I hate these comments.
"Nikdo
9/7/2012 4:28 PM EDT
she's deliciously black and generous, nice. He should like her, heck, any man should. Besides, she doesn't want a man who is too tall. I approve. And her video is goofy and fun, and totally Silver Spring."
Since when was it ok for women to determine what men must like?
This reminds me of the countless situations in which I hear men (usually weak, naive, "beta" nice guy types) going on and on about how they OUGHT to have girls. "I'm a nice guy", they say. "I've done all these nice things" they reason. "She should like me-most girls should!", he concludes.
The reality, of course, is that women are not obligated to be attracted to any guy just because he's polite. No matter how much beta-bitching is done, one cannot force women to like what they do not like-men have a duty to be attractive to women, and this duty cannot be circumvented by bitching and moaning about what you WANT them to like instead.
Whenever one of these fools shows up in the media, he is torn down. Women waste no time reminding him that he doesn't get to determine when and why they should spread their legs ("you don'town my body!"), and guys like us (who are smart enough to realize the idiocy of this "nice guy" disease) school him too. Should any famous male figure be foolish enough to do such a thing, an article would be up on Jezebel with a scathing critique in mere minutes.
Yet some of these women think it is ok for them to determine what a man must be and what he must prefer, and when/why he needs to prefer it. Can't tell a young woman that, but a 24 year old guy? "He's gotta like her!"
This girl is not particularly attractive. He has no obligation to be into her. The dogged maintenance of the notion that he does is just more evidence of a pathological arrogance on the part of these women.
"lk11
11:45 AM EDT
OK, she is total marriage material, or at least relationship...she is bright, grounded, and comfortable with herself. He's still in the dawg stage. He' not ready for a commitment, especially to someone who really has her shite together. No worries, move on! Find a real man while he continues to find himself."
Once again, same BS. She defines her as marriage material on the basis of her having a handful of perceived qualities (none of which reference her weight or appearance-clearly these things are irrelevant to men, right?) that she is sure men MUST consider valuable.
Then this same woman (who I'm sure would not be too open to any characterizations attempting to determine with whom and when she mates on the basis of her maintaining "real womanhood"/traditional gender roles) insists that this guy is not a "real man".
Are these a "real women" levying these complaints?
The arrogance of it all is astonishing. Then these same women wonder why they have trouble getting and staying attached.
"Nikdo
9/7/2012 4:28 PM EDT
she's deliciously black and generous, nice. He should like her, heck, any man should. Besides, she doesn't want a man who is too tall. I approve. And her video is goofy and fun, and totally Silver Spring."
Since when was it ok for women to determine what men must like?
This reminds me of the countless situations in which I hear men (usually weak, naive, "beta" nice guy types) going on and on about how they OUGHT to have girls. "I'm a nice guy", they say. "I've done all these nice things" they reason. "She should like me-most girls should!", he concludes.
The reality, of course, is that women are not obligated to be attracted to any guy just because he's polite. No matter how much beta-bitching is done, one cannot force women to like what they do not like-men have a duty to be attractive to women, and this duty cannot be circumvented by bitching and moaning about what you WANT them to like instead.
Whenever one of these fools shows up in the media, he is torn down. Women waste no time reminding him that he doesn't get to determine when and why they should spread their legs ("you don'town my body!"), and guys like us (who are smart enough to realize the idiocy of this "nice guy" disease) school him too. Should any famous male figure be foolish enough to do such a thing, an article would be up on Jezebel with a scathing critique in mere minutes.
Yet some of these women think it is ok for them to determine what a man must be and what he must prefer, and when/why he needs to prefer it. Can't tell a young woman that, but a 24 year old guy? "He's gotta like her!"
This girl is not particularly attractive. He has no obligation to be into her. The dogged maintenance of the notion that he does is just more evidence of a pathological arrogance on the part of these women.
"lk11
11:45 AM EDT
OK, she is total marriage material, or at least relationship...she is bright, grounded, and comfortable with herself. He's still in the dawg stage. He' not ready for a commitment, especially to someone who really has her shite together. No worries, move on! Find a real man while he continues to find himself."
Once again, same BS. She defines her as marriage material on the basis of her having a handful of perceived qualities (none of which reference her weight or appearance-clearly these things are irrelevant to men, right?) that she is sure men MUST consider valuable.
Then this same woman (who I'm sure would not be too open to any characterizations attempting to determine with whom and when she mates on the basis of her maintaining "real womanhood"/traditional gender roles) insists that this guy is not a "real man".
Are these a "real women" levying these complaints?
The arrogance of it all is astonishing. Then these same women wonder why they have trouble getting and staying attached.
Know your enemy and know yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles. Know yourself but not your enemy, find level of loss and victory. Know thy enemy but not yourself, wallow in defeat every time.