Shaming Tactics against males.

Post Reply New Topic

Seriously? Well I'll have to explain that to all the guys who have ditched me because of it.



Don't get sarcastic to me, just because you think so does not mean it's common. Again, I'll have to tell that to all the guys who have laughed in my face or ditched me because of it.

Honestly, you are portraying a huge amount of ignorance in stupidity. How old are you? You don't know sh*t about what you're talking about, you're just taking age old stereotypes and going with them.



How do you know then?

well, yes. you should be thankful if someone finds you attractive a a lot of people struggle with getting enough of that. and what's wrong with obese women that you have relegated them to the very bottom? fat chicks are not the dregs, you know.

i'm senseng the exact reverse of what you are accusing... you seem to be saying that really large women are beneath you, and that they are not worth your time because you are somehow better than them.

People are people. You are lying if you or anyone says they don't have at least some disdain for obese people. When was the last time you spoke to an obese person, went out of your weigh to help them? When was the last time you acknowledged their existence?

You are lying to yourself if you think that obese people are valued just as much as healthy people.

Again I am not trying to say I hate people that I don't know.

People are people. You are lying if you or anyone says they don't have at least some disdain for obese people. When was the last time you spoke to an obese person, went out of your weigh to help them? When was the last time you acknowledged their existence?

I speak to anyone who seems cool regardless of how fat they are. I would help anyone who looks like they are struggling.



You don't have to. Your post already did.

In what society is it okay to treat obese people like lepers? Blinking norah

It must be different where I live lol. I know decent looking guys that don't get laid, while fat girls get laid all the time (hell, I like a thick girl if I think she's pretty, not too too fat though lol).

I don't think anyone has it harder than each other, I find that whoever has negative energy, people tend to gravitate away from that person unless they are moderately attractive for some reason (male or female). I won't deny that women have their "advantages" in the dating department, but women don't actually see this as an advantage, that's just the way it is.

I don't know, I've never dated properly anyway, so I'm speculating & observing others. When I'm a successful dater, I'll let you know.

It's not. I just wouldn't go out of my way to engage them in conversation. But then again I almost never go out of my way to engage anyone in conversation. That is just me, if there was a chance that I am going out of my way, it wouldnt be them.
If I was a more sociable guy, then yes I probably would talk to everybody.

I am trying to say something that I believe in, but you won't listen. It looks as though hate obese people.

I don't, but I can find them annoying like anyone else in public situations like being seated next to someone on the airplane. Would you be ok with that?

And you didn't answer the question: what guys did you go out with that laughed in the your face?

And would you guy out with an obese guy?

It was sarcasm (mostly).

But I've seen people of both sexes get passed over for being fat by people of both sexes. As for the eternal "who has it easier question," I agree that neither has it "easier." Women have an "easier" time attracting one-night stands from creepy loser males, but that's about it. The women I'm acquainted with generally don't consider a one-night-stand to be the equivalent of a real relationship the way some men seem to. Ultimately, I suspect that honest, fulfilling relationships between good-hearted people are just hard to come by, regardless of who you happen to be.

In any case, my MAIN point was that certain posters seem pretty vehemently trying to pass their "personal experience" off as "objective fact." That's a fairly stupid thing to do on a regular discussion board, but it's extremely stupid to attempt it on an Aspie board. Personally, I couldn't give a winged rat turd about someone's "personal observations" as a measure of objective reality.

i'm going to explain... again... and again... as necessary... that there are an approximately equal number of single men and women on the planet (heterosexual). mathematically, this is the case. for every woman who gets taken off the market, there is a man to match.

an equal number of members of each gender are lonely.i doubt that the members of either gender are happy about that situation. it is hard for both men and women. not many people really want to be alone, and it isn't easier for one gender or another.

it isn't surprising to me that the men who express the most misogynistic posts in general are the ones who argue most strenuously that women have it so easy. i guess it is easier to demonise someone who is viewed as the enemy.

The first big, basic difference has to do with what I consider to be the most underappreciated fact about gender. Consider this question: What percent of our ancestors were women?

It’s not a trick question, and it’s not 50%. True, about half the people who ever lived were women, but that’s not the question. We’re asking about all the people who ever lived who have a descendant living today. Or, put another way, yes, every baby has both a mother and a father, but some of those parents had multiple children.

Recent research using DNA analysis answered this question about two years ago. Today’s human population is descended from twice as many women as men.

I think this difference is the single most underappreciated fact about gender. To get that kind of difference, you had to have something like, throughout the entire history of the human race, maybe 80% of women but only 40% of men reproduced.

Right now our field is having a lively debate about how much behavior can be explained by evolutionary theory. But if evolution explains anything at all, it explains things related to reproduction, because reproduction is at the heart of natural selection. Basically, the traits that were most effective for reproduction would be at the center of evolutionary psychology. It would be shocking if these vastly different reproductive odds for men and women failed to produce some personality differences.

For women throughout history (and prehistory), the odds of reproducing have been pretty good. Later in this talk we will ponder things like, why was it so rare for a hundred women to get together and build a ship and sail off to explore unknown regions, whereas men have fairly regularly done such things? But taking chances like that would be stupid, from the perspective of a biological organism seeking to reproduce. They might drown or be killed by savages or catch a disease. For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe.

For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. Hence it was necessary to take chances, try new things, be creative, explore other possibilities. Sailing off into the unknown may be risky, and you might drown or be killed or whatever, but then again if you stay home you won’t reproduce anyway. We’re most descended from the type of men who made the risky voyage and managed to come back rich. In that case he would finally get a good chance to pass on his genes. We’re descended from men who took chances (and were lucky).

The huge difference in reproductive success very likely contributed to some personality differences, because different traits pointed the way to success. Women did best by minimizing risks, whereas the successful men were the ones who took chances. Ambition and competitive striving probably mattered more to male success (measured in offspring) than female. Creativity was probably more necessary, to help the individual man stand out in some way. Even the sex drive difference was relevant: For many men, there would be few chances to reproduce and so they had to be ready for every sexual opportunity. If a man said “not today, I have a headache,” he might miss his only chance.

Another crucial point. The danger of having no children is only one side of the male coin. Every child has a biological mother and father, and so if there were only half as many fathers as mothers among our ancestors, then some of those fathers had lots of children.

Look at it this way. Most women have only a few children, and hardly any have more than a dozen — but many fathers have had more than a few, and some men have actually had several dozen, even hundreds of kids.

In terms of the biological competition to produce offspring, then, men outnumbered women both among the losers and among the biggest winners.

To put this in more subjective terms: When I walk around and try to look at men and women as if seeing them for the first time, it’s hard to escape the impression (sorry, guys!) that women are simply more likeable and lovable than men. (This I think explains the “WAW effect” mentioned earlier.) Men might wish to be lovable, and men can and do manage to get women to love them (so the ability is there), but men have other priorities, other motivations. For women, being lovable was the key to attracting the best mate. For men, however, it was more a matter of beating out lots of other men even to have a chance for a mate.

Tradeoffs again: perhaps nature designed women to seek to be lovable, whereas men were designed to strive, mostly unsuccessfully, for greatness.

And it was worth it, even despite the “mostly unsuccessfully” part. Experts estimate Genghis Khan had several hundred and perhaps more than a thousand children. He took big risks and eventually conquered most of the known world. For him, the big risks led to huge payoffs in offspring. My point is that no woman, even if she conquered twice as much territory as Genghis Khan, could have had a thousand children. Striving for greatness in that sense offered the human female no such biological payoff. For the man, the possibility was there, and so the blood of Genghis Khan runs through a large segment of today’s human population. By definition, only a few men can achieve greatness, but for the few men who do, the gains have been real. And we are descended from those great men much more than from other men. Remember, most of the mediocre men left no descendants at all.

People are people. You are lying if you or anyone says they don't have at least some disdain for obese people. When was the last time you spoke to an obese person, went out of your weigh to help them? When was the last time you acknowledged their existence?

You are lying to yourself if you think that obese people are valued just as much as healthy people.

gain I am not trying to say I hate people that I don't know. If someone weighs what they weigh and is ok with it then fine. Plenty of underweight people don't feel ok with themselves. As long as you feel good about yourself that is what matters. But they don't concern me. Since I am relatively in shape, I want the same. If I wasn't, then I wouldnt be able to be able criticize.

At the same time, I am not attracted to woman who aren't healthy. To ignore this, would be lying to myself, and that would be dishonest to her. Not cool

But you would go out of your way to engage a "normal" sized person in conversation? Yeah, seems like you hate obese people to me. Unless you're talking about people you're trying to HIT ON.



Well say it more clearly then.



Yes. I would have a problem sitting next to someone on a plane who
1. Mouth breathes
2. Stinks

Neither of those are more exclusive to fat people.



You don't know them. But none of them were alpha males, and they thought less of me being a virgin at my age. (older than 16)



In regards to what you think is obese, yes, I would. In fact I would rather have a slightly overweight guy to one who is athletic or skinny.

Women do get looked over over for a social skills defocit. Not by me but I like most here am unusual.

I know the dating scene of male and female from a bi male perspective. I am not what you could call alpha, I could never bother to act as what is known that way. I have had success with what PUAs misterm as HBs.

I am placid, I am poor. I don't pretend to be anyone else however. Believe it or not some women do go for a guy they like. Being nice as opposed to "nice" or "bad" is an advantage.

I like many people, not fake interest, real interest. PUA has it's points but it's not real psychology, it's pseudo-psychology. Overall it's rather venomous.

I admit men are easier, that is not a mystery. The last time I went into a gay club I "pulled" in under a minute.This however was not a relationship and he turned out to be a predator. These are the sort of things women have to worry about.

If you get to see things from both sides you will have a different perspective, until then please believe it when I say a woman may actually like genuine personality. If you don't believe me try living as me and you are in for a shock.

The PUA view on men is false too. Some of us have standards.

Seriously? Well I'll have to explain that to all the guys who have ditched me because of it.

Don't get sarcastic to me, just because you think so does not mean it's common. Again, I'll have to tell that to all the guys who have laughed in my face or ditched me because of it.

Women would rather share a top man than have a lesser man to themselves

Yes obviously both hard it hard. but one-night stands really? Do we need to make a poll on how many girl vs guys are in a relationship right now? The percentage of guys who have never been in a relationship, vs the percentage of girls who have never been in a relationship?

Both have it hard, but its clear who has an easier time actually finding a partner.

Any experience, even if bad is still more helpful than none at all. Just keep that in mind.

And one-night stands? Really? This may come as a shock to some girls on here but, I don't think most guys are looking for one-night stands.