[Roosh]

Quote:

At 11 on a weeknight earlier this year, her work finished, a slim, pretty junior at the University of Pennsylvania did what she often does when she has a little free time. She texted her regular hookup — the guy she is sleeping with but not dating. What was he up to? He texted back: Come over. So she did. They watched a little TV, had sex and went to sleep.

Their relationship, she noted, is not about the meeting of two souls.

“We don’t really like each other in person, sober,” she said, adding that “we literally can’t sit down and have coffee.”

Ask her why she hasn’t had a relationship at Penn, and she won’t complain about the death of courtship or men who won’t commit. Instead, she’ll talk about “cost-benefit” analyses and the “low risk and low investment costs” of hooking up.

“I positioned myself in college in such a way that I can’t have a meaningful romantic relationship, because I’m always busy and the people that I am interested in are always busy, too,” she said.

http://nytimes.com/2013/07/14/fashion/se...m=homepage

Top rated comment:

Quote:

These women strike me as extremely shallow and self absorbed, even presumptuous, to think that you can hook up your way through undergrad and grad work and then just glide into the family thing, when you've created no predicate for, and have no real experience with, having a real relationship.

With this kind of emotionally stunted and undeveloped background, one can only imagine the familial dysfunction to follow.

[Professor Fox]

Quote:

In general, she said, she thought that guys at Penn controlled the hookup culture. But women played a role as well.

“It’s kind of like a spiral,” she said. “The girls adapt a little bit, because they stop expecting that they’re going to get a boyfriend — because if that’s all you’re trying to do, you’re going to be miserable. But at the same time, they want to, like, have contact with guys.” So they hook up and “try not to get attached.”

Now, she said, she and her best friend had changed their romantic goals, from finding boyfriends to finding “hookup buddies,” which she described as “a guy that we don’t actually really like his personality, but we think is really attractive and hot and good in bed.”

The masculinization of American women, personified.

Quote:

Dancing like that felt good but dirty, and like a number of girls, Haley said she had to be drunk in order to enjoy it. Women said universally that hookups could not exist without alcohol, because they were for the most part too uncomfortable to pair off with men they did not know well without being drunk. One girl, explaining why her encounters freshman and sophomore year often ended with fellatio, said that usually by the time she got back to a guy’s room, she was starting to sober up and didn’t want to be there anymore, and giving the guy oral sex was an easy way to wrap things up and leave.

Stay classy American women.

Quote:

Her unease was common among students from relatively modest backgrounds, said Dr. Armstrong, the University of Michigan sociologist. In one study, conducted with Laura Hamilton, now a professor at the University of California, Merced, Dr. Armstrong followed roughly 50 women from their freshman year at Indiana University in 2004 until the end of their college careers. They found that the women from wealthier backgrounds were much more likely to hook up, more interested in postponing adult responsibilities and warier of serious romantic commitment than their less-affluent classmates.

The women from less-privileged backgrounds looked at their classmates who got drunk and hooked up as immature.

Remember this the next time a woman brags about her money.

Quote:

In Catherine’s view, her classmates tried very hard to separate sex from emotion, because they believed that getting too attached to someone would interfere with their work. They saw a woman’s marrying young as either proof of a lack of ambition or a tragic mistake that would stunt her career.

Ladies and Gentleman, your 2020 prospective wifey candidates!

[Kabal]

The herd-like behavior of women on display:

Quote:

One woman recalled a guy showing her an e-mail he had received on his fraternity Listserv, in which another guy described having sex with a girl in the bathroom at a club.

“They’re not afraid to use names,” she said of the men, adding, “I’m sure there’s been a story about me on a Listserv. It happens to everyone.”

Maybe the social conservatives are right in this regard--we need top-down societal level morals to keep behavior in check.

Otherwise we have the potential for:

1. Loose social mores leading to some high socioeconomic status women eschewing family-formation and embracing academia, careers, and the hook-up lifestyle, which snowballs as more women see that it's encouraged and assimilate as well, being the stampeding herd that they are.

2. High socioeconomic status men growing increasingly averse to commitment as they see what slores are around them.

3. Family formation is delayed and/or forgone altogether, leading to a demographic death spiral among the higher socioeconomic classes, creating a dysgenic effect on the overall population.

Next article:

WHY WON'T COLLEGE MEN COMMIT?!

It can start off with:

Quote:

At 11 on a weeknight earlier this year, his fourth beer with his bros finished, a medium-height, decent-looking senior at the University of Pennsylvania received what he often does at these kinds of moments. He got a text from his regular slampiece — the sloot that he is drilling but in whom he is not investing any time, emotion, or resources. What was he up to? He texted back: Come over. So she did. They watched a little TV, had sex and went to sleep.

Their relationship, he noted, is not about the meeting of two souls.

“I don’t really like her, sober,” he said, "hell, I can barely tolerate her annoying personality after half a dozen brews"--adding that “she's always trying to do stuff like get coffee with me, but no way am I seeing that bitch when I'm sober during the day.”

Ask him why he hasn’t had a relationship at Penn, and he won’t complain about the death of courtship or girls who are supposedly too busy. Instead, he’ll talk about “cost-benefit” analyses and the “low risk and low investment costs” of hooking up.

“I positioned myself in college in such a way that I don't need to have a meaningful romantic relationship, because sloots are always slooting about” he said.

“And I know everyone says, ‘Man up! Man up!’ ” said the man, who was indifferent to the condition of anonymity, but accepted to be identified by the first letter of his fraternity, which is A. “There's really nothing else going on in my life except drinking with my bros and trying to nail sluts, so time is not an issue. But if girls are going to be easy, who wants to make time to wife up one of these sloots? Who would even want to, even if not for time?”

[scorpion]

This is inevitably what happens when you leave women to their own devices without any kind of societal structure that discourages this type of behavior. Women are the gatekeepers of sex and therefore control when, where and how often it will happen. Men simply respond to this and, being rational creatures, will game the system to get access to sex with the least amount of investment possible.

Women are physical beings as well and enjoy the pleasure of sex with a man they are attracted to, so obviously they will be tempted to have a lot of sex if there is no compelling reason for them not to. With free birth control, condoms, antibiotics and on-demand abortions, the physical risks associated with sex have greatly diminished for women. With the erosion of our cultural morals, the social risks have diminished as well. Women slut it up simply because they can, and they aren't judged or shamed for doing so.

And as usual, they lay the blame on men for refusing to commit.

I think part of the problem is that feminism has made women blind to the fact that sex is really their greatest power. It's not their career. It's not their personality. It's the value of their sex. They don't understand that when they keep giving it out for free they massively devalue their greatest source of power to secure a relationship with a quality man.

[Kingsley Davis]

(07-13-2013 12:06 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

This is inevitably what happens when you leave women to their own devices without any kind of societal structure that discourages this type of behavior. Women are the gatekeepers of sex and therefore control when, where and how often it will happen. Men simply respond to this and, being rational creatures, will game the system to get access to sex with the least amount of investment possible.

Women are physical beings as well and enjoy the pleasure of sex with a man they are attracted to, so obviously they will be tempted to have a lot of sex if there is no compelling reason for them not to. With free birth control, condoms, antibiotics and on-demand abortions, the physical risks associated with sex have greatly diminished for women. With the erosion of our cultural morals, the social risks have diminished as well. Women slut it up simply because they can, and they aren't judged or shamed for doing so.

And as usual, they lay the blame on men for refusing to commit.

I think part of the problem is that feminism has made women blind to the fact that sex is really their greatest power. It's not their career. It's not their personality. It's the value of their sex. They don't understand that when they keep giving it out for free they massively devalue their greatest source of power to secure a relationship with a quality man.

Lack of comprehending cause and effect, accountability without responsibility........best part is they're allowed to vote.

[WesternCancer]

Hamsters of epic proportions.

I've never understood why women want to focus on their career so much, or why they will sacrifice their happiness for success.

I've banged a few chicks who wanted to be lawyers. I asked them why they want to be a lawyer they don't say something about how the profession excites them or how they value the law or helping people. They simply want success.

Why don't they be successful in something they truly care about? They can't because as we all know women are weak. They can't think for themselves and will just live life as its dictated to them by media/society. They ride the cock carousel because they've been told "don't worry the men do it too" and they waste the best years of their lives studying for a profession they really don't care about because it's socially acceptable.

[WestIndianArchie]

"My college days were in an era of sexual "freedom." The only way I could eventually make a good marriage was by repudiating all I had "learned" from men during my college days--that sex doesn't mean any sort of emotional commitment, that the price of pretending a guy cared was to submit sexually even though it felt like rape,"

LMAO.

[Professor Fox]

Another top comment:

Quote:

To me this is an article about reproductive resources. Sexual youth -- fertility -- is a resource. It doesn't surprise me that these highly intelligent young women see it as something to be managed with a "cost-benefit analysis". This is nothing new -- just ask a 16th century king trying to consolidate power by marrying off his daughter or a 1950s woman pursuing an MRS degree.

The resource argument also explains why the wealthier women are more likely to "play the game", i.e. practice hookup behavior. They can "afford" to spend their fertility on men who don't matter to them -- at least until they're about 30. Sure, spending those resources on men who have no investment in a relationship can have expensive consequences -- sexual assault, emotional wear and tear -- but better-supported women are more willing/able to take on that kind of risk. For a woman of modest means, there's a lot more on the line. It's not easy to get from a mostly-Latino public high school in California to the Ivy League. Why blow it for some so-so sex? But if you're in the 1% already -- well, then, why not?

What I find really interesting is how closely the hooking-up women guard their status, position and power -- resources formerly in the "male" realm. What they may not realize is that by the time they are ready, those partners who are "qualified" may prefer to choose a younger woman -- because he's done a cost-benefit analysis of his own.

The whole story made me glad to be 50.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

They've taken the romance out of sex. The next step will be to remove it from conception.

Coming soon: calls for the government to provide affordable access on demand to women to sperm banks so they have access to the best genetic material. Denying them that will be considered a form of "oppression."

These women have access to the best educations money can buy; why should they settle for "some guy" who might have flawed genetics when the government can provide access to superhumans?

Laugh if you will, but I see my scenario as the outcome of this article.

[Architekt]

(07-13-2013 02:16 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

Laugh if you will, but I see my scenario as the outcome of this article.

Brave new world anyone?

There is a God and there is a devil. It is us...

[A War You Cannot Win]

And they wonder why guys view them as a fleshlight with about 110 lbs of extra flesh attached.

[Excelsior]

Just finished the article.

My response: Yep, that's Ivy League dating in a nutshell.

Girls who insist that anything romantic is a distraction or an obstruction but who in less than a decade will be complaining "where have all the good men gone?"

Girls sharply focused on chasing credentials, going out of their way to avoid relationships even with men they like since they're always sure they can "do better", launching into regular feminist complaints about the greek/frat/hookup culture but simultaneously fueling it with their own insistence on "nothing serious" and general preference for sexual relationships with guys they admit they don't even really like on a personal level (only on a sexual one).

Quote:

Now, she said, she and her best friend had changed their romantic goals, from finding boyfriends to finding “hookup buddies,” which she described as “a guy that we don’t actually really like his personality, but we think is really attractive and hot and good in bed.”

(keep that quote handy for the next time some wise-ass feminist tries to argue that it isn't common for young women to look for "bad boys" and the whole "women hate betas/nice guys" thing is overblown)

What is ironic is that so many expect things to be different. They figure that the Ivy League is where all of the smart girls are, and naturally assume that the hookup culture would be less prevalent there than at a more normal school where people are less academically focused and far better at partying.
It is the opposite. The more intellectually/socio-economically average girls are the most open to relationships. The phenomena describe in this article are driven primarily by the culture of America's female intellectual and/or socio-economic 1%. The wealthier and/or smarter the girl, the more likely she is to break down the nature of relationships like this:

Quote:

“We are very aware of cost-benefit issues and trading up and trading down, so no one wants to be too tied to someone that, you know, may not be the person they want to be with in a couple of months,” she said.

Ask her why she hasn’t had a relationship at Penn, and she won’t complain about the death of courtship or men who won’t commit. Instead, she’ll talk about “cost-benefit” analyses and the “low risk and low investment costs” of hooking up.

“I positioned myself in college in such a way that I can’t have a meaningful romantic relationship, because I’m always busy and the people that I am interested in are always busy, too,” she said.

“And I know everyone says, ‘Make time, make time,’ ” said the woman, who spoke on the condition of anonymity but agreed to be identified by her middle initial, which is A. “But there are so many other things going on in my life that I find so important that I just, like, can’t make time, and I don’t want to make time.”

In the meantime, from A.’s perspective, she was in charge of her own sexuality.

“I definitely wouldn’t say I’ve regretted any of my one-night stands,” she said.

“I’m a true feminist,” she added. “I’m a strong woman. I know what I want.”

At the same time, she didn’t want the number of people she had slept with printed, and she said it was important to her to keep her sexual life separate from her image as a leader at Penn.

“Ten years from now, no one will remember — I will not remember — who I have slept with,” A. said. “But I will remember, like, my transcript, because it’s still there. I will remember what I did. I will remember my accomplishments and places my name is hung on campus.”

Such a typical Ivy League female.

The closer you get to environments where women like this are common (mostly Ivies and a handful of other elite schools), the emptier and less satisfying the gender relations become. These women are some of the most difficult and frustrating to interact with. At my school it was very common for men to simply give up on their female classmates and quit seeking relationships with them altogether. It wasn't just the losers and herbs doing this-many of the guys I spoke to who claimed to have "quit" on the girls at my school were athletes, members of top fraternities and taps at the schools elite secret societies. Even the men who get what they want from these women don't want them, and you can see part of why above. They inspire apathy-after a while, you'd rather just not bother anymore.

As an Ivy Leaguer, I can tell you that I've never been a) more sexually frustrated myself and b) surrounded by more sexual frustration than at my school. This article outlines a very big reason why: relationships are rare and when they do exist, they are too often just totally empty.

I wrote recently on the male response to this in the Black Hotness thread, detailing how this dynamic impacts the black community. The discussion was about why "well-to-do" black men seem so unwilling to settle down early once they get out into the real world. My answer essentially blamed that on a version of the dynamic described in this article, which is magnified in the black community due to a) the shortage of such men (black men are less likely to go to school and find gainful employment than any other group of men) and b) the de-emphasis of relationships in the young black community (ex: "no cuffin in the club").

Quote:

This ratio reality gives those few black men with their life in order a lot of power. They are in high demand (from ALL races of women) and very short supply.

Their experiences as youth influence how these men use that power. I find that a disproportionate number of this nation's "well-to-do" black men were men that black women didn't find all that interesting during their school days. They were men that were probably a bit more relationship-oriented in their youth than other guys their age, but were not appealing enough to get black women their age to fore-go their fun and independence in their prime years.

This experience (regular rejection, lack of sexual power, etc), I find, enhances the temptation for these men to play the field a little longer when they get older and finally find the tables turned.

I've felt it happen to me in my four years at college. I arrived fully expecting (and wanting) to find a future wife. I took this more seriously than most of my peers and, as a result, found girls practically running away from me even after showing some initial interest. I would ask some girls out only to have them respond in the negative and justify it with their desire to "meet other people".

After a while I slowly began to adapt. Most of the girls I pursued were in "have fun" mode, and most of my male peers were not nearly as serious as I was. I found myself discovering forums like these and opening my mind to new ideas and possibilities, discovering the reality of just how many young, attractive, interesting, and intelligent women there were out there. I began to open my mind to the idea of traveling and meeting a large number of them while having fun doing so. I began to open my mind to the idea of maybe not being the married family man I'd been raised to be during my 20's, and instead spending that time building my career and just having fun meeting all of those people.

In short: if you can't beat them, join them.

I entered college seeking a relationship and planning to be married not more than a few years after graduation. Having now swallowed the red pill, I'm coming toward the end of my college career with no real intention of getting married before my mid 30's. In fact, most of the scenarios I imagine involve me "settling down" properly at around 40-45.

I suspect that a lot of "well-to-do" black men (a group I suspect I'll probably join) went through the same process I did.

The problem is that upwardly mobile black women want to dictate the way this process goes. By essentially closing themselves off to anything serious early on in their lives, they force a lot of the men they will later seek to settle with to adapt to a more casual way of seeing things during their youth. This happens in the way that I described above and I will tell you, having gone through the process, that it isn't easy to reverse. Once you've swallowed the red pill, you don't turn back. Your blue-pill desires essentially die.

Then, after they open themselves up to something more serious in their later years, these women start hoping that some of those men are still around with that old blue-pill mindset along with all of the other qualifications (gotta have a degree, no jail, be straight, dress well, be athletic, etc, etc) that they want. They would not have given up their prime years (18-23 or so) for those men, but they hope that those men will give up their prime years (28-40 or so) for them.

The article is titled "She Can Play That Game To". That title almost makes it sound like these women are just getting back at men and beating them at their own game, but that's not really the story. Many men enter colleges like Penn looking for relationships. It is the women who decide that they'd prefer not to go in that direction.

Men then do what I described in that quote above from the Black hotness thread: they adapt. By the time these same women change their minds and figure the time to get serious has come (usually at 27+ when their prime years are just about done), the men are in a different place themselves and the cycle continues.

I'm sure the same is true of non-black men as well, as this well known graphic indicates:



Women are making their decisions and writers like Hanna Rosin are cheering them on, but men will adapt and there probably will be consequences.

Most of these girls will probably just have to learn this the hard way.

[Hades]

So a booty call has a little initiative and calls the guy. So what.
She's not playing any game, that guy is just pulling free ass. If you consider this from the guy's perspective I don't see how anybody considers this a "win" for women, or women "running game". If anything I would say that this guy has her trained pretty well. She's so afraid of being emotionally broken due to investment in failed relationships and unwilling to put up with a lack of quality dick that she puts herself out on the market for free (using economic terms, making it that much harder for a prostitute to make a living), then tries to play it up as a strength or being in control of her sexuality when in reality she's incapable of even a little emotional risk. Encouraging that is no different that cheering on people dying alone with a hundred cats. What a dumb bitch.

[ryanf]

(07-13-2013 02:16 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

They've taken the romance out of sex. The next step will be to remove it from conception.

Coming soon: calls for the government to provide affordable access on demand to women to sperm banks so they have access to the best genetic material. Denying them that will be considered a form of "oppression."

These women have access to the best educations money can buy; why should they settle for "some guy" who might have flawed genetics when the government can provide access to superhumans?

Laugh if you will, but I see my scenario as the outcome of this article.

People should boycott selling sperm. If girls can't pay the price to get it the old fashioned way, don't let them buy it with their lawyer and gender studies money.

[Architekt]

I'm starting to feel bad for feminists. I wish they would just pick an idea that makes sense and stick with it, rather than having 9001 different contradictory ideas being thrown around at any one time. It's just unprofessional. These are supposed to be the women at the forefront of the feminist movement and they're just making themselves look like fucking retards. I'm almost glad that many of these women won't be able to find a partner to have kids with - their kids would go through horrible suffering

[Tuthmosis]

I see this article as a glimpse into the consequences of feminism's dual mythologies of you-can-have-it-all and women-are-exactly-like-men in full blossom. What we're seeing is how chicks have back-rationalized (hamsterized) the situation to be "empowering" and what they "want," when, in fact, it's little more to an adaptation to being used for their one valuable asset (their ephemeral beauty) and thinking they're getting one over on the system and mother nature. Feminism is robbing these chicks blind and, by leaving behind increasingly worse women for all of us, robbing men blind too.

Women have been told they can draw from that bank account and still get everything else--career and family--but will eventually (and painfully) find that that's not true. The account they're drawing from has finite resources and is very different than the account that men have. I wrote an article on ROK that very closely follows this arc of a story through to the end.

And check out the new top-rated comment:

   

[Thatdude]

(07-13-2013 02:26 PM)Hades Wrote:  

So a booty call has a little initiative and calls the guy. So what.
She's not playing any game, that guy is just pulling free ass. If you consider this from the guy's perspective I don't see how anybody considers this a "win" for women, or women "running game". If anything I would say that this guy has her trained pretty well. She's so afraid of being emotionally broken due to investment in failed relationships and unwilling to put up with a lack of quality dick that she puts herself out on the market for free (using economic terms, making it that much harder for a prostitute to make a living), then tries to play it up as a strength or being in control of her sexuality when in reality she's incapable of even a little emotional risk. Encouraging that is no different that cheering on people dying alone with a hundred cats. What a dumb bitch.

Exactly what I was thinking as I was reading this article. I think this is great for young players in college.

[michelin]

Most worrying of this article is what everybody overlooks here, the title of this article: "...THAT GAME". Rockhard proof that Game has definitely gone mainstream. And by meanstream I don't mean Neil Strauss and the players community. I mean mass media: how more mainstream can you become when you're the most viewed and emailed article in the New York Times? What this means is that, no matter how you look at it, game will become tighter in the future: game will be less of a competitive advantage to the average dude when the number of competitors with game has tripled.

[Kabal]

(07-13-2013 03:52 PM)michelin Wrote:  

Most worrying of this article is what everybody overlooks here, the title of this article: "...THAT GAME". Rockhard proof that Game has definitely gone mainstream. And by meanstream I don't mean Neil Strauss and the players community. I mean mass media: how more mainstream can you become when you're the most emailed article in the New York Times? What this means is that, no matter how you look at it, game will become tighter in the future: game will be less of a competitive advantage to the average dude when the number of competitors with game has tripled.

"Game" awareness has certainly disseminated into the public zeitgeist, but this is not an instance of that.

"Two can play that game" has been a saying long before The Game days.

[Hades]

(07-13-2013 03:22 PM)Thatdude Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 02:26 PM)Hades Wrote:  

So a booty call has a little initiative and calls the guy. So what.
She's not playing any game, that guy is just pulling free ass. If you consider this from the guy's perspective I don't see how anybody considers this a "win" for women, or women "running game". If anything I would say that this guy has her trained pretty well. She's so afraid of being emotionally broken due to investment in failed relationships and unwilling to put up with a lack of quality dick that she puts herself out on the market for free (using economic terms, making it that much harder for a prostitute to make a living), then tries to play it up as a strength or being in control of her sexuality when in reality she's incapable of even a little emotional risk. Encouraging that is no different that cheering on people dying alone with a hundred cats. What a dumb bitch.

Exactly what I was thinking as I was reading this article. I think this is great for young players in college.

Yeah it is . If these younger players are exposed to the whole "why buy the cow when you can get milk for free" lifestyle then they're that less likely to settle down and buy into the marriage bollocks.

The other thing I was thinking about was that she was babbling on about "risk" and "cost-benefit analyses, doing her best to intellectualize sluttitude and cowardice in economic and financial terms, what about reward? What does she gain out of this? Low investment and low risk generally implies low reward, or even negative reward (she depreciates by the day, and getting all kinds of dick theoretically causes greater depreciation).

If she exposed herself to genuine risk (emotionally investing in a relationship) and managed to buck the trend and snag a worthy candidate for marriage, then she's set for life. If she finds a computer programmer on the up-and-up, and in ten years he's making six figures, how is that not winning the game? That's an investment that's likely to pay off huge dividends, especially considering the modern court system. Then she bitches about having "no time" for that, let's be frank here, what the shit is a degree worth if you never have to work another day in your life?
There's no upsides to being risk averse, unless being an old, childless slut who has to work fifty hours a week until death is a desired outcome.

It's almost like these morons at the NYT think that if enough sluts exist, they can destroy the player/slut dichotomy, but that's impossible - female access to dick (commitment notwithstanding) is theoretically infinite while male access to pussy fluctuates due to factors involving scarcity and status. It goes without saying that if you're giving up something that has inherent worth (pussy), for free, then you're making a stupid decision. I wouldn't open a bank and just hand out money.

[Bacchus]

These girls are all future members of the triple 30 club. Over 30 years old, over 30 pounds overweight, over 30 sexual partners.

[Kabal]

(07-13-2013 04:28 PM)Bacchus Wrote:  

These girls are all future members of the triple 30 club. Over 30 years old, over 30 pounds overweight, over 30 sexual partners.

Don't worry, that won't stop them from thinking they deserve triple 6 men -- 6 feet, 6 figures, 6 inches.

This saying needs to be adjusted for female entitlement inflation--it's a bit dated at this point--it's probably more like 6.5, 6.5, 6.5 nowadays.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

"Now, she said, she and her best friend had changed their romantic goals, from finding boyfriends to finding “hookup buddies,” which she described as “a guy that we don’t actually really like his personality, but we think is really attractive and hot and good in bed.”

From next year's New York Times:

"Now, she said, she and her best friend had yet again changed their romantic goals and seek to prosecute those "hookup buddies" on charges of emotional distress, harassment, and rape charges when the buddies dumped them for freshmen.

"We saw it as a handshake business transaction and they reneged," she said. "Now we plan to take them for everything they're worth. Women used to have to be married to do this. Why wait?"

Laugh now, cry later. This is what happens. Times change; women don't.

[Architekt]

(07-13-2013 04:33 PM)Kabal Wrote:  

This saying needs to be adjusted for female entitlement inflation--it's a bit dated at this point--it's probably more like 6.5, 6.5, 6.5 6'6, 6 figures, ((((6*6)-6-6)/6)+6)" nowadays.

Sticking with 6s...

[GameTheory]

i've given this thread 5/5 stars