Are women's standards higher now or is it just a myth?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


It’s very unusual a man is asked to “excel” in two spheres. What many men seem disincentivized to do is to do the work of a below-average woman on the domestic front, while he may (or may not) excel professionally. The statistics are pretty clear that low-earning men don’t do more housework than their high-earning peers.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:LOL these guys think that the 1950s were some halcyon era where all men had their pick of supermodels that would cook them dinner and clean their house and sleep with them every night.

What they forget is that men in the 1950s had been to war, could fix anything around the house, and could support a family of 5 on their salary so mom could stay home.

The standards are the same, men just don’t meet them anymore. They have zero accomplishments other than beating some dumb video game.


And don’t forget in order to marry those supermodel sex dolls, they had to explain to **another man** what their plans for her financial upkeep in “the manner to which she is accustomed” was. I think a lot of todays young men would wilt at the question.


+100
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:LOL these guys think that the 1950s were some halcyon era where all men had their pick of supermodels that would cook them dinner and clean their house and sleep with them every night.

What they forget is that men in the 1950s had been to war, could fix anything around the house, and could support a family of 5 on their salary so mom could stay home.

The standards are the same, men just don’t meet them anymore. They have zero accomplishments other than beating some dumb video game.


And don’t forget in order to marry those supermodel sex dolls, they had to explain to **another man** what their plans for her financial upkeep in “the manner to which she is accustomed” was. I think a lot of todays young men would wilt at the question.


Exactly. When my grandfather married my grandmother, he had to court her, take her out with a chaperone, no sex at all, meet with her dad, get her dads approval to court her, get her dads approval to marry her, prove he could provide a future, and if he failed to be a good husband the other men in town gave him hell, as in would take bad husbands out behind a shed and beat his @$$.

These dudes crying on TikTok that girls don’t like their flowers and friend zone them wouldn’t let a week 100 years ago.


Are you going to tell women to wait until marriage? If not you're being hypocritical. Sex is the lynchpin. Historically, boys became men largely so that they could get sex on the regular. There's no reason the women's lib movt and sex revolution had to go hand in hand.
Anonymous
Women are always the scapegoats for what men don't want to do any introspection about.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Women are always the scapegoats for what men don't want to do any introspection about.


+1
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.


+1

This is the equivalent argument of “I just don’t know HOW to load the dishwasher…”
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:LOL these guys think that the 1950s were some halcyon era where all men had their pick of supermodels that would cook them dinner and clean their house and sleep with them every night.

What they forget is that men in the 1950s had been to war, could fix anything around the house, and could support a family of 5 on their salary so mom could stay home.

The standards are the same, men just don’t meet them anymore. They have zero accomplishments other than beating some dumb video game.


And don’t forget in order to marry those supermodel sex dolls, they had to explain to **another man** what their plans for her financial upkeep in “the manner to which she is accustomed” was. I think a lot of todays young men would wilt at the question.


Exactly. When my grandfather married my grandmother, he had to court her, take her out with a chaperone, no sex at all, meet with her dad, get her dads approval to court her, get her dads approval to marry her, prove he could provide a future, and if he failed to be a good husband the other men in town gave him hell, as in would take bad husbands out behind a shed and beat his @$$.

These dudes crying on TikTok that girls don’t like their flowers and friend zone them wouldn’t let a week 100 years ago.


Are you going to tell women to wait until marriage? If not you're being hypocritical. Sex is the lynchpin. Historically, boys became men largely so that they could get sex on the regular. There's no reason the women's lib movt and sex revolution had to go hand in hand.


WTF are you talking about. Boys today aren’t becoming men to get sex. It’s literally the easiest time in history to get laid, and instead of becoming men, they drink their Mountain Dew and play their video games and complain that men in the past had it easier.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.


I think this is pretty insulting to every woman who lived before 1960. What do you think the avg woman's life was like before reliable birth control and a washing machine. Yes, I think women, on average, have always been better at multitasking then men, on avg.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:LOL these guys think that the 1950s were some halcyon era where all men had their pick of supermodels that would cook them dinner and clean their house and sleep with them every night.

What they forget is that men in the 1950s had been to war, could fix anything around the house, and could support a family of 5 on their salary so mom could stay home.

The standards are the same, men just don’t meet them anymore. They have zero accomplishments other than beating some dumb video game.


And don’t forget in order to marry those supermodel sex dolls, they had to explain to **another man** what their plans for her financial upkeep in “the manner to which she is accustomed” was. I think a lot of todays young men would wilt at the question.


Exactly. When my grandfather married my grandmother, he had to court her, take her out with a chaperone, no sex at all, meet with her dad, get her dads approval to court her, get her dads approval to marry her, prove he could provide a future, and if he failed to be a good husband the other men in town gave him hell, as in would take bad husbands out behind a shed and beat his @$$.

These dudes crying on TikTok that girls don’t like their flowers and friend zone them wouldn’t let a week 100 years ago.


Are you going to tell women to wait until marriage? If not you're being hypocritical. Sex is the lynchpin. Historically, boys became men largely so that they could get sex on the regular. There's no reason the women's lib movt and sex revolution had to go hand in hand.


WTF are you talking about. Boys today aren’t becoming men to get sex. It’s literally the easiest time in history to get laid, and instead of becoming men, they drink their Mountain Dew and play their video games and complain that men in the past had it easier.


Um that's my point. If you can get sex without becoming a man, why become a man?
Anonymous
Matchmakers (women) are quitting because single women have become completely unreasonable with their wish lists and high standards. The men are dating younger or are dating foreign women.

So, yes.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:LOL these guys think that the 1950s were some halcyon era where all men had their pick of supermodels that would cook them dinner and clean their house and sleep with them every night.

What they forget is that men in the 1950s had been to war, could fix anything around the house, and could support a family of 5 on their salary so mom could stay home.

The standards are the same, men just don’t meet them anymore. They have zero accomplishments other than beating some dumb video game.


And don’t forget in order to marry those supermodel sex dolls, they had to explain to **another man** what their plans for her financial upkeep in “the manner to which she is accustomed” was. I think a lot of todays young men would wilt at the question.


Exactly. When my grandfather married my grandmother, he had to court her, take her out with a chaperone, no sex at all, meet with her dad, get her dads approval to court her, get her dads approval to marry her, prove he could provide a future, and if he failed to be a good husband the other men in town gave him hell, as in would take bad husbands out behind a shed and beat his @$$.

These dudes crying on TikTok that girls don’t like their flowers and friend zone them wouldn’t let a week 100 years ago.


Are you going to tell women to wait until marriage? If not you're being hypocritical. Sex is the lynchpin. Historically, boys became men largely so that they could get sex on the regular. There's no reason the women's lib movt and sex revolution had to go hand in hand.


WTF are you talking about. Boys today aren’t becoming men to get sex. It’s literally the easiest time in history to get laid, and instead of becoming men, they drink their Mountain Dew and play their video games and complain that men in the past had it easier.


Um that's my point. If you can get sex without becoming a man, why become a man?


They aren’t getting sex. That’s literally the whole point of this thread, that guys are complaining women’s standards are too high and they’re not getting sex or companionship.

Women don’t have to withhold sex. They withhold relationships, which is what most guys want. Women get to sleep with the small percentage of men who are actually hot, make their own money, and can have a baby on their own. So the standard for relationships is higher.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.


I think this is pretty insulting to every woman who lived before 1960. What do you think the avg woman's life was like before reliable birth control and a washing machine. Yes, I think women, on average, have always been better at multitasking then men, on avg.


There’s “multitasking” and then there is literally fighting their way into careers that were closed to women as recently as mothers and grandmothers day, and somehow that is the less challenging task than learning to fold laundry? I think you’re doing a disservice to every woman who became a pilot, a diplomat, a judge, a surgeon in the last 40 years…
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.


I think this is pretty insulting to every woman who lived before 1960. What do you think the avg woman's life was like before reliable birth control and a washing machine. Yes, I think women, on average, have always been better at multitasking then men, on avg.


There’s “multitasking” and then there is literally fighting their way into careers that were closed to women as recently as mothers and grandmothers day, and somehow that is the less challenging task than learning to fold laundry? I think you’re doing a disservice to every woman who became a pilot, a diplomat, a judge, a surgeon in the last 40 years…


The average woman today will never become a pilot, a diplomat, a judge or a surgeon. But now it's also a hell of a lot harder for her to become a mother and wife.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Maybe having to excel in two spheres (work and home) is easier for women, on avg, and harder for men, on avg. Combine that with the fact that women, on average, don't withhold sex until marriage, you're going to see an increasing number of males not striving to be the best version of themselves.

If the past 50 years can be considered a success for women, someone else is going to be less successful. Social and political revolutions always have knock on effects.

Financial independence is nothing to sneer at, but there are always going to be trade offs and making men less essential could very well mean that their incentives to fulfill our ideals as husband's as father's have been cratered.


Hold on. So women, who only recently got the right to work and to exist independently outside of a man, picked up the skill of multi-tasking through osmosis while men's ability to cope and do the same fell in the gutter? And their increased ability to function took away mens' ability to function due to a limited supply? Sure Jan.


I think this is pretty insulting to every woman who lived before 1960. What do you think the avg woman's life was like before reliable birth control and a washing machine. Yes, I think women, on average, have always been better at multitasking then men, on avg.


There’s “multitasking” and then there is literally fighting their way into careers that were closed to women as recently as mothers and grandmothers day, and somehow that is the less challenging task than learning to fold laundry? I think you’re doing a disservice to every woman who became a pilot, a diplomat, a judge, a surgeon in the last 40 years…


The average woman today will never become a pilot, a diplomat, a judge or a surgeon. But now it's also a hell of a lot harder for her to become a mother and wife.


What a bleak view of both sexes. Women can't become pilots (something they have done since at least WWI) and men are so mentally incapacitated that they can't walk and chew gum at the same time because of those dang women.
post reply Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)
Message Quick Reply
Go to: