Welcome to our new upgraded phpbb 3.2 forum! The upgrade is now complete. See announcement and new features here, or report any problems or issues here. Enjoy the new forum.
Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
Only because women have food in their mouths, jobs given to them mandated by the government, our wages are taxed to feed them without our permissions, they take billions from men every year in child support and alimony.
Stop all of this and we would see who needs who more.
It's artificial, women are near useless but for the wet holes between their legs.
Yes men pay for sex, but in their natural condition women have to lay on their backs and let a man run them through with their penis in order to survive.
That is why they started feminism, so they could force men to give them what they could not earn.
Now they can be very selective about who they lay down for and that is why this forum exists. Because a bunch of guys woke up one day and said "we're not getting any p***y! whatpup with that!"
Pathetic, sexist salivation. Could you do me a favour and drop the last letter from your nickname. It sounds a lot better as "leaving us". Alone.
Men need to become unapproachable. Problem is mangina's won't go along with it.
"Woman is a violent and uncontrolled animal... If you allow them to achieve complete equality with men, do you think they will be easier to live with? Not at all. Once they have achieved equality, they will be your masters." Cato the Elder
Perhaps you can explain why what I said was wrong, Pubic Blunder.
This is not the kind of stuff I would spend hours debating. Perhaps it's you who should bring us evidence that women are "near useless" if it weren't for the hole between their legs... Those few statements above are denying so much of biology, anthropology, world history and culture and social development, one doesn't even know where to start to refute them.
What has become a pitiful reality on this forum, is that most of the forum members who entertain these sexist views on women and society, followed by the "rage against manginas" corollary, are just bitter little men who prefer talking about hate instead of looking for love. Abroad or at home, it doesn't really matter. Some of you guys are just frozen in a self-referential world where all women are evil, manipulative and materialistic anyway. You probably gave up even trying to think, just for a moment, that your love life so far cannot be assumed as a universal truth, either about yourself or about anyone else.
It continues to puzzle me why, with the "happier abroad" banner well in evidence on the top left of this webpage, so many of you chaps are still lying in the bed of sterile hatred you make for yourself everyday.
History shows that birth rates and the economy are linearly proportional. If a country has a declining birth rate, this is a sign that it has peaked in it's power/influence, hence it's national economy starts shrinking. This is most recently evident in Japan.
What I'm curious to see is what is going to happen in America, where there is a declining marriage/birth rate amongst the larger, older, mostly caucasian population but a continuously steady influx of immigration from mexico, asia and eastern europe. Like previous generations of fobs, these immigrants have higher birth rates, are more religious and also more industrious. Curious to see how this all works out for the nation as a whole.
It's common knowledge that in many cultures around the world boys are the preferred sex over girls because boys turn into men who in their lifetime are much more useful/beneficial to society then women.
I remember my mom always said to me that she was go glad she had a boy (me) over a girl because I fixed things, solved her problems and was just easier to manage. A society needs a balance though, not too many men over women or vise versa.
Having said that, women are not "useless", but I do get angry when modern women try to make themselves appear to be more useful then what they really are.
The Earth has been colonized and cultivated by men since as far back as the oldest records we can find. Women played their part in giving birth to these strong men, that's about it.
Oh, come on.... This is a place for men to vent. This pisses me off like no other because every time a man speaks harshly about women, even if it's VALID, he's automatically vilified and placed in the "bitter misogynist" category.
The bottom line (as far as I can tell) is that most of the men on these forums are decent men, but unfortunately, and along with what leavingusa said, Western women are no longer dependent on the average man like in the old days so either they hold out to only make themselves available to rich guys, or they rather date thugs/criminals because they're fun and exciting, so all the average guys are stuck being single and sexless unless they chose to date women who are obese, single moms, or are over 35 and used up.
This is definite grounds to be angry at women. The fact that most hot women will reject 80% of men who still directly or indirectly contribute to their well being, and the fact that they see 80% of men as undesirable and invisible. It's absolutely disgusting and inhumane which is why men are either choosing to live alone (ghost) or they're leaving this country altogether.
+1 - wow this is the best post I've read on HA - I think I'll frame it - LOL
Here's the evidence:
Women are useless in the home nowadays because feminism has told women they don't have to do anything. As a result mediocrity has set in because women now think that merely doing anything is enough. We now have women who think they are 'liberated' simply because they have a job, despite the fact that do next to nothing in the workplace and contribute nothing but gossip, b*tchiness and childishness...
You have as much right to vent your "manly" frustrations and post them as personal opinions as I have to find them partial, baseless, and inconclusive. I would respect those usual statements much more if only you guys learned to see them as an expression of your personal experiences with women and life in general, instead of a Universal Truth that comes from a superior knowledge or wisdom.
I don't need some obscure piece of research to refute you and those who speak like you. When you proclaim that "most hot women will reject 80% of men", are you really considering that:
1) the definition of a "hot woman" is highly subjective;
2) being a "hot woman" doesn't necessarily equate to being an intelligent, considerate and loving woman; if you (quite rightly) point out how spoiled, materialistic and manipulative many "hot women" are, and how absolutely unfit for a serious and fulfilling relationship they are, isn't that enough ground to just peacefully ignore them, making them invisible to you?
3) assuming the majority of us on this forum are just average, if not below average, Joes with a decent life and job, and perhaps a head full of escapist dreams, isn't it about time we started to value "mediocrity" in women as much as we want women to love ours? Isn't it immature, if not a tad hypocritical, to claim that women should drop their glossy magazine standards and fall in love with plain Joe mainly because of his inner qualities, when so much of what I keep on reading here is frustrated fantasies of 8s and 9s, 20-something exotic beauties from Asia or blonde bombshells from Eastern Europe?
I mean, look at some of Falcon's posts. He is what I define a man with his feet strongly on the ground. He talks about his happiness in sharing the company of average-looking girls who haven't lost a sense of wonder and respect for foreign cultures, who can still give people smiles and attention and appreciate the simple things of life as the more important. I don't think the question is whether Falcon is attracted to hot, model-quality women. The queston is that he has chosen to cherish inner over outer beauty, and look far beyond the elusive gift of youth and physical attractiveness for his coordinates of who a decent, serious and loving woman should be.
Can't you guys just take him as example? Is it so hard?
I already did, you tried to change the subject and tap dance like a little nancy boy.
Women are entirely subsidized by the government, the reason women can reject most men is because the government is their boyfriend forcefully subsidizing the sex lives of women.
Everywhere else they are struggling to survive and need men, average men. They can't afford to only screw pool boys and ignore the accountant.
That's the evidence, when you have to have all this affirmative action and laws to give you an unfair advantage in all areas of life that means you suck shit.
Here's my take on the publicduende/leavingusa dispute going on right now.
Publicduende is happier abroad, being an Italian who found happiness in the UK, but the ironic part is that he didn't find his happiness with a British woman but rather with a Colombian woman. Leavingusa is a frustrated American (which is okay, that's why this site exists) who has experienced firsthand many of the things publicduende likely never did.
I find it interesting that publicduende mentioned falcon as a poster who values inner over outer beauty. From what I've seen here on this site, there are only a few posters who demand an absolutely perfect woman; most men on here simply want a feminine and not fat woman. How is that a sense of entitlement? Now if he demanded she had supermodel good looks, the right breast to butt ratio, etc then he would have a sense of entitlement, but wanting a woman to be feminine, not fat, and APPROACHABLE does not mean men have a sense of entitlement. My Mexican fiancee for example would probably not win any beauty pageants but she is nice, makes every effort to eat properly and avoid getting fat and was highly approachable when I first met her. You can say rejecting a fat woman is superficial but I disagree; eating improperly lowers a person's quality of life and also can cause mental problems (which is why I think many American women are hostile and paranoid; eating too many carbs and not enough animal fat).
I personally find publicduende to be one of the most confusing posters on this site. He's a non-Anglo who found happiness in an Anglo country with a non-Anglo woman who then comes on here and has this self-righteous attitude towards many American posters who are simply frustrated because the United States is filled with unapproachable women who run to the authorities for everything. In fact I would almost say that many of his posts could have come out of the mouth of an American woman.
Now as for leavingusa, I disagree that women's only value is that of sex. I agree fully that a male-run society is best but in traditional patriarchal societies (ie non-Anglo societies like Mexico) women have sort of a "calming" effect on society. Men really run the place in Mexico but without women the society would be far less pleasant since women add the beauty to the society (and I'm not just talking about physical beauty of the women themselves). Compare that to the United States where women rather than having a calming effect on the society have a violent effect.
LMAO!! That's hilarious hahah. It is so true. It's because all these women have so many so called "choices" when they are in their 20s but they take it for granted. During their 20s, they probably have so many chances of having that "guy" but 99% of the time they have already rejected several guys that could have been potential good husbands. Then they get older and uglier but even when they are older and uglier, they still carry on that mentality that their shit don't stink and they still deserve something that is out of their league. Women in America become easier to pick up of course as they age but they still carry that unrealistic qualification list of a man that should marry them. American women overall just plain suck.