The Number One Thing That Women Are Looking For In A Husband

[Ghost]

.

[traveller]

Women are naturally materialistic (especially western women). 60% of college graduates are now women in the USA. Women DO NOT marry down and only want to marry a man that makes more money than them. This is going to become difficult as time goes on because women are now actually outpacing men as far as income goes.

Oh no, women in the US might start to have to marry DOWN and marry a man who makes LESS money than they do! Oh no, what is the world coming to? Cupcake will either have to marry a guy who makes less money then them or not get married at all (and buy a couple of cats and lot's of dildos).

You know something, you are absolutely right. Women will need to learn how to marry down soon. In fact, not only are women outpacing men, but there is a rising percentage of married families in which the woman is the main breadwinner!

Sadly, I don't see Chicagoland women lowering their standards at all. Even as Illinois has a terrible job market and high unemployment rates, all thanks to the corrupted bureaucrats that have run Illinois straight into the ground. Seriously! No wonder so many Chicagoland women are moving to the ghetto and hooking up with guys who get their 6+ figure incomes through crime and drugs. It certainly is no wonder that countless young women, it's like right after they graduate high school or college, they move right to the ghetto, even from suburbs as far as Naperville, Elgin, Glen Ellyn, Bolingbrook, and such, and hook up with breadstealer men.

[re85with]

Probably perfection.

He has to be charming. He has to be attractive. He has to be cool. He has to be rich. He has to be confident.

I guess that some American/Western women want men who pretty much don't exist.

But, most foreign women accept and want American/Western men who are imperfect but moral.

[IraqVet2003]

Women are naturally materialistic (especially western women). 60% of college graduates are now women in the USA. Women DO NOT marry down and only want to marry a man that makes more money than them. This is going to become difficult as time goes on because women are now actually outpacing men as far as income goes.

Oh no, women in the US might start to have to marry DOWN and marry a man who makes LESS money than they do! Oh no, what is the world coming to? Cupcake will either have to marry a guy who makes less money then them or not get married at all (and buy a couple of cats and lot's of dildos).

You know something, you are absolutely right. Women will need to learn how to marry down soon. In fact, not only are women outpacing men, but there is a rising percentage of married families in which the woman is the main breadwinner!

Sadly, I don't see Chicagoland women lowering their standards at all. Even as Illinois has a terrible job market and high unemployment rates, all thanks to the corrupted bureaucrats that have run Illinois straight into the ground. Seriously! No wonder so many Chicagoland women are moving to the ghetto and hooking up with guys who get their 6+ figure incomes through crime and drugs. It certainly is no wonder that countless young women, it's like right after they graduate high school or college, they move right to the ghetto, even from suburbs as far as Naperville, Elgin, Glen Ellyn, Bolingbrook, and such, and hook up with breadstealer men.

Well, that's hypergamy at work fellas!!! But, unfortunately in America it is HYPERGAMY AT THE EXTREME!!!!

[Wolfeye]

I have a question to add: Is this in the sense of a present cultural alignment or a primal alignment? I notice a lot of theories revolve around work, but a "trade propelled" society (where activities only get done by a third party commissioning it through exchange of some form) isn't really a natural thing. So the ideas of "this is the design" might be flawed from the get-go.

Also, there is WAY too much equating of work with hunting. No, it's not hunting. When someone goes to the store & buys meat, it's shopping. It's not farming if they buy vegetables, is it? The attraction to a good hunter would have taken on a much larger dimension than just capacities as a provider- the physicality/athleticism required to chase something with a spear for seven or eight hours, as an example. Someone would likely have good or great physical functioning at that point, due to increased circulation & also oxygenation from the heart & lungs being exercised in a rigorous way. There also would be demonstration of patience, diligence, and an ability to take serious things seriously (not traits that can be found in all people that have "good money"). That's just using persistence hunting & a spear- other things can be said for hunting with a bow (the same last three things mentioned, but also potentially craftsmanship). Similar things could be said for most, if not all, forms of close-range hunting.

The concept of deeper implications of courage is usually overlooked, as well. Someone with a "weak spine" is considerably more likely to be absent or a menace whenever there's a "high-stakes situation"- it could be anything from abandoning their children to terrorizing their own or other people. They're also much more likely to "flex" on somebody to excite a sense of not being feeble (chicks, kids, old people, someone that thinks them a friend, etc...).

How this relates to hunting? With persistence hunting, at least when tackling the animal at the end of the chase & finishing it with a knife, can be exceedingly dangerous- the animal might turn "at bay" when it's not quite exhausted & then can be quite capable of causing very severe injury with its horns & hooves. Hunting buffalo from the back of a horse is somewhat like hunting a car from the back of a motorcycle- if one of those buffalos bumps into the horse the hunter is riding, it can break its legs & send the rider to the ground hard enough to cause injuries just as serious as the ones from being trampled by the buffalo herd. Some animals are just plain dangerous to hunt (bears, lions, alligators, etc...). A screw-up when trying spear a bear is likely the end of the hunter's story.

So, a woman was potentially gauging MUCH more than what materials the man had. This is not necessarily the case in a "worker" environment.

[Kradmelder]

I have a question to add: Is this in the sense of a present cultural alignment or a primal alignment? I notice a lot of theories revolve around work, but a "trade propelled" society (where activities only get done by a third party commissioning it through exchange of some form) isn't really a natural thing. So the ideas of "this is the design" might be flawed from the get-go.

Also, there is WAY too much equating of work with hunting. No, it's not hunting. When someone goes to the store & buys meat, it's shopping. It's not farming if they buy vegetables, is it? The attraction to a good hunter would have taken on a much larger dimension than just capacities as a provider- the physicality/athleticism required to chase something with a spear for seven or eight hours, as an example. Someone would likely have good or great physical functioning at that point, due to increased circulation & also oxygenation from the heart & lungs being exercised in a rigorous way. There also would be demonstration of patience, diligence, and an ability to take serious things seriously (not traits that can be found in all people that have "good money"). That's just using persistence hunting & a spear- other things can be said for hunting with a bow (the same last three things mentioned, but also potentially craftsmanship). Similar things could be said for most, if not all, forms of close-range hunting.

The concept of deeper implications of courage is usually overlooked, as well. Someone with a "weak spine" is considerably more likely to be absent or a menace whenever there's a "high-stakes situation"- it could be anything from abandoning their children to terrorizing their own or other people. They're also much more likely to "flex" on somebody to excite a sense of not being feeble (chicks, kids, old people, someone that thinks them a friend, etc...).

How this relates to hunting? With persistence hunting, at least when tackling the animal at the end of the chase & finishing it with a knife, can be exceedingly dangerous- the animal might turn "at bay" when it's not quite exhausted & then can be quite capable of causing very severe injury with its horns & hooves. Hunting buffalo from the back of a horse is somewhat like hunting a car from the back of a motorcycle- if one of those buffalos bumps into the horse the hunter is riding, it can break its legs & send the rider to the ground hard enough to cause injuries just as serious as the ones from being trampled by the buffalo herd. Some animals are just plain dangerous to hunt (bears, lions, alligators, etc...). A screw-up when trying spear a bear is likely the end of the hunter's story.

So, a woman was potentially gauging MUCH more than what materials the man had. This is not necessarily the case in a "worker" environment.

I dont think work vs hunting is the correct way to see it. They want a provider. Both work and hunting are providers. Why did hunter gatherer societies eventually become workers? because by working land a man was able to offer more provision and shelter, and by banding together into militaries, to provide more security. Hunter gatherer or warrior societies eventually all gave way to organised societies. From the female perspective, hunting was also a very dangerous form of provision, in which a man could die and leave her without provision, except generosity of the tribe. There was also insecure food supply. Women still look for a provider and someone who offers security of goods and physical security. Hence the losers without a proper job, no strong appearance or behaviour, no proper home etc cannot attract women.

You can't blame women for this. The men should look at themselves. Why should women owe weak sisters sex? The so called alpha BS is nothing but a man who projects an image of confidence and success and commands respect. Stupid women don't see it is only an image and it might be all debt or hot air. Clever women see through that. Look at the losers who can't get women. They dont even command any respect from men and hold no authority. So why would any women want them. They just whine over a computer about lack of women. Going to asia to trade on skin colour is a losing proposition eventually once the asian girl realises she only got a white dud. The asian girls want the same. A man with a house, prospects, and who can look after her. If you can 'provide' she will look after you.

White women people complain about, they just need a white man who can tame them with a firm hand. Like it has always been. Many of them are just not worth it. More and more white men are weak sisters, so women get out of control. Until a man comes along who commands their respect. Then they do women things they once said they would never do. If the men can only whine they cant get women, women will just walk by. Cant blame them for that. I wouldnt even wnat to have a beer with some of the negative loser weak sisters on here. So why on earth would a white woman want to sleep with them?

How is europe? You enjoying your trip?

[Cornfed]

You can't blame women for this. The men should look at themselves. Why should women owe weak sisters sex? The so called alpha BS is nothing but a man who projects an image of confidence and success and commands respect. Stupid women don't see it is only an image and it might be all debt or hot air. Clever women see through that. Look at the losers who can't get women. They dont even command any respect from men and hold no authority. So why would any women want them. They just whine over a computer about lack of women. Going to asia to trade on skin colour is a losing proposition eventually once the asian girl realises she only got a white dud. The asian girls want the same. A man with a house, prospects, and who can look after her. If you can 'provide' she will look after you.

White women people complain about, they just need a white man who can tame them with a firm hand. Like it has always been. Many of them are just not worth it. More and more white men are weak sisters, so women get out of control. Until a man comes along who commands their respect. Then they do women things they once said they would never do. If the men can only whine they cant get women, women will just walk by. Cant blame them for that. I wouldnt even wnat to have a beer with some of the negative loser weak sisters on here. So why on earth would a white woman want to sleep with them?

You realize that all it would take is for someone like Soros or one of his simian underlings to make a phone call and then within a year you could be broke, seemingly through your own bad decisions, and viewed as one of these “weak sisters” by your fellow sychophants to the ZOG, right?

[Nailer]

On the west coast, I do not see this at all. Having a good career makes a guy boring. Who do you think gets laid more, a bartender in a hip place or a lawyer? Looks, social status, and body adornment (tats, piercings, etc.) are what get your laid over here. Maybe the fat 45 year old cat ladies want a guy with a career, IDK.

[Cornfed]

On the west coast, I do not see this at all. Having a good career makes a guy boring. Who do you think gets laid more, a bartender in a hip place or a lawyer? Looks, social status, and body adornment (tats, piercings, etc.) are what get your laid over here. Maybe the fat 45 year old cat ladies want a guy with a career, IDK.

The exception might be aging sluts who want to marry you in order to get a second source of income to allow them to have children while continuing to f**k dirtbags on the side.

[Nailer]

What planet are you from? This is completely retarded. I have never met an unemployed man. If employment was what it took to find a decent woman, this site would not exist.

The idea that women like men with good jobs implies that they can think more than 3-4 days out into the future. I see girls throw themselves at anything exciting and ignore good stable prospects every day. Why are you even spouting off such nonsense?

[Mercury]

When it comes to love women are cold hearted accountants.

The Number One Thing That Women Are Looking For In A Husband
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archiv ... -a-husband

The Number One thing that American women are looking for in a husband is MONEY!!! If the husband can not afford an immense luxury palace, a superyacht the size of the Costa Concordia, a luxury limo as large as an Amtrak, and the ability to give her every single luxury in the world on a solid, sparkling gold platter, then even 6-pack abs, a charming and friendly personality, and unique skills are even an abomination to her!

[MrMan]

When it comes to love women are cold hearted accountants.

The Number One Thing That Women Are Looking For In A Husband
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archiv ... -a-husband

The Number One thing that American women are looking for in a husband is MONEY!!! If the husband can not afford an immense luxury palace, a superyacht the size of the Costa Concordia, a luxury limo as large as an Amtrak, and the ability to give her every single luxury in the world on a solid, sparkling gold platter, then even 6-pack abs, a charming and friendly personality, and unique skills are even an abomination to her!

Overstating the problem is already typical on this forum. You are taking it ot a whole new level.

[Adama]

This is the trend RIGHT NOW ~ but as female-domination happens totally in the next 10 years in U.S.A. {(already a matriarchal society in all Western nations ~ in U.S.A., men will be reduced to a 2nd-class citizen status regarding income levels as the last generation of normal males retires)}, these females will be the leaders and males will be content to be sitting at home and doing no work. I guarantee that females that have been taught since birth to be the family leaders have NO PROBLEMS 'marrying beneath them'.

U.S.A. {(and Western nations)} ~ the first society in history that is TRULY matriarchal, with females being the upper-class and males being the lower-class in every way. But I wish to point out that this was all done because the insane American men WANTED this. I am dumbfounded as to how the rest of the world's males even spit on this madman, let alone talk to him!!


AT THE RATE EVERYTHING IS GOING, INDIA WILL BE THE SAME WAY IN 20 YEARS AND CHINA IS ALREADY TOTALLY FEMINIST {(feminism = women's in every area of men)}.

I mostly agree with you. I remember listening to a how to be a millionaire book on Youtube a few years ago. The authors were going on about how they feel that their daughters need to be empowered, while basically they didn't care nearly that much about their sons. Even the millionaire men who've made it basically disregard their own legacy, in favor of feminist nonsense.

It is just that people have been brainwashed. And unfortunately for rich men, they are wise to the ways of the world, but completely ignorant of the proper way. They are just more sitting ducks for indoctrination, because they are completely worldly people without any light from God to guide them. I don't feel sorry for these people at all though.

I've met a couple of men who were married to professional women. The only matter is, is she going to share her money with her husband? The destructive ones will not share their money. The better ones do. I know one former EMT who is married to an ER doctor. He's a stay at home dad for two children. And I know a couples of women who openly told me their husbands stay at home. And of course there are other women I've met whose husbands are at home ill from some chronic disease, and the woman is supporting the family.

Women who are not gold diggers will probably be marrying men who earn less than them.

Unfortunately for women, now they have to do everything for themselves. They've got to birth the children, breastfeed, and now they have to slay the pigs to bring home the bacon. Women really fell for it. And they will spend their most valuable years slaving away for the man, when they could have spent it with their children. But at least now they are free, to be men.

A woman is still commanded to obey her husband, in submission. These rules are permanent, whether the woman earns money or not.

[Adama]

,

Women are naturally materialistic (especially western women).

I would not say that women are naturally materialistic. I would say that women who indulge every lust they have are also materialistic. Because there are poor women who are not materialistic. Some women are naturally frugal. Some are naturally ambivalent. This is not a universal female characteristic, despite what the world says.

Now, an immoral, greedy person is different altogether. Are there women like these? Yes. But just because there are greedy women in the world, it doesn't make it natural for women to be that way.

Everyone believes women only go for money. Probably most of these dupes believe in the myth of evolution, and survival of the fittest: that men "bring the resources" and all women bring are "the eggs." But what we forget is, some animals share the roles and some animals have the opposite roles. There are different roles for different species of animals. But they are only really telling you the one they want everyone to believe: That males must basically purchase the presence of a female. It's a lie.

Always remember and have faith. The woman was created for the man, not the man for the woman. The woman is the man's helper. The man is not the woman's helper. The woman was made from the man. The woman is commanded to submit and obey to the man. The man is the lord of his home. How do we think that we must purchase women when God made them for us?

Was there a fee Adam gave to Eve? Or was she freely given to him by God Himself?

[Adama]

I have a question to add: Is this in the sense of a present cultural alignment or a primal alignment? I notice a lot of theories revolve around work, but a "trade propelled" society (where activities only get done by a third party commissioning it through exchange of some form) isn't really a natural thing. So the ideas of "this is the design" might be flawed from the get-go.

Also, there is WAY too much equating of work with hunting. No, it's not hunting. When someone goes to the store & buys meat, it's shopping. It's not farming if they buy vegetables, is it? The attraction to a good hunter would have taken on a much larger dimension than just capacities as a provider- the physicality/athleticism required to chase something with a spear for seven or eight hours, as an example. Someone would likely have good or great physical functioning at that point, due to increased circulation & also oxygenation from the heart & lungs being exercised in a rigorous way. There also would be demonstration of patience, diligence, and an ability to take serious things seriously (not traits that can be found in all people that have "good money"). That's just using persistence hunting & a spear- other things can be said for hunting with a bow (the same last three things mentioned, but also potentially craftsmanship). Similar things could be said for most, if not all, forms of close-range hunting.

The concept of deeper implications of courage is usually overlooked, as well. Someone with a "weak spine" is considerably more likely to be absent or a menace whenever there's a "high-stakes situation"- it could be anything from abandoning their children to terrorizing their own or other people. They're also much more likely to "flex" on somebody to excite a sense of not being feeble (chicks, kids, old people, someone that thinks them a friend, etc...).

How this relates to hunting? With persistence hunting, at least when tackling the animal at the end of the chase & finishing it with a knife, can be exceedingly dangerous- the animal might turn "at bay" when it's not quite exhausted & then can be quite capable of causing very severe injury with its horns & hooves. Hunting buffalo from the back of a horse is somewhat like hunting a car from the back of a motorcycle- if one of those buffalos bumps into the horse the hunter is riding, it can break its legs & send the rider to the ground hard enough to cause injuries just as serious as the ones from being trampled by the buffalo herd. Some animals are just plain dangerous to hunt (bears, lions, alligators, etc...). A screw-up when trying spear a bear is likely the end of the hunter's story.

So, a woman was potentially gauging MUCH more than what materials the man had. This is not necessarily the case in a "worker" environment.

That's because they're only pushing one part of the story onto you, to fit into their female worshiping narrative. This is nothing but the worship of the vagina.

There are many species that share the hunting and providing roles. There are species where the females are the main providers, more than the males. They are only pushing the male as the provider to purchase the woman because they themselves worship the vagina. They are simply female worshipers who think women are gods. That's why they think men must purchase their presence, being holy by virtue of their birth.

Meanwhile out of the other side of these scientists mouths, they will tell you how natural it is to be a homosexual, because some few birds they observed were doing it. So they are only searching for and providing cases that support their evil narratives of social dysfunction.

These people have inverted reality completely. And because everyone else believes them, and the learned scholars with their self-appointed degrees declare it (as false teachers), everyone believes every lie.