The Nice Guy syndrome. Are you suffering from it?

[Unsigned]

So we're just a piggybank.

More women then men are graduating from higher education for some time now and people still want us men to always be the breadwinners? I understand wanting him to work with stable employment and income, but to be the primary/sole provider of shelter and food? I don't know where you live, but where I live a small one bedroom apartment in a decent area is $1800 a month. You got to make minimum $29 an hour to qualify to stay there. Of all the guys I keep in contact with only one of them makes that much.

We could do that in the 50s and 60s when us men had all the high paying jobs and women stayed home and raised a family. That isn't the case anymore. We have to compete with women now for high paying jobs. That means a big chunk of men are going to now make less money then women. And I don't think many women want to be the breadwinner, thus the coming collapse of world population.

No. We should not be a piggy bank. Rather we should be valued as providers and protectors. That's how it worked from the time the Austropithicus descended from the trees until the mid 1960s. And we need to get back to that, as it is the natural order of male/female relationships. A male seeking or expecting a two income household is a losing proposition for him right from the start.

 

[ardour]

No. We should not be a piggy bank. Rather we should be valued as providers and protectors. That's how it worked from the time the Austropithicus descended from the trees until the mid 1960s. And we need to get back to that, as it is the natural order of male/female relationships. A male seeking or expecting a two income household is a losing proposition for him right from the start.

How do you propose people survive on one income? Neoliberal policies meant manufacturing was exported to the developing world. Encouraging women into the workforce further pushed down wages. Then investment firms and boomers bought up all the houses.

Your libertopia made sure this isn't possible any more.

 

[TheRealCallie]

No. We should not be a piggy bank. Rather we should be valued as providers and protectors. That's how it worked from the time the Austropithicus descended from the trees until the mid 1960s. And we need to get back to that, as it is the natural order of male/female relationships. A male seeking or expecting a two income household is a losing proposition for him right from the start.

Yeah, see, I can take care of myself. I don't expect anyone else to do it for me. Now, I wouldn't pay HIS way, he'd be responsible for his own bills and if we share a house, bills will also be shared, but all in all, I pay my own way.

 

[NoxApex(N/A)]

How do you propose people survive on one income? Neoliberal policies meant manufacturing was exported to the developing world. Encouraging women into the workforce further pushed down wages. Then investment firms and boomers bought up all the houses.

Your libertopia made sure this isn't possible any more.

Don't do stupid honeysuckle like buy crap you don't need.
If a person can't separate want from need accurately, than yeah, that'll really throw a wrench in it. If that's the case than it doesn't matter how much money they make because they have a spending problem and therefore it will never be enough money. I've seen it happen, it gets ugly.
Provided you don't have kids and medical problems it's doable. It's not comfortable, but it is doable.
Practical? Probably not. Comfortable? Definitely not. Doable? Absolutely.
I definitely do agree that prices need to drop and that it would probably do a great deal of good for society if we began to divorce non-essential materialistic values.
I also absolutely think that we should go witch hunting for the IRS, but I mean, that'll never happen.

 

[MysteriousTelephone]

I suppose the "I'm not physically abusive, date me!" comes from guys who've seen women who go out with guys who seemingly have very little to offer; they're not big earners, they're not physically attractive, not particularly kind or funny, AND they have no problem hitting their partners. We all know at least one woman who's been in a relationship with that type of guy, and wracked our brains as to why she didn't ditch him sooner.

Looking at that from the outside, I can see why a guy can look at that and think "Gee, I may not be any of those things either, but on a base level I'm not going to hit you, so that's one thing I've got on him."

It's not a mindset I particularly indulge in, I think that a baseline for attraction can't be "won't hit you", but I can see where it comes from in men.

 

[Unsigned]

How do you propose people survive on one income? Neoliberal policies meant manufacturing was exported to the developing world. Encouraging women into the workforce further pushed down wages. Then investment firms and boomers bought up all the houses.

Your libertopia made sure this isn't possible any more.

Yes I am a conservative libertarian.
But as such, I am against all forms of affirmative action and EEOC that led to this mess in the first place. In my libertopia, those things would be abolished.

Also, I strongly encourage males to get marketable college degrees, like I did. A boring career that earns a good living is far better than "following your dreams" to be the next Robert Frost or something. A CPA or a good software developer does not need a second household income.

 

[Unsigned]

Yeah, see, I can take care of myself. I don't expect anyone else to do it for me. Now, I wouldn't pay HIS way, he'd be responsible for his own bills and if we share a house, bills will also be shared, but all in all, I pay my own way.

That is fine. I didn't say that women couldn't or shouldn't work. I said that men shouldn't seek out or rely upon a 2nd household income.

Personally I think relationships only work out when the male is the sole or greatly primary breadwinner, but that's just me and my very traditional way of thinking. If other guys can make a non traditional relationship work, goid on them.

 

[CenotaphGirl]

I suppose the "I'm not physically abusive, date me!" comes from guys who've seen women who go out with guys who seemingly have very little to offer; they're not big earners, they're not physically attractive, not particularly kind or funny, AND they have no problem hitting their partners. We all know at least one woman who's been in a relationship with that type of guy, and wracked our brains as to why she didn't ditch him sooner.

Looking at that from the outside, I can see why a guy can look at that and think "Gee, I may not be any of those things either, but on a base level I'm not going to hit you, so that's one thing I've got on him."

It's not a mindset I particularly indulge in, I think that a baseline for attraction can't be "won't hit you", but I can see where it comes from in men.

My issue is domestic violence is too common. But to use the fact that a large portion of women have been victimised by men as some sort of “should have picked me” just disturbs me. Makes me think what would you do to me then? Tie me up? You obviously think its some sort of reward for women to be in relationships without domestic abuse (not you but the nice guys who spout that crap)

 

[user 139760]

That is fine. I didn't say that women couldn't or shouldn't work. I said that men shouldn't seek out or rely upon a 2nd household income.

Personally I think relationships only work out when the male is the sole or greatly primary breadwinner, but that's just me and my very traditional way of thinking. If other guys can make a non traditional relationship work, goid on them.

That interesting. I'm going to slightly derail this thread (because it's a more interesting subject to me). What's your view of social democratic policies?
We've been rehashing nice guys bad boys for 5 pages, I could do with a little light discussion. Like...politics

 

[ardour]

If men consistently ignored, let's say 'homely' women - in favour of hot women who cheated or emotionally abused them, "nice" women would be making similar comments. And they do just going by the femcel subreddits. Bitterness and self-absorption are part of human nature, particularly if you see people who are objectively worse than you getting what you want.

 

[CenotaphGirl]

If men consistently ignored, let's say 'homely' women - in favour of hot women who cheated or emotionally abused them, "nice" women would be making similar comments. And they do just going by the femcel subreddits. Bitterness and self-absorption are part of human nature, particularly if you see people who are objectively worse than you getting what you want.

I dont agree with it either way, but the fact remains they are trying to extort and exploit women that have been victimised because they are too weak to do it themselves not because any man was “worse” than they are.

 

[TheRealCallie]

That is fine. I didn't say that women couldn't or shouldn't work. I said that men shouldn't seek out or rely upon a 2nd household income.

Personally I think relationships only work out when the male is the sole or greatly primary breadwinner, but that's just me and my very traditional way of thinking. If other guys can make a non traditional relationship work, goid on them.

My experience has shown me that one income isn't the answer either. The sole income person likes to think they have all the control. It's THEIR money. You can handle the money but in the end it's still theirs.
The "traditional" relationship is very rare these days. Most relationships do act on a two income household because they have to. Things are too expensive these days and covid screwed us all. So unless you are rich, that doesn't work anymore.

 

[Unsigned]

My experience has shown me that one income isn't the answer either. The sole income person likes to think they have all the control. It's THEIR money. You can handle the money but in the end it's still theirs.
The "traditional" relationship is very rare these days. Most relationships do act on a two income household because they have to. Things are too expensive these days and covid screwed us all. So unless you are rich, that doesn't work anymore.

I wouldn't call myself rich, but I suppose I am "upper middle class" and would have no need for a second income. Hasn't been an issue though because I've been alone my whole life and most likely will be until I'm in the ground or reduced to ashes. Leaning more towards the ashes. Just seems more efficient to me.

 

[Unsigned]

That interesting. I'm going to slightly derail this thread (because it's a more interesting subject to me). What's your view of social democratic policies?
We've been rehashing nice guys bad boys for 5 pages, I could do with a little light discussion. Like...politics

Yeah let's not derail, but to answer your question, my political philosophy is pretty much the polar opposite of the social democrats, at least the ones here in the US. From what I know of him, I most certainly would NOT have voted for Trudeau if I were Canadian. Or Macron if I were French.

 

[user 139760]

Yeah let's not derail, but to answer your question, my political philosophy is pretty much the polar opposite of the social democrats, at least the ones here in the US. From what I know of him, I most certainly would NOT have voted for Trudeau if I were Canadian. Or Macron if I were French.

Canada is no longer a real social democracy, not like it used to be. Technically speaking it's always been a constitutional monarchy based in Federalism. Quebec used to be very different in the 80's and 90's but neo-liberal policies aligned it more with the rest of Canada.
I never liked Trudeau. He's basically the same as his dad, though I could respect the elder more because he was an outspoken prig, whereas his son his a hypocrite one.
My cousin has been a long time federal official for the gov. He said the only diff between Trudeau and Harper's conservatives was pr. It's basically the same policies.
Not at all in ligne with ny way if thinking. Though I'm not sure about Libertarian views either

 

[ardour]

Yes I am a conservative libertarian.
But as such, I am against all forms of affirmative action and EEOC that led to this mess in the first place. In my libertopia, those things would be abolished.

Also, I strongly encourage males to get marketable college degrees, like I did. A boring career that earns a good living is far better than "following your dreams" to be the next Robert Frost or something. A CPA or a good software developer does not need a second household income.

So only upper-middle class professionals should have the opportunity to buy a house and raise a family. Social Darwinism, the 'lower classes' don't have kids etc.

 

[Unsigned]

So only upper-middle class professionals should have the opportunity to buy a house and raise a family. Social Darwinism, the 'lower classes' don't have kids etc.

Erm...never been married, no children, never had a girlfriend, never been on a free date.
I've been getting "Socially Darwined" my entire life.

Also, I have lived in studio apartments since 1990, drive a Camry I bought in 2005, wear reasonable clothes like Haggar slacks and Van Heusen shirts.
I live in small apartments because it's only me, I don't need a lot of space, and I saved a lot of money over the years.
Same with keeping 1 car for long periods of time. Although it barely has 67K miles on it. I do a lot of walking and use public transportation quite a bit.
Bottom line, I am not caught up in consumerism.
When I traded in my flip phone in 2018 (yep!) it was for a Samsung J3 (the cheapest smart phone in the store). I still have it. It's my only phone.
So yeah, I've always done OK, but I SAVE LIKE NO ONE ELSE!
And despite the fact that I've spent ungodly amounts of money on escorts over the decades (my only indulgence), I can still retire comfortably when I see fit.

You are incorrect if you think I believe that only well off males should be able to pair off with females.
I saw a great chart once.
It showed that prior to the women's movement, males and females at roughly the same level (economically, socially, physically, etc..) paired off together.
But today. the top 80 percent of females chase to top 20% or even 10% of males.
And today, it's much more based on the males physical appearance and persona than anything else.

I would want male female relations to return to the way it was.
How nature intended.
That is all.
Have a great night (or day if it's morning in Kiwiland).
And have a nice weekend too.