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.
I agree with Winston when he says on his website American women are the most unapproachable, unfriendly, antisocial and paranoid women in the world! But it's not just the women, the men in American are also aloof and don't like talking to strangers. In America there is the mentality that we don't talk to strangers and some people don't even talk to their neighbors! How are you supposed to meet people when it's taboo to talk to strangers? I guess the bars and nightclubs are the only socially acceptable places to talk to strangers! That really limits your opportunities to meet people. No wonder why so many people are using the personal ads and internet dating! People even avoid making eye contact with others when out in public!
Last edited by jamesbond on December 29th, 2009, 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
...it's not just the women! Many of the men are pretty bad too. 'Creepy' is about the best word to describe it... add in devious and depraved and we get pretty close to the truth.
The question is: Do foreign women deserve these types of men?
Ask yourself, before going abroad, are you doing anything useful for anyone or anything aside from your pecker?
W: You keep forgetting, S, that YOUR LABELS are your opinion, only in your mind. The labels we put on people are OUR way of judging them. In reality people are far more complex and don't fit into labels, formulas, and theories. Let me share a little philosophical enlightenment with you, from a paragraph I recently added to my ebook.
Some guys see everything in terms of money and economics. Well Iâ€™m not one of those type of guys of course, for I consider many other deeper factors. Not every guy with money can duplicate everything Iâ€™ve done. Looks, personality, and attitude are strong factors too, among others, and in this culture, I rank high in those areas to them, which is why I often get preferential and special treatment from girls here that richer guys who are more shallow and not as personable or likable donâ€™t get. Let me give you a little pep talk though. In reality, human beings are very complex, and donâ€™t fit into overly simplistic pet theories like â€œShe just wants you for moneyâ€�. People often donâ€™t make sense and donâ€™t even understand themselves even. So these one shot labels and formulas put together by shallow know-it-all people to try to explain other people just donâ€™t hold in reality. None of the girls here would claim that they like a guy ONLY for money or a green card. (Likewise, no one considers themself â€œbadâ€�, â€œevilâ€� or â€œcrazyâ€� either, as we all consider ourselves justified in what we do) These are merely labels we put on others to explain them in OUR MINDS. And in this case, the â€œthey just like you for money and green cardâ€� theory comes from the mouths of judgmental people who like to jump to conclusions, and maybe are â€œall about moneyâ€� themselves. But they can only speak for themselves, not for others.
Anyhow Mr. S, I hope you are able to bring something to this discussion other than hate and judgment.
The throwing around of labels does tend to sully the waters and create needless bad feelings.
Even though I agree with many of the points brought out on MRA websites, I'm reluctant to show them to others. Though I do feel that the anger of many of my fellow men in regards to these matters is justified, statements of the ilk that all women are innately gold digging and selfish, and only act good because of their cultural upbringing, are not going to endure outsiders to their views.
This also calls to mind the workplace. This is more or less a 'safe' place to hold social discourse.
The US appears to hold individuality so dear that it has produced possible the most bland 'individuals' of all cultures, bi-polar patients aside perhaps, which there seems to be no end of now. It would appear the true life of the person cannot be found in isolation, rather it blooms in a more collective mentality. No surprise, it's difficult to cultivate a complex mentality when all you're exposed to is the same people, friends, situations, roads, jobs, etc or worse, left in isolation. I have always found my friends from other countries to be far more informed and colorful as people, men and women both and far more altruistic and 'other oriented' than the people I've known in the US.
Strangest thing is, the people I've known from politically torn and bomb ridden countrysides are far less paranoid than people from the States and far more outgoing. Then again, people from safer countries than the US, which are many, are also less paranoid and more outgoing. Go figure.
W: Excellent observation Frankly. Mind if I add it to my ebook under the chapter about paranoia?
If the point is that there are issues on both sides, I'd have to agree. However, making the point without vulgarity is more in line with productive discourse and would give less the appearance of being 'creepy' as you put it.
While the impetus of civilization does have a certain reproductive element to it, we can hopefully rise above the tendencies to use it as a sole motivating force for our actions. I would only say, that the men and women from countries other than the US have done far more to enrich my life than those from it; my experiences only. Some people have real problems with the smallest divergence of experiences from their own, others with certain variations only.
I find members of the opposite sex from countries other than the US to be stimulating not because of the differences however, but because they seem to embrace a less jaded more hear-felt integrity that I relate to. I don't seek members of various cultures for the sole purpose of embracing differences, it's more about sharing common outlooks in dealing with people and situations, so I guess it's more about similarities than anything else.
IMO if we look back to a time when humans lived in smaller tribal settlements, we were probably quite xenophobic because bumping into folks from other tribes sometimes resulted in beheadings (or scalping in North America). When people visited another tribe, they had to be very cautious. I recall watching a show on Amazon natives, one visitor came to a village and he sat by the entrance area for everyone to see. He waited patiently for someone in the tribe to come fetch him, because had he intruded right away, he may have been killed.
Relations between men and women varied, but usually these tribal societies had some kind of festival or event where boys and girls are allowed to meet and dance. Outside of permissible "meeting events", eloping with someone's daughter might end very badly for you.
It's funny to compare this to modern day people's behavior. With advent of trains, automobiles, urbanization, WW1 / WW2, etc., people from all kinds of backgrounds find themselves living next to each other in the city. Yet instinctively I think we still have some "genetic memory" on how to protect ourselves by forming cliques (to replace tribes) and act cautiously to strangers. Also, instead of dances around the bonfire, we go to clubs to dance around a disco ball, or some other sanctioned social event.
This kind of defensive behavior is also evident in real estate, where walled, exclusive communities command higher price and rent. Just as our ancestors built walls and dug moats, we still value the safety and security of walls and gates.
In old days people built fortifications in carefully chosen locations, where access is limited and the enemy cannot assault you from the rear. Just as castles were protected in the rear by inaccessible cliff, lake, river, or some other geographic feature, we still value building exclusive communities on hills with limited access roadways. If you knew your guests (wanted or not) can only come from one direction, it makes it easier to defend your castle.
Also, older cities like Tokyo built many confusing alleyways that twist and turn, with many dead-ends. So if the enemy invaded, they might get lost and give you the opportunity to hit them from rear or flee. Having fences and difficult to nagivate roads also prevent fast-moving raiders on horses from coming in to snach your people/goods and getting away quickly.
Today when people shop for a good gated community, they also look at its layout and road access. If the community is arranged like grid-iron pattern, it makes it easy for a child molester to rush in, grab your kid, and run away. Community parks next to major streets also make it easier for criminals to drive up in their car and rob you. This is why good master-planned communities have slower, curvy roads, sometimes confusing with end-ends, and HOA/association parks located in the center of the community under everyone's watchful eye.
Homes in well-defended communities retain their value better, because as humans we somehow instinctively know the value of good security. As Americans we express this through suburban sprawl (away from undesirable areas) and development of walled, exclusive communities. This is very evident in locations like South Orange County (California) where the residents resist ubranization and construction of more rail through their communities, preferring to remain behind the safety of their walled enclaves, and hanging out with their exclusive clique (tribe).
People retreat to this self-defense mentality when they feel threatened. Why is it that suburban America, one of the safest places in the world, produce such paranoid people? I don't have an answer for that, but I can tell you that people leave their walled enclaves and cliques willingly when they're discontent, or feel that they'd get a better deal elsewhere.
So, you see, it's difficult to "break in" and take an American women who is well protected by the safety of her "tribe" and defensive walls, which can be real (socio-economic barrier) or virtual (sexual market value). It takes a lot of time and effort, unless if you got lucky at a dance around the bonfire (clubbing), or if you're lucky enough to have a high sexual market value that makes her want to abandon her walled enclave to be with you.
p.s. I apologize if my real estate analogies are head-spinning
What's with all this waffling and wishy-washy stuff.
We admit that people are complex creatures and then say that people are strictly motivated by money. So which is it? Or are we going to re-label things as it suits our purpose?
It makes me wonder if the problems that men complain about in women are really the faults of men. Seriously, I read trip reports and questions by guys who seem like they have never been on a date before.
Here's a place you can start:
Every issue you have had with women in the past is your fault!
Granted, the ladies have some reponsibility for this too. But this is simply a mental exercise. I went through exactly the same thing. And when I was honest with myself I started to learn more about relatiosnhips with between men and women and what went wrong. It was because I picked the wrong women. It was because I rationalized red flags that indicated a relationship was in trouble. I didn't practice diligence to maintain my relationships. Only then, did I learn my lessons and become a better man for it. And I won't say I'm perfect, but I feel that I came a long way in my development.
Many of you are here because of the issues that you have with western women. I have my issues with them too. But try and date them anyway. It will do wonders for your social skills. You will be able to learn what motivates them. It's not money per se, it's natural selection. You'll work on your banter. You will learn what makes them laugh and what makes them blush. You'll learn what makes them angry. Then you will be prepared to find your love overseas.
I guarentee that this may have saved somebody like Winston a lot of trouble in the beginning. Winston claims that he relationships shouldn't be about money. But it doesn't change the fact that most people see money as an integral part of a successful relationship. It's a matter of survival. The ones that don't see it that way are still enjoying the comforts and innovations developed by people who seeked fame and fortune from their inventions. This is hypocritical in my opinion.
His first trip to Russia was an object lesson in this. He did a tour of Russian and Ukraine for six weeks. Did he stay in a hotel? No. Did he rent an apartment? No. He stayed in a hostels for $10-20 a night. Hostels are generally used by poor high school students that are backpacking across Europe for the summer. Not for men that are seeking wives. Why? Because any man who has put some thought in this will realize that he will need to demonstrate to his love interest that he is a man of means and can support her if she decides to give up her life in her country to be with him. He will also want some privacy if he hits it off with her and wants to invite her to his place. Winston would have had better chances for success if he would have cut his trip to three weeks, for example, and use the money that was saved for better accomodations.
But he didn't learn. He continued to use hostels for his future trips. When he wanted to save more money he tried to crash at his friends or ladies places. When that failed he spent nights in internet cafes. When things got truely desperate, he decided to ask for donations from the list members (supposedly he had a job writing for a Moscow paper at the time).
If this is what being a man is about, I shudder.
Put your ego to the side and really reflect on the reasons why you are having problems with western women and why you think you can succeed finding a wife overseas. Even if you are a sex tourist, this advice can do you good.
Wow! When did you become the forum's know-it-all psychologist?
Granted, I wouldn't say your advice is necessarily bad, but you seem to be making a lot of assumptions, not the least of which is that users here should be interested in dating westerners, wish they could, are failing, and are therefore settling for foreign women. I have to wonder for how many here that is really true.
There is another side to this. In my searchings I have come across a number of articles and blogs about western women living abroad in places like Asia and Latin America. Their social life seems to drop to zero, even the attractive ones. In there own words they say they see, "...the grossest, ugliest men with beautiful young women on their arms..." and yet they can't get a date to save their lives. Perhaps there's something to this idea that western women have become undesirable.
“b***y is so strong that there are dudes willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of b***y in another dimension." -- Joe Rogan
...users here should be interested in dating westerners, wish they could, are failing, and are therefore settling for foreign women.
No, you should deffinately not settle. But going on a few dates in the west can give you a better perspective on relationships. I'm suggesting a recipe for self-discovery.
Think of it this way, if you can impress a western woman or at least get one to date you more than once, you will likely be able to impress women overseas. If you can't get anywhere with western women, you can't logically conclude that the problem is with them. It may be in the mirror looking at you.
In there own words they say they see, "...the grossest, ugliest men with beautiful young women on their arms..." and yet they can't get a date to save their lives. Perhaps there's something to this idea that western women have become undesirable.
I've read similar articles. Some of these women even lose thier husbands and boyfriends to these foreign beauties.
If these men are so "ugly and gross" why do the western women care so much about them? It's not like they would be open to dating them unless they lower their standards.
I don't fully understand how western women are getting worked up over men that they never wanted in the first place.
I also have ideas on how a western woman can be more desirable. But I don't think there are many of them here and I don't think that they would be open to hearing about it.
There is no sense complaining. Half of the people you talk to won't care. The other half will think you deserved it!
I've noticed this as well. It's as if they think life owes them a husband, or that men owe it to them to find their bodies attractive irregardless of how fat they are.
If I was to want to go with them, then yes, I would have to conform to some of their standards, but if they want me, they will then have to comform to MY standards.
Which means, reasonably thin, well-groomed, feminine, doesn't nag all the time, is caring and has a sense of honor. However, even the very notion that guys have their own standards is enough to elicit cries of shallowness and misogyny from western women.
Most of this thread so far reads like sour grapes. I've had dozens of American women lovers, and friends, and noticed that they usually don't take to men they find undesirable. Same as men don't go for women they find undesirable. Surprise!
I've lived in the former Soviet Union for years, and I do notice a distinct difference between women in America and the fSU. That's not to say one or the other is more desirable. And, if American women don't like a guy, fSU women probably won't either, at least not for long. If guys bomb out with American girls, it's most likely due to some defect in the men that makes them undesirable. Such as being socially inept (geek nerd, neurotic), having few if any social skills, or just being dull and boring. If you're looking for salvation among foreign women, you might overcome age difference to an extent in fSU (where Winnie bombed out totally), or more likely in Philippines or Thailand. But personality disorders won't go far in any relationship. They'll be tolerated most by some young women (very young, like late teens) simply because girls that age don't have much experience in life overall and will put up with it until they figure things out. (As Aunt Shirl is pressing her niece to do now, fast, for example, being older and wiser.)
Bashing US girls because of lack of action isn't a fault of the girls en masse as some are trying to suggest here.