Devin

Objectifying does not mean looks, it means reducing them to an object, ie; ATM Machine https://www.acog.org › faqs › havin... Having a Baby After Age 35: How Aging Affects Fertility and Pregnancy | ACOGA woman's peak reproductive years are between the late teens and late 20s. By age 30, fertility (the ability to get pregnant) starts to decline. This decline becomes more rapid once you reach your mid-30s. By 45, fertility has declined so much that getting pregnant naturally is unlikely for most women. Unless you only want 1 kid, yes early twenties is prime time for a woman to marry. Yes she can marry later but early twenty has benefits in this conversation. And many people don't want more than one toddler at a time. Virginity; VDs can leave women infertile, men as well, but hey they're providers right!!

Yes, he says the husband and wife are equal in all responsibilities these days including income. Thanks, it's hard to believe someone with such loving sentiment wouldn't be okay with objectifying men

Nice attempt at a straw man but it's hard for me to believe you believe that.I didn't say it's wrong to provide for a family I said it's objectifying of a man to say he should. That'd be like me saying you said it's wrong for a girl to marry young and a virgin. That's just like saying "what's wrong with her being pretty and marrying while she's young, that's just being considerate, not an object, she's healthier and more fertile at 20, soooo considerate." I'm not saying those traditions are wrong, the ability of the man to provide is the equivalent of a woman's fertility though in that tradition. It's also tradition the woman marrys young. There's nothing wrong with her relying on her husband, just as there's nothing wrong if he wants a young pretty virgin, just basic expectations and traditions as you said

I didn't say that's what I wanted I'm attracted to over 25 actually, I'm 32 and wouldn't look for someone under 25, I don't follow tate, that doesn't mean what he's saying isn't true though. I also don't want submissive or care about sexual history. You should have whatever requirements you want for a partner Most people are not even capable of love though, "objectifying" suits them very well though. Saying men should be providers is clearly objectifying, not in the sense of looks obviously but in the sense of being something other than just a person. Is it wrong for the woman to be the provider? No, what if the man became disabled? Then he's worthless, to use your words? Objectifying; men are ATM machines(object) = "provider" Women are vending machines; object Men are security systems; object Women are sex toys; object

I haven't heard anyone remotely imply that. To derive that from this thread is implying women's value is only based on her relationship with a man

Please elaborate

Please elaborate. I don't believe in objectifying women I believe and want something deep and meaningful, but most people aren't in a position to even want that

Who's not a phony, unoriginal, and just here to get paid?

Misandry Women refusing to try to understand men, and make them women, but still hold up their end of "tradition" Why is it wrong for a man to want what he wants just because you don't understand it? Why is that gross? That's hateful, harmful, and more toxic than what I've seen of Tate. No one is saying a woman should be forced to participate in that, but you're saying men shouldn't participate in what they want. You should do whatever you want as well. But don't hate men because they want something different.

Pure objectification Your statement is pure misandry Men wanting young pretty submissive virgins is traditional gender role

I think she said he wouldn't date her. Nothing loving in the grand sense for sure, but a guy should be allowed to have that standard and is allowed, and many do, that's the real world. Actually he's anti hooker in the video I watched, sounds Muslim actually, very pro Virgin one man woman type of guy. Says he wouldn't even associate with the hooker or slut type. Objectifying for sure, which is the level most men are at, them faking a different level is unhealthy. Most women objectify men as well, as providers and or emotional punching bags. Real world

@Tyler Robinson A qualifier in the video I watched of him that I think you may be overlooking is that he says he has no interest in controlling any rules he just plays the game of life according to real world rules. Consider that and then consider the average man and woman, I think what he's saying is relevant in that context, he isn't saying this is the way it should be just how it is. He also said money and wealth is not actually important or there's something greater beyond those, something to that effect

Yeah nothing new but most women don't know those or still refuse to accept them and force men against them. How is saying something old automatically make him or the girl in the video you posted deluded?

Men need time away from their woman Men cannot be led by a woman Men cannot be changed Men cannot tell their woman he's scared Generalizations, but good ones. These aren't new tate things, I didn't hear anything new from him, it's all old tested concepts

Exhibit A.)

@Tyler Robinson I only just watched one video of him for the first time, I think everything he said is true, except the bragging parts. Definitely poison to the neo feminist movement, but a lot of what he is saying is good for most men. Just real world. I haven't watched anything else of his, but seems like women could gain some understanding of men from him, a lot of modern women refuse to accept men for men, instead of just liberating women it goes into confining men trying to make them women

So 95% of women

Desensitize the penis so guys aren't so sexual *this is a heinous reason, but the real reason since victorian era/industrial revolution, keep the poor from over breeding Pre Victoria; similar reason but symbolic and less removed, more sensitivity left It was in western Europe, with the Industrial Revolution, that the second population revolution began. Europe's population doubled during the 18th century, from roughly 100 million to almost 200 million, and doubled again during the 19th century, to about 400 million. The modern use of Hebrew circumcision as a medicalized practice dates from about 1865 in England and about 1870 in the US. The procedure accepted for medical use essentially was the Jewish peri'ah. http://www.cirp.org › library › history History of Circumcision

Yeah, I don't think marriage makes unhappy people happy, I think it's a next level sort of thing. My emphasis in the post that started our conversation is meant to be spending your life going as deep as you can with one person rather than multiple shallower relationships. It's just my view, marriage isn't for everyone.

In the second path you see the only logical thing to do is "surrender"

You shouldn't get into a relationship until you know how to love You shouldn't get into marriage until you're ready to commit to a marriage And did she get everything she put into the marriage back? No, most of it is intangible, you gonna go to your exes when she has the flu and nurse her? This is bullshit, someone with that mentality will not have a pretty martiage, ALL income made during the marriage is made by both partners, it's not dating, this is ridiculous you are like one person when married, one legal entity, one Yes, men get alimony half the woman's retirement for them refusing without legit reason, in merica' anyway and any other backwards country

I would like some others view's on the following concept; I think there's a trap in spirituality where you think being a part of society is a trap, but you're just looking at the problem of society controlling you with too broad of a brush stroke, you shouldn't let society control you but going with the flow of society is a fun adventure to partake in. A way to tell if you're being controlled by "secular society" or "spirituality society" is if you have anxiety/fear, if you're having fun/are joyful; then you're just going with the flow/adventure, you're on the "right" path. We have a life GPS within us that we can trust, that we can use whenever we like, go with the peace, flee from the angst, worldly and spiritually speaking *all paths are "right", I just mean the peaceful path, the path that brings you peace. Somehow this reminds me of " do or do not, there is no try" If anything is worth doing you will do it, if it's not worth sacrificing your life for, you shouldn't do it. When you're truly at peace with a decision; there's no longer choice, or a matter of will power, it's what you must do or die trying

Yeah, I mean why I've avoided trying to have an intimate relationship with people, because it's often not going to work out like you said, but they get attached and I see a diminishing return continuing the relationship.

On the "path to enlightenment" or after, do you come back to society and integrate back into it in a way where you appear as a normal person in society at least on the surface? I keep detaching more from society in terms of how I think and what I believe and I have less of a social need. I still do and want to live in society and be a part of it, I'm just definitely less attached to it than I was. I'm afraid I'll get to a point where I'll be very detached permanently, I think I will always come back to be a part of it but I have this fear I may just keep getting more distant. It seems like more and more people seem asleep to me, I feel more and more alien. Also, if you think I may be doing, or following something, or believing something wrong please let me know, I'm not afraid to take help, and I don't and never have done drugs by the way.

No. Just a few standards, I leave the rest up for surprise, if you look for a specific person a.) You probably won't find them B.) You ruin the surprise of life if you know how it works out My few standards are; -Compassionate -Down to earth -Intelligent -a height range and same race I think with those, although few they are relatively high bars together though, I have someone I can navigate a healthy relationship with and I also get the constant surprise of life unfolding in the present rather than resenting what doesn't unfold as I planned I thinks it toxic or unhealthy to want the perfect partner. Relationships are about adventure not destination or goals or accomplishing something, adventure, have fun, see what comes