What are the most common ways women waste their 20s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel men are obsessed with feeling needed, including for the purposes of reproduction, which is why they tend to be anti-LGBTQ and oppose single women having kids via donor eggs. They don’t understand that they suck so bad than women would rather be single moms, divorced or marry other women rather than partner with them. We are entering a world in which men are unnecessary.

The incel phenomenon baffles me. When did it become a thing? I'm a single mom raising two boys. How do I prevent them from becoming incels?

Socialize them in coed activities and schooling from a young age.

Off topic, but the incel thing always fascinated me because believe me, these men are NOT involuntarily celibate, they are voluntarily celibate. They insist they deserve the attention of the top ten women without bringing to the table anything top ten women are looking for. At the same time, there are tons of women "in their own league" with whom they could be most fortunately coupled. But they don't want to look at the average, they insist on top ten. I mean I could have called myself an incel if I insisted that I positively absolutely want only George Clooney and no one else on the planet would do.

Yes, of the two sexes, it’s well known that men are the ones that have ridiculously high and unrealistic dating standards.

Repeat after me: you are not entitled to a girlfriend or wife.

He didn’t claim to be entitled to anything. He’s also not the one holding out for a statistical anomaly of a man 6’0” or taller (eliminating 85% of the prospects) and affluent enough to eliminate 95% of those left standing. Women pull that crap.

[Anonymous]

Dead end job, relationships.
Waiting for the Mr Right and waiting to travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dead end job, relationships.
Waiting for the Mr Right and waiting to travel.

I didn’t travel in my 20s and spent my 20s doing whatever it took to max out my retirement accounts. I wish I lived a little more in my 20s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you believe that your mid-late 20s are the best time to meet a partner. You may disagree but let’s say for arguments sake. What are the most common mistakes women make that waste the “best” relationship-building years, and how would you advise Gen Z women to not repeat these mistakes? Or if this was you, what advice would you give your younger self?

I’ll start: I always wanted a relationship, but could not move on easily from rejection and breakup and wasted precious months moving over failed romances. I also wasted time trying to change the minds of men who just wanted casual sex. I had been exposed to too much online misogyny and believed that if I held out and proved that I was “not that kind of girl” and that I was the type you would marry, not just sleep with, instead of just ignoring the guys who had this mentality. The best advice to my 25 year old self would be to move on, and move on faster.

They waste a lot of time on social media. traveling, getting d*ckrd down by hot randos, spreadsheeting the guys they’re dating but not sleeping with to figure out which one will best meet their criteria, provide a picturesque wedding and be a good provider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel men are obsessed with feeling needed, including for the purposes of reproduction, which is why they tend to be anti-LGBTQ and oppose single women having kids via donor eggs. They don’t understand that they suck so bad than women would rather be single moms, divorced or marry other women rather than partner with them. We are entering a world in which men are unnecessary.

The incel phenomenon baffles me. When did it become a thing? I'm a single mom raising two boys. How do I prevent them from becoming incels?

Socialize them in coed activities and schooling from a young age.

Off topic, but the incel thing always fascinated me because believe me, these men are NOT involuntarily celibate, they are voluntarily celibate. They insist they deserve the attention of the top ten women without bringing to the table anything top ten women are looking for. At the same time, there are tons of women "in their own league" with whom they could be most fortunately coupled. But they don't want to look at the average, they insist on top ten. I mean I could have called myself an incel if I insisted that I positively absolutely want only George Clooney and no one else on the planet would do.

Yes, of the two sexes, it’s well known that men are the ones that have ridiculously high and unrealistic dating standards.

Repeat after me: you are not entitled to a girlfriend or wife.

He didn’t claim to be entitled to anything. He’s also not the one holding out for a statistical anomaly of a man 6’0” or taller (eliminating 85% of the prospects) and affluent enough to eliminate 95% of those left standing. Women pull that crap.

Good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:not sure how providing love and the best environment possible will help boys if they are rejected by girls for their looks or their inherent personality.

There is a dynamic where boys are attracted to appearance, and are nervous to talk to pretty girls. They do not understand that most girls want a cool guy, not necessarily a handsome one. And let's be honest, when women are attracted to "personality", this often means emotionally exciting bad boys. The nerdy, aspy boys believe the Hollywood trope that you must "be yourself", and that love is based on merit. These boys are shy and socially awkward. It is worse if they socialize exclusively with men (military, math/science/technology, precocious). Then they become desperate and repulsive to women. When you understand women, then you don't confuse their sexual preferences with your personal value, and don't take rejection personally.

BTW, women make the opposite mistake. When they want a successful man, they brag about their own accomplishments and careers. They misunderstand what men want.

[Anonymous]

Men want feminine, younger, debt free, and warm/welcoming/supportive women.

If you have these in your 20's, use it to your advantage to find a good man and keep him for life.

Because it's not gonna get easier if you wait until your 30's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men want impressionable women who are easy to manipulate.

If you have these in your 20's, use it to your advantage to find a good man and keep him for life.

Because it's not gonna get easier if you wait until your 30's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most women dated in HS and college. Do they really need to keep dating different men for 3-4-5-6-7 more years after college? If they’ve been focused on finding good partners at every stage of dating, how likely is it that none of these guys was Mr. Right-enough? Are there really that many women who are setting impossible standards? Assuming that they envision at some point settling down and raising a family, why does this project take so damn long for so many of them? I think there’s something in our culture/nurturing of girls that throws a wrench in the works, but not sure what that is. Perhaps it’s how emphatic and powerful the highly contradictory messages are (such as in this thread) — they just cause a kind of purgatory of undecidedness.

It’s moreso that men suck.

NP here and I hear this sentiment from other women a good deal. I truly don't understand it -- if men are so horrible and constantly derided, why be with them at all? Why not find a woman to spend your life with or be celibate? There are awful dudes out there, and awful women, but it doesn't mean you have to be in a relationship with any of them.

A lot of women make this choice once the societal pressure to marry is gone. I know many contented single women in their 40s and beyond.

Content, or philosophically resigned tontheir fate, or putting on a brave face?

Do you actually think a woman cannot be haply without a man? I mean seriously, wtf. But yes, gasp, content.

Women seem unhinged when alone. Men less so. Both suffer from loneliness, to what extent is sensitive to their sex.

It reminds me of Houellebecq’s Elementary Particles, a book about the tragic lives of men and women who grew old in the post-sexual revolution world. On aging alone:
"The whole spiritual thing makes the pickup lines less brutal. Men who grow old have it easier than older women. They drink cheap booze and fall asleep, their breath stinks, then they wake up and start all over again; they tend to die young. Women take tranquilizers, go to yoga classes, see a shrink; they live a lot longer and suffer more. They try to trade on their looks, even when they know their bodies are sad and ugly. They get hurt but they do it anyway, because they can't give up the need to be loved.”

Oh yes, known friend to women, Houellebecq.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel men are obsessed with feeling needed, including for the purposes of reproduction, which is why they tend to be anti-LGBTQ and oppose single women having kids via donor eggs. They don’t understand that they suck so bad than women would rather be single moms, divorced or marry other women rather than partner with them. We are entering a world in which men are unnecessary.

The incel phenomenon baffles me. When did it become a thing? I'm a single mom raising two boys. How do I prevent them from becoming incels?

Michel Houellebecq perfectly explained how modern society disenfranchises some young men. Just like any free market, a liberalized sexual marketplace has winners and losers.

[…] in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization. Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as `the law of the market'. In an economic system where unfair dismissal is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their place. In a sexual system where adultery is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their bed mate. In a totally liberal sexual system certain people have a varied and exciting erotic life; others are reduced to masturbation and solitude. Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. […] Certain people win on both levels; others lose on both.

https://incels.wiki/w/Michel_Houellebecq

The solution is to love and accept your sons. Some boys are taught that they are only have value for their ability to make money and satisfy others.

As a boy, I fought with my sister for the affection of our puppy. I felt that an innocent puppy was an impartial judge of character. Yes, the same puppy that sniffed butts and rolled in poop. In the same way, some boys are taught that women are pure, and the clitoris is a judge of your worthiness. Boys need to be raised with self-esteem.

Guess what does not get you laid … quoting Houellebecq. *shudder*

[Anonymous]

How did the DC Urban Mom forum turn into an incel hangout?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most women dated in HS and college. Do they really need to keep dating different men for 3-4-5-6-7 more years after college? If they’ve been focused on finding good partners at every stage of dating, how likely is it that none of these guys was Mr. Right-enough? Are there really that many women who are setting impossible standards? Assuming that they envision at some point settling down and raising a family, why does this project take so damn long for so many of them? I think there’s something in our culture/nurturing of girls that throws a wrench in the works, but not sure what that is. Perhaps it’s how emphatic and powerful the highly contradictory messages are (such as in this thread) — they just cause a kind of purgatory of undecidedness.

It’s moreso that men suck.

NP here and I hear this sentiment from other women a good deal. I truly don't understand it -- if men are so horrible and constantly derided, why be with them at all? Why not find a woman to spend your life with or be celibate? There are awful dudes out there, and awful women, but it doesn't mean you have to be in a relationship with any of them.

A lot of women make this choice once the societal pressure to marry is gone. I know many contented single women in their 40s and beyond.

Content, or philosophically resigned tontheir fate, or putting on a brave face?

Do you actually think a woman cannot be haply without a man? I mean seriously, wtf. But yes, gasp, content.

Women seem unhinged when alone. Men less so. Both suffer from loneliness, to what extent is sensitive to their sex.

It reminds me of Houellebecq’s Elementary Particles, a book about the tragic lives of men and women who grew old in the post-sexual revolution world. On aging alone:
"The whole spiritual thing makes the pickup lines less brutal. Men who grow old have it easier than older women. They drink cheap booze and fall asleep, their breath stinks, then they wake up and start all over again; they tend to die young. Women take tranquilizers, go to yoga classes, see a shrink; they live a lot longer and suffer more. They try to trade on their looks, even when they know their bodies are sad and ugly. They get hurt but they do it anyway, because they can't give up the need to be loved.”

Oh yes, known friend to women, Houellebecq.

He did finally get married a year or two ago. She looks lovely and they appear to be quite happy, despite him aging like a wrung out dish towel. And to be fair, the male protagonists of his novels are even worse off than the women so I think it’s quite even to the despair on both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How did the DC Urban Mom forum turn into an incel hangout?

Oh, we’ve had a few resident incels for quite a while. Unfortunately rank misogyny is tolerated here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most women dated in HS and college. Do they really need to keep dating different men for 3-4-5-6-7 more years after college? If they’ve been focused on finding good partners at every stage of dating, how likely is it that none of these guys was Mr. Right-enough? Are there really that many women who are setting impossible standards? Assuming that they envision at some point settling down and raising a family, why does this project take so damn long for so many of them? I think there’s something in our culture/nurturing of girls that throws a wrench in the works, but not sure what that is. Perhaps it’s how emphatic and powerful the highly contradictory messages are (such as in this thread) — they just cause a kind of purgatory of undecidedness.

It’s moreso that men suck.

NP here and I hear this sentiment from other women a good deal. I truly don't understand it -- if men are so horrible and constantly derided, why be with them at all? Why not find a woman to spend your life with or be celibate? There are awful dudes out there, and awful women, but it doesn't mean you have to be in a relationship with any of them.

A lot of women make this choice once the societal pressure to marry is gone. I know many contented single women in their 40s and beyond.

Content, or philosophically resigned tontheir fate, or putting on a brave face?

Do you actually think a woman cannot be haply without a man? I mean seriously, wtf. But yes, gasp, content.

Women seem unhinged when alone. Men less so. Both suffer from loneliness, to what extent is sensitive to their sex.

It reminds me of Houellebecq’s Elementary Particles, a book about the tragic lives of men and women who grew old in the post-sexual revolution world. On aging alone:
"The whole spiritual thing makes the pickup lines less brutal. Men who grow old have it easier than older women. They drink cheap booze and fall asleep, their breath stinks, then they wake up and start all over again; they tend to die young. Women take tranquilizers, go to yoga classes, see a shrink; they live a lot longer and suffer more. They try to trade on their looks, even when they know their bodies are sad and ugly. They get hurt but they do it anyway, because they can't give up the need to be loved.”

Oh yes, known friend to women, Houellebecq.

He did finally get married a year or two ago. She looks lovely and they appear to be quite happy, despite him aging like a wrung out dish towel. And to be fair, the male protagonists of his novels are even worse off than the women so I think it’s quite even to the despair on both sides.

His books are disgusting and shouldn’t be taken as some kind of roadmap to personal happiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most women dated in HS and college. Do they really need to keep dating different men for 3-4-5-6-7 more years after college? If they’ve been focused on finding good partners at every stage of dating, how likely is it that none of these guys was Mr. Right-enough? Are there really that many women who are setting impossible standards? Assuming that they envision at some point settling down and raising a family, why does this project take so damn long for so many of them? I think there’s something in our culture/nurturing of girls that throws a wrench in the works, but not sure what that is. Perhaps it’s how emphatic and powerful the highly contradictory messages are (such as in this thread) — they just cause a kind of purgatory of undecidedness.

It’s moreso that men suck.

NP here and I hear this sentiment from other women a good deal. I truly don't understand it -- if men are so horrible and constantly derided, why be with them at all? Why not find a woman to spend your life with or be celibate? There are awful dudes out there, and awful women, but it doesn't mean you have to be in a relationship with any of them.

A lot of women make this choice once the societal pressure to marry is gone. I know many contented single women in their 40s and beyond.

Content, or philosophically resigned tontheir fate, or putting on a brave face?

Do you actually think a woman cannot be haply without a man? I mean seriously, wtf. But yes, gasp, content.

Women seem unhinged when alone. Men less so. Both suffer from loneliness, to what extent is sensitive to their sex.

It reminds me of Houellebecq’s Elementary Particles, a book about the tragic lives of men and women who grew old in the post-sexual revolution world. On aging alone:
"The whole spiritual thing makes the pickup lines less brutal. Men who grow old have it easier than older women. They drink cheap booze and fall asleep, their breath stinks, then they wake up and start all over again; they tend to die young. Women take tranquilizers, go to yoga classes, see a shrink; they live a lot longer and suffer more. They try to trade on their looks, even when they know their bodies are sad and ugly. They get hurt but they do it anyway, because they can't give up the need to be loved.”

Oh yes, known friend to women, Houellebecq.

He did finally get married a year or two ago. She looks lovely and they appear to be quite happy, despite him aging like a wrung out dish towel. And to be fair, the male protagonists of his novels are even worse off than the women so I think it’s quite even to the despair on both sides.

His books are disgusting and shouldn’t be taken as some kind of roadmap to personal happiness.

Nobody reads his books that way nor is that ever the takeaway from the stories. Like, that’s the whole point. And I didn’t quote the book out of admiration of him as a person, rather that it was art that is pretty true to life.