Are women's standards really this high?

Post Reply New Topic

LOL I love this line. I think most women online have been to more countries than I own SNES games and I must have 40 of them.


It's especially crazy when you consider that real estate and air travel are insanely expensive here in Canada and my city has a flood of un/underemployed University graduates. I drove to Quebec City a couple of years back and got the 'new culture' experience for a lot less and didn't even need a passport. What a concept!



I really wonder if every adult female is spoiled by their parents: it's the only logical explanation I can come up with. Either way I wanted to have a child and I don't know how you can start a family with someone who is that obsessed with travel. I am very lucky that my wife has a large amount of wealth saved for us to actually buy a house and afford a child comfortably, plus she is not going to get that itch to get up and go with an infant!

The article was kind of cringeworthy tbh. She over exaggerates. I bet half of her relationships weren't even that bad.
She reminds me of those Buzzfeed people who act like something is waaay worse than it actually is.

But no, womens standards are no where near that high unless they're fussy like this woman clearly is. She was right on a few of the types of men you'll bump into as a woman, like as an example the man baby/mamas boy she was sort of accurate with but like exaggerated a little. Sometimes that isn't even a bad thing depending on the circumstances, but ofc if their mother is interfering in every aspect then it's a bit weird. She gives no detailed context in how they were bad to her because half of these guys could be on different levels of the groups she's put them into.

I think she was too brief in some of the points she made. If she'd have gone into proper detail of the men she had to deal with then it would make a lot more sense I think because she is generalizing a lot and teaching other women to do the same which is pretty horrible really.

I found the "you can't call us 'females'" line to be pretty stupid as well. Did I miss the point when that became a derogatory term?

Online magazines (and offline) are built to fuel drama and gossip. I wouldn't recommend listening to either.

I think this discussion came up the other day, I myself use female and woman interchangeably sometimes so I don't really see the issue with that.

I am not sure what her experience was wit those type of guys but I have noticed that people will make ridiculous standards when they have had a bad experience with someone who had that characteristic. Like someone didn't want to date anyone who is a musician because her ex was one and he would keep her up at night with his music and do it all the time and it would give her a headache and he would go "if you accept me and really care about my hobby, you will let me do it." I told her that was just an as*hole and nothing to do with being a musician and even other musicians chimed in trying to reassure her not all of them are that way and they rent a spot to practice their hobby so they are not disturbing anyone. I have seen people say how they will never date a gamer just because someone they were with only wanted to play games and ignored them and never did anything else so other people were telling her that was just a gaming addict.

Mine was I didn't want to date anyone who is always playing on their computer and doesn't have a job and doesn't drive because of my bad experience with one of my ex's but then I met my husband and changed my mind.

^ Exactly like you when you said you wouldn't date a guy with low-self esteem because your ex with low-self esteem was abusive.

I feel the same about rich guys because of a bad experience

^ We all have something like that. I don't want to date anyone with mental illness because of bad experiences.

Boo, I never knew you even wore high heels.

I don't have any bad experiences.

well some few females have low standards but its like 00000.1 %.

its the new generation females that are like this, the older generation females did not have so big standards.

if some of us lonely guys lived in 1950 we would have a wife and 2 kids.

Men don't just want sex/pleasure though, they want love to. It's just, admittedly, men approach it in a far more efficient way.

The.male.method is essentially: see woman we are attracted to (doesn't have to.be model looking or anything), approach her, get a date, and get to know her on said dates. Ask if she wants to be in a relationship. Use online dating to increase chances, be on the lookout for compatible female acquaintances.

Women do the male method too but it appears more rare to me. The female method appears to be: Wait until man your interested in asks you out, either by giving him signs you're interested, or not due to shyness and just passively being there. Perhaps ask.him out yourself (much rarer) or just get on with your life and be friends with both men and women until either you hit it off with a friend of friend or after 2-8 years+ possibly but not guaranteed develop feelings for your best.male friens, who has probably had feelings for you since mere months inp the friendship as in my experience when a man and woman are just friends most of the.time the male WILL developed feelings or be open to a relationship or aex if she we're to simply ask while when a woman sees a man as just as friend, she really sees him as just a friend. There is zero attraction on her part whatsoever, never was and likely never will be. Use online dating to increase chances.

Some men appear active in dating, ad some.women reactive.

Some Men cant just get on with their lives as many of us see love as a big part of it, it IS living our lives to just live our life while simultaneously seeking love

Some women just get on with their loves as they appear happy to be single.

Some men want to find love, some women want to wait for love to find them.

And guess which one makes.me think who in general appears places far.more value into relationships and gives the illusion of wanting love far more at least in the short term?

I completely agree with absolutely everything else you say, word for word.

How's the wrist doing?

things that are certain: worry of the current day being the last before earth is consumed in nuclear fire, education and living standards behind today's, possible social safety net not comparable to that seen today, lack of creature comforts taken for granted, risk of polio, risk of smallpox

things that are not certain: any one of today's modern loners having a wife and two kids


be careful of which you desire.

True.

And if some of us aspies lived in the 1950s, we'd be far worse off.

First of all we'd have no diagnosis or treatment and second of all the 1950s culture was ultra-macho. I don't think some of us nerdy guys could thrive in that.

Maybe I've got better odds in 2016 where I can be a respected IT worker instead of in 1950 where I'd probably be unemployed.

The 1950s was a dark time for nerds. Without computers I'd have nothing to do. Some of us with social anxiety would feel very cut off from the world without the internet.

Back then it was socially acceptable for tough guys to bully nerds. Guess who the girls liked? Not the nerds. They liked the tough guys. Nowadays girls have more respect for computer nerds with stable employment.