It's not about power, it's about masculine / feminine polarity and masculinity has been associated with being the provider for tens of thousands of years. You can't simply change these attraction dynamics in two generations
I’m about halfway in, and she’s mentioned several times that she suspects this feeling in women is due to conditioning, but she hasn’t substantiated that at all. What is she referencing to make this hypothesis? What if it’s NOT conditioning? What then? I hear an appeal to the emotions of other women, but I’m not hearing a well thought out point.
@@melissasmuse Consider first that not everything that happens in a human being is conditioned. The studies on this bear this out pretty clearly. It's not all nurture with no nature. Genetics and evolutionary wiring play a part in how we behave too. So what else could it be? A piece of evolutionary wiring. Check out some Evolutionary Psychology to get a better sense of this.
@@melissasmuse It could be hard coded in our genetics from thousands of generations of humans before us. Animals have instincts, humans are animals. Modern society can't completely override those instincts.
Hypergamy doesn’t care. For the women that define hypergamy by financial success, they are digging a hole from which they cannot climb out. For women that base hypergamy on other characteristics, they have a much greater chance of finding a man that meets those characteristics, namely, competence in the world. It is an evolutionary psychological trait that women seek men that they perceive to be more competent and capable in the world. If they’re able to attract and keep that kind of man, they enjoy a greater level of status among their female peers for that achievement.
She asks a good question of why do you need that and it relates back to women's insecurity and a collateral effect of hypergamy with a sense of pride in your man tied to his money
When men come Home with money it is our money The moment a woman start to get more money these money is hers that is my expirence it happen to me after 27-28 years of marriage and now after 36 years of marriage this is ending it - her view on me has changed totally she has no respect fore me anymore so we are heading for divorce
That's sad, if it was a cool off trigger in the first few years I could understand, but if woman looses interest in you after 3 decades based only on that... And it's not like you got broke and she had to finance you, she simply started making more than you. Even in that case, after all that time. Guess woman are just not like that, majority of them.
There is another angle that financially, successful women are encountering for the first time. Their financial success places them at a disadvantage at the time of a future divorce. It is a fear that almost predominantly affects men but now more financially successful women are beginning to understand it as well and they can mitigate this fear by always wanting a more financially, successful husband, from which resources can be shared in the event of a divorce.
As a woman i do think that far ahead and we arent all the same, but it shows up in my circles in not marrying at all - because since we can provide for ourselves traditional relationships are more of a burden on us as live in partners or we are getting a prenups.
I'm fascinated by the whole thing about income and the perceived attractiveness of a man. I mean, I own two rental properties (one of them is mortgage-free and the other will be in 12-18 months) I also have investments in the stock market and premium scotch whisky and will achieve complete financial freedom in the next 60 months which means money from my passive income streams can replace what I earn from my employed income and completely fund my lifestyle. But while I have no debts and will achieve financial freedom, I am not a high earning individual so probably not that attractive to a woman who want a man who earns more than them. Of course, the thing is, while I only work part-time in a menial job, over 50% of the population are living paycheck to paycheck, which means many women who would not date me because of what I earn are right now probably struggling to pay their bills. Meanwhile, in theory, I could give them a place to live and pay all the bills for the property and they could live there rent-free. But still something tells me if a woman is wedded to only dating a man who earns more than her then she'll fail to see the value of the financial security I can offer. Oh well, it's her loss, eh?
It really was all over the place. She was arguing that her clients still want men that earn more money and are more powerful than them even though in our modern society women have no need for either of those things. What's she's seemingly missing is that no one chooses who they're attracted to and although our society has change, our instincts haven't women will continue to prefer a guy that makes more than her.
From my experience men seem to turn into little puppy dogs when they encounter women who they feel are bigger than them. I notice that instead maintaining their frame and sense of self they will put the leadership on her. When you look to her for direction or to tell you what to do… Or when all your time with her is spent with you complaining about your shortcomings (instead of doing something about it), this is what’s unattractive It’d help to just treat her like her money doesn’t exist to you. Not in a condescending way but just remembering that at the end of the day she’s still a woman who wants to feel cherished and valued for her femininity. And that you still have value and strength to add to her life that go far beyond money
I think a subset of this whole issue is one around class. Not all instances, but I can see how class divides can play into these emotional pressures. If you are a woman who makes $200k+, you didn't just stumble into that position. You are far more likely to come from an upper middle class or higher social standing, and with a cultural background that is going to orient you towards keeping yourself within that general social class. Part of that is going to be having a husband who makes equal or more in income, in part to simply be able to live the kind of lifestyle that you are either used to from your family, or striving to enter that next rung. If you live in NYC, London, or other hyper competitive city then making $100k is "poor" due to cost of living. Making $200k gives you the middle class lifestyle, but if you really want to move into the higher rungs of what is offered there then you need something more like $500k in income. If the woman wants to have children, and wants to be able to afford the incredibly expensive childcare, along with private schools so her children can remain at her social level or go beyond, then again she is going to be looking for a man who is going to match her or beyond financially to pay for that social trajectory for her kids. Lastly, who are her peers within the work world? If she is making a lot of money then the men in her profession are likewise going to be in a social class and display cultural traits that she very well might expect for her partner. If she works in the NYC financial district, works with people that are making upper six figures or more, and wants the kind of lifestyle that the water cooler talk evokes on a daily basis, then it becomes harder to see the guy who is a high school public school teacher in NYC, making $80k, to just fit into that whole social level, both financially and culturally.
That’s because you’re still just “the boyfriend”. Neither of you have made a permanent commitment where her financial security is now tied to you. Once children are in the mix she will change her need for security once again. You must be the provider. If not, she will lose respect for you.
Trying yo ask anyone to explain logically why they enjoy anything sexual is a logical fallacy. None of our desires are rooted in logic. Women like what they like because...reasons. Its not that deep and youre not gonna present a logical argument that can change their feelings. That goes for men as well.
Actually we can logically explain a lot of this stuff. But you're right in the fact that we don't actually use logic to decide who and what we're attracted to.
It’s a strange time for women where the ball is in their court. They need to figure out what they truly want and/or how they are going to play with men. Because they now have the same opportunities, if not more than men. Yet if we go by what Jillian is saying here, they still harbor this old fashioned sense of “because I’m a woman, my man should be taking care of me.” When it comes to earning, which is only one sector in a relationship (One, but a large one!)…then it’s almost a double standard against the man. Unless said woman manages to find one of the 5% of men in the US that are making more than $300k+. Overall it’s just an unfair standard to essentially hold against a man in a relationship. You’re comparing his earnings to yours and evaluating his worth as less. That relationship is already on rocky ground if it’s always going to be a monetary game of Tug of War.
Sorry I had to cut it off halfway through. It’s clearly not “conditioning” which she keeps repeating over and over. There is data that clearly demonstrates what we already know; our monkey brain is operating as it did thousands of years ago, a woman is attracted to a superior mate because that means better genetics, more resources and basically survival. No amount of talking yourself out of it is gonna change any of this. Attraction isn’t a choice.
As a top 5% earner in the UK I can say I want a man to earn as much or more than me. I want to be able to take time out to raise my children and maintain my standard of living. I want to be able to afford private education and specific experiences for my children. It has nothing to do with power and everything to do with standard of living and child resource provision. Power is a masculine and man's game, very few women in the pursuit of money are looking for power, most are looking for financial stability and flexibility. It's a form of safety, which is a very feminine obsession. I wonder if this woman has spent too much time in male circles.
Maybe it’s more about working with biology rather than trying to override it. Every time a woman has sex there is a risk of pregnancy and in the back of her mind she needs to feel like if she ever fell into that vulnerable position that you are someone who would be able to have her back and provide that stability for her to give birth comfortably Even if you don’t plan on having a kid, that possibility is still running through your mind unconsciously I think a man making less money threatens that survival need. maybe men have to work a little extra at creating the illusion and feeling that she’s still protected and safe with you. Like she mentioned, there’s a lot of strength in character, personality, physicality, etc.
I don’t think this lady understands evolution. When a woman gets pregnant she won’t be making as much maybe due to her stopping work so she can care for the children. She needs security for her and the children. This is very important and feminist nowadays don’t understand this most likely because they are not having kids
These types of shows continue to present this as a situation of women outearning men. There are many women who make much less than men that they continue to ignore!!!!!!!
The only reason why this situation exists is because of quotas, inclusivity, incentives to put women first in employment choices, which is sexual discrimination against Caucasian men. Companies have been infiltrated by woke policies, where HR stands for " her resources" and includes a protected category paragraph, where women are placed first in the order. It's very suspicious and self serving because most HR departments are women. This aspect is only reinforced by the over whelming predudice against masculinity in schools, with an emphasis on undermining men and not seeking equal opportunity.
I'm so confused. All we heard is this lady's opinion on what women's wants and desires should be. There's no proof given at all, just her opinion, and maybe I missed it but what's her actual credentials? There's a power with acceptance, and her discussion here is the opposite of that. I'm not sure that anything is changing or ever will with men's and women's relationship ideals
QUESTION: Why do you need him to be more powerful than you? ANSWER: maybe because men generally feel they need to be the provider and breadwinner. If we go by old gender roles, which are still prevalent today. Men may not know how to adapt to a lesser (financially) role as their worth and ego are tied to it. The men she wants earn less, and they can handle that. Maybe she also needs work through her insecurities around being with a man who earns less. 🤔
It's not about power, it's about masculine / feminine polarity and masculinity has been associated with being the provider for tens of thousands of years. You can't simply change these attraction dynamics in two generations
Exactly, but they don't think of the tens of thousands of years. They think it's all cultural.
It is about power now. They want the power and control, yet none of the accountability
A woman in this situation won’t admit it but she’s afraid to be judge on her choice of man
Women are deathly afraid of being judged and seen as shallow.
I’m about halfway in, and she’s mentioned several times that she suspects this feeling in women is due to conditioning, but she hasn’t substantiated that at all. What is she referencing to make this hypothesis? What if it’s NOT conditioning? What then? I hear an appeal to the emotions of other women, but I’m not hearing a well thought out point.
I thought the same thing. I haven't learned anything from her really.
What else do you think it could be?
@@melissasmuse Consider first that not everything that happens in a human being is conditioned. The studies on this bear this out pretty clearly. It's not all nurture with no nature. Genetics and evolutionary wiring play a part in how we behave too.
So what else could it be? A piece of evolutionary wiring. Check out some Evolutionary Psychology to get a better sense of this.
@@melissasmuse It could be hard coded in our genetics from thousands of generations of humans before us. Animals have instincts, humans are animals. Modern society can't completely override those instincts.
Hypergamy doesn’t care. For the women that define hypergamy by financial success, they are digging a hole from which they cannot climb out. For women that base hypergamy on other characteristics, they have a much greater chance of finding a man that meets those characteristics, namely, competence in the world. It is an evolutionary psychological trait that women seek men that they perceive to be more competent and capable in the world. If they’re able to attract and keep that kind of man, they enjoy a greater level of status among their female peers for that achievement.
Why is there this war going on between men and women it is so depressing why can’t we just love each other fore who we are
Preach. Couldn’t agree more.
Social media has ruined it alot, among other things
Women have a checklist men have to fufil in order for them to be loved so it will never happen
She asks a good question of why do you need that and it relates back to women's insecurity and a collateral effect of hypergamy with a sense of pride in your man tied to his money
When men come Home with money it is our money The moment a woman start to get more money these money is hers that is my expirence it happen to me after 27-28 years of marriage and now after 36 years of marriage this is ending it - her view on me has changed totally she has no respect fore me anymore so we are heading for divorce
That's sad, if it was a cool off trigger in the first few years I could understand, but if woman looses interest in you after 3 decades based only on that...
And it's not like you got broke and she had to finance you, she simply started making more than you. Even in that case, after all that time. Guess woman are just not like that, majority of them.
There is another angle that financially, successful women are encountering for the first time. Their financial success places them at a disadvantage at the time of a future divorce. It is a fear that almost predominantly affects men but now more financially successful women are beginning to understand it as well and they can mitigate this fear by always wanting a more financially, successful husband, from which resources can be shared in the event of a divorce.
That's a very interesting thought.
I don’t think women are really thinking that far ahead to be honest but your logic is sound
As a woman i do think that far ahead and we arent all the same, but it shows up in my circles in not marrying at all - because since we can provide for ourselves traditional relationships are more of a burden on us as live in partners or we are getting a prenups.
I'm fascinated by the whole thing about income and the perceived attractiveness of a man. I mean, I own two rental properties (one of them is mortgage-free and the other will be in 12-18 months) I also have investments in the stock market and premium scotch whisky and will achieve complete financial freedom in the next 60 months which means money from my passive income streams can replace what I earn from my employed income and completely fund my lifestyle.
But while I have no debts and will achieve financial freedom, I am not a high earning individual so probably not that attractive to a woman who want a man who earns more than them. Of course, the thing is, while I only work part-time in a menial job, over 50% of the population are living paycheck to paycheck, which means many women who would not date me because of what I earn are right now probably struggling to pay their bills. Meanwhile, in theory, I could give them a place to live and pay all the bills for the property and they could live there rent-free. But still something tells me if a woman is wedded to only dating a man who earns more than her then she'll fail to see the value of the financial security I can offer. Oh well, it's her loss, eh?
What about fear of being taken advantage of financially by someone who earns less? High earning=/=power
😂🤣😂🤣🪓🤣🪓😂😂🤣😂🪓😂
I’m super lost in this conversation right here…
Why?
How so?
Probably live in a bubble
It really was all over the place.
She was arguing that her clients still want men that earn more money and are more powerful than them even though in our modern society women have no need for either of those things.
What's she's seemingly missing is that no one chooses who they're attracted to and although our society has change, our instincts haven't women will continue to prefer a guy that makes more than her.
From my experience men seem to turn into little puppy dogs when they encounter women who they feel are bigger than them.
I notice that instead maintaining their frame and sense of self they will put the leadership on her.
When you look to her for direction or to tell you what to do… Or when all your time with her is spent with you complaining about your shortcomings (instead of doing something about it), this is what’s unattractive
It’d help to just treat her like her money doesn’t exist to you. Not in a condescending way but just remembering that at the end of the day she’s still a woman who wants to feel cherished and valued for her femininity. And that you still have value and strength to add to her life that go far beyond money
Thats interesting. That would almost be the financial equivalent of being scared off (pulled out of your masculine frame) by a very attractive woman.
She’s being honest
To pay the bill and buy her gifts and support her, but she contributed 0 dollars 💸 of her money.
I think a subset of this whole issue is one around class. Not all instances, but I can see how class divides can play into these emotional pressures. If you are a woman who makes $200k+, you didn't just stumble into that position. You are far more likely to come from an upper middle class or higher social standing, and with a cultural background that is going to orient you towards keeping yourself within that general social class. Part of that is going to be having a husband who makes equal or more in income, in part to simply be able to live the kind of lifestyle that you are either used to from your family, or striving to enter that next rung.
If you live in NYC, London, or other hyper competitive city then making $100k is "poor" due to cost of living. Making $200k gives you the middle class lifestyle, but if you really want to move into the higher rungs of what is offered there then you need something more like $500k in income.
If the woman wants to have children, and wants to be able to afford the incredibly expensive childcare, along with private schools so her children can remain at her social level or go beyond, then again she is going to be looking for a man who is going to match her or beyond financially to pay for that social trajectory for her kids.
Lastly, who are her peers within the work world? If she is making a lot of money then the men in her profession are likewise going to be in a social class and display cultural traits that she very well might expect for her partner. If she works in the NYC financial district, works with people that are making upper six figures or more, and wants the kind of lifestyle that the water cooler talk evokes on a daily basis, then it becomes harder to see the guy who is a high school public school teacher in NYC, making $80k, to just fit into that whole social level, both financially and culturally.
My girlfriend and i make about the same amount of money, and it's not an issue at all.
That’s because you’re still just “the boyfriend”. Neither of you have made a permanent commitment where her financial security is now tied to you. Once children are in the mix she will change her need for security once again. You must be the provider. If not, she will lose respect for you.
Trying yo ask anyone to explain logically why they enjoy anything sexual is a logical fallacy. None of our desires are rooted in logic.
Women like what they like because...reasons. Its not that deep and youre not gonna present a logical argument that can change their feelings. That goes for men as well.
Wrong
Actually we can logically explain a lot of this stuff. But you're right in the fact that we don't actually use logic to decide who and what we're attracted to.
This conversation doesn’t have much structure.
It’s a strange time for women where the ball is in their court. They need to figure out what they truly want and/or how they are going to play with men.
Because they now have the same opportunities, if not more than men. Yet if we go by what Jillian is saying here, they still harbor this old fashioned sense of “because I’m a woman, my man should be taking care of me.” When it comes to earning, which is only one sector in a relationship (One, but a large one!)…then it’s almost a double standard against the man. Unless said woman manages to find one of the 5% of men in the US that are making more than $300k+.
Overall it’s just an unfair standard to essentially hold against a man in a relationship. You’re comparing his earnings to yours and evaluating his worth as less. That relationship is already on rocky ground if it’s always going to be a monetary game of Tug of War.
One in 20 people are not making $300,000 a year…
It’s women’s nature being hypergamy.
Her money is her money; his money is her money.
I don’t agree in that I need him to make more, I just want him to be on the same page.
Sorry I had to cut it off halfway through. It’s clearly not “conditioning” which she keeps repeating over and over. There is data that clearly demonstrates what we already know; our monkey brain is operating as it did thousands of years ago, a woman is attracted to a superior mate because that means better genetics, more resources and basically survival. No amount of talking yourself out of it is gonna change any of this. Attraction isn’t a choice.
When a women out earns a man it leads to separation
Not always but it seems it does happen often.
As a top 5% earner in the UK I can say I want a man to earn as much or more than me. I want to be able to take time out to raise my children and maintain my standard of living. I want to be able to afford private education and specific experiences for my children.
It has nothing to do with power and everything to do with standard of living and child resource provision.
Power is a masculine and man's game, very few women in the pursuit of money are looking for power, most are looking for financial stability and flexibility. It's a form of safety, which is a very feminine obsession. I wonder if this woman has spent too much time in male circles.
Maybe it’s more about working with biology rather than trying to override it.
Every time a woman has sex there is a risk of pregnancy and in the back of her mind she needs to feel like if she ever fell into that vulnerable position that you are someone who would be able to have her back and provide that stability for her to give birth comfortably
Even if you don’t plan on having a kid, that possibility is still running through your mind unconsciously
I think a man making less money threatens that survival need. maybe men have to work a little extra at creating the illusion and feeling that she’s still protected and safe with you. Like she mentioned, there’s a lot of strength in character, personality, physicality, etc.
hypergamy can also works against women.
I don’t think this lady understands evolution. When a woman gets pregnant she won’t be making as much maybe due to her stopping work so she can care for the children. She needs security for her and the children. This is very important and feminist nowadays don’t understand this most likely because they are not having kids
These types of shows continue to present this as a situation of women outearning men. There are many women who make much less than men that they continue to ignore!!!!!!!
The only reason why this situation exists is because of quotas, inclusivity, incentives to put women first in employment choices, which is sexual discrimination against Caucasian men. Companies have been infiltrated by woke policies, where HR stands for " her resources" and includes a protected category paragraph, where women are placed first in the order. It's very suspicious and self serving because most HR departments are women. This aspect is only reinforced by the over whelming predudice against masculinity in schools, with an emphasis on undermining men and not seeking equal opportunity.
I'm so confused. All we heard is this lady's opinion on what women's wants and desires should be. There's no proof given at all, just her opinion, and maybe I missed it but what's her actual credentials? There's a power with acceptance, and her discussion here is the opposite of that. I'm not sure that anything is changing or ever will with men's and women's relationship ideals
QUESTION: Why do you need him to be more powerful than you?
ANSWER: maybe because men generally feel they need to be the provider and breadwinner. If we go by old gender roles, which are still prevalent today. Men may not know how to adapt to a lesser (financially) role as their worth and ego are tied to it. The men she wants earn less, and they can handle that. Maybe she also needs work through her insecurities around being with a man who earns less. 🤔
Why can't successful women find a good man? They never wanted one.
I earned more before we married and still earn more after marriage. We don't talk about what we earn, though.
“Conditioning”. What else could it be?
For some reason it’s hard for me to absorb what this lady is saying.
It's not about the money. It's about the quality of the sex.
Dating is destined for the bedroom, not the bank.
Well, I"m S.O.L.-L.O.L.😆
Jillian's obviously talking about Bernadette from BBT😅
Why is there this war going on between men and women it is so depressing why can’t we just love each other fore who we are
Money, and egotism
Our modern society has messed a lot of stuff up it seems.
2nd through 4th wave feminism is why