Friend in trouble - advice appreciated

[Blubbartron]

This is how you get divorced to a wife you have never actually fucked and haven't "made love to" in years.

I don't see how a couple having complete faith in each other as mates precludes them from enjoying noisy, animalistic fucking.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems your point in this thread is that people should live in constant fear that their mate will leave them for someone better. Surely you've lived long enough to know that nothing positive comes from negative emotions?

[Lucienne]

I don't see how a couple having complete faith in each other as mates precludes them from enjoying noisy, animalistic fucking.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems your point in this thread is that people should live in constant fear that their mate will leave them for someone better. Surely you've lived long enough to know that nothing positive comes from negative emotions?

It's very easy to stop trying your hardest if you feel safe, and start taking the other person for granted. Once you do that, the relationship is dead. A healthy amount of uncertainty is good.

[Churchill]

Sadly true, doesn't help that I'm exceptionally stubborn and strong headed, and think I can handle just about anything on my own, or at least without a man.
The top and the left, yes.

Being able to support yourself and take care of yourself have nothing to do with what people want and expect in a relationship. I've never stated women are weak or incapable of life without men, most women in married life are the ones in charge and are the ones making the decisions and they work and do it all. (Terrible relationships) I've only commented on what I've found women react to, women think/feel/say, and how a woman's imperative conflicts with a man's imperative. I hate having to qualify myself for making a statement, but in this thread the most egregious attack against women was made by a man trying to validate his own feelings - stating that 90% of women base their self worth on the men they sleep with. If you've read the thread, you know I disagreed with that wholeheartedly. Women are great, but what they want and what a man want are not the same thing.

[Churchill]

I don't see how a couple having complete faith in each other as mates precludes them from enjoying noisy, animalistic fucking.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems your point in this thread is that people should live in constant fear that their mate will leave them for someone better. Surely you've lived long enough to know that nothing positive comes from negative emotions?

I don't fear anything.

Failing to understand women is something to fear though. Having complete faith in anything shows a lack of maturity and experience - the exact thing you would gain by sleeping with and dating more women. Holding on to each and every one like they are a unique snowflake is a recipe for disaster.

[Blubbartron]

Being able to support yourself and take care of yourself have nothing to do with what people want and expect in a relationship. I've never stated women are weak or incapable of life without men, most women in married life are the ones in charge and are the ones making the decisions and they work and do it all. (Terrible relationships) I've only commented on what I've found women react to, women think/feel/say, and how a woman's imperative conflicts with a man's imperative. I hate having to qualify myself for making a statement, but in this thread the most egregious attack against women was made by a man trying to validate his own feelings - stating that 90% of women base their self worth on the men they sleep with. If you've read the thread, you know I disagreed with that wholeheartedly. Women are great, but what they want and what a man want are not the same thing.

He can speak for himself, but I'm pretty sure you should re-read what he wrote. I believe he said that there are women that determine 90% of their self worth by who they're fucking, not that 90% of women determine all of their self worth that way.

[Blubbartron]

I don't fear anything.

Failing to understand women is something to fear though. Having complete faith in anything shows a lack of maturity and experience - the exact thing you would gain by sleeping with and dating more women. Holding on to each and every one like they are a unique snowflake is a recipe for disaster.

You continue to act as if women are a homogenous group that can be understood. Understanding one person is a monumental undertaking, let alone understanding 3.5 billion. And I'll agree about the faith thing with one stipulation - blind faith is immature. I suppose I could've picked a better word there. The intention was more of an "earned trust."

[Churchill]

The bolded phrase is one of the scariest things I've heard said about a relationship ever. You don't tell someone what they should be doing at any given time. You can give suggestions and try and help guide someone, but you do not and cannot demand someone do what you think is right for them. That is controlling and if it continues is in fact abusive.

It's not unreasonable to expect things from a person, but that expectation comes from their respect of you. Making those expectations known from a position of control or dominance is fine. Making ultimatums or similar demands comes from a position of weakness and most women will recognize it as such.

we make enough money to provide for ourselves.

This is not as relevant as is that the man has his own priorities and goals.

This actually makes a lot of sense. If you have any idea how to point out the difference for someone, do tell me.

I can't say I'm very good at fixing women, I've met my share of broken ones and I'm not sure of a good approach. Women are people, and people only really change when they are forced to. Hit rock bottom, significant emotional event, whatever. Women are also women, so they tend to shield themselves from actual criticism or self reflection. My honest suggestion is find men 5-8 years older than her that piss you off and give you that feeling and hope she goes home with one of them. Maybe they aren't serious, but at least give her an example of a man that knows what he's doing instead of the bitch she's with.

[Blubbartron]

It's very easy to stop trying your hardest if you feel safe, and start taking the other person for granted. Once you do that, the relationship is dead. A healthy amount of uncertainty is good.

A fair point. Taking advantage of your mate by getting complacent isn't good. This is why I hesitated in trying to make any firm definitions. Relationships are incredibly complex.

[TheDangerousDave]

Understanding one person is a monumental undertaking, let alone understanding 3.5 billion.

For one I don't think he is trying to understand 3.5 billion women and secondly, women are not the same from the world over. Women from Western lifestyles are different to Asia, city girls are different to village girls etc, but there are things generally the same in the mentality of women from one general group. Although Lucienne is not necessarily in America, it is obvious she has a mentality that is synonymous with a Western mentality it so I see no problem with Churchill's judgements on the situation.

[Churchill]

Women from most of europe are actually more old school than western women (the US) aside from sweden and norway, though I don't have experience in either country. Italy for example is crazy. If you wreck someones home (as a woman) you get the shit beat out of you by every woman in the neighborhood.

[Blubbartron]

For one I don't think he is trying to understand 3.5 billion women and secondly, women are not the same from the world over. Women from Western lifestyles are different to Asia, city girls are different to village girls etc, but there are things generally the same in the mentality of women from one general group. Although Lucienne is not necessarily in America, it is obvious she has a mentality that is synonymous with a Western mentality it so I see no problem with Churchill's judgements on the situation.

The bold part is an example of rational thought. You're quite right, people will be *similar*, but they will not necessarily be the *same*. This is more than just a semantics argument. Churchill seems to quite literally believe that all women are X (whatever the hell that happens to be), or will do Z when confronted with Y. That kind of thinking is problematic for obvious reasons (most notably how closely it resembles misogyny). It's the same kind of thinking that racists do when they say "all black people are illiterate thugs."

If he wanted to qualify his statements that most women, or even just a lot of women behave in the ways he's suggested throughout the thread, I would agree in a heartbeat, because I have observed the same. But to claim that all women are the same is just pure ignorance.

[Lucienne]

Maybe he wanted to make sure that she was asleep as it was in her best interest?

You're like a puppy in the rain, I can't be mean to you.
If you want to make sure someone's sleeping, do you normally call them and wake them up?

[TheDangerousDave]

The bold part is an example of rational thought. You're quite right, people will be *similar*, but they will not necessarily be the *same*. This is more than just a semantics argument. Churchill seems to quite literally believe that all women are X (whatever the hell that happens to be), or will do Z when confronted with Y. That kind of thinking is problematic for obvious reasons (most notably how closely it resembles misogyny). It's the same kind of thinking that racists do when they say "all black people are illiterate thugs."

If he wanted to qualify his statements that most women, or even just a lot of women behave in the ways he's suggested throughout the thread, I would agree in a heartbeat, because I have observed the same. But to claim that all women are the same is just pure ignorance.

I have a lot of experience with women from many places and many ages, I can tell you that he is certainly justified in his statements. There ARE things about the female mentality that are universal. I wish it weren't true but it certainly is.

[Abandon]

Why not? Maybe he missed her and wanted to make sure she was ok. Sure that might make him a bit insecure but that doesn't make him a weirdo or "abusive". Maybe he wanted to make sure that she was asleep as it was in her best interest? If he text her she could easier ignore it.

But I'm only 25.


Ok e-warrior, you're welcome to try.
To make sure she wasn't asleep? Maybe the problem is not that he doesn't trust her, but maybe that she makes herself difficult to trust? I.E. Like ignoring his calls like a douche.
I don't think that is proof of what you're saying there, calling her once doesn't tell me that he wants to know what she's doing at any given time, it tells me he wants to know what she is doing in that moment, a moment in which she is not doing what she said she was, not doing what was most beneficial to her (i.e. getting sleep for work), and not being polite enough to answer his call the first time. It is only because you are a woman that you see this situation so objectively, i.e. called her once = omg has to know what she is doing at every point in time.

lolololol

[Lucienne]

I can't say I'm very good at fixing women, I've met my share of broken ones and I'm not sure of a good approach. Women are people, and people only really change when they are forced to. Hit rock bottom, significant emotional event, whatever. Women are also women, so they tend to shield themselves from actual criticism or self reflection. .

She's doing really poorly health wise, she even had to go see a doctor. My mother told me the best thing would be if he hit her, the problem is, he probably won't do that before the trip. If he is to hit her it's going to be when they're alone on the other side of earth, surrounded by his family and friends, and there'll be nothing me or her sister can do about it.

My honest suggestion is find men 5-8 years older than her that piss you off and give you that feeling and hope she goes home with one of them. Maybe they aren't serious, but at least give her an example of a man that knows what he's doing instead of the bitch she's with.

Lol
The ass she's dating is 13 years older than her too.
I've been considering that honestly. She got a lot of attention when we went out, which she seemed to enjoy at least.

[Churchill]

The bold part is an example of rational thought. You're quite right, people will be *similar*, but they will not necessarily be the *same*. This is more than just a semantics argument. Churchill seems to quite literally believe that all women are X (whatever the hell that happens to be), or will do Z when confronted with Y. That kind of thinking is problematic for obvious reasons (most notably how closely it resembles misogyny). It's the same kind of thinking that racists do when they say "all black people are illiterate thugs."

If he wanted to qualify his statements that most women, or even just a lot of women behave in the ways he's suggested throughout the thread, I would agree in a heartbeat, because I have observed the same. But to claim that all women are the same is just pure ignorance.

I don't feel the need to qualify every statement I make with "most" "generally" or whatever you'd like me to say so that you can feel better about the topic. As far as your assertions, you're right, not all women fall into the category I described but most do. The ones that don't are not worth dating because they will not make you happy (no woman would) and they will make your life hell.

The problem with your mentality is in thinking that if you meet a woman who is sweet, takes care of you, does what you ask promptly, that she is somehow a once in a lifetime woman. She isn't, you've just unlocked a part of her she reserves for men she respects. Once you see this enough (again, experience) you can begin to make assessments based on more than just "dat pussy game ridiculous" and also learn how to not fuck it up so she feels that way forever. Then if you do decide to get married someday, you can make that decision intelligently.

And this obviously doesn't apply to all men as some like to be submissive and some women enjoy dominance. There are outliers in any statistic.

I would ask you to consider why it is you jump to crying "misogyny" (or resembles, so you keep your jimmies) if a generalization of women is made.

[Blubbartron]

I don't feel the need to qualify every statement I make with "most" "generally" or whatever you'd like me to say so that you can feel better about the topic. As far as your assertions, you're right, not all women fall into the category I described but most do. The ones that don't are not worth dating because they will not make you happy (no woman would) and they will make your life hell.

The problem with your mentality is in thinking that if you meet a woman who is sweet, takes care of you, does what you ask promptly, that she is somehow a once in a lifetime woman. She isn't, you've just unlocked a part of her she reserves for men she respects. Once you see this enough (again, experience) you can begin to make assessments based on more than just "dat pussy game ridiculous" and also learn how to not fuck it up so she feels that way forever. Then if you do decide to get married someday, you can make that decision intelligently.

And this obviously doesn't apply to all men as some like to be submissive and some women enjoy dominance. There are outliers in any statistic.

I would ask you to consider why it is you jump to crying "misogyny" (or resembles, so you keep your jimmies) if a generalization of women is made.

You're reaching on almost every assertion you made about me. I have made zero statements in this thread about what I consider to be an ideal woman, or what I look for in relationships.

You're also sorely mistaken if you believe that I'm jumping on you simply because your comments regard women. I lambaste every generalization that isn't properly qualified (because it's ignorance), regardless of which subgroup of humans it is made for. The only reason my presence is so strong in this thread (as opposed to others) is because your confidence (arrogance) could, unfortunately, encourage people to think as you do. It's an unfortunate part of our psychology that people tend to automatically trust authority figures, and confidence in speaking/writing shows a dominant personality, which is usually equated with authority.

Honestly, I would ask you to consider why you think that women who don't fit in your neat little box aren't worth dating or will only "make your life hell." That kind of statement speaks volumes. That said, I'd appreciate a clarification on the "no woman would" part. I can't tell what you were getting at with that.

[Abandon]

You're reaching on almost every assertion you made about me. I have made zero statements in this thread about what I consider to be an ideal woman, or what I look for in relationships.

You're also sorely mistaken if you believe that I'm jumping on you simply because your comments regard women. I lambaste every generalization that isn't properly qualified (because it's ignorance), regardless of which subgroup of humans it is made for. The only reason my presence is so strong in this thread (as opposed to others) is because your confidence (arrogance) could, unfortunately, encourage people to think as you do. It's an unfortunate part of our psychology that people tend to automatically trust authority figures, and confidence in speaking/writing shows a dominant personality, which is usually equated with authority.

Honestly, I would ask you to consider why you think that women who don't fit in your neat little box aren't worth dating or will only "make your life hell." That kind of statement speaks volumes. That said, I'd appreciate a clarification on the "no woman would" part. I can't tell what you were getting at with that.

i didnt read much further than this; just wanted to note that was the first time I think I've seen this word on BG.

[Blubbartron]

i didnt read much further than this; just wanted to note that was the first time I think I've seen this word on BG.

I'm elevating motherfuckers up in this bitch.

[Lucienne]

Btw, I'm totally cool with people posting dicks in my thread, as long as they're pretty. I much prefer that to having to read dumb shit.