cookie doesn't have chocolate chips." or "Most cookies recipes don't have chocolate in them." isn't a theory, it's a statement of the fact that most chocolate, while maybe the most preferred ingredient in chocolate chip cookies, isn't a necessary one. It doesn't state that the woman is hypergamous, just that her standards are too high. Unlike neuro-divergent which strongly suggests that there is some diagnostic neurology which confers her standards, hypergamy merely asserts that she's engaging in a behavior that many other women engage in. Women preferring chocolate chip cookies and men preferring any cookie is an example of hypergamy just as much as women preferring men over 6ft. tall while men preferring any woman who has sugar and eggs (if even that) is. It's not a theory, it's an observation.
Women seem to have a problem admitting that they are picky. Too picky. That's somehow wrapped up in who initiates divorces, who cares about being seen as "promiscuous", and more. We men are somehow always the problem. IMHO somebody needs to understand that it's impossible for one half of the relationship to be the whole problem all the time. Where are the articles written by men about relationship problems? Are we writing articles like this mansplaining how modern feminism is making dating hard? From what I hear, we are more likely to be incels, complaining that 80 percent of the hookups are going to 20 percent of the men. I'm not confusing hookups with relationships, I'm saying other than platonic relationships, a long term intimate relationship doesn't get established at all if it doesn't start, and women are the ones saying yes or no...they have the control, and it appears they aren't happy with how that's working out. Puzzling isn't it?
Women have recreated harems for the top 20% of men who get the pick of the litter of the 80% trying to get with him.
@@ShaferHart Ding ding ding. Bingo.
@@ShaferHart This society is truly confused. I'm all for equality, but in my experience, while Westerners are coddled in general, it's the women- especially the White ones- who are coddled the most. People will say that's racist, but I have seen it my whole life with my own eyes. I know a Bulgarian dude who actually told me that he will not date a White American woman because "they're crazy and don't know what they actually want". Even my own husband said, "What the fuck was I thinking???" It is what it is, but general coddling in our society has made people unwilling to practice introspection and unwilling to listen to other viewpoints.
women are biologically hardwired to be picky; if they chose a bad date, not only is 9 months of their lives lost by giving birth to the child of someone who very well might abandon them, but it might actually result in the woman and the kid passing away in a survival situation, especially if the male is pathetic and incapable. This would naturally create an evolutionary pressure for women to select for competence, which is unfortunately being correlated (correctly? Incorrectly?) with your annual income
As men we are and will always be disposable. It's simple as that, no one really cares. So we should not care about anyone either.
I think that, in general, it's women who don't like to date men who earn less. In a marriage, as soon as a woman starts to significantly outearn the man, that marriage is in danger of falling apart. The reason is 90% the woman: she starts to feel she is carrying the guy, and as long as she still has her looks, she feels she can do better. I think this is really harmful in the long-run - it is counter to the (relatively) recent "career woman" ethos.
Honestly that mentality is truly toxic for both sexes. Because if the beauty fades away, then that sole reason would fade away as well.
@@killertruth186 That's why you don't marry for looks.
@@killertruth186 It's unfortunate that women seem to be the most common proprietors of it.
completely agree...
@@mistergoodfellow5847 women are told from birth their value is their looks so ...
My Wife earns 3x what I can. We're a complimentary pairing. When we had kids, we've took turns working and looking after the kids. I see life is a game, and right now I feel like I'm winning. As long as you can try and meet each others needs, screw what the world thinks. I'm definitely not a woke man, so I find this nonsense they print about relationships is stupid. Thanks for your input Louis!
Man, you're so right about this. Especially the pert about being treated like a pet. Most women feel like a man should make more than them, not the other way round.
Because that’s what society thought them from the very beginning. Structures are just starting to change. I’m looking forward to how it will be in 10 or 20 years. Hopefully that way of thinking won’t be as prevalent then.
@@DieFarbeLila88 No, what's being described here is 'hypergamy' and has been a part of female nature since forever, and has little to nothing to do with social structures.
Here's a quote from an article about the science behind hypergamy "it's evolutionarily adaptive to engage in hypergamy, because it increases the likelihood that you’ll have children who live long enough to reproduce" "Hundreds of thousands of years ago, you wanted a man who had more resources, land, or his own watering hole. A man with resources is better suited to help you raise your children"
@@shmeegol Women were not allowed to have land and watering-holes back then. So I wouldn't really call it "nature" but more like "the only option they had". There is a difference. Everything belonged to the men. So pretty much ALL partnerships were hypergamy. There was pretty much no there option. But the situation is different now. Women are allowed to have land and watering holes. Which makes me think, that your argument is not really applicable to our current situation.
"Where are all the romcoms where males pursue female CEOs?"
Lol, that sentence is a modern day recipe for an HR disaster.
I don't think even man with 10 in looks department but a garbage collector will even be enough for these female CEOs. "but he is garbage collector". anyone below 10 in looks department will be called a creep, then she call the police or security on him, just like awkward student in UK who got jailed for saying "hi".
imagine taking relationship advices from Hollywood rich creeps... who gives a f about Hollywood
Movie producers: Where is the demand for such movies so we don't spend millions of dollars for it to flop in the box office?
The only CEO & lowerlevel employee romcom i've watched is The Proposal - and even then, she's the CEO. I literally cannot think of one where the man is the CEO and the woman is the lowerlevel employee
I love how she can just say "it's up to men"; the tremendous privilege of taking no responsibility for success in your own relationships, that can only come from being a woman in the west.
That's what they do bro... they need their man to be "perfect"... so they don't have to figure out anything
Does anybody actually believe Hollywood actors should be the baseline of a healthy relationship to represent all of society?
Idiots do
You would be surprised. Millions of women do. And I mean millions. They were raised on it.
I don't think a lot of people believe it consciously, but there are examples about how the media we consume do have an affect on us.
If things we see didn't affect us at all propaganda wouldn't even be a concept which exists :P
Journalists. Yeah, they're that stupid.
Art should imitate life
I can only really speak from experience, but I was once broken up with because she made more than me. She never directly admitted it to me, but it was forwarded off to me through mutual friends that she felt she'd have to 'take care of me' and despite her career and education, still wanted the old school 'man takes care of me' type relationship. I dunno. It is what it is.
Because she wanted to have her cake and eat it at the same time.
Meanwhile I'm disabled so know that I'm basically screwed on finding any sort of relationship because quite literally and biologically I am damaged good. To say nothing of the fact that disability and the issues that come along for the ride, basically fuck over my employment chances.
NOBODY is gonna want that.... So my dating options are simple. 'Slim, and None. Slim found someone years ago.'
My dad picked my mom because he liked her personality. Her amputated leg and body full of scars dies not bother him. He called me a nice bonus, as many don't like raising another's "trash"... or did not like my ginger hair.
Have hope, there are people out there that don't care how you look or what disability you have.
@@xiamaramu1538 Men are much more likely to accept a disabled woman than vice versa.
In the great scheme of things, you must be self sufficient and your happiness (and mental health) shouldn't depend on someone else. A partner is a luxury, a plus, an accessory, it's not indispensable, just like having children. If people stop been so needy about having a partner, toxic & abusive partner wouldn't have so much leverage.
Sounds like this article was written while hopped up on soylent. I have never had any problems with a woman earning more. If anything, it means I can pursue my hobbies and dreams more since there is less risk if things go wrong.
One thing I found interesting about this article is how it asked for rom-coms (a genre men generally don't even watch) with men pursuing female CEOs... as in MEN doing the pursuing.
If they really wanted to flip the gender roles, why wouldn't they make it about the female CEO pursuing a man?
The only way a men would watch such a movie was if the CEO was Elexis Sinclaire, but then there would be complaints that they made the CEO too sexualized.
@@cryora complaints? That sounds like a sacrifice I'm willing to let others make.
@@CordovanSplotchVT Housing prices are still too high
@@cryora Is this an American thing? I'm not sure what housing prices have to do with flipping gender roles in movies.
@@CordovanSplotchVT Everything is interconnected somehow
My ex wife is a HW engineer, and I'm a low life despicable SW guy. Why she's an ex is beside the point. When she did her bachelor's thesis I wrote the software to prove it because the HW design tools at the time couldn't cope with integers large enough to do it. The morale of the story is; SW complements HW. And also, we fix all your damn bugs and design flaws.
Loved the moral! You go SW guy! Thanks for your work!
She saw herself as above you. Equal marriages, or ones where women see themselves as the greater always fail for one reason or another. In the show "All in the Family" that Louis mentioned, as far as I can remember, Archie and Edith did not divorce. Mike and Gloria did. Mike and Gloria were equal partners. That show was spot on. Males form groups to help protect their resources and women. Women join groups and will always be on the lookout for something better. What is happening right now in our society is the breakdown of the nuclear family, which is a group. They are "Dividing and Conquering us"
Women need to respect a man more than they love them or they will find an excuse to move on. It is by design, and it works if not meddled with by tyrants who are attempting to push forward a GREAT RESET. Would you like the blue pill or the red?
@@kandrkandr
Not really.
@@bobfg3130 he’s right though
@@StevenSanchezWelding
Not really. He's wrong about the latter stuff.
Real title: _How masculine tropes are used to continue damaging men and women by creating the idea men and women must remain in conflict for an ideal that ignores that individuals are unique people that must find out how to best interact in their own places in society._
Being treated "like a pet", brought back some bad memories of a time when I dated a woman briefly who definitely made more money than me, there wasn't even room for conversion because my opinion would not even be listen to. Although we were at different points in our lives, this is no way to treat someone and I have never done it regardless of where I've been in life...
Woman tend to want to date higher status mates. And men tend to went to date attractive mates. I could phrase it better and ofcourse everyone is different but this is a really basic breakdown of the different evolutionary preferences men and woman have while dating. This whole article is the mentality of "woman most effected" meme. Like every problem is never a woman fault and they are always the biggest victims. My favorite example of this is when Hillery Clinton said, 'woman are the biggest losers in when because they lose there sons and fathers and husbands". She literally said it's worse for a woman to lose a loved one then for a man to die.
Hillary was also been indited yesterday for everything they blamed Trump to be the last 7 years.
Yes, it has to do with testosterone. It makes males more willing to fight. Males fight over territory and females. This is easily observable in nature shows. In some cases, the male has many females. Females are less muscular and tend to be physically smaller. They tend to look for protection.
It is one reason why jails have more men. They tend to do riskier things.
It is one reason why there are less men than women even though more men are born. They tend to do riskier things.
Even when it comes with language, women are ok with being called girl while it seems that men don't like being called boy.
@@MrThetruthhurts ill believe it when it sticks
Then there are the women that have a deadbeat baby's dads. They knew full well what they were getting into, but they were the victim.
@@Chris-vx5kp 80% of woman initiate divorce most on basis of "irreconcilable differences" and than jsut cash out on alimony there aren´t many dead beat dads out there but a lot fo single mom welfare queens
I agree with Louis on this topic.
I do wonder about the influence the media has on gender roles and long term relationships. The author seems to suggest that all of this would not be an issue if there was a sitcom about a dishwasher man pursuing a billionaire CEO woman. Maybe children who watched that growing up would change their mind as they get older.
I would assume most people would form their own ideal romantic interest and long term relationships based upon the adults who grew up around them rather than a sitcom or movie. I find it hard to believe that a string of sitcoms and romcoms can have that much influence on attraction and long term relationships for a whole generation of people. Culture goes deeper than television. I would assume most television mirrors real life relationships rather than shaping what a real relationship will be.
Representation matters for many things. However, I think it would be delusional to think so many marriages would have survived if only there were more Romantic Comedies about struggling marriages. Hollywood is not going to save everybody's marriage with a slew of TV shows and Movies, life is more complicated than that.
These sorts of influences seem to have more of an impact on women than men. When you look at entertainment products that target female audiences and what types of fiction women prefer it very often revolves around fantasy relationships and contrived social conflict. Where men love violence, dark humor and stoic adventures.
Essentially. Suggesting men can be programmed by these things is projection. Men are increasingly turning away from TV and mainstream entertainment anyway. A lot of people are.
@@carbonstar9091 Except that you're wrong about music media. Music is extremely powerful in influence, and males are so obviously brainwashed by the bullshit today. Just look at rap music; don't sit there and say only women are so weak that they're the only ones influenced by media. Most PEOPLE are weak as fuck in general and are too easily brainwashed. If they weren't we wouldn't have problems in the first place.
What fairytale was it that a poor man married a princess? Oh right that doesn't exist. The invese does though. It's so culturally ingrained because it is biological. It makes sense why to; having a child is a far greater risk for women. In the day and age where everyone is encouraged to work and discouraged from being stay at home parents the number of higher status women rise and as women have a biological prerogative to seek out the highest status partner possible the dating pool for women gets smaller. Personally I think it is just another side affect of telling everyone to go to college.
Media absolutely destroyed gender roles. It made women all to be girlpower super heroes, and men to be complete brainlets (especially fathers). I wonder what the motives of the producers of this media were.
Lmao, it's all about hypergamy. Women only date on the same level or upward. So the higher they are, the smaller the pool of men they are interested in.
Men do not have this limitation.
"Where are the romantic comedies of men who romantically pursue women CEOs?"
Duh.. Disney
What to people think a princess even is?
Persuant to the first pause point Louis made: Advertisers and show writers have a disturbing and destressing habit of making men out to be stupid, gullible, raging dickheads with fragile egos.
Now then I have personal anger issues, but that is wholly unrelated to 'getting a date.' I honestly love being around people who are both smarter than me, and at the same time try explaining these things in a way that it isn't completely over my head rather than someone going 'i'm smarter than you what do YOU have to offer to ME'
But like.... I know i"m in no kind of place in my life financially, emotionally, or capacitywise, that would ALLOW for a relationship.
Edit: My hot take here based on a LOT of anecdotal evince, the declining birth rates in east asianic countries and cultures, hearsay and please keep in min I'm just some schlub on the internet.
Women who activly earn a decent amount of money, are less INTERESTED in a traditional relationship, and those that are, can afford to be more picky. Under normal situations guys have to work their ass off because women get pick of the litter anyhow. Add ont othat someone who's more selective because they have a career and life and most guys are going to go like Rossman here and 'she's treating me like I treat my cat. I'm out, because i was never really in the running to begin with.'
I say all this not to blame women who want a career. I say this to put blame squarely on the article writer tryign to act liek 'men bad men evil Hiss. Death to Men we don't need you.'
There are some rare cases where the woman is not smarter. For example, All in the Family. Edith was less intelligent than Archie.
Married with Children.Bug (the son) was the intelligent one and Kelly (the sister) played the dumb blond. Al seemed slightly more intelligent than Peggy.
@@Blox117 While i can sooorta agree with the sentiment? That does feel a bit harsher than necessary to the point of it turning into a rant on how horrible women are.
Which to me is just as not cool as what the lady writing this article is doing. So can we... Not do that please?
@@singletona082 No, his comment was so verbally abusive that he needs to be staked to a cross (sarcastic). plz that was just an example of a double standard that some women have nothing personally targeting.
At the same time? I've seen that sort of rhetoric immediately slide into far worse far more toxic. What he said right htere is a fair criticism. Women get to a point where unless it tics EVERY checkbox? Garbage. Part of that though is wiring. They are looking fora provider and protector. And if they're already successful on their own they don't see 'settling' as filling that need.
I disagree entirely that women with a career don't want children and a house with a traditional relationship to boot. Top CEO women might not, but most career women either do want these things openly and lament their "options", blaming men....or they actually want these things but hide it from themselves. A major drive of biology is procreation, if someone lacks a sex drive that is a symptom of there being a mental issue. Women DO want traditional men, which is why the wealthy, smart, handsome, and big burly men tend to have the most options. Women just grew up being lied to and don't want to admit it to themselves. Men grew up being lied to as well, but around puberty we get a wake up call when people start to show how little society cares about men. The smart ones notice this and wake up...the idiots don't, and the mentally ill become male feminists that prey on women.... look up the stats.
We are now dealing with several generations where it is more usual than not for kids to come from broken homes. I grew up in a stable home with two parents who got married at 20 and are still together. Once I hit the dating scene, I was dealing a non-stop string of guys from divorced homes who were totally f'd up from the experience. I was playing by the rules and they were playing games and had no idea how to communicate, be a gentleman, be responsible, make sacrifices, compromise etc, etc. and I am sure it is the same when the genders are reversed.
@@mg00 please dont compare, its not a competition
Exactly. My fiance and I both have intact families and intend to create one for our future kids. Too many people are broken and won't do the work to fix themselves.
@@mg00 Ever see that TED Talk where the woman complains she can't find a man with the list of requirements that filled an entire PowerPoint slide?
You obviously have never had to deal with BPD daddy issue women.
@@ShaferHart damn, sexual liberation has positives? Care enough to name them?
Times Louis showed his flux tube:
2:37
4:29
7:31
15:16
😆
Drink a shot everytime louis says "flux" in a video lmao
Even Louis who people might consider “blue pill” has the most basic understanding of male and female relationship dynamics.
Men are not ready date strong successful women.
Ok. We're ready.
I don't want to date a bum/man child/not successful enough.
Uh...
See men can't keep up with us.
how exactly is he blue pilled? genuinely interested.
Purple pill
@@svenjorgensenn8418 im gay pilled
6:00 thank God someone finally said this. I can't believe you have the balls to go against this narrative. It's frustrating having the media constantly paint men as a villains.
You don't think I'd date a woman making my salary or more? But women not only aren't interested, I now realize they ask me probing questions to figure out my salary. I've had women straight up say "I don't think you make a lot of money" and just walk off. Media couldn't care less. But God forbid if you flip those scenarios and a man said he wouldn't date a woman for any reason. You're a phobic or ism. For all the things society has asked us to accept while dating, the standards for men have only gotten higher. Make more money, be taller, more in shape, more charismatic, spontaneous and if you're not? That's fine, you're one tinder swipe away from being replaced.
Instead the narrative is men don't accept women and have too insane standards for women. The media has created a completely false narrative. Even the beauty standards thing is bs. 80% of men are below average in looks to women whole its 50% for men. Yet Men's standards are too high. Women file 80% of divorces. But it's men who are blamed saying "if only you had been better, less abusive, less toxic."
Dating and relationships is a lot harder than ever before for a normal dude.
This is why mig tau bro
The issue is innocence by association. Criticism will see you painted as the enemy. This article is trying to avoid that and taking the easy road. But it keeps many in the dark, and their world view is shaped to believe men are bad or have power way way more then a women could ever dream of.
The problem isn't often that men won't date women who make more than them, it's waaaaaaaay more often that women won't date men that make less than them.
See also: thousands of articles of 'where have the good men gone?'
Bloomber telling you to fight stereotypes while using stereotypes… typical.
I would love a woman that has computer, linux and privacy knowledge. She would be my desired type of woman.
Where to find them? Lol
We got long-sock wearing political extremists that code, will that work?
@@biggali no
Errr... hi?
@@carlab7678 Hi
I'm at a point where I couldn't care less about womens grievances in the first world even if I got paid. If you want equality with men you either gotta realize shit's tough or make life easier for men. You can't call something equal if you need extra privileges to get there.
Remember guys,"equality"is a must & your masculinity is toxic/fragile, unless your country needs defending; then traditional gender roles are enforced into you & you get the "male privilege"of dying in war, so politicians can negotiate over your corpse. I say F them all.
"Men are poor women most affected"
Part of the problem is that these women that make a lot of money feel like that adds to their worth as a companion. It does to someone who doesn't have much money and would see his quality of life improve vastly, but they solely seek out men who make even more money than they do. Those men want a trophy wife. They don't care about someone who's going to make their life slightly more extravagant than it already is.
I wonder what they would complain about if men married these high earning women? 🤔 Would they call these men gold diggers?🤔
90 day fiancé proved male gold diggers are real, they do the same to rich ugly old women
Yea it happens its just very rare. Only women who make a lot of money and look a poor man's way are old /physically unattractive women.
@@AppleMenace makes sense
No, they still manage to call them bums and losers though.
My husband and I are more the "equal footing" type match. We met our first week in college with similar engineering career goals and have been together for over 20 years. I make less than him, but it's more because of the fields we went into. I went down the Civil path and he the tech & computer path. But we're usually within 20k of each other, and it doesn't really matter since for us, it's just one pool of income. We "grew up" into real adults together.
My sister, however, is textbook what Louis is talking about. Career woman, highly specialized field in education and was very picky about who she dated. She could be...she could support herself and really had no reason to find someone else except for companionship. Throughout her 20s and early 30s she went on dates but never more than 2-3 before realizing she had nothing in common with them. She did find someone a few years ago and just got married last year at 37. But, he was a 6-figure earner as well with multiple income streams and high education.
From my limited group of family and friends (nearly all of which has some sort of college education and middle class salary) I feel that it quite often is about the woman (assuming hetero relationship) and their preferences whether or not something proceeds from meeting to dating to marriage.
And honestly, I don't know that I teach my children any different. My daughter in high school is very academically ambitious and her "nerdy" gaming friend group (who are all boys) is the same. I doubt she would want to be with someone very long that she can't relate to. Things change of course, but if she does well for herself, i can see her being inclined to want a true partner in all aspects of life like I feel I am with my spouse. Salary is only one of those aspects, but I think it's one that can be reflective of many others.
Married at 37, it's over. A time will come where she will regret marrying so late.
@@TheSuperBoyProject Why?
@@yeahgirl11 because she got married 37, likely out of rush, for money. If she has children they will be genetic abominations at that age. Statistically speaking she will also divorce within the decade and her children will hate her. She will die alone.
The thing is, more often than not, men who make over 6 figures as described have their choice in women and are wayyy less inclined to seek out an over 30yo career woman as a wife. Your sister got lucky to even get married to such a guy. Normally those men look at younger women around 21-27 and don't even bother with older women. Why? Because they can. They got enough money to not care about what she earns and go for the most attractive and fertile woman they can. A lot of women like your sister end up being completely alone their entire life due to their own standards.
Using Kamala Harris as an example in this kind of an article made me laugh out loud!
Yeah, you should not use some one who fucked her way to the VP office
@@wesss9353 or the countless lives she’s ruined by withholding evidence
She like most of the political class is literally clueless - someone just about smart enough to be indoctrinated into far left ideology at university and to sell out and do whatever special interests tell them to. In Kamalas case smart enough to get on her knees for the occasional powerful man to win promotion. Not intelligent enough to do self study or to conduct their own logical or moral decision making. Any number of conversations in dissident political or economic corners happen on CZcams livestreams every day that most politicians would be completely incapable of understanding because it doesn't fit their ideological framework.
@@gamerguy6990 hochial got her position by being next in line
"Men don't like to date women which are more intelligent than them"?
Dude, the more intelligent a women is, the sexier her inner values are.
Dayum thats one really sexy uterus you have m'lady lol
"I can't get a man because they are intimidated by me" reeks the same vibes as "I can't get a girl because I'm too nice". If everyone else is problem, then YOU are the problem. And nobody but YOU acknowledgeing that problem & solving it, will fix it.
@@Jose04537 Yes and no. Some people just lack any amount of mentally compatible people (or even sane people that are not crazy) in their area and are thus unable to find someone.
Intelligence is subjective and even more complicated in relationships. You wouldn't date a girl who is smart but use it against you right so just to say "the more intelligent a woman is the sexier her inner values are" is sort of too generalized. And how about the opposite end? Why are they not promoting women picking guys who they think are smarter? We live in a feminized society where a man's intelligence is worth less because we are told to value intelligence of women, but not the other way around! It is subtle but slowly men are trained to take the traditional role of women! Why, because feminists want women to be like men and then women can control the world. Remember they couldn't contain themselves when they say "the future is female"?
Whatever that is supposed to mean@@lickalotlickalot2210 .
Noone trains me to be the way I am. In fact, in real life people tend to yell at me for behaving feminine at times, which in turn just makes me want to resist the clichés even further. I am a result of resistinf the drill, not a result of doing what society wants me to do.
As a very masculine man, 6'3" 240 lbs, relatively fit, I would have no problem dating a woman CEO who was making couple mil a year. Did I mention I currently make around 40K a year?? The thing is, I doubt very much if any of these woman CEO's would bother to give a guy like me making what I do the time of day let alone date me.... She would probably look at me, what I make, my "status" in life and think "I can do better" NOT because I'm a terrible person, unattractive, anything like that but because other variables that people think of. I'm ok with that. Have your standards. Date who you want but this article is bull and is trying to take a very complex situation with MANY variables and simplify it down to this ONE reason....as all these type of BS articles do....
Awesome video as always, Louis!
Although it's still disparate among men and women, I think there's a harsh game leveler: aging.
If you realize you're getting old and you're getting lonelier, you even consider lowering your standards by desperate measures. Still, some women can't even do that, so they get a bunch of pets, grow plants and call it a life without knowing there were some men just trying to get noticed.
I'm going to smoke a depression stick
I'm pretty sure any straight man that makes less money would happily accept a rich attractive sugarmomma, what universe wouldn't they? lol
I have no doubts that at least someone will be more than happy with that, there are billions of people in this planet, too many to just stereotype everyone into the same bag
As a guy in mid twenties just starting to get his shit together thinking about dating right now just makes me depressed. Social media hyper-inflated women's perspective of themselves across the board and now I'd argue at least half of young men are outright ignored by young women like they don't exist.
Ever watch Kevin Samuels? You should check him out. Great take on it all and very balanced. Doesn't bash anyone.
And young women are feeling increasingly sexualized and just like pieces of meat by young men due to dating apps and social media, that half of them don't feel like they exist and are ignored by men unless they wear super tight tops and stick their chest out like a twitch streamer. The problem is the decent people of both sexes don't fit into how modern society functions and can't find each other in natural settings like in the past.
@@gauloise6442 I learned a long time ago to stop using dating apps. They're one of the main reasons we're currently where we are today.
@@gauloise6442 all depends on who these women chase. The data shows women on dating apps are Insanely selective and only go after 15% of the men on the app (men will talk to most women on average). OK cupid and other dating sites have published this data. Women on apps simply need to pick different people. To suggest it's men as a whole who are sexualizing women on apps is a false narrative.
Another creator did the economics of tinder. For the average guy using a dating app, he's lucky to get 1 match a day. In fact, the average number of matches for a normal dude is extrmely low compared to the average woman.
But I mean, men have been saying this for ages online. Doesn't matter. The media will run with your narrative that it's young men sexualizing women rather than the truth which is women chase the same small group of men which allows those men to be complete jerks because there's another 10 ladies lined up.
@@gauloise6442 I have zero sympathy there. It's 100x harder for men on dating apps. Unless you are rich or a Chad you get almost no engagement because of how selective women are. Why bother with anything other than sex if she has 50 other suitors and is going to dump/cheat on you in a week anyway? Might as well keep it transactional.
Speaking from experience, I've been in great relationships that failed because girlfriend started making more than me. Initially the relationship worked but as her career took off and mine didn't I felt comfortable and secure with where I was at that point in life, and she was more interested in a more successful man.
We need to teach young men they need more masculinity, and not fully embrace their feminine side as their entire identity
This is usually how it goes, most men don't care. But women will distort reality so they don't have to take ownership of their instincts and actions.
Would telling men that being contentful is a bad thing? or even feminine?
I totally agree with everything you say here ...I make more than my husband, so what? I love the guy to death and we are secure in our bond. These kind of studies seem like desperate efforts to prop up cultural norms from the last century.
This whole study was NOTHING about old cultural norms lol, hence why Louis spoke on it. Not sure if you listened or not...
It's not that these articles are designed to prop up old cultural norms, it's that they're designed simply to shit on them and make it seem like they were completely wrong.
It's meant to divide the family unit and keep it from coalescing in the first place, that's it.
"Cultural norms" that have been the same for all of human history are not cultural norms, it's human nature. Now we're a few decades into breaking "culture norms" and woopsie! Big surprise - society is declining, morality is declining, happiness is declining, birthrates crashing, divorces rising, family structure is breaking down, mental illness and loneliness skyrocketing. It may work for some people, like you and your husband, but for the large majority of people it does not. There is a reason why every civilization on the face of the Earth regardless their differences in geography, beliefs, circumstances has followed essentially the same "cultural norms" for thousands of years... It's because they're the only way a society will exist.
Probably less to do with men rather than its women that won't lower their standards. If they move up professionally and only accept guys at or above their level then that pool dramatically decreases and they only have themselves to blame, but instead in true women fashion they blame all men for this. And it also kind of illustrates that its always about money, when guys date down they just want a partner.
I mean, in age of "I need no man" and high divorce rate(what i know mostly requested by women but i might be wrong) how i'm supposed to not be afraid that "normal" woman will left me without will to work out problems and each other imperfections , let alone woman that earns x times more than i and is couple steps higher in social hierarchy.
Tell someone about Gender Double-Standards and most are going to think about Toxic Men and almost undressed Women with no personality...
This world has equality, but women still cling on old Romantic ideas...
Most women earn just as much as most men, yet they still want a guy who makes more money. Fortunately there are also exceptions when it doesn't matter.
Money these days are deemed more important than anything else. That is just a sad reality which most people are always asking for more.
I gave up on finding a mate close to 4 years ago. Monk mode, focus on work, business and I can buy "socksual" satisfaction if I want. And I am not the one to blame, I did everything to the best possible, money wise, qualifications wise, and I don't look bad at all .... solong society, I am eating popcorn, drinking strawberry lemonade while watching all of it collapse.... and I wouldn't care the slightest any more.
A lot of women wouldn't want to be a mate to someone who pays for sex.
@@c.c.l.9139 good! because I didn't do it yet, but I can if i want to!
@@c.c.l.9139 Does that include and OnlyFans? Because they don't seem to care if men pay for that? At least men get something out of paying for a prostitute.
@@dougdimmadomeownerofthedim5376 truth! and the other day I found a friend of my ex wife who does rhe same in disguise of "nubu massage and happy ending".... I was shocked but not entirely shocked.
@@c.c.l.9139 A monk mode man couldn't care less about what women find attractive
The issue is with being poor. Seems like the people who wrote this never ever felt like that. Id love my girlfriend to make 3x my salary because we are broke af
I feel this
I tried man. But the look on a woman's face when she does or thinks she makes more than you, it's something I can't unsee. The complete turn off. Not for lack of trying, I'd love to make decent money with a partner and not struggle in life. But the article assumes men just can pick women as we please. We can't. We pick from the options handed to us, and the options handed to most men are women who earn less than us. Women who earn more will openly say "I can do better than you." it's not even a secret, so I don't knoe why the articles and media never point this out.
I personally think takes like this article's are partly why some feel unwelcome in left leaning circles and retract to right leaning circles.
This idea (that's majoritarely online, thought its seeping into IRL conversations) that nothing is the fault of women and everything is because of men is so toxic that it's legitimately putting more stress on men than they already have to deal with. It's damned if we do, damned if we don't. Masculinity seems to have become the number one scapegoat in online conversations about anything related to women. And it's insanely infuriating because the only people that seems to recognize this are majoritarely other men. Being a decent man, has become an issue of feeling like you belong no where, go to the right and you'll have a bunch of biggoted and sexist men and women, go to the left and you'll be seen as the biggoted and sexist man whatever you do.
Join the libertarians then, we have personal responsibilty!
You don't have to belong to any group, left, right, etc. Just do you, support the issues and causes you want to. Start just talking to people without having an end goal in mind, like dating or a relationship. And, Do Not Talk about what you do, make any excuse, even just " I don't talk about work ", and be ready to be attacked over this, just say there are more interesting things to talk about, if they still persist end the convo, period, they are not for you. ( They really don't want to hear about your work, they want to know how much you make ). There are decent people out there, you will find them if you keep looking.
I recommend the book "The subtle art of not giving a F*ck" by Mark Manson. Just give an F about things that affect you.
In the great scheme of things, who cares? I don't care what a twisted society thinks about me or my masculinity, I don't care about the opinion of people I'm not seeking approval, specially people with hypocrital & self servings opinions so flimsy that change at their convinience. I stopped giving an F about everything that doesn't directly affect me, because ultimately only me cares about me, only me can save me. But if they think that I can be shamed, stigmatized or forced into compliance because it suit them, without any push back or rebuttal, they are VERY wrong.
Society & it's laws/rights are a social construction, and easily collapse when reality knock it's door.
The Ukraine War put things into perspective, THEN "toxic/fragile masculinity" & gender roles are required, I say, F them all, those who can save themselves (there must be a lot of killing/torture/rape there, and there will be no punishment, no one is going to save you but you).
You have one if the Samsung heiresses who married his driver's son and the press called him "Cinderella Man" and another married an ex catholic priest ( who give up on his calling for her) but those are women who ( even if they struggled to assert their position) they have been born rich.
your response was very sensible and i could tell you were choosing your words wisely, but unfortunately the type of women who write articles like these don't actually care about being accurate and they'll dismiss you offhandedly solely on the basis of your gender. they're just bitter, spiteful, and looking for statistics to back up their toxicity. it's kind of sad, really.
The vast majority of successful career women are successful due to behaving in a masculine way: competitive and ambitious and striving personalities aren’t attractive to a lot of marriage minded men.
I know this video is probably scripted loosely, but if it isn’t, Louis’ commentary is chock full of sociological cues about how we are completely unaware of our blind spots in how others experience the world.
Would recommend to any students of sociology to watch this video! Incredible!
I agree. The article is basically a rough draft. Louis defintely brought clarity to the forefront.
"I have never experienced this. I have no friends like this. Therefore I know what I'm talking about" - Men 😂
Are you saying competitiveness and ambition are masculine traits, or how they're competitive and ambitious is masculine?
@@justanoscar ... he did admit that it might be his social circles which is the problem there so I think your quote are pretty close to taking something out of context, I would at least not call it a quote written in good faith 😛
It's crazy how they blame men "not pursuing female CEOs". I've never heard of a woman in a position like that looking for Blue Collar men.
The reason there is no romantic comedy with this concept is because women would see it as a horror movie.
@@lightly-red-huedmaleindivi6266 Uhh no. That is factually incorrect. I'm pretty sure the men in uniform thing is for male strippers in costumes or a saying from the 20s about military men.
Women have blogs, magazines, music, newspapers etc, talking about the men they like and the #1 common factor among all the women no matter the age, race, or location is that they find men who work 9-5s to be utterly disgusting.
The last paragraph - the second last sentence is open - this is related to toxic masculinity - and then puts everything on males to solve the issue.
Issue is larger than men not wanting to date better earning women. Mostly society viewing such arrangements not so favourably - just viewing male as lesser men or even leaches living off women income. Same time pushing on women with "you could do better" attitude. This is one of those toxic masculinity cases where both sides need to solve it and not just "men do better".
I'll agree when I got married my wife made more, I was ok with it at first, but I wanted to go get a new computer, and she made double what I did, and she went "thats fine here take my debit card because I know your account can't cover it and you deserve a new toy sometimes" the tone and her words made me feel more like a toy than anything else, and that was pretty normal, she insisted on paying for things because I made 35,000yr and she was making 82,000/yr when we got married. It's not the situation anymore, she got injured on the job and doesn't work anymore from medical complications and I'm now making significantly more but yea at the time it got to me because she acted like i was more a pet and as she said deserve rewards.
Louis: I work in repair as an AASP and had a question that Apple wouldn’t answer (even our “contact” sent us a templated email). I just wanted to talk to a person who knew what they were talking about (a senior tech) but nobody would transfer me to one. This was over several days, while a customer was waiting on their MacBook to get repaired. I decided to give your company a call and they transferred me to a tech (Shane) right away, who was very helpful. I sent him some pictures over email and he helped me sort out this issue within a matter of hours. I want to thank you again for your great work and it’s good to know that you’re there to help when Apple isn’t. Thanks a ton and keep up the right to repair work!
p.s. we love showing your videos (especially board repair) on our Apple TV display demo 😁
I agree with most/a lot of what you say and I appreciate that you don’t necessarily impose ideologies in your videos but rather explore ideas and try to logically put why one is better for certain reasons and not for other reasons.
Most women just want to move up as much as possible. Men are an afterthought. Love is rare these days.
Dude you gotta quit talking like "pour flux on motherboards and heat them up" is somehow a bullcrap job. You have a skill that very few people do. I can build a gun like nobody's business, but I could never do microsoldering. Ever. My hands are too shaky. Hell, I enjoy shooting, but my targets look like the before image of a Proactiv commercial.
3:59 Absolutely agree, I love to be able to have smart conversations with people and I love to learn and share my knowledge.
The article didn't touch on how either man or woman is raised. What you learn and view as a child into adulthood as examples of relationships, broken homes, marriage, etc. Has a significant impact on your view of the world specifically when seeking a suitable mate.
I have a cousin who makes less than his wife by around 40% to 50% less. His parents had a similar dynamic. My cousin wife was in the military and came from a broken home, where her parents were separated. I spent several years with them and at no point did she throw finances in his face at least not infront of me or there children. Both had regular jobs but also were entrepreneur's able to help each other's business in a symbiotic way which didn't offset their finances, but both simply made more together.
Also if considering intangibles, he's definitely higher on the scale. He's far more family oriented and she more career oriented. Not perfect by any means but they've made things work where he became a step father to her two children and they eventually had a child together. I think they've been together over 15yrs and have had many ups and downs.
I wonder if the majority or minority of US women specifically think outside of the prototypical marriage lifestyle or if the majority are going into it based on their own upbringing and what's been known as the standard.
One of the most difficult aspects is getting a genuine answer out of a women. No offense but they typicality lean toward a PC response whereas men lean toward an adaptive response.
I was having a lovely day. Interesting perspective Louis.
“I’ll take, what is Hypergamy, for 500$, Alex”
It is not my fault that women can't compete with men. Women want everything in life but sadly you can not. Don't get mad if you want equal rights with equal consequences.
Honestly for everyone to be truly happy, it is best to not throw jabs (unless if most people who do believe the person deserves it).
Since we're speaking anecdotally, I'll add my own:
1) First marriage - I was stay-at-home wife and mom with a reasonably successful man. Since he was abusive it didn't go so well. Among other things, he used to abuse his status as the breadwinner by withholding money for food and bills to "punish" me. After that I decided I wouldn't EVER be in that position again.
(insert college and first post-college job here)
2) Serious, almost-marriage boyfriend - since my job involved long hours and travel, I asked him if he would be open to being a stay-at-home dad for my kids and his daughter. He enthusiastically agreed. About 6 months later, he was resentful of me being the breadwinner and jealous that my career was started and his wasn't. So even though he liked the idea of me being the breadwinner, he DID feel emasculated by it. Ultimately we broke up, because you see - he was unhappy and it was all my fault. (These are all direct quotes from him, by the way - I'm not assuming anything.)
3) Second marriage - found the guy that actually wanted to be a stay-at-home dad and loves it, 13 years and counting. His only complaint is that everyone ELSE in his life tries to hard to get him to feel emasculated, but he's happy to tell them to f@#$% off.
TL/DR: There absolutely are guys that are intimidated and emasculated by women that earn money. But even for those guys that aren't emasculated by women earning more money, there appears to be some social pressure that they have to wade through.
Anyway, that's been my experience.
Thank you for saying this. Yes, there are men who are abusive and use the social status crap too, and there are men who genuinely feel emasculated by staying at home. But thank you for recognizing underneath all of that, there is a genuine social norm for men being the breadwinner that kind of browbeats men into working to support a family. Like, even if you walk the walk, then there's external pressure proving men deal with gender role social norms too, and its not just all the fault of muh patriarchy.
Even my feminist mother who constantly compains about gender roles is herself a stay at home mom (and was a really good one), supported by a hard working spouse (he's going to work overtime till he dies sadly), and complains about my brother in law being a deadbeat father, when he stays home to take care of the kids and my sister works a bunch to support them (dont get me wrong, he sucks for other reasons, but the fact that he's good with kids when he's out of a job, is about his only redeeming quality).
Im glad you did a trial period with your second relationship before marrying. I feel like thats a good idea in this day and age where people dont actually know what they want anymore. And I'm happy for you that both you and your current spouse are both able to GENUINELY be above gender norms, and mean it, rather than just talk about it. Youre a model for true gender equality, and it's the rest of society that needs to catch up.
This comment should be pinned! It shows how important it is for women to be I financially independent but also how f-d society is, that stay-at-home-dads have to go through all this sh***
Also, what the person in that 👆 comment said. Absolutely true!
This video, in 20 minutes, explains why I no longer subscribe to any more "mainstream" magazines...even supposedly business focused ones. Every one of them pushes the victim hierarchy, and of course, women (who now make up the majority of high earning college graduates), are still near the top of the victim totem pole, as if it was 1950.
This channel features:
- board repair
- real estate
- politics
- dashcam video
- cats
- life advice
- j o u r n a l i s m
- drunk streams
- dota 2
- way too many videos for someone who supposedly has a job
Louis's videos require very little editing due to how well spoken he is. That makes a world of difference in terms of how much work is required to produce content. He could certainly balance all of this with his job.
Also let's be real here, Louis is a machine.
We need more cats
Louis has insomnia, so he has plenty of time to do everything
@@CarterCovers55 I don't think he does any editing, at least on the videos that are in this format. not hard to do live in one take.
"Society puts too much pressure on men: women most affected".
2:31 caught me off guard for some reason. Made me release a single loud laugh.. or chuckle.. a 'HA!'. Well played sir