What’s Wrong with Wanting to be Loved?

by W.F. Price on April 10, 2012

One of the most common epithets hurled at men by feminists, and probably the most genuinely hurtful, is that men are upset at women because they are bitter about being unloved. The reason this one hurts more than the typical “small penis” or “mother’s basement” insult is because it is so often accurate to some extent. The best insults always hit a weak spot. It’s true that many men are very bitter about loss of love, betrayal or lack of attention from women. This is why some pick up artists have such commercial success with their ventures, and why men flock to gurus who say they hold the secrets to a woman’s heart.

Actually, if these cruel women only knew, it goes a lot farther than mere heartbreak. The abandonment of men in contemporary society is so comprehensive that a man who has lost a wife or lover not only suffers from the loss of that deep personal connection, but from a fairly comprehensive rejection by society in general. First you lose your wife, then your kids, and then even your own family turns against you in many cases (this is a lot more common than most people realize — American men’s own mothers very often blame them and side with the ex in what is usually a futile effort to maintain contact with the grandchildren). The thrashing you get from the police and courts is just gratuitous abuse; in many cases guys are simply numb to additional pain by that time.

So, yes, these are bitter, unloved men. They are hated and they know it, although many have no clear idea why. They think to themselves “I’m not a criminal… I never hurt anyone… How could this happen to me?” Some can’t handle it. There are many suicides that simply don’t make the news. In a small minority of cases, they snap, and then there’s the “domestic disturbance” situation that has become so routine these days in which a police gunman puts the man out of his misery, as though he were a rabid dog. However, in most cases the men simply accept their doleful fate and live their miserable lives.

I was one of those miserable, unloved men for some time. But not entirely. Circumstance gave me a considerable amount of time with my kids when my ex decided to make her move. She left just as she obtained a good job thanks to my promise to work part-time and take care of the children while she trained for it, and she didn’t want to pay for daycare, so she proposed and received a parenting plan that had me caring for them much of the time she was working. Although being abandoned without any warning was devastating, my children never abandoned me, and despite the horror of separation I had them almost half time. All it took to snap me out of the most morbid thoughts was the sound of my kids’ voice, or the thought of them growing up and wondering why daddy did such a selfish thing as to leave them.

But if it weren’t for that time with my kids, I would have been totally, utterly alone. When I didn’t have them I had no desire for human contact. I really felt that the only people in the entire world who cared about me at all were my little children, aged one and three at the time. I suppose I digress a little here, but I can’t help feel that they were little angels, even if I did have to change their diapers and wipe food off their faces after every meal.

For men who don’t even have that, it’s almost unimaginable. It’s such a shockingly horrible experience that I wouldn’t wish it on anyone, yet here we have feminists taunting men for feeling unloved. And still we have people whining about “misogyny.” Young feminists whose most important concern is the ability to have sex entirely free of consequences, and who shamelessly raise their voices for the right to kill their children in the womb. Lesbian gender feminists who wreck families for profit and sex. Male feminists who boast about fathering children and shuffling their responsibilities onto some duped cuckold, and who malign their fellow men for a crack at college girls.

All that said, men have every right to be angry, and righteously so. But deep down, I think what most of them want is far simpler and more benign than revenge or some political payback. They want some love, some security and the opportunity to be a part of a family. They want to grow old with a woman who is true to them, and to see their children grow tall and strong. It doesn’t always come out that way, and there are those who have rejected the idea entirely, but it’s an ideal that I think most men would agree is worth some effort, if not for themselves then for a better society in general.

So, I’d like to say to the feminists out there that yes, there are men who are bitter and sad about being unloved. Yes, it is often why they malign women, and it isn’t always a pretty thing. But if you really take pleasure in people’s loneliness and despair, you’ve got a cold, dead heart, and no reason to be proud of yourself. Instead of waxing triumphant about unfortunate men’s loneliness and misery, why not work for a world in which everyone can feel loved? Are you woman enough to do that?

{ 110 comments… read them below or add one }

revver April 10, 2012 at 00:34

Having seen and heard a great majority of women, being “unloved” becomes lighter and lighter a burden with each passing year.

How easily they make themselves look like fools.
Classical Freudian projection: “I’m not unnloved, you’re the one that’s unloved”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 73 Thumb down 4
piercedhead April 10, 2012 at 00:38

“The abandonment of men in contemporary society is so comprehensive that a man who has lost a wife or lover not only suffers from the loss of that deep personal connection, but from a fairly comprehensive rejection by society in general. First you lose your wife, then your kids, and then even your own family turns against you in many cases (this is a lot more common than most people realize — American men’s own mothers very often blame them and side with the ex in what is usually a futile effort to maintain contact with the grandchildren). The thrashing you get from the police and courts is just gratuitous abuse; in many cases guys are simply numb to additional pain by that time.”

I would argue that the sudden and total collapsing of love, as it is presented to men, is evidence of its illusion.

Children are raised on it, women can expect it their whole lives in a watered down sense, but men lose all right to it as they come of age. Unfortunately, in the West, no-one ever tells them that this is their heritage as men. They have to learn it the hard way, or go mad refusing to learn it at all.

Other cultures, particularly those closer to nature, had rites of passage for young men. The rite usually involved sending the stripling out in the wild, on his own. He would be exposed to danger, expected to survive on his own, and could expect no assistance. It was a symbolic, and real, exercise to let him know that he was no longer the dependent he once was. Young women were never subjected to the same. They belonged to the community, no matter their age, their fertility or their ability.

It is a feature of all men who go wild at women and take it out on innocents, as well as their former intimates, that they are still sold on the love illusion – they are men that fervently believe they deserve a place in the bosom of society. The trick is maintained for its utility in deceiving men into social contracts that are counter to their own interests.

It’s the same the world over. Every deal won by trickery has a higher harvest of woe than that done with all cards on the table and intentions plainly stated.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 96 Thumb down 5
Patrick Brown April 10, 2012 at 01:09

Beautiful piece. Thank you.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 2
AfOR April 10, 2012 at 01:34

I’m not bitter and sad, I was, then I learned the lesson the wimminz were going to such great lengths to teach me, and I learned it WELL.

Seems that contrary to expectations, I was not actually supposed to learn this lesson, I was supposed to take it and come back for more… oh well..

OT but relevant and important, the wimminz teachers agitating about false accusations against them, this time the shockingly low conviction rate of 3% is proof that the allegations are false, and you guessed it, the wimminz want the surrogate husband the state and po-lice to kick these kids asses.

http://wimminz.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/bitches-do-not-want-equality/

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 7
AmStrat April 10, 2012 at 01:42

Very very deep, there PiercedHead. I remember reading another’s account that, for 99% of the cases a woman’s “love” is fake and she is just accomodating him to get what she wants.

Some have said that this is so because she truly IS in love with him before the great “falling out” of “I’m not haaaaaaaappy”, but if this is so, and her “love” is so fickle, it never really was love as Men understand it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 6
Raj April 10, 2012 at 02:13

For women, love is like electricity. It doesn’t mean anything if its not put to some use. When women talk about finding love. They mean “you” loving them and how it benefits them.

Society teaches them this lie because its good for business when in fact true love is unconditional.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 81 Thumb down 4
ecnayonnA April 10, 2012 at 02:16

wonderful article.

i cant even describe how happy i was for the woman i thought i loved told me she actually appreciated me. this all of course was 2 days before she effectively announced on facebook she was in a relationship with some one else. apparently a guy in middle management with more money was way better then me. the whole thing was the last straw for me. the lessons had finally been learned.
i work on my own happiness now.

due to not having kids i cannot fully comprehend how a person like you would feel Price. but the ray of sunshine of having someone appreciating your efforts on their behalf is a powerful feeling.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 0
AfOR April 10, 2012 at 03:05

Foreigner sang “I wanna know what love is” many years ago… I didn’t really know then and I don’t know now.

I can apply the word to many things, but is any of these applications correct… do I really love my motorcycle, or freedom, or a pint of brown ale, or teen cunt?

I will observe that a dog will lie down next to its dead owner and starve, while a cat will dine on its erstwhile owner before the flesh is cool, and draw obvious parallels between men and dogs and wimminz and cats

love is a poor servant of a word, it has been used by too many masters for too many purposes, it has now lost all meaning, if it ever had any.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 54 Thumb down 11
DCM April 10, 2012 at 03:25

“….Young feminists whose most important concern is the ability to have sex entirely free of consequences, …..”

That’s why men should have the same sex standard as females. Fuck ‘em and chuck ‘em.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 54 Thumb down 5
Opus April 10, 2012 at 04:09

Women judge men by pre-selection.

If you have been dumped, then a member of Team Vagina has deemed you unworthy, so as in Snakes and Ladders you start from the bottom again. There is simply no point seeking female solace, because the woman will see that you do not seek her, and thus, offended, accuse you of unsolicited attention, or alternatively act offended that you are not interested in her. (I speak from experience).

Men, however, not only do not want to know, but will blame you for your ex’s freely chosen decision. (More experience). This must be something to do with our evolutionary wiring, where for a woman to dump a man, could only mean that the man had been usurped by a bigger guy (now the State) or else the man was so awful that being alone on the Savana was preferrable for her and her children (highly unlikely).

Women as we know are programmed to get over even the worst relationship in no more than three months, whereas for a man (even when in hindsight it was Xmas come early) we are often talking decades, for to be ditched is to take away all that it means to be a man (provider, nurturer). Blame God or Darwin as you choose; there is nothing to be done for it, although it helps for people to be aware of these things rather than walk aimlessly in the dark. Now, why am I betting that Futrelle did not mention these things last night – and why am I also betting he has not got one single phone number from any female at Northwestern Univeristy?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 6
Apollo April 10, 2012 at 04:27

Love. Nice, sure. I understand why you want it. But unfortunately, I think it’s an indulgence men cannot afford.

“So, I’d like to say to the feminists out there that yes, there are men who are bitter and sad about being unloved. Yes, it is often why they malign women, and it isn’t always a pretty thing. But if you really take pleasure in people’s loneliness and despair, you’ve got a cold, dead heart, and no reason to be proud of yourself. Instead of waxing triumphant about unfortunate men’s loneliness and misery, why not work for a world in which everyone can feel loved? Are you woman enough to do that?”

Unfortunately, I don’t think appealing to feminists sense of empathy and compassion is going to get you anywhere. Mostly because, at least where men are concerned, they have no empathy or compassion.

I feel pretty sure you can expect some “cry me a river” style responses to this from feminists, probably justifying their hate using references to teh evil Patriarchy. You know, women’s centuries long oppression at the hands of those men, who now deserve whatever happens to them.

As I said, expecting “love” or any such affirming emotional comfort in today’s society, is just a luxury men cannot afford. You’re just setting yourself up for disappointment.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 3
Rod April 10, 2012 at 05:30

I read once in a book whose title and author escape my memory right now that when a man says to a woman “I love you,” he is in effect saying “I submit to you,” while when a woman says to a man “I love you,” she is in effect saying “I control you.” That hit home to me as true at the time I read it, though I’ve forgotten nearly everything else in that book (including its title and author). People talk about women giving or withholding sex in order to control a relationship, but it isn’t just sex; it’s also the emotional dimension behind the sex. I’m convinced that, in most cases, women hold far more relationship power than men do, which really gives the lie to the old feminist canard that “men have all the power.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 3
Davd April 10, 2012 at 06:09

There are four words for love in Greek, the original language of the “New Testament,” and eros is the one that has the sexual “loading”. Philios is the brotherly love (in which a good sister can also partake, and other kin.) Charis is the basis for our word “charity”; and agape is selfless love which many people, so i have heard in sermons and read in books, never achieve.

Parenthood typically combines charis and philios; and those are the forms of love that hold families and buddy groups together. It’s not “love” we need, it’s philios, and some incoming charis when we’ve hit a string of bad luck, and some outgoing charis to be fully good-men* and worthy friends. Eros, when we are young, we want once our basic needs for food and safety are met; but it’s no necessity. Confusing it with philios and charis, which people do need, is the cause of much mischief.

When i read comments extolling the merits of the “nuclear family”, i usually disagree–because a nuclear family is too easily-and-often destroyed by divorce [and 100+ years ago, was often destroyed by death]. A larger group, traditionally an extended family, has more resilience, more bonds to support those left when one person leaves. Its main strength comes from philios and charis, and eros is as the fancy jelly in a peanut butter sandwich. If the jelly runs out, the sandwich still nourishes; if the eros runs out, the philios and charis still sustain.

The love we need, the most valuable love we can give, we can do just as well with our pants on, our mouths closed in a gentle smile, and our hands in full view.

* http://www.everyman.ca/2012/02/05/a-good-man/ contains more about men’s goodness, from a better perspective than that of female solipsism.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 2
greyghost April 10, 2012 at 06:12

Men actually have the capacity to love. Only a man can write an article like that. Women just don’t have the capacity to love. Women gina tingle. Men give a damn about the order and and purpose of every thing. Men join any thing they become loyal parts of the organization. Women don’t do that, any where there are women it must accomedate and join them.
The big lie was and is that a woman can love. Romance is what men do women receive it. A healthy society doesn’t live a lie, it lives with the truth. It is an easy lie to tell men because it is normal for a man. This is where terms like honor, team, sacrifice and loyalty come from it is a male thing. A man cares for a man the way he would his wife the man on the receiving end will have a strong sense of obligation and duty to the man. Women do not have that problem.
One of the constant things MRA’s tend to post is how nothing gets done in the MRM. The resistance to MGTOW and definately game and the PUA and to the to us bizzarre just giving up and turning your back on your kids. (globalman styles) are the very things men out of love for there country and society have come up with as a path to a solution to this madness (that for some reason doesn’t involve actually killing off femminist and manginas). With huge life altering trauma men will not do the things needed to be done because it is so against a good mans nature. Cads,thugs,and alphas don’t have that problem and the girls just gina tingle all over them. A healthy society has women that gina tingle over men that love based purely on how it delivers respect and status to it’s citizens. The MRM with women on board on not will never ever change the nature of women. No matter how much awareness of the pain men and even children are in, women will vote and demand what is in therir childish perception of their interest. ( It will always be uninhibitted status and hypergamy)
Thank you Welmer Price

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 9
Bufface April 10, 2012 at 06:16

Bookmarking one of the best threads I’ve seen on the-spearhead.

thumbs up!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2
migu April 10, 2012 at 06:17

Love is a verb people. The joy is in giving it to whomever you choose.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 21
imnobody April 10, 2012 at 06:30

I read once in a book whose title and author escape my memory right now that when a man says to a woman “I love you,” he is in effect saying “I submit to you,” while when a woman says to a man “I love you,” she is in effect saying “I control you.”

The book is “Anatomy of female power” by Chinweizu

http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-female-power-masculinist-dissection/dp/9782651052

You can download it here:

http://therawness.com/anatomy-of-female-power-download-and-discussion-page/

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2
imnobody April 10, 2012 at 06:31

Sorry, the first paragraph is a quotation of Rod’s comment.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
andybob April 10, 2012 at 06:36

Many men yearn to love and be loved. Unfortunately, this makes them seem vulnerable and weak. Nothing whips most women into frenzies of contempt and scorn than a weak and vulnerable man. They always perceive him as deserving of exploitation and betrayal. Serves him right – loser.

Male vulnerability is quite a conundrum for feminists which is why they seem quite ambivalent about it. It inconveniently contradicts their patriarchy narrative where they deny us any humanity by characterizing us all as violent oppressors (who, you know, rape and stuff). Acknowleging that men yearn for love makes us sound too human.

Predictably, feminists just can’t stop themselves from gloating about male pain, especially when thay are responsible for most of it. They are too arrogant to care that doing so reveals this contradiction. In their hamster-infested minds, characterizing us as both oppressors and love-lorn losers means they get to despise us twice.

From where I stand, marriages are fraught with so much tension and unhappiness that it’s the last place you should go if you want to be loved. Entering the homes of “happily married” couples can be very stressful experiences for gay men. Me and my partner rarely accept invitations into the homes of married couples we know because it’s like walking into hellish psycho-dramas where the protagonists are at war with each other.

On Easter Sunday, we went to the home of a nice American couple I have known for years. I was best man at their wedding. Devout Lutherans, 2 kids. The whole visit was like a descent into hell. They couldn’t even serve the soup without bickering over why the croutons weren’t crisp. At one point, she locked herself in a room, then he did, then the kids did – we nearly did too, just to get away from them.

The wife – it is always the wife – instigated all of the drama, even though she was very creative trying to shift the blame onto him (and at one point, the kids). We didn’t have a very good time.

As always, we left the home of a straight married couple utterly bewildered by what we saw. Why were all marriages crap? How could anyone stand living like that? In 14 years, me and my partner have never had an argument. We are convinced that it is because, like most men, we just want peace and a nice life and nothing is worth interfering with that. If you want to squabble about croutons, then you are a dickhead – goodbye.

Of course, everything is easier when kids are not in the picture, which is probably why my mate is still in that marriage. He knows what would happen if she took them back to the US (they were born there). None of this helps men who want to love and be loved. I don’t know what the answer is, but it sure as hell isn’t marriage.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 121 Thumb down 10
Rumour April 10, 2012 at 07:07

i wonder if that feeling we get is so much a desire for love as it is an inner incongruence between what nature has formed us for and the mold society is trying to remake us into. it is natural for a man to desire a wife, children, and grandchildren. this is denied us and so there is an underlying discomfort even for MGTOW. if we express it as a desire for love, well that works.

either way, these things can only happen because the western male is weak. until we men as a whole are willing to embrace virtuous manhood, there is little hope of a bright future for our sons.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Andrew S. April 10, 2012 at 07:07

I will admit I want to be loved, but not in the typical way a feminist would throw out the insult of not being loved.

When my mom killed my father and then killed herself, I was looking for compassion and love from my family. I had three aunts who lived nearby, one worked for SRS, another for Head Start, and yet another was a “compassionate, empathetic, ethical” liberal. I was hoping to get love and emotional support from these women at a time when I really needed it. I got none. This lack of love and emotional support is still is very upsetting after almost 10 years.

So yes, if a feminist was to try and and insult me for being angry about being unloved I would have to agree.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer April 10, 2012 at 07:14

“The wife – it is always the wife – instigated all of the drama…”

Hilarious post andybob. I’ve been to many of those fine family gatherings. Always the male trying uneasily to negotiate past the impending meltdown because she’s stressed about all the “crouton” details that must be addressed lest the guests think untowardly of the hosts. Insane.

This dynamic is what causes so many young women to sour on thoughts of early marriage because they’ve lived through it with their own parents. The feminists are there to provide the siren song of male blame and offer the alternative of “empowerment” and “independence” over the suffocating co-coon of marriage. The men just understand that shouldering a family is a difficult burden and are willing to endure it. The constant drumbeat of male hatred has also reached their ears however, and as they turn away from matrimony in droves a new shaming industry has arisen to remind them of their inadequacies.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 73 Thumb down 3
Just Some Canadian April 10, 2012 at 07:18
Somehow Somewhat April 10, 2012 at 07:35

At least when men become bitter for being unloved, they show that they still care. An increasing number of men are becoming indifferent to whatever women do. Indifference is what gets women freaking out.

As someone once said: “The worst thing you can do to your fellow human being is not to hate them. It is being indifferent to them.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 1
freebird April 10, 2012 at 07:37

It’s true that children should be a joy,I’m glad you’ve got yours.
I never had any,and after being through false Dv charges I can see how it’s not worth the risk nor investment.

Of course I get the shaming language on a regular basis,but that’s a lot easier than loss of house,income,sanity,freedom and civil rights.

My son was never born to VAWA related social misandry,there must be millions of unborn by now,this leads to thoughts of population control,and social engineering.

Cudos to the coppers for only letting the very rich,illegal immigrants,and thug-fucking single mothers to breed.

That should insure your job, as crime will be going sky-high.

Well,you’ve got yours, screw the next guy,right?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 4
Rumour April 10, 2012 at 07:50

that this whole culture is doomed is beyond question. it is a rotting structure that needs to be torn down. i have considered what my part in this is and then i look at my children. it has been almost a decade since the divorce and they are now in their teens. of my two daughters, one is already displaying her hypergamous nature and the other is a high maintenance drama queen; it’s like their mother has replicated into two new entities. my son is shiftless, effeminant, and demanding … in other words he’s his mommy with a male appendage. to all three, i am an idiot. my advice is spurned, my instructions ignored. there is little respect, and why should there be? i’m the guy living in an apartment with a 12 year old car and mommy is the real success … nice house, car, unchecked spending … just ask her.

and so i rest content that i have done my part to pull apart this rotting corpse … i procreated with a cruel, foolish woman who has reared children in her own image. and they will go forth and multiply … or perhaps the foolishness that i have been spouting will eventually claw its way out of the confines of their self-deluded minds and into the light of day.

in the meantime … i put up with my eight days a month of bickering and snottiness; enjoy the peace of my court-mandated non-parenting time; and bang and discard every single mom i can get my hands on.

i know … i’m an asshole. maybe. but once you come to the conclusion that a structure can’t be repaired and needs to come down. do you really blame the guy who wields the wrecking ball?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 9
Georice81 April 10, 2012 at 08:09

My observation is that when women have been sexually promiscous their ability to submit and be very loyal to a single man is very diminished. Sex is very different for a woman than a man. For them it is a total submission to a person during the act and from a biological and emotional point of view it truly is. How often can they do this without feelings of guilt and inadequacy? Ultimately they give up on themselves and pursue it for pleasure only and become emotionally dulled. They can’t respect that one man that may actually love them since they are contemptous of a man that could love someone like them. Men in the 1950′s understood this and would not marry someone who was not a virgin since they did not trust those that were not.

We men can love and want to love. We also have a huge capacity to forgive. Modern western woman don’t seem to comprehend this because of their own hangups.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 5
Binxton April 10, 2012 at 08:23

Women are by nature emotional, self-centered creatures. Absent controls on their behavior, they lack both morals and objective principles. They are too easily manipulated by their environment to allow them to be free.

Ultimately, female emotional nature requires men to control women.

Women will love when they endure hardship and respect higher authority, i.e., patriarchy.

Western women must acknowledge a male-centered world where they can enjoy the labors of man only if, and when, they show due deference to male authority. Those who fail to do so must be disciplined and punished as examples.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 12
HeligKo April 10, 2012 at 08:33

“All that said, men have every right to be angry, and righteously so. But deep down, I think what most of them want is far simpler and more benign than revenge or some political payback. They want some love, some security and the opportunity to be a part of a family. They want to grow old with a woman who is true to them, and to see their children grow tall and strong. It doesn’t always come out that way, and there are those who have rejected the idea entirely, but it’s an ideal that I think most men would agree is worth some effort, if not for themselves then for a better society in general.”

Wow what a great paragraph. I sat in my marriage wondering why I wasn’t lovable for years. As she has walked away, and I have seen how she deals with the kids without me there, I have learned that it wasn’t that I was unlovable, but that she lacked the empathy necessary to love. Sadly, I think society has taken a turn for women that eliminated empathy from their thinking, and the end result is a very narcissistic form of femininity that was only seen in the nobility of old.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 5
keyster April 10, 2012 at 08:42

“It’s true that many men are very bitter about loss of love, betrayal or lack of attention from women.”

The phrase “unconditional love” is the antithesis of a woman’s love for a man. To her EVERYTHING is conditional.

A man can simply love a woman for how she looks, talks and walks. A woman is far more scrutinizing by design. If he slips up in some way it’s his fault for making her fall out of love with him. This is when the scorn and verbal abuse ensues.

The “bitterness” comes from being deluded by pop culture into believing women think the same as you do. They don’t. Their agenda is completely different, and they HAVE an agenda. It won’t be the same honorable, noble and selfless agenda you might have in mind. These aren’t mutual aspirations. She has conditions that you must constantly meet. It’s your job to navigate the “politics” of the relationship because “a happy wife is a happy life”.

Ask yourself; is “being loved” really worth it?
There is no man more lonely than the one married to a feckless recalcitrant harpy. Everyday he asks himself, “How did I get here?”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 63 Thumb down 7
Ken April 10, 2012 at 08:54

Arguably the best article you’ve written thus far, Mr. Price! :)
Bravo sir, you deserve a Pulitzer Prize for this one.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 8
MKP April 10, 2012 at 08:55

@ Piercedhead

“I would argue that the sudden and total collapsing of love, as it is presented to men, is evidence of its illusion.”

Exactly. How “loved” was any man in the first place, if his wife disappeared with his children once she got bored?

Women come up with an endless eries of strange and contradictory justifications:

- “fell out” of love
- no longer felt that “spark”
- wanted to “discover herself”
- still love him, but no longer IN love with him

And other assorted garbage. All to disguise the obvious truth – she never loved her husband in any meaningful sense. He was convenient at the time, or he was the means to an end, and now he’s no longer useful.

For men who have been so discarded, it’s tempting to look back on the old days vistfully. Because you remember not just what happened, but how things felt at the time – the feeling of being part of a happy and healthy family. When the illusion is shattered, men want to fall into a backward-looking mode of focusing on the time before the illusion was shattered, even if it’s not abundantly clear that it was always an illusion.

But, you know, at the end of the day, nothing trumps the truth.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 3
D April 10, 2012 at 08:57

When i read comments extolling the merits of the “nuclear family”, i usually disagree–because a nuclear family is too easily-and-often destroyed by divorce [and 100+ years ago, was often destroyed by death]. A larger group, traditionally an extended family, has more resilience, more bonds to support those left when one person leaves.

This is a great point that needs more discussion in anti-feminist forums. I’ve lurked on many websites that promote traditional values as an antidote to feminism, and I think most take a short-sighted view of things.

Where the so-called traditionalists go wrong is that usually when they say “traditional family”, they mean nuclear family. Somehow they think the nuclear family has always been the norm, when in fact, it’s a recent innovation.

The idea that a man and woman should live on their own without support from the rest of their family has contributed to the disconnect between the generations. I believe this is part of what helped feminism take hold. Women were home all day with the kids and no guidance other than popular media (think housewife since the 1940′s and later). Men had to shoulder the burden of leading a family with no help, either. Expecting the love (eros) between the man and women to hold this together long-term is asking too much. Romance is a weak foundation for building a family.

In contrast to this, a true traditional family was the extended family. The husband and wife had help and guidance from older and wiser family members as well as a big safety net if something went wrong. Less stress and more love for everyone.

How do we get back to this? For my family, it meant leaving the rat race in the big city and moving to a small town. We took a big hit in our income and lifestyle, but it was worth it. We’re within 20 minutes or less of most of our family. Nothing we could buy back in our big city days could replace the time we’ve spent with them.

For others, well, maybe the in-laws could give up their expensive condo and spend their golden years helping out with the grandkids. Or maybe some of those neo-traditional women could take some time off from quilting to take care of the elders in their family. That’s what real traditional women used to do. It may not be very romantic, but it’s very loving and it’s a time-tested method for creating a stable environment for the kids.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 2
Random Person April 10, 2012 at 09:19

Here is the simple truth: our postmodern societies are lonely. People are dispersed and transient. We don’t grow up and stay in a certain neighborhood with the same families and friends our whole lives anymore. Add to that rising relative morality and everyone being overly concerned with their own rights and interests and love is nowhere to be found. Women and men are both lonely and both want love – neither is solely and fundamentally responsible for this mess, and neither is incapable of love. The prototypical woman of the MRM is nearly pure fiction.

Here’s the truth that no one wants to hear: more than half of loneliness is selfishness. When we’re lonely we’re often victims of ourselves rather than anyone else. Others may have mistreated you, you may have been raised with very poor examples, there might be quite a few causes outside of you that are legitimate, but ultimately nothing significant is going to change in your life unless you change. If you’re not capable of an enduring loving relationship no one else is going to be able to create it for you – it necessarily involves at least two people who are capable of it.

If I honestly ask myself whether or not I’m a loving person to any significant extent I realize the answer is no. I lie when it suits me, I’m unkind when I feel like being unkind, I don’t offer to help others without being asked, I don’t usually take any time thinking about how others feel or what their hopes and fears and problems and projects are. So of course I’m lonely. I could say to myself well no one has ever loved me, so why should I love anyone? But guess what that accomplishes? Nothing. I’m still alone and I’m still a jackass.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 24
HeligKo April 10, 2012 at 09:27

@MKP “When the illusion is shattered, men want to fall into a backward-looking mode of focusing on the time before the illusion was shattered, even if it’s not abundantly clear that it was always an illusion.”

That is incredibly true. I spent months trying to find where things broke. It took a while for me to realize they didn’t. It was an illusion. An elaborate one she worked hard to paint for me, so I would do what she wanted at the time. The illusion was changed and changed as she realized she didn’t really want what she thought she wanted.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
Towgunner April 10, 2012 at 09:32

I suppose we all want to be loved, evolution speaks to this as being loved increases chances of survival. But, this brings to light a major flaw in feminism and liberals in general; truth is people are concerned with two things 1. survival 2. reproduction, which is survival of your genes. That’s it. Consider soros in cahoots with the Nazis during WW2 or any wall street trader that would easily throw his fellow traders under the bus to get a better bonus. It’s all a function of survival. Our modern world of convenience is just an illusion, at all times we’re trying to survive. And when faced with it, whether it’s immediate or drawn-out, love is revealed to be a rather stupid thing to want let alone expect from others. That’s not to say that love isn’t great, it is…but it’s a luxury by natural standards. feminism speaks to this, as it perverted the relationship between men and women putting just women’s survival ahead of men (dismissing outright the smack-face obvious symbolic relationship i.e. men enable women survival and vice versa). feminists have claimed ownership on “love” as it fits both the weaker nature of women and their natural proclivities, at least superficially, and enables them to assume a faux yet effective moral high ground. Indeed, it’s hard to argue against love under normal circumstances. However, looking at the true nature of feminism we all know that their claim of “love” is a disgusting example of the pond-scum levels humans are capable of obtaining…its blatant and unrepentant hypocrisy. Perhaps they mean love for just them? Make no mistake about it, a rejection from a women cannot get any more personal and can’t cut any further as it’s an indictment on everything about you. You, according to her, are unfit for reproduction at least in her eyes. Now, men and women alike have much to be angry about because the arbitrary measures of reproductive value are, by way of our culture, remarkably feeble and inaccurate. Worse, these measures completely contradict the entire canon of post 60′s liberalism, simply sex is the ultimate act of discrimination. If you’re not a follower, if you’re a free spirit, being yourself, despite the constant media messages to the contrary, is precisely what you shouldn’t do. women are hard-wired conformist, they’re not natural survivors and they gain and feel security (not strength, though they interchange these two words) by being in the herd. The more their accepted into the herd the greater chance of survival and the safer they feel, so, they’re freer to act up e.g. “find themselves”. Who’s defining the herd? Answer – the wrong people…but we know that. So, “love” is obtainable only under the auspices of our cultural standards. Take a moment to consider just how f-up our culture is. Of course, it’s really hate (opposite of love) that women display at men and in an oppressive, speech/thought controlled society. women have no monopoly on love, their proclivities to it are actually weakness, they are equal to men in their ability to dispense hate to ensure their survival.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9
MKP April 10, 2012 at 09:40

@ HeligKo

I’m sure that was a painful few months, and you have my utmost sympathy. Not that that means much.

You’ll note that the maintenance of the illusion, even after the wife has gotten bored and left, is clearly a priority of the machine. That’s why you have all these limp-dicked fools like Dr. Phil trying to convince guys that it was THEIR FAULT that their wife left. I’m sure some people in your life – whether friends and family, co-workers, or idiots on TV and in books – tried to do the same with you.

“Well, did you make her feel loved everyday? Did you treat her to surprises? Did you make her feel like a queen? etc.”

But, again – if you have to cater to your wife’s capacity boredom every goddamn day, lest she leave and take your house and/or children, then she never loved you in the first place.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 2
MKP April 10, 2012 at 09:41

Should say “capacity FOR boredom.” Sorry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Annonymous April 10, 2012 at 09:43

So much more than mere love, a man wants and needs for others and the State to respect his children, to respect him and to respect his property. It’s all about boundaries with males you see.

Love is being overrated, overetsimated or confused here with what a man really really wants and needs. Respect.

Who cares that absolutely nobody nor any State on earth loved a man, if only by keeping their hands off and their nose out of his business … they respected his person, they respected his progeny and they respected his property.

Heaven on earth for women is love, but for men it is respect.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 1
greyghost April 10, 2012 at 09:52

This is maybe the most important message all boys can get in their journey to manhood. Women do not and can not love the way you do and can. The best a man can get is some good emotional gina tingle. Never ever forget it. It can be a very emotionally pleasing and soothing time for a man but a man can never forget he is a man and right or wrong is a keeper of civilization.
The emotional trauma brought down on men when the realization of the lie hits off the charts. It is where murders and suicides come from.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 5
HeligKo April 10, 2012 at 09:54

@mkp Amazingly I didn’t have those people harping at me to do something. Well there was one at first, but after that my pastor didn’t go there. My best friend who is in youth ministry did not go there. My parents who have worked in ministry and in particular youth ministry did not go there. My pastor was clear that I needed to be a good husband until that wasn’t possible, which included telling her that she was out of line on many issues. He said if there was something worth fixing, the ground work needed to be laid now, and that capitulating to her demands meant that either we were heading for divorce or an even more miserable marriage. My best friend asked me if I needed depositions to help gain custody of the kids, and my parents told me a series of events that turned them against her years before that they never thought they could talk about before. I think the gig is up on this behavior. Legally women may still have the advantage, but individuals within the society we live in are accepting this less and less. More and more men will not accept a woman for anything more than a roll in the sack who left another man for such stupid reasons. I may be imagining the change, but I find it hard to believe that the people in my life are that much more enlightened than the society at large. Or perhaps she was that much worse than the average woman. Sure feels that way to me, but I am living it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
Rumour April 10, 2012 at 10:14

rather than men looking for love with women, perhaps its time to resurrect love between men, in a platonic sense. think about it, have any of you ever had a truly meaningful conversation with a woman? and yet we have meaningful conversations daily on sites like this. it’s because men … even when competing … build one another.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 54 Thumb down 4
Rebel April 10, 2012 at 10:18

Love is probably the greatest Ponzi scheme in recent history. It rests on nothing, produces nothing and cannot be measured by any means at our disposal.
Yet, billions of dollars are spend on a premise that is totally false.

One cannot love anybody by ourself. Love, it has been said in almost every song, is an illusion. That is all it is.

And when a man (or women) feels unloved, it’s a sensation that originates in some neurons and propagates through the brain: again, electrical impulse,… illusion.

Maybe women are more practical than men here: they know and understand that love is really… nothing at all, save a couple of electrons lost in the meanders of one brain.

There is really nothing to woory about, nothing to spend time on and nothing to attract our attention. In short, love is… bullshit to the nth power.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 9
Anonymous Reader April 10, 2012 at 10:34

I’ve lived without love, and lived without any respect. Of the two, I find loss of respect is more painful, and most painful is when a woman’s “love” mutates to contempt. Kowtowing to female demands leads not only to loss of their respect, but of self respect. And that is the worst.

I’d rather have respect, especially including self-respect.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 1
Georice81 April 10, 2012 at 10:58

1 Corinthians 13 lists the attributes of love:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

How many women who abandon their husbands can say that they were patient, kind with him? A woman who loves will not be self-seeking (i.e. to heck with him or anyone else that stands in the way of her “happiness”). A woman who remembers the wrongs her husband did to her is keeping a record. Divorcing/abandoning your husband also serves to dishonor not only him but all those around that family. Leaving their husbands for another man not only brings dishonor to him but delights in evil.

We men understand the protect part and I see that in many decent guys.

My point to this is that the Bible defines love. For us that believe in it, we can contrast this with the action of women and it gives us an understanding of their true actions. At least it gives us comfort in knowing the truth.

Also, there is that word, “dishonor”. How often do we see the word “honor” being mentioned nowdays? Honor is what kept people of yore intact in their character and actions. Honor is what made sure that people behaved decently and righteous no matter what. A woman who fooled around or who would leave her husband was considered dishonorable. Why don’t we use this word more often?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 5
keyster April 10, 2012 at 11:00

“The idea that a man and woman should live on their own without support from the rest of their family has contributed to the disconnect between the generations.”

I agree.
The support structure is so far away, if it exists at all.

My family began to fall apart when a popular uncle moved to Arizona for his wife, because it would be better for her arthritis. (She was an unpopular neurotic/hypochondriac aunt and wanted to separate from the family.) Suddenly there were no more family reunions, holiday gatherings, and divorces mounted as strife broke out; all from the early (I am Woman) 70′s onward. Everyone drifted apart as brothers and cousins moved to where the work was, rather than stay in dingy Philadelphia.

Fast forward to present day and the patriarchs have died off, my two brothers have been married 7 times between them, and untold divorces among cousins as well. We’re all separated, a thousand miles between us. I envy families who are “together”. They’re very rare.

There is no community, no communion.
The “progress” of Secularism has a lot to do with it as well.
Family has gone from relatives to “relative”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 2
Cynical Youth April 10, 2012 at 11:45

“Here’s the truth that no one wants to hear: more than half of loneliness is selfishness. When we’re lonely we’re often victims of ourselves rather than anyone else. Others may have mistreated you, you may have been raised with very poor examples, there might be quite a few causes outside of you that are legitimate, but ultimately nothing significant is going to change in your life unless you change. If you’re not capable of an enduring loving relationship no one else is going to be able to create it for you – it necessarily involves at least two people who are capable of it.”

I’m sorry, but this line of thinking doesn’t hold water when a man is a victim of divorce, being robbed of his children, his ex turning into a vindicative monster, the full power of the State is being used to destroy him and rob him of his assets, and him turning into a pariah despite doing what society asked of him.

What you wrote is deflecting deserved blame from women and a corrupt society at large onto individual men who are thrown into the divorce blender because its much easier to put the blame on men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 5
greyghost April 10, 2012 at 11:52

The support structure was there for men. Remember the mens clubs,the male only gyms, The military, look at the bullshit at agusta golf thing. It is one of the reasons for this strange compansion men have for sports teams.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 4
Pops April 10, 2012 at 12:15

Enjoyed reading this. Very nice.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3
jaego April 10, 2012 at 13:25

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 38
AC April 10, 2012 at 13:29

This is an excellent piece.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Navian April 10, 2012 at 13:41

Great insight and comments. Are we fighting the natural order of things?
Is the wound men must experience, referenced in myths, symbolized by circumcision, manifested in laws, customs and the unquestionable disposability of men in war, is it that understanding that you will very likely not be loved, the kind of the love you will give to a woman your male destiny? I believe this now, but it is painful to give up the search for her. The exceptions Romeo & Juliet, Johnny Cash & June Carter and the imagery in the lyrics in the music I listen to, make it more difficult. MRA, MGTOW and Zeta masculinity are to me the equivalent of the masts Odysseus lashed himself upon, to prevent being destroyed by the Sirens.I am doing my best right now for not falling into the eyes (five second strong eye contact) of a young pretty dark haired blue eyed cutie. PUA or pump & dump is out of the question, I cant’t bring myself to mislead women. A mutually agreed to, no expectations fucking is ethically OK for me, but this sweet thing would not qualify for that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
Andrew S. April 10, 2012 at 14:55

Interesting post about your family keyster.

My father was the patriarch of our highly dysfunctional family, and once he was gone there was no longer “a family.” Men seem to be the only ones holding all these dysfunctional American families together, and we will soon get to the point where even the best of men will just not to be strong enough to keep these circus acts we call families together. A few might have the strength to keep the family unit together, but families will continue to get more and more dysfunctional and it will just be to much work for even the highest character of men.

I have seen a few instances where black women kept the family together, but I have yet to see any white families held together by a woman. I’m sure they’re out there but it’d be like seeing a white tiger in the wild.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Jacko April 10, 2012 at 16:13

Like the old song says, love is a woman’s whole happiness. Women hurt much more from not being loved than men do. This does not mean that men do not hurt either from lovelessness, but there are alternatives for men and I do not believe that men suffer as much as women do when they are unloved.

The key to dealing with not being loved is to recognize that human beings [yes, both men and women] are fundamentally flawed and that not having the love of these flawed creatures is not really a big deal. God’s love is really all that matters. People can live without love from other people, but it’s much harder to live without acceptance of God’s unconditional love.

A British interviewer once asked the great Italian conductor Carlo Maria Giulini how a performance of the Verdi Requiem might be different if the conductor was an atheist [there are lots of atheists in Britain, in case you didn't know]. Giulini said he couldn’t answer this question because he did not how it is possible to live in this sad world without belief in God. I agree. If you don’t have the love of a good woman, you need to get some religion if you don’t have some already.

The other thing you need to do is to develop some enjoyable solitary pursuits. As I just alluded to by mentioning Carlo Maria Giulini and the Verdi Requiem, collecting classical recordings and reading about classical music is my main interest, by I have many others. The MGTOW lifestyle must be embraced and savoured, not grudgingly accepted. Given the bad experiences with women suffered by so many men in this sad world, MGTOW is actually better than the alternative in most cases.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 13
imnobody April 10, 2012 at 16:33

Ashley Judd’s tantrum in Salon (a feminist website).

http://www.salon.com/2012/04/09/ashley_judds_facial_war/singleton/

In the comment section, a guy is making good points but all the wimminz are supporting Ashley Judd.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
will April 10, 2012 at 17:09

For women love is sentimentality.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Joe April 10, 2012 at 17:46

Women are capable of love but there’s a reason St. Paul tells wives to “fear” their husbands. Because women are just much more like children in their moral reasoning and in their emotional “resilience” (or capacity for cruelty). So for a woman to love a husband is much like a child’s love for his parents. It is a love that is requires her to be in a dependent position. This is why marriage in a feminist society of independent and irreligious (I don’t mean women without superstition, but women without fear of moral judgment) women, cannot work.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 5
TFH April 10, 2012 at 18:03

Heroic man dies saving little girl from powerful riptide :

http://gma.yahoo.com/heroic-man-dies-saving-child-powerful-riptide-183449517–abc-news-topstories.html

Oh, but fathers are not necessary.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Worthless Bitch April 10, 2012 at 19:18

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 36
greyghost April 10, 2012 at 20:15

Worthless Bitch April 10, 2012 at 19:18

I do love my husband. And I respect him. I try every day to make him feel special and adored. I’m sorry you have not experienced this, but that doesn’t make our happiness any less real for us.

Who the hell was that? Was that one of your spaerhead groupies Welmer?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5
jaego April 10, 2012 at 21:19

A Priest, teaching the very modern Theology of the Body told my class just that: that Women need only respect and obey whereas Men must be willing to die for her as Christ died for the Church. Extraordinary thing to hear nowadays in the Novos Ordo Church.

Or as C.S Lewis said, “Submission is an erotic necessity”. Btw, eros means romance or overwhelming attraction for a whole person. I believe I read that the Greeks had another word for lust – porneia or something like that. In any case, neither one nor both together will keep a marriage together without the higher love – and without the aid of functioning society which must include a men’s culture as well as a woman’s culture.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 12
The Real Peterman April 10, 2012 at 21:44

Great article, Mr. Price! I could not agree more.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
varslandeman April 11, 2012 at 03:31

If “love is like oxygen” (if that isn’t too Sweet for you), then we should be able to measure the rate at which love combusts. Of course, we would need some untainted samples for controlled scientific research, lest we contaminate the calorimeter of our emotions with unspent fuel.

Perhaps it does not react completely — perhaps the noxious gaseousness left behind from a burnt-out love is in fact part of the problem.

Clearly something this unpredictable could be a fire hazard.
Gentlemen, don your asbestos suits and proceed with caution.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 11, 2012 at 05:21

@Jacko “[there are lots of atheists in Britain, in case you didn't know]”

And there are just as many in Italy. England and Italy have the most atheists in the world. Just because the Catholic church has its headquarters in Rome doesn’t mean you should assume that everyone believes it . And I wouldn’t be surprised if many people still believe in the gods in the Pantheon.In both England and Italy the old religions that had been around for thousands of years which we errorneously refer to as witchcraft, are still there, especially in the country, with Christianity just sort of added to them on the surface. After the Jesus religion became popular in Rome Jesus was made a god which is really just a higher order of human. And then chief and only god. When the religion became more organised and then the State religion Jesus was then viewed as the GOD.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 15
Jacko April 11, 2012 at 08:00

Avenger,

I never said that Italy has no atheists. Of course, they have. Spain [another Catholic country] has a long tradition of atheism and anti-clericalism [e.g. the Spanish civil war]. The Italian Marxist atheist genius, Antonio Gramsci, is as intellectually responsible as anyone for the normalization of feminist thought, the subversion of the family, the demonization of organized religion and the decline of traditional ways of living.

Your notion that many folks still believe in the gods of the Pantheon is absurd. As with all pagan religions of the past, the religion of ancient Rome is as dead as a doornail.

Your other arguments [that Christianity is just a thin veneer painted over ancient paganism; that Jesus never claimed to be God and was only elevated to the level of "God" as a powerplay by the Church] are the usual tired atheist warhorses.

I would merely point out that in the nearly 300 years between the time of Christ and the Edict of Milan [313, by which Christianity became officially tolerated in the Roman Empire] when Christianity was illegal and Christians were periodically persecuted by the Romans, the Christian martyrs who willingly suffered horrible deaths for their faith had no doubt that Jesus was God. If one has any doubt about this, have a look at the gruesome paintings of martyrs’ deaths on the walls of the basilica of Santi Nereo e Achilleo in Rome and see what I’m talking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santi_Nereo_e_Achilleo

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
D April 11, 2012 at 12:51

My Grandma had a few choice words about love. Some background: She was born in 1916 and raised Southern Baptist, then converted to Catholicism to marry Grandpa. Basically, she had a strict religious life and grew up during the Great Depression. Character building stuff.

She and Grandpa were together for 50+ years and remained openly affectionate and cheerful until death parted them. Marriage 1.0 at it’s finest.

Anyhow, she said that love wasn’t what people felt when they married. Most people just feel some combination of lust and friendship. Or worse–desperation and relief that someone actually wants them. They just think they’re in love because they don’t know better.

The real love was what happened after a couple stayed together for a decade or so. Love was the result of–wait for it–actually behaving in a loving manner toward your spouse and children no matter what else was going on. In other words, do your duty and the rest follows. Love is something you work at, not something that just happens magically. Expecting “true love” before many years of marriage was putting the cart before the horse. This was basically what Grandma’s own mother and father told her.

How many modern women get this? How many have a sense of duty or even accept that love is actions not words? No wonder so many men are heartbroken–they do their duty, so they truly fall in love. Their women have no sense of duty and a Hollywood concept of love, therefore they can’t achieve the real thing.

Add to this the fact that most women these days are promiscuous before marriage, which decreases their ability to bond, plus a culture that rewards irresponsibility and you’ve got a perfect storm.

Most modern women can’t love.

No one told them how, they kill what little instinct they have with pre-marital sex and there’s less reward for trying anyway.

How far we’ve fallen.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2
D April 11, 2012 at 13:02

Women are capable of love but there’s a reason St. Paul tells wives to “fear” their husbands.

St. Paul knew game.

There is truly nothing new under the sun.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Eric April 11, 2012 at 14:29

Price:
Excellent article. The fact that the question is even being raised shows how bad the social situation in the US really is. Shaming men for wanting to be loved is like shaming people in a famine-stricken region for wanting to eat. The cruelty and female sadism—offering men nothing then blaming them for not being able to obtain anything—is illustrative of the low-caliber character of the typical American female.

So much of this shaming about so-called ‘male bitterness’ is just another attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that this bitterness is, in large measure, justifiable anger. This is another aspect of feminine sadism: the fact that they not only depreciate unloved men, but throw themselves at males who are genuinely unlovable. It’s like heaping Shaming Tactics upon real men and then flaunting them by slutting around with the types of males any real man would rightly despise.

In fact, a major benefit of the MRM has been to immunize men against this kind of shaming and false guilt. After all: just which gender is it who has university-level feminist and womens’ studies programs to devalue and marginalize men? Or which has a media culture that constantly lampoons men as subhumans? The lack of love men feel is NOT because of anything inherently wrong with themselves; it is because we simply have no material to satisfy that longing. Today’s feminised women are incapable of either giving or receiving love.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Eric April 11, 2012 at 14:33

Worthless Bitch:
“I’m sorry that you have not experienced this.”

The sad reality is that the majority of today’s men never experience that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Eric April 11, 2012 at 14:48

Jacko:
“It’s true women hurt more from not being loved.”

False. Women are mostly narcissicists and the only love they feel is for themselves. There’s no room in most female psyches for extending love to others. They couldn’t care less about what anybody else things of them.

“The key is to recognize that human beings are fundamentally flawed &c.”

That’s not the ‘key’ at all. Human beings might be fundamentally flawed; but flawed human beings in combination make cultures and societies. The ‘key’ is recognizing that human nature—the good side of it— is being corrupted by a social system operating to contrary human interests. When people of either gender realize that the entire ‘gender war’ is artificial construct promoted by selfish special interests, then— and only then will there be change.

I agree that the MGTOW lifestyle should be embraced, but it certainly isn’t for everyone. It is a lifestyle choice, but not a natural condition. There are some MGTOWs who recognize this and are working on technological plans literally to replace women. More power to them, I say! I think that branch of the MGTOW movement has some serious potential.

The reality is that most of us men are INCEL—celibate but not by choice. The social conditions have made it impossible to make a choice to be anything other single. For many of us, it’s a matter of coping with, what is realistically speaking, a social crisis.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Eric April 11, 2012 at 14:55

Migu:
“Love is a verb. That means giving it to whomever you choose.”

No–love is a moral principle. (Also a noun). Giving it to whomever you choose implies that it doesn’t exist; since a moral principle can’t be diffused— it can only be exchanged with a corresponding value; i.e., the love of another person.

Secondly, this also implies that a choice of love-objects actually exists or is worthy of the expenditure of that moral principle. In men’s case, the choice no longer exists (since there are no women worth falling in love with anymore); in women’s cases the choice is inevitably bad (since they have all the social power of choosing and they make choices for selfish reasons).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
D April 11, 2012 at 15:24

They couldn’t care less about what anybody else things of them.

I thought females were mostly herd minded.

They care deeply what others think, it’s just that in our culture no one shames them for bad behavior. They’re taught the opposite–that premarital sex, cheating and divorce are empowering.

It used to be that an irresponsible woman could lose everything, including her friends and family who would shun her.

Now, she’s met with a chorus of “You go, Grrrl!!”

Basically the herd is telling her it’s okay to be bad.

I pray for a massive backlash. Preferably sometime in the next 10 years before my daughter reaches puberty. God help us.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
Pops April 11, 2012 at 16:59

I do love my husband. And I respect him. I try every day to make him feel special and adored. I’m sorry you have not experienced this, but that doesn’t make our happiness any less real for us.

This is becoming so typical. Injecting your ALLEGED individual personal experience as some kind of counter to a widespread observation about society as a whole. What point does that make?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3
ahamkara April 11, 2012 at 17:00

Sure we want love, but not from diseased women in a diseased culture. Those of us who have made the mistake of seeking it there know this all too well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Eric April 11, 2012 at 17:45

Pops:
It doesn’t make any point. This is the whole weakness of the NAWALT argument: women keep trying to argue that the ‘exceptions prove the rule’. Going back to my earlier famine analogy, it’s like showing pictures of well-fed government officials and soldiers in some famine-ridden area and saying: ‘See! Not everybody’s starving! A lot of people are eating well here—it’s just that the starving populace isn’t trying hard enough, or making bad dietary choices!’

This culture makes me sick.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Eric April 11, 2012 at 17:50

D,

“It used to be that an irresponsible woman could lose everything…now she’s met with a chorus of ‘go grrrrl!’”

Exactly. It USED to be that women cared deeply about what others thought of them, and in a normal society, they still do. But now that ‘grrrl power’; ‘independence’; and narcissistic egotism is the norm, women are educated to selfishness to the point of completely ruthless amorality. And typical of feminist illogic, though, the Sisterhood will gang up on and shame any female who goes against their interpretations of girl power and independence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Worthless Bitch April 11, 2012 at 19:16

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 23
Oddsock April 11, 2012 at 22:20

So there you have it guys. This lying worthless bitch is without doubt some born again slapper thats had enough cock up her to build a hand rail around the tower of London and now wants to try and tell us that we are wrong in refusing to be held to the usual double standards.

In other words. Not all land mines detonate. You just have to ask yourself; Do you feel lucky ? Well do you ?

She is full of shite. NAWALT ? My big fat hairy feckin arse ! ANY woman is only as loyal as the opportunities she has before her.

Anyway, she probably has small tits grey hair a baggy snatch and false teeth married to the perfect mangina wage slave pack horse with self worth lower than a grave diggers heel.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 11
Oddsock April 11, 2012 at 22:37

Eric & D

With respect. Although you both make good points about ” Love” I suggest you arew both still viewing things from the old position. There is a paridigm shift in progress. Sites like the Spearhead are helping men grow and at an ever increasing speed. The idea of modern love is nothing more than a social construct based around reproduction lust and attachment, programmed into us from birth. Usually by society and mothers/females/manginas/white knights. Real love has nothing whatsoever to do with the above. Men are simnply going through the 21st century version of the old tried and tested initiation or passage rights long forgotten. Its not hard to check and find the history of marriage etc. Its was and still is all a farce simply to keep men producing and protecting. What is happenining is basically men are waking up to the big feckin con.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
piercedhead April 11, 2012 at 22:45

“Feminists want to blame everything on the patriarchy. How are you any different?”-Worthless Bitch

There are pages upon pages of social statistics all documenting how very different we are.

You will never understand it. You appear to be incapable of that. The sooner you accept that, the better for you. To us, it makes no difference at all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Ted April 11, 2012 at 23:16

@Worthless Bitch April 11, 2012 at 19:16

” If I have been blessed, thank God. ”

Here’s a short story which I think is quite well written:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30444531/Revelation-by-Flannery-O-Connor

I found it from a Manboobz comment, funnily enough.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Worthless Bitch April 11, 2012 at 23:29

@odddsock. Wow you are a nasty person. Turn to personal attacks rather than offer any logical response. And you do not know me and yet call me a liar? I may be a woman but I am in no way anti male. I feel very sorry you. You find it easy to say hateful remarks with the anonymity of the Internet protecting you but I doubt you would ever say such things aloud to another person. You take out your resentment of women on me and the other unfortunate women who venture on this site because you are powerless in your real life. You don’t even know me, so I know all that hate and bile isn’t about me! It’s you.

I’m done with this place and MRAs. All you do is alienate the very antifeminist women who could be your allies. NAWALT? You bet your ass.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 22
piercedhead April 12, 2012 at 00:28

“I’m done with this place and MRAs. All you do is alienate the very antifeminist women who could be your allies. NAWALT? You bet your ass.”-Worthless Bitch

Don’t let that door hit you on the way out!

Of course, if you’re gone for good you never read this, did you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
DCM April 12, 2012 at 03:10

“Worthless Bitch April 11, 2012 at 23:29
…………….
I’m done with this place and MRAs. All you do is alienate the very antifeminist women who could be your allies. NAWALT? You bet your ass.”

If she feels alienated she isn’t antifeminist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Opus April 12, 2012 at 04:23

So Farewell then, Worthless Bitch…

Isn’t it interesting that every time a woman comes here, she soon feels butt-hurt, and resigns in high-dudgeon, whereas when men are (frequently) attacked for some cause or another, they merely ‘take it on the chin’ – and after a day or so they ‘let bygones be bygones’.

Women are now, so I am told, strong and independent and yet even so always resort to their favoured tactic of hurt feeeeeelings, and leave with a string of shaming put-downs, so in this case we have Worthless Bitch telling Oddsock:

“I feel sorry for you”
“You are powerless in real life” [note: the female obsession with powerful men]

… and she also tells Oddsock that she bet he would not say these things in real life – well I am not a gambling man – but I would not be quite so confident.

Her parting shot is to suggest that we are alienating our natural allies (i.e. women) – women just cannot, can they, accept that the Man-o-sphere does not need them (anymore than the Army needs women to beat the Taliban).

Worthless Bitch thus joins an ever lengthening line of attention-seekers at The Spearhead (although I doubt she would recognise this).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4
Jacko April 12, 2012 at 07:30

@ Eric April 11, 2012 at 14:48:

I don’t disagree with most of what you say.

MGTOW is not for everyone and we practitioners of it are merely trying to make the most of a bad situation. From my point of view, it would be nice to live in the Middle Ages when couples entered into arranged or quasi-arranged marriages and husband and wife both had socially enforced behavioral obligations to each other. The sexes were truly regarded as complementary. Unfortunately, those are not the times we live in today. But you have to look on the bright side. We live in a time of freedom, health and material prosperity unknown in the Middle Ages. Sure, trying to find love isn’t even worth the effort today, but life’s not all bad.

Your assertion that women are narcissists incapable of love is demonstrably untrue. Of course women are narcissists. We all know that and we also know they also incapable of loving the vast majority of men. But women can love and, when they do, they love hard.

This is the real reason why women stay with abusive bad boy husbands. It has nothing to do with economic security or low self-esteem or any of the other comforting lies told by the sisterhood. Women love their bad boy husbands to death [sometimes quite literally].

Of course, when women fall out of love, they will hate their ex with a passion, even though he’s usually exactly the same person he was before! Such is the irrational emotional roller coaster of women’s lives when freed from social constraints. Roller coasters make me sick. I’ll take MGTOW!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Georice81 April 12, 2012 at 08:33

Jacko wrote:
“This is the real reason why women stay with abusive bad boy husbands. It has nothing to do with economic security or low self-esteem or any of the other comforting lies told by the sisterhood. Women love their bad boy husbands to death [sometimes quite literally]. ”

I have seen too many women leave their nice and stable husbands to live with some wacked out bad boy. I don’t quite understand this especially when the women are mature. Is this their way of re-living their teens? Does this make them feel young again? I honestly think that they are mentally unstable.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
D April 12, 2012 at 09:46

@Eric April 11, 2012 at 17:50

Thanks for the clarification.

@Oddsock April 11, 2012 at 22:37

The idea of modern love is nothing more than a social construct based around reproduction lust and attachment, programmed into us from birth

Agreed!

Its not hard to check and find the history of marriage etc. Its was and still is all a farce simply to keep men producing and protecting. What is happenining is basically men are waking up to the big feckin con.

Fair enough.

However, has there been a civilization that didn’t have marriage? I’m talking marriage 1.0 here–Arranged marriage or courtship, girl expected to be virgin, man head of family, usually an extended family, divorce difficult. Little romance or “true wuv”, basically a lot of duty and responsibility for everyone.

What’s the alternative? Do you have a plan that will work just as well or better for rearing children into responsible adults?

Is civilization possible without men “producing and protecting”? I’m not taking the piss, I’m asking an honest question here.

The past, what, 150 years or so has been full of modern ideas that were supposed to be better than the old-fashioned ways. Not sure we need another new-fangled re-engineering of society. Unless it’s something that will really work this time.

If MGTOW is a stepping stone back to sanity, great. If that means starving (literally and figuratively) the beast that is modern woman, great. At some point, the Sugar Daddy state will crash, and women will realize they can’t raise the kiddies by themselves. What then?

This is personal because I have children to guide through this train-wreck of a culture and the crash that is sure to follow. I see hope in the MRM.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Jacko April 12, 2012 at 10:38

Georice81,

Some women are indeed mentally unstable, but that is not the only reason.

I’m a believer in evolutionary psychology. I think that the great [and much maligned] Satoshi Kanazawa has given the most persuasive EP explanation of why some battered women stay:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200804/why-do-some-battered-women-stay

To summarize briefly, Kanazawa’s argument is that for many thousands of years, violent men were the most likely to be successful in life. Women wanted to mate with them because the resulting offspring would have a better chance of being successful too. Violent men don’t do well in the modern world of today and they often end up murdered or in jail. This doesn’t matter to a woman’s subconscious because her subconscious mind has still not caught up to the modern world; it’s stuck in an ancient world where might makes right.

Makes sense to me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Oddsock April 12, 2012 at 11:38

D

Interesting questions but again with respect, I can only give you my personal opinion and I trust you will not take offence. Who cares ? Society is fecked, I did not break it and I am sure as hell not going to set myself up as punch bag in trying to fix it. IMHO society must collapse before we can even start to think about what we replace it with and regardless of what the optimists think, it is collapsing, infact, I believe we are now at the quickening stage. I also believe it is a pointless and even futile exercise in trying to figure out what comes next. Let the dust settle then we can see whats left. If you want to try and rescue things and turn it all around, be my guest. Personally, I think you would be pissing in the wind.

I hope that helps explain things a little better?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Epoche* April 12, 2012 at 13:17

All that said, men have every right to be angry, and righteously so. But deep down, I think what most of them want is far simpler and more benign than revenge or some political payback.
———————————-
I have been told by several women that they love me, I didnt believe them. Even if I did have someone who loved me and things were going great, I would be gravely concerned with this direction the country is headed in. I want payback.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
D April 12, 2012 at 15:04

Oddsock April 12, 2012 at 11:38

No offense taken. You have a good point.

Thanks.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
MRA April 12, 2012 at 17:00

(this is a lot more common than most people realize — American men’s own mothers very often blame them and side with the ex in what is usually a futile effort to maintain contact with the grandchildren)

That is why we often see more and more parental grandmother with custody rights on grandchildren over the own father and the heroic single mom, former daughter in law tend to not speak in the same way about grandmother than she does about the former male partner.

Because in order to get what they want they could turn the back on their own son.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eric April 12, 2012 at 17:35

Jacko,

I pretty much agree with you about MGTOW, but I think where we disagree is on women’s motives. I think that the reason they stay with bad-boys and thugs has little to do with love; or the lies of the Sisterhood which you mention. I think women are drawn to such men because our culture teaches them that men are inferior and women must always feel a sense of superiority and independence from them. IOW, it’s strictly a matter of maintaining their ego-equilibrium. They can’t stand decent or real men for the same reason—those men don’t fit their world-view that all men are pigs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Avenger April 12, 2012 at 20:12

@Jacko-I have no idea what you’re trying to prove. That some people believed that the man Jesus was a god and were willing to die for it? People will believe and die for a lot of deluded nonsense. Jim Jones got a 1000 of them to drink the Koolaide. Showing me some artist’s paintings of martyrs which I’ve seen before you were born proves nothing as well.
And I have no idea what Atheists believe or preach since I’m not a professional Atheist. I imagine that they just don’t believe in a God but what has this to do with believing that Jesus, a man, was God?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Jacko April 13, 2012 at 10:32

Avenger,

I think you’ve overlooked the original context of my initial comment about religion. I had suggested that getting some religion [and I did not specify Christianity or Catholicism in particular] is potentially a good way for men to cope with the reality of not having a woman’s love. Obviously, you disagree. So be it.

I would observe, however, that atheists are much more likely than religious folks to be “progressive” and to believe in rubbish like Marxism, environmentalism, overpopulation, “tolerance”, radical equality, affirmative action and, of course, feminism.

And why is this? It’s because atheists, like feminists and the other “progressives”, reject the wisdom and traditions of the past. The fact is that most pre-modern traditions [including patriarchy and hierarchical religion] lasted for so many centuries because they worked!!! It’s only thanks to the Enlightenment that these old traditions were cast aside in the name of “progress”.

Atheists and feminists are natural bedfellows because they are both “progressive”. Religious folks and MRMs are natural bedfellows because they are both traditionalists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Anonymous April 13, 2012 at 12:46

@Somehow Somewhat:
“At least when men become bitter for being unloved, they show that they still care. An increasing number of men are becoming indifferent to whatever women do. Indifference is what gets women freaking out.

As someone once said: “The worst thing you can do to your fellow human being is not to hate them. It is being indifferent to them.”

Another famous quote:

“The true opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.”

I agree but only in regards to the case of spurned-love hate.
Spurned-love hate is much different than pure hate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 13, 2012 at 18:08

I would observe, however, that atheists are much more likely than religious folks to be “progressive” and to believe in rubbish like Marxism, environmentalism, overpopulation, “tolerance”, radical equality, affirmative action and, of course, feminism.

The only thing I believe in there is that the world is overpopulated.

And why is this? It’s because atheists, like feminists and the other “progressives”, reject the wisdom and traditions of the past. The fact is that most pre-modern traditions [including patriarchy and hierarchical religion] lasted for so many centuries because they worked!!!

Just because people did things in the past doesn’t make them a tradition or a good tradition. And I can assure you that men were no smarter in the past than today. And btw, your view of the past is very limited and apparently left over from late Victorian days. What about the other 200k years of human history? Some people even believe that the earth has been destroyed numerous times by natural disasters and that the few survivors had to rebuild it which took thousands of years. Man may actually have existed for a billion years and may have coexisted alongside dinosaurs (they still exist btw) and other species of humans. Isn’t that what your Bible says? Adam may just have been one of the first modern men because as you’ll note there were other primitive people living at the same time. Thegods gave Cain and then Adm and Eve a Mark (possibly a weapon or something of that nature) to protect them from the savage humans.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
Kris W April 14, 2012 at 04:41

Adam’s Weakness. As much as we might need love and affection, women are raised to be addicted to it. It may hurt, but through controlling ones own emotions, and limiting the positive emotions you give, you are already breaking through many levels of conditioning that prevent women from seeing that which is right in front of them.

As per feminism, it is a hate movement. The only conservation an MRA should be having with a feminist is to kick a feminist’s proverbial teeth down their proverbial throats with a pair of proverbial steel toe boots. You do not debate or tolerates bigots, you stamp them out.

The MRM didn’t get where it is today by being nice, we got here through shameless verbal/written radicalism. Rhetoric that made it more and more acceptable to engage in men’s rights topics because the Radical rhetoric was lit by the light of truth and facts.

We didn’t emote the Radical Feminist’s off of public comment sections and blogs, we shouted them out. We crushed them like the bigoted bugs they are(that is why most of them can now be found in Feminist safe havens like the Huntington Post). We can never back down and never surrender. Because to do so is to invite total ruin to our cause.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Abides April 14, 2012 at 09:27

Women do not and can not love the way you do and can. The best a man can get is some good emotional gina tingle. Never ever forget it.

That is the typical story, about women objectifying men, but reality is much, much worse than that.

I realized that was the case when I was pretty young and a natural alpha (lots of gina tingling and girls throwing themselves at me, but nothing else) and I was unhappy with that and then thought that men and women share too much gene material and the brain etc. are too complicated to be that substantially different, so women had to be able to love men, just as men love women, and I set out to look for that, having developed a correct and operational definition of “love” as between a man and a woman (other combinations possible).

With great skill and quite a bit of effort I have managed to get “love” with a few women, but I have been at first astonished and then horrified by their reaction.

All were fearful and resentful about the resulting feelings. In part because they were new and unknown to them, but in part because as one told me loving me “love” for me diminished her sense of control over me, her “hand”/”leverage” in our relationship. Even if they were equally sure that I loved them, so there was no issue that I would be taking advantage of that.

They rejected their love for me because it weakened their leverage/hand in their relationship with me. Because love means not being able/willing to use that leverage/hand and that made them too anxious/insecure.

That really devastated me. So it is not true that AWALT, but those very few who are NAWALT as a rule feel anxious/insecure about being NAWALT and try to become “standard”.

My impression as to why this is the case is that for a very long time women considered men mostly as drones and employers, objects to be used or negotiated with, and therefore it was a bad idea for them to love their drone or employer object. I suspect this is still largely the case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Abides April 14, 2012 at 09:48

Anyhow, she said that love wasn’t what people felt when they married. Most people just feel some combination of lust and friendship. Or worse–desperation and relief that someone actually wants them. They just think they’re in love because they don’t know better.
The real love was what happened after a couple stayed together for a decade or so. Love was the result of–wait for it–actually behaving in a loving manner toward your spouse and children no matter what else was going on. In other words, do your duty and the rest follows. Love is something you work at, not something that just happens magically. Expecting “true love” before many years of marriage was putting the cart before the horse. This was basically what Grandma’s own mother and father told her.

Your granma learned that through tradition, but someone long ago posted on the net a definition of “love” that I have adopted as being both correct and operational, and corresponds to what your Granma told you: “love” as between a man and a woman is shared (emotional) confidence and (physical) intimacy.

The most important detail is that it is not a feeling, but a *situation*. It is a situation that can be driven towards or it just happens.

Your Granma is saying correctly that usually it is a situation that builds up with time and requires work doing things that build both confidence and intimacy because most people don’t realize “love” is not a feeling but a situation between 2 people (usually man and woman, sometimes man and man, very rarely woman and woman, and almost never among more than 2 people because it gets too complicated) and stumble into it more or less accidentally and rather slowly. BTW it is a situation between 2 people that can be established, if one has a clear ideas and skill, much faster than several years of marriage, because it is a really powerful yearning of the human mind to achieve it.

The problem I mentioned in my previous comment is that most men don’t have preconceptions about what “love” is, and when the situation above happens and they are part of it they think it is pretty good, while most women have preconceived fantasies of the “butterflies in your stomach” or “gina tingle” nature, and when shared confidence and intimacy happen instead they feel worried and that their power in the couple threatened by a situation of intimacy and confidence with their partner.

Note: shared confidence and intimacy does not mean totally shared confidence and intimacy, it is not a merging of two personalities, or reciprocal slavery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Lara April 14, 2012 at 11:43

Most of us used to think that marriage is a woman invention, a lifelong bond to keep women and their kids safe and provided,,,what a huge lie.

Women consider the relationship much more important than the “institution”, if the bond in the couple is broken, then the marriage is also broken (as simple as it is, don’t know what it is so difficult to understand to men); we are more sincere to ourselves, and search for real and true love, but eventually, if it is not what we imagined, we are better on our own (to men, being alone is almost a tragedy, something that strikes to me,,,,aren’t you those “independent and selfsufficient beings? there is a saying in my country: “mas vale solo que mal acompañado” (better alone than in bad company), which most of women fully meet, when they have the minimum resources to live on, in whatever country, or culture.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
Emma the Emo April 14, 2012 at 15:45

Once I talked to people on Manboobz, and said that while I only had one, MRAs can be nice if you’re nice to them. The response was that “He was only nice because he got everything he wanted”. This idea that you’re supposed to act all normal, calm and nice and never express any negativity while the government is making your life harder and no one gives a shit, is absurd. First, he got only some of what he wanted (how can one person give you absolutely everything anyway?), and second, people aren’t in general nice and calm when they feel unfairness and lack the essentials they need for living a tolerable life. It’s not really fair or good when all women are maligned for the deeds of those women whom the maligner encountered, but it seems it rarely leads to killing sprees and not something to attack with all your might because it’s “misogyny”. It should be pretty neutral and irrelevant in itself. The only thing to really worry about is that you might be digging your own hole by sweeping problems under the rug. Or worse, setting women up, telling them it’s ok to do this and that, and nothing bad will happen.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Epoche* April 15, 2012 at 18:13

This idea that you’re supposed to act all normal, calm and nice and never express any negativity while the government is making your life harder and no one gives a shit, is absurd.
———————————-
our therapeutic culture attempts to malign any rage (legitimate or not) as being somehow unhuman. A similiar technique was used in the Soviet Union where one had to humiliate oneself before the party.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
ubermensch April 15, 2012 at 21:52

“They want some love, some security and the opportunity to be a part of a family. They want to grow old with a woman who is true to them, and to see their children grow tall and strong. It doesn’t always come out that way, and there are those who have rejected the idea entirely, but it’s an ideal that I think most men would agree is worth some effort, if not for themselves then for a better society in general”.

I for one have decided to unplug and check out. Fuck working for anything resembling marriage, when it is statistically likely – highly likely mind you – to end in abject slavery and utter misery? I’m an intelligent man and I’ve given the situation and my life a lot of very, very careful and self-critical thought.

To this end I made the logical conclusion. I took the red pill and realised we’re all living in the femimatrix. There is no way out; so, rather than remain in servitude and end up in the meat grinder, I chose to work the system to my benefit and simply go my own way.

No marriage. No co-habition. No children. No free shit for women. No walking ATM. Prostitutes and one night stands only.

I am liberated. I am free. And each and every day it just gets better. And funnily enough, the women are circling like vultures no that I don’t give a fuck about them any longer. But you know what? Nobody would know any different. I still treat men and women alike with respect, courtesy and decency. The perfect ghost. The MGTOW movement is growing – I see the behaviour all around me – it’s almost like it “takes one to know one” – but no words are ever exchanged …

@Worthless Bitch
“Give a boy a hammer and he will find that everything needs hammering.”

Damn-fucking-straight he will – especially if he’s pissed off! Painful times are coming for women. Dark and *very, very painful* times. But it won’t come in the form of physical violence. No, it will be more drawn out than such barbarity. It will come in the form of mass abandonment. It’s already happening now – look at the latest statistics – single mothers are legion and the only reason they can survive is due to the government – and Daddy is running shit out of cash. So, hope you’re money maker is in good working order, as you’ll need to sell it for food in the not too distant future. Enjoy the decline. I know I am! ;)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Attila April 30, 2012 at 20:30

Men started to seek God/Whatever when the realized that those around him couldn’t care less if they lived or died.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Contempt for mothers, the first error May 25, 2013 at 10:20

Its collective hatred in here, where haters firing off more hate towards one another is the REAL problem with the world today. No wonder according to the thread, women are insecure and unstable – who would trust any of you? Self destruct? Did your seed all end up on the floor or were you all not the seed that reached your mothers…whose earth has been hell ever since. Not a single one of you has the capability to extend beyond your own selfish needs. Looking to others to serve you, slaves to own delusions, the war in your brains scorches fields into desert sand equal to the wastelands of your souls. Burn in that hell because that is the reality you create in your own lives and the reason nothing grows in your presence. The energy you put out there is exactly the energy you get back, its that simple.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
binary options July 6, 2013 at 04:15

When making use of investing program, enjoy having the capacity
to business binary options which end inside 60 seconds or so all the way till the finish from the
exchanging yr. When utilizing investing system, appreciate
to be able to business binary options in which end inside
1 minute all the way before stop with the investing season.
While some other programs may possibly seek to amazing anyone together with higher winnings in addition to minimal boundaries, solely binary options provides an opportunity
to honestly benefit from binary options. One
other factor to weigh can be which agents enable investors to invest in deals which might be in fact based upon fundamental assets associated
with just about every purchase car or truck. The all day and hour or so guidance ensures that
you get as often assist as well as help you have to turn
out to be a highly effective entrepreneur.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
lee September 15, 2013 at 21:17

Let me guess. She was attractive and nothing else mattered at the time. Now u know, pretty doesn’t equal good, kind, or compatible. Go out, conquer, and make a smarter choice next time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Dan October 30, 2013 at 15:56

I met a woman two to three years back, with whom there was a physical spark with straight away and we were very physically attracted, and when we got to know each other, we had just such a deep connection. I was honestly falling for her, and at one point she had told me that she had feelings for me too. It felt incredible at one time. Since that though over the last few months, after things should have moved forward, she has seemed to be going backwards and out of control, going out drinking too much, spending more and more time with friends a lot younger than her and trying to live a similar lifestyle to them, even though she has two young children, we’ve just grown more distant and more distant. Now she is in what appears to be a superficial relationship, and I feel I’ve lost someone I had a deep connection with. I don’t ask for much, I don’t want to play games or be on the receiving end of them. I suffer from anxiety so I like to take a straightforward approach otherwise complicated situations just make me ill… I just want to love, share my life with someone and get the same back. No “one-upmanship”, no complications, not anything for what I have – rather than what I am. And what is wrong with that? It seemed a physical attraction and a connection and actually getting on really well is not enough these days? I admittedly had some sex struggles because of my anxiety which I’m working hard on addressing. Quite a few think the grass is greener on the other side these days… often to find that grass is – metaphorically speaking – fertilised with bullsh*t – and to find that it wasn’t greener at all. Some people want more more more… and this is why things are failing spectacularly for some people these days. And people think way too much on things these days. All this itself is weak. Things take work and effort too – and only the strongest survive.

Rather than get angry, I know to carry on loving and improving myself for myself. It’s showing its benefits already, although I do really get very down about it still. People say it’s her loss, but I still feel a sense of loss too… but I guess it’s her loss going forward because I would’ve been loving and caring… and what has she ditched all that for? A man who “isn’t romantic” and has a “violent streak”. What is annoying is I’m quite loyal and had been caring during her time where she appeared to be all over the place and out of control, and I feel trying to stay loyal and strong might have been interpreted as weak (it cost me a little as it made my anxiety worse and worse but only because I genuinely loved this woman!)… But then to some it doesn’t seem okay to be just human these days does it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: