Gen Z Women Prefer Gay Men Over Straight Men

[Joseph Maynor]

Women like the long-haired dude who is clean cut.  This type of guy has a lot of options.  

[yetineti]

14 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

I just don't buy this dry fasting claim at all, not from the guy in the video either😂

I like to think he did it really creatively. Like turned the humidity up and wore a CPAP for water or something.

[Monster Energy]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

Women like the long-haired dude who is clean cut.  This type of guy has a lot of options.  

Long hair is magnetic 

[Monster Energy]

1 minute ago, yetineti said:

I like to think he did it really creatively. Like turned the humidity up and wore a CPAP for water or something.

If disappointment had a profile picture, it would be yours.

[yetineti]

@Monster Energy
 

That’s funny. Want me to change my picture? I was ironically just thinking about how I’m a long-haired clean cut guy.

[Joseph Maynor]

I feel bad for all this online stuff when it comes to dating.  It is sad to me.  

[Sugarcoat]

20 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

I understand the skepticism. Honestly, I’d probably think I was full of shit too. 😂

I’ll just let you keep thinking I’m insane.

 

You don't seem insane to me overall, dry fasting is just one of those things that doesn't make sense to me, coming from someone who is unconventional with health too. It's fine tho, I can keep pondering it myself

Edited 10 hours ago by Sugarcoat

[Emerald]

Women aren't usually attracted to gay guys because there's an awareness that he won't be interested.

So, if the game-plan is to pretend to be gay or even just to try to come off that way in some way, you'll find that it will backfire. 

First off, it's not true. So, it's a misrepresentation. And women will sense the act immediately.

But secondly, women are attracted to guys who give off straight-guy vibes. And if a guy gives off gay-guy vibes, there's an immediate understanding of "This guy is categorically a friend and not a love interest."

I don't know if that's the plan. But that's what your post seems to be implying. And if that is the plan, it won't be effective. 

[aurum]

They might feel safer around gay men at times.

But that's not the same thing as "preferring" gay men over straight men.

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

Women aren't usually attracted to gay guys because there's an awareness that he won't be interested.

So, if the game-plan is to pretend to be gay or even just to try to come off that way in some way, you'll find that it will backfire. 

First off, it's not true. So, it's a misrepresentation. And women will sense the act immediately.

But secondly, women are attracted to guys who give off straight-guy vibes. And if a guy gives off gay-guy vibes, there's an immediate understanding of "This guy is categorically a friend and not a love interest."

I don't know if that's the plan. But that's what your post seems to be implying. And if that is the plan, it won't be effective. 

Who would of thought. i guess this isn't rocket science after all.

 

[Olaf]

@Monster Energy hahahahahaha this might be why I struggle lol

[gengar]

8 hours ago, yetineti said:

@gengar
 

I think if you pressed LordFall on some of your assumptions, you’d find he battles with his own potency.

My assumption.

But if I’m correct, perhaps his intention is different than you assume.

I also don’t think you can change him or the average guy or the women you talk about.

The best you could do for the average guy is a version of what LordFall tries to do for people here.

Good versus bad advice aside, LordFall is not going to change either. We could interrogate him and perhaps find ways to minimize the side effects of his behavior haha

But neither group inherently has a reason they need to change.

An average guy has a lot of advantages LordFall may not see, especially if his ventures take off.

Also, average dudes are average by definition.

Tradeoffs

 

I'm not trying to change individuals, I'm just pointing out realities of our current situation and what it will lead to, albeit with some salty rhetoric since yes, I do believe that this is the destruction of society. 

[yetineti]

8 minutes ago, gengar said:

I'm not trying to change individuals, I'm just pointing out realities of our current situation and what it will lead to, albeit with some salty rhetoric since yes, I do believe that this is the destruction of society. 

What is the connection to this destroying society, sorry? Trying to understand your point more.

Edited 4 hours ago by yetineti

[gengar]

8 hours ago, LordFall said:

 

@gengar That is a lot of paragraphs to justify why men who refuse to build charisma or presence feel entitled to a wife. Calling self-improvement and social competence "societal degeneration" is textbook cope. Women don't want reckless idiots; they want leaders who actually build interesting lives. You can either learn the game or keep writing essays about the decline of the West while other men build.

Mostly what I advocate is building baseline competence and value as a man, socializing and networking to the point of building a solid social circle and building a personal brand to be able to scale your influence, vision and in terms of dating your access globally. What is degenerate about that?

I think you have some more sitting down to do to figure out why your mind goes to these negative tangents about self-improvement as a man. You seem to have projection issues that come up in weird ways. 

@yetineti I think you also have some strange ideas that you like to project onto people. If you want to elaborate on some of your ideas, feel free but you seem quite far out of line. 

Building charisma or other self-improvement I am not against. Self-improvement in itself can be used for used for good and bad. I am in favor for self-improvement for good. you can self-improve to become a criminal. You can self-improve to become a good citizen and husband. or you can self-improve to live a Hugh-Hefner type lifestyle.

What "women want" is not a linear, rational thing. They want all sorts of things on different levels of their consciousness, some good and some evil. different women will cater more towards one side depending on many factors. In this they are not different from men. I have a side to me that wants to have 100s of women and live like Hugh Hefner, and this probably stems from biological instincts and also egoic traumas of feeling unworthy. But I also have a side that wants to have a marriage and children. My issue is that most men seem to realize this dichotomy and ultimately want marriages and families, but feminist women, both young and old (who are the majority of women in the west), see family as something inherently suspicious, maybe even oppressive, but in the least as something that is a burden to her that weighs down her other options. And we are living in a surface liberal culture that is deeply invested in the worldview of these women. 
If you tell a woman she is selfish for living out her bad girl/feminist agenda (fucking as many of the richest and hottest dudes while young and then getting the best husband possible and lie about your past), she and society will shun you. But if you tell a man he is selfish for wanting to live a life of debauchery, society and him (most likely) will agree. That is the joke we are living under today. Total gynocentricism. 

By studying the facts it has become clear to me that this worldview simply leads to the decline and collapse of society. "wanting children" for example is seen as an individual choice and only through the lens of what it brings and costs the individual(especially the woman). Never is it seen as a moral choice affecting the whole of collective society. It is a simple fact that younger people carry the old people's burdens. This used to be in a direct family system where children would literally take care of their parents and grandparents in their old age. Nowadays this is a welfare system; everyone's children take care of everyone's parents. 

A person who doesn't want children, who is more likely a woman, still wants to be taken care of by the state when she is old, effectively saying that someone else's children should take care of her. With the fertility rate at an abysmal level, this cannot hold. The only solution is migration, which we are seeing at a rapid rate here in Europe. European people are not having children and are replacing them with young migrant workers. 

I don't care about you choosing a life of chasing a multitude of women that much. Even though you're basically incentivizing those harlots to continue in their evil and doing evil yourself. I am not above it. I contemplate suicide every day because I can't get with women because of various acquired medical issues. In one way I would tell you to "live your best life", although I do realize I wouldn't be better than those harlots myself, who cheer on their fellow women in their 20s to ride the carousel, dishonor themselves and destroy society one bit at a time. And I'm not better. If I had the chance to be promiscuous I probably would be. Yet again, this is also incentivized by women's modern freedoms and their ways of handling it. Choosing to be monogamous when you see other women be hypergamous and polyamorous is a much harder choice to make than a society of chaste people. 

My problem with your rhetoric is that you are framing it through the lens that there is no consequence, that you should just chase your dreams no matter what. This is precisely the gynocentric, anti-truth, self-biased mindframe that I described. We are in a forum that is supposed to be about putting truth 1st.

The truth is that a culture and implementation of healthy, monogamous marriages leads to a stable society while the opposite leads to it's collapse and ultimately famine, war and genocide. If you want to partake in that, sure, and i'm not being sarcastic. we are all human after all, and like I said, I couldn't tell you if I'd be any different.

Just realize that liberalism is a lie and that the current sexual market is a direct incentivizing towards extreme forms of selfishness of both sexes and will lead to death and destruction. 

Don't justify it as generic self-improvement. Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law if you want it to be. I am calling out your bullshit, not your lack of morals, although that also frustrates me, but again, I'm not above that. I'm above bullshit and lies. 

PS: This culture shift has not been organic but quite orchestrated from institutions like the Frankfurt school and others with lots of money behind it. From bolsheviks wanting to end the family to give control to the state, to liberals like the actual Hugh Hefner who wanted sexual revolution and feminism so he could fuck 100s of girls. They all had power/ego-driven ideological reasons for incentivizing the breakdown of healthy marriages and this is all well documented.

 

Quote

What is the connection to this destroying society, sorry? Trying to understand your point more.

 @yetineti The game-theoretical realities I described above. In essence; destroying marriage incentives endless competition, lack of morals and degeneration (because of women selecting for dysgenic traits) and both sexes becoming huge pieces of shit until society collapses due to frustration, lack of trust and moral character. Women choosing to be childless also makes society economically unbearable.

Edited 3 hours ago by gengar

[Emerald]

10 minutes ago, gengar said:

Building charisma or other self-improvement I am not against. Self-improvement in itself can be used for used for good and bad. I am in favor for self-improvement for good. you can self-improve to become a criminal. You can self-improve to become a good citizen and husband. or you can self-improve to live a Hugh-Hefner type lifestyle.

What "women want" is not a linear, rational thing. They want all sorts of things on different levels of their consciousness, some good and some evil. different women will cater more towards one side depending on many factors. In this they are not different from men. I have a side to me that wants to have 100s of women and live like Hugh Hefner, and this probably stems from biological instincts and also egoic traumas of feeling unworthy. But I also have a side that wants to have a marriage and children. My issue is that most men seem to realize this dichotomy and ultimately want marriages and families, but feminist women, both young and old (who are the majority of women in the west), see family as something inherently suspicious, maybe even oppressive, but in the least as something that is a burden to her that weighs down her other options. And we are living in a surface liberal culture that is deeply invested in the worldview of these women. 

By studying the facts it has become clear to me that this worldview simply leads to the decline and collapse of society. "wanting children" for example is seen as an individual choice and only through the lens of what it brings and costs the individual(especially the woman). Never is it seen as a moral choice affecting the whole of collective society. It is a simple fact that younger people carry the old people's burdens. This used to be in a direct family system where children would literally take care of their parents and grandparents in their old age. Nowadays this is a welfare system; everyone's children take care of everyone's parents. 

A person who doesn't want children, who is more likely a woman, still wants to be taken care of by the state when she is old, effectively saying that someone else's children should take care of her. With the fertility rate at an abysmal level, this cannot hold. The only solution is migration, which we are seeing at a rapid rate here in Europe. European people are not having children and are replacing them with young migrant workers. 

I don't care about you choosing a life of chasing a multitude of women that much. Even though you're basically incentivizing those harlots to continue in their evil and doing evil yourself. I am not above it. I contemplate suicide every day because I can't get with women because of various acquired medical issues. In one way I would tell you to "live your best life", although I do realize I wouldn't be better than those harlots myself, who cheer on their fellow women in their 20s to ride the carousel, dishonor themselves and destroy society one bit at a time. And I'm not better. If I had the chance to be promiscuous I probably would be. Yet again, this is also incentivized by women's modern freedoms and their ways of handling it. Choosing to be monogamous when you see other women be hypergamous and polyamorous is a much harder choice to make than a society of chaste people. 

My problem with your rhetoric is that you are framing it through the lens that there is no consequence, that you should just chase your dreams no matter what. This is precisely the gynocentric, anti-truth, self-biased mindframe that I described. We are in a forum that is supposed to be about putting truth 1st.

The truth is that a culture and implementation of healthy, monogamous marriages leads to a stable society while the opposite leads to it's collapse and ultimately famine, war and genocide. If you want to partake in that, sure, and i'm not being sarcastic. we are all human after all, and like I said, I couldn't tell you if I'd be any different.

Just realize that liberalism is a lie and that the current sexual market is a direct incentivizing towards extreme forms of selfishness of both sexes and will lead to death and destruction. 

PS: This culture shift has not been organic but quite orchestrated from institutions like the Frankfurt school and others with lots of money behind it. From bolsheviks wanting to end the family to give control to the state, to liberals like the actual Hugh Hefner who wanted sexual revolution and feminism so he could fuck 100s of girls. They all had power/ego-driven ideological reasons for incentivizing the breakdown of healthy marriages and this is all well documented.

All this is a bunch of conspiratorial thinking that soothes your own pain. But it really doesn't make any logical sense if you actually investigate the premise you're operating off of.

Your thesis is that female promiscuity is leading to fewer women wanting kids... and fewer women wanting kids is causing society's downfall.

But the reality is that women have already been liberated sexually and otherwise for a very long time (since the 60s or thereabouts). And Feminism was just as strong of a force (if not stronger) back in the 60s and 70s.

And young women in 2026 are having less sex than women 10+ year ago. So, male and female promiscuity has wained down from previous generations that were desiring children. Sociologists even call it a "sex recession".

In fact, the most promiscuous generation (for both men and women) were the baby boomers... specifically baby boomers born in the 50s.

But it's only in the past 10 years that young men and women are less likely to want kids and that men are a bit more likely to want kids than women.

10+ years ago... most young people eventually wanted kids... and women and men were about equally likely to want them.

So, there has been a change there. (though it's a big leap to say that change will lead to society's downfall)

But you're interpreting that change as flowing forth from women's sexual liberation and promiscuity... which doesn't make sense with any of the facts.

Realistically, I think the reason why fewer young people are coupling up and wanting kids are because humans aren't connecting as much in person anymore.

So, I'm guessing that fewer young people are wanting kids because there's more online interactions and fewer in-person interactions.

Perhaps it's even because young men and women are having less sex than young men and women a decade ago... as that tends to be where kids come from.

[yetineti]

@gengar
 

I understand your concern. Please consider, guys like you’re worried about usually don’t have a bunch of wives.

They usually do not have one wife.

A lot of guys with this mindset you worry about push women right to guys with an opposite mindset, as they can crave authenticity instead of game.

And a lot of these people craving group relationships misunderstand relationships and ignore diminishing returns on connection, mistaking it for something else.

Another problem, that is very much just as real, is other men being discouraged because a minority gets laid a lot and acts like it is self justified or ties in an exceptional life by default.

You mentioned some medical problems. Maybe you can’t have sex. Maybe you can’t change that.

This is your friendly reminder, everybody loves a good listener, and a fingerblast.

There are a lot of good people out there. Society is under too much stress for you or me to diagnose it.

Just try to relax and connect with people.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by yetineti