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       Switch to Mobile


Women aren't attracted to men (an article)

Discuss and talk about any general topic.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

Postby ExpeditionSailor » June 15th, 2012, 3:21 am

OutsideoftheBox wrote:
DarkMinxMish wrote:
Winston wrote:This topic got me thinking about something.

Why is it that when a woman gets a tattoo with a name on it, she will pick the name of her mother, her best girlfriend, her child, or her pet, but never her boyfriend or husband? Doesn't that say something? Namely, that they aren't really attached to men deep down in their hearts?

What do you think? Anyone ever notice this?

Likewise, women with internet accounts tend to pick the name of their pet or child as their password, but never their male lover. Anyone ever notice that?

Does this support the claim in the OP?


No offense Winston, but I think it's hella stupid for a female to have any males name tattooed on them....especially a lover. -_-

I mean tattoos are suppose to mean something and they kinda stay with you forever. (though there are ways to remove them)
Mainly you never know whats going to happen. Plus the women(ditz) who do get tats for love often end up not with that person after a certain period of time. So your left loveless and with a momento that won't come off...that'll suck.

In certain cases sure since it is a personal choice. I could see girls doing it for the love of their lives and for lovers they were deeply in love with, but lost. Or the other case would be couples do it for marriage. Sort of like a lady would wear her hubby's name in honor of him. Somewhere so not out in the open.

For me personally as kinda romantic that may seem, it just represents a brand of sorts. Even if there was someone I was crazy for (there might be) I still wouldn't wear their name on my skin. It would be a bit embarrassing....
Sure the male can own our hearts, but not the skin we're in if that makes any sense...


Actually a tattoo is just a raunchy tattoo which females utilize to draw attention to their bodies. The thing that is supposed to "mean something" and "stay with you forever" is your mate. You place more value on raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos, than the man you choose to mate with.

Your post merely proves how f***ed up in the head, and ass backwards Americanized females truly are. No wonder the world is sick of your kind.

Americanized females = Epic failure.


'Raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos..." Exactamundo! The same goes for piercings. The problem with a lot of people in America and Canada (and Western Europe to a lesser extent) is that they're more or less living in a state of arrested development - i.e. adolescence. They seem to have little desire or incentive to behave like adults. The elites like it this way because people in an arrested state of development are much, much easier to control.

I am waiting, no, living for the day when women who got tats in their thirties turn 45 or 50, and all that wrinkly skin they'll be sporting plus the general effects of aging will make their tats look like shit. They will then look like used-up crack whores, and I will be laughing at them. As loudly as I can.
ExpeditionSailor
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 219
Joined: January 28th, 2011, 5:33 am




Check out our Dating Sites and HA International Romance Tours!



Postby DarkMinxMish » June 15th, 2012, 3:29 am

OutsideoftheBox wrote:
DarkMinxMish wrote:
Winston wrote:This topic got me thinking about something.

Why is it that when a woman gets a tattoo with a name on it, she will pick the name of her mother, her best girlfriend, her child, or her pet, but never her boyfriend or husband? Doesn't that say something? Namely, that they aren't really attached to men deep down in their hearts?

What do you think? Anyone ever notice this?

Likewise, women with internet accounts tend to pick the name of their pet or child as their password, but never their male lover. Anyone ever notice that?

Does this support the claim in the OP?


No offense Winston, but I think it's hella stupid for a female to have any males name tattooed on them....especially a lover. -_-

I mean tattoos are suppose to mean something and they kinda stay with you forever. (though there are ways to remove them)
Mainly you never know whats going to happen. Plus the women(ditz) who do get tats for love often end up not with that person after a certain period of time. So your left loveless and with a momento that won't come off...that'll suck.

In certain cases sure since it is a personal choice. I could see girls doing it for the love of their lives and for lovers they were deeply in love with, but lost. Or the other case would be couples do it for marriage. Sort of like a lady would wear her hubby's name in honor of him. Somewhere so not out in the open.

For me personally as kinda romantic that may seem, it just represents a brand of sorts. Even if there was someone I was crazy for (there might be) I still wouldn't wear their name on my skin. It would be a bit embarrassing....
Sure the male can own our hearts, but not the skin we're in if that makes any sense...


Actually a tattoo is just a raunchy tattoo which females utilize to draw attention to their bodies. The thing that is supposed to "mean something" and "stay with you forever" is your mate. You place more value on raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos, than the man you choose to mate with.

Your post merely proves how f***ed up in the head, and ass backwards Americanized females truly are. No wonder the world is sick of your kind.

Americanized females = Epic failure.


Actually no American females do not equal epic failure. I don't care how many times you guys whine over American women we are not and never will be failures. Sure plenty aren't perfect, but we're human just like you so deal (or not deal). Whatever. ^_-

Outside a tattoo can just be a raunchy thing for some women sure. Some girls wear tramp stamps and others do not. It's no different then when a guys gets a half naked chic tatted on him. That's can definitely be trashy.
Most people who get tattoos do it for the attention of course, but also there's meaning involved.
Tattoos are symbols or whatever placed on one's body to generally mean something. No different then any other design.
People have been wearing tattoos for thousands of years as an expression and art. So no while some of it is trashy; I don't believe all of it is.

When a women gets one and she has the right. It can be something important to her or not. A momento, memory, sign, treated like an accessory or whatever. It doesn't always have to be obvious or in your face. Though to be fair women who get them especially younger girls like to show them off. Personally I see nothing wrong with that. Unless it's in an indecent manner than obviously the female is wanting a certain kind of attention.

My sister has one and it's one she designed. It's on her chest, but placed in a spot that she covers mostly.
She's not one to show it off too often. It's generally for her pleasure and her b/f.
She's doesn't think it's trashy and she's pretty conservative for the most part.

Now in regards to a females mate of course they mean something and most women want to be with someone forever.
Realistically that doesn't always happen. If everyone who ever dated, loved, or married someone stayed with them forever this site wouldn't exist.
Also to reply so negatively to something that pertains to Winston's question is f***ing rude.
I was stating that getting a tattoo of a lover is stupid and it is. Unless of course you really mean it. A tattoo isn't something you get lightly and it is difficult to get rid of once you get it.

It's not that the tattoo has more value than the lover. It's doesn't it's the meaning behind it and the importance to the individual. It would be the same if a guy got a girl's name on them and they weren't together anymore it would be awkward with future relationships. This really shouldn't have been this big of an issue. It's about tattoos. That's it. :roll:
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 82
Joined: March 27th, 2012, 7:14 am

American Females are TRASH

Postby OutsideoftheBox » June 15th, 2012, 3:44 am

DarkMinxMish wrote:
OutsideoftheBox wrote:
DarkMinxMish wrote:
Winston wrote:This topic got me thinking about something.

Why is it that when a woman gets a tattoo with a name on it, she will pick the name of her mother, her best girlfriend, her child, or her pet, but never her boyfriend or husband? Doesn't that say something? Namely, that they aren't really attached to men deep down in their hearts?

What do you think? Anyone ever notice this?

Likewise, women with internet accounts tend to pick the name of their pet or child as their password, but never their male lover. Anyone ever notice that?

Does this support the claim in the OP?


No offense Winston, but I think it's hella stupid for a female to have any males name tattooed on them....especially a lover. -_-

I mean tattoos are suppose to mean something and they kinda stay with you forever. (though there are ways to remove them)
Mainly you never know whats going to happen. Plus the women(ditz) who do get tats for love often end up not with that person after a certain period of time. So your left loveless and with a momento that won't come off...that'll suck.

In certain cases sure since it is a personal choice. I could see girls doing it for the love of their lives and for lovers they were deeply in love with, but lost. Or the other case would be couples do it for marriage. Sort of like a lady would wear her hubby's name in honor of him. Somewhere so not out in the open.

For me personally as kinda romantic that may seem, it just represents a brand of sorts. Even if there was someone I was crazy for (there might be) I still wouldn't wear their name on my skin. It would be a bit embarrassing....
Sure the male can own our hearts, but not the skin we're in if that makes any sense...


Actually a tattoo is just a raunchy tattoo which females utilize to draw attention to their bodies. The thing that is supposed to "mean something" and "stay with you forever" is your mate. You place more value on raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos, than the man you choose to mate with.

Your post merely proves how f***ed up in the head, and ass backwards Americanized females truly are. No wonder the world is sick of your kind.

Americanized females = Epic failure.


Actually no American females do not equal epic failure. I don't care how many times you guys whine over American women we are not and never will be failures. Sure plenty aren't perfect, but we're human just like you so deal (or not deal). Whatever. ^_-

Outside a tattoo can just be a raunchy thing for some women sure. Some girls wear tramp stamps and others do not. It's no different then when a guys gets a half naked chic tatted on him. That's can definitely be trashy.
Most people who get tattoos do it for the attention of course, but also there's meaning involved.
Tattoos are symbols or whatever placed on one's body to generally mean something. No different then any other design.
People have been wearing tattoos for thousands of years as an expression and art. So no while some of it is trashy; I don't believe all of it is.

When a women gets one and she has the right. It can be something important to her or not. A momento, memory, sign, treated like an accessory or whatever. It doesn't always have to be obvious or in your face. Though to be fair women who get them especially younger girls like to show them off. Personally I see nothing wrong with that. Unless it's in an indecent manner than obviously the female is wanting a certain kind of attention.

My sister has one and it's one she designed. It's on her chest, but placed in a spot that she covers mostly.
She's not one to show it off too often. It's generally for her pleasure and her b/f.
She's doesn't think it's trashy and she's pretty conservative for the most part.

Now in regards to a females mate of course they mean something and most women want to be with someone forever.
Realistically that doesn't always happen. If everyone who ever dated, loved, or married someone stayed with them forever this site wouldn't exist.
Also to reply so negatively to something that pertains to Winston's question is f***ing rude.
I was stating that getting a tattoo of a lover is stupid and it is. Unless of course you really mean it. A tattoo isn't something you get lightly and it is difficult to get rid of once you get it.

It's not that the tattoo has more value than the lover. It's doesn't it's the meaning behind it and the importance to the individual. It would be the same if a guy got a girl's name on them and they weren't together anymore it would be awkward with future relationships. This really shouldn't have been this big of an issue. It's about tattoos. That's it. :roll:


American females are trash. And no I am not going to read that storybook you just wrote me. Especially when I know you're an American female. Thus 99.9% of your comments will be moronic. I'm not your emasculated mangina boyfriend/husband; therefore I do not have to put up with (or acknowledge) your attitudinal fat mouth.

American Females = IGNORED Epic Failures (from this point on).
OutsideoftheBox
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 241
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 1:57 am

Karl Marx on Women.

Postby OutsideoftheBox » June 15th, 2012, 3:57 am

ExpeditionSailor wrote:
OutsideoftheBox wrote:
DarkMinxMish wrote:
Winston wrote:This topic got me thinking about something.

Why is it that when a woman gets a tattoo with a name on it, she will pick the name of her mother, her best girlfriend, her child, or her pet, but never her boyfriend or husband? Doesn't that say something? Namely, that they aren't really attached to men deep down in their hearts?

What do you think? Anyone ever notice this?

Likewise, women with internet accounts tend to pick the name of their pet or child as their password, but never their male lover. Anyone ever notice that?

Does this support the claim in the OP?


No offense Winston, but I think it's hella stupid for a female to have any males name tattooed on them....especially a lover. -_-

I mean tattoos are suppose to mean something and they kinda stay with you forever. (though there are ways to remove them)
Mainly you never know whats going to happen. Plus the women(ditz) who do get tats for love often end up not with that person after a certain period of time. So your left loveless and with a momento that won't come off...that'll suck.

In certain cases sure since it is a personal choice. I could see girls doing it for the love of their lives and for lovers they were deeply in love with, but lost. Or the other case would be couples do it for marriage. Sort of like a lady would wear her hubby's name in honor of him. Somewhere so not out in the open.

For me personally as kinda romantic that may seem, it just represents a brand of sorts. Even if there was someone I was crazy for (there might be) I still wouldn't wear their name on my skin. It would be a bit embarrassing....
Sure the male can own our hearts, but not the skin we're in if that makes any sense...


Actually a tattoo is just a raunchy tattoo which females utilize to draw attention to their bodies. The thing that is supposed to "mean something" and "stay with you forever" is your mate. You place more value on raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos, than the man you choose to mate with.

Your post merely proves how f***ed up in the head, and ass backwards Americanized females truly are. No wonder the world is sick of your kind.

Americanized females = Epic failure.


'Raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos..." Exactamundo! The same goes for piercings. The problem with a lot of people in America and Canada (and Western Europe to a lesser extent) is that they're more or less living in a state of arrested development - i.e. adolescence. They seem to have little desire or incentive to behave like adults. The elites like it this way because people in an arrested state of development are much, much easier to control.

I am waiting, no, living for the day when women who got tats in their thirties turn 45 or 50, and all that wrinkly skin they'll be sporting plus the general effects of aging will make their tats look like shit. They will then look like used-up crack whores, and I will be laughing at them. As loudly as I can.


The Elite Anglo establishment actually works through American females. The clues are strewn all throughout history. What is transpiring today would be impossible without the willing help of droves of angry, man-hating, entitled, spiritually devoid, dumbed down females.

American females are the walking dead; taking droves of unsuspecting men by the hand and leading those men to their deaths as well. Misery loves company.

"Anyone who knows anything of history knows that great social changes are impossible without feminine upheaval. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex, the ugly ones included." - Karl Marx
OutsideoftheBox
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 241
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 1:57 am

Postby DarkMinxMish » June 15th, 2012, 4:45 am

So just, because I'm an American female you won't respond. Whatever keep that childish shit to yourself. ;p
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 82
Joined: March 27th, 2012, 7:14 am

Postby leavingusa » June 19th, 2012, 6:02 am

DarkMinxMish wrote:So just, because I'm an American female you won't respond. Whatever keep that childish shit to yourself. ;p


And I'd like to join what he said with a hearty nobody gives a f**k.

I was talking to this female idiot on huffington post who says her niece cannot get boys to take her seriously always flaking on her and won't take her out on a date.

There's plenty of man up articles in the media about guys playing video games instead of getting married.

Kind of hard to separate fact from fiction here.
leavingusa
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 322
Joined: June 21st, 2011, 9:13 pm

Postby Blue Murder » June 19th, 2012, 3:22 pm

Okay, while DarkMinxMash needs to shut up before Outside REALLY embarrasses her, LeavingUSA has a point -- or one that can be expanded upon, at least. Of course guys are playing video games instead of getting married -- they're SMART!
Self-improvement addict. Always striving for perfection.
Blue Murder
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 699
Joined: May 12th, 2012, 11:25 pm
Location: Climbing that mountain; reaching that plateau.

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:23 am

All_That_Is_Man wrote:
Jester wrote:
Someone wrote:
I remember women really wanted to get married and it was the era of "The Rules" and "Bridget Jones" and "Sex And The City" -- all those women were desperate to find a husband. Nowadays it's the opposite. The men are having trouble finding wives.


Yes things have changed just since 2005-2006 as many point out on this thread. I am not sure it is the women. It may be us. Maybe we are onto them, and therefore losing interest.

At least for me, I spot the bullshit games they play much faster. What used to seem cute now just seems toxic. I disqualify women much more readily.


This is very true. So when you say that it was us who changed, you simply mean that we became fully aware that western women are out to get us! It was us who changed for the better then. The question is, if women haven't changed in the previously mentioned years, then how long have women been man-hating, sex-witholding schemers?


IMO since getting kicked out of the Garden of Eden.

I have heard that the Koran prescribes monthly whippings for females as a preventative. Though not a Moslem, I must say that NOT whipping them doesn't work too well.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Postby Renata » June 20th, 2012, 7:31 am

Jester nowhere in the Qur'an says to whip women wtf lol ... & muslim women majority of them are treated well. Don't bother with american propoganda that these women are sad & surpressed & depressed. They just have a very conservative way of life & should stick to it to be 'good muslims'.
Like everything else in this world today the muslim religion has been ruined by extremists.

Islam is a way of life.
- It's easy to give, when you know what it's like to have nothing. -

- Develop a backbone, not a wishbone. -
Renata
Experienced Poster
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: May 7th, 2012, 12:14 am
Location: Ireland

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:33 am

Blue Murder wrote:So I overhear a conversation one day.

"We save nice guys for marriage."

Yup. You heard it right, folks. There's another reason not to get married; bitches won't even give you their best years. f**k all the false alphas they want, and give a true alpha a beat-up, worn-out p***y that's already-been-chewed.


I see this close-up. A bitch using her p***y and youth to get power over one pussywhipped fool after another, in series - and thinking that she is getting "bad boys". As if any heterosexual male is a tough guy. Hah. She is getting pussywhipped mommas boys.

I feel sorry for the young guys wasting time now, and also for the young girl, for later when she realizes what she pissed away.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:36 am

polya wrote:
I hate to tell you, but it was around 1991 when Madonna sang "Don't go for 2nd best baby" when the US dating scene went to hell - I think it was because then women got "more rights than men" - women could sue for sexual harassment, child support laws got very tough, women got custody over 90% of the time, etc. All these rights made women thinkthey're better than men and no longer wanted tomarry and act reasonably. ... the dating scene followed these changes.


This is what i noticed exactly.

Madonna's song seemed like propaganda when it came out. Bitch-whore anthem.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:46 am

DarkMinxMish wrote:
No offense Winston, but I think it's hella stupid for a female to have any males name tattooed on them....especially a lover. -_-

I mean tattoos are suppose to mean something and they kinda stay with you forever. (though there are ways to remove them)
Mainly you never know whats going to happen. Plus the women(ditz) who do get tats for love often end up not with that person after a certain period of time. So your left loveless and with a momento that won't come off...that'll suck.

In certain cases sure since it is a personal choice. I could see girls doing it for the love of their lives and for lovers they were deeply in love with, but lost. Or the other case would be couples do it for marriage. Sort of like a lady would wear her hubby's name in honor of him. Somewhere so not out in the open.

For me personally as kinda romantic that may seem, it just represents a brand of sorts. Even if there was someone I was crazy for (there might be) I still wouldn't wear their name on my skin. It would be a bit embarrassing....
Sure the male can own our hearts, but not the skin we're in if that makes any sense...


I hate tats on a chick. Hate.

But Minx's words here give me pause.

A chick'll give me her p***y, but not commit with a tatt. Yeah. Come to think of it I've known more than one like that.

And ***WE'RE*** on strike?

Bullshit.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:49 am

ExpeditionSailor wrote:
'Raunchy juvenile bullshit, such as tattoos..." Exactamundo! The same goes for piercings. The problem with a lot of people in America and Canada (and Western Europe to a lesser extent) is that they're more or less living in a state of arrested development - i.e. adolescence. They seem to have little desire or incentive to behave like adults. The elites like it this way because people in an arrested state of development are much, much easier to control.

I am waiting, no, living for the day when women who got tats in their thirties turn 45 or 50, and all that wrinkly skin they'll be sporting plus the general effects of aging will make their tats look like shit. They will then look like used-up crack whores, and I will be laughing at them. As loudly as I can.


Word.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Re: American Females are TRASH

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:53 am

OutsideoftheBox wrote:American females are trash. And no I am not going to read that storybook you just wrote me. Especially when I know you're an American female. Thus 99.9% of your comments will be moronic. I'm not your emasculated mangina boyfriend/husband; therefore I do not have to put up with (or acknowledge) your attitudinal fat mouth.

American Females = IGNORED Epic Failures (from this point on).


:lol:
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

Postby Jester » June 20th, 2012, 7:54 am

DarkMinxMish wrote:So just, because I'm an American female you won't respond. Whatever keep that childish shit to yourself. ;p


Outside - I think she's turned on.
Jester
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7874
Joined: January 20th, 2009, 10:10 am
Location: Chiang Mai Thailand

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], MrMan and 7 guests