Comments by "Dharmadasa" (@dharmadasa66) on "The SERVANT takes the MONEY: the double-edge of hypergamy" video.

@andersnielsen6044 May be in Sweden and Nordic countries, not everywhere.
4
The channel is intended for any-one that has the intellect to understand it. Men and women. You can fairly say that other women have ruined it for genuine ones like yourself. Yes. Of course, some men are ruining it for other men too, in different ways. Society as the aggregate expression of the hearts and minds of men and women is ruining it for everyone too. The only solution is to express your own values, know and be true to yourself, and try to bring the best into your life and create it as you go. The ruination of men and women is a numbers game. You just have to play longer odds.
3
@andersnielsen6044 But has she? And do the courts really adjudicate it fairly? Many people think not.
3
@andersnielsen6044 I point out your conclusions are not generalisable across the world and you accuse me of failing to vote properly. Non-sequitur logical fallacy. Your thinking is feminine.
3
It is still the black pill. Who says they will ever understand this or care? It is difficult to correct a person's view when their well-being and security requires them to ignore the truth.
3
Modern society is a short-lived and will collapse back. It is sustained largely by the efforts of men who mine, grow food, build and maintain infrastructure and the technology etc. Men still maintain the basic economy, women working in service roles are not as essential. The technology you speak of requires men, when women say they don't need men they are thinking immediately and short-term, but the social change underway are threatening even this. Men maintain law and order, who will protect you against criminals? Police men. Not women. So when discussing social arrangements, think about who sustains them and why, and if the technology and organisation is sustainable if men think it is not worth doing so.
2
@strikingitrich7630 One aspect of the 'intangibles' is that it is not enforceable under contract, such as marriage. The financial contribution can be quantified and the 'love and affection' cannot. So withdrawal of those intangibles does not materially or contractually affect the woman as it should, hence the 'price' signals are wrong.
2
It is good that it is now reaching the mainstream. Should profound truths be spoken only once, or repeatedly so they stay in consciousness and spread to more people?
2
@Alexxx492 I agree with all of that. The social engineers do not.
2
Strangely enough, most of what men are looking for comes down to the same basic things: companionship, commitment, emotional support, love etc. That is what makes a proper relationship. So either you are able to find these things, in which case you have no problem, or you can't, in which case your analysis misses the wider social conditions. Society is operating at a very low level due to the erosion of ethics, morality and higher purpose etc. Hypergamous calculations are hard-wired and even the exchange of companionship, commitment, emotional support, love are 'transactional' in that they require an exchange. If the love is one-way, it is not reciprocated. Social science suggests the basal level of transactional calculus is dominant and as the value exchange does not favour men overall they are giving up on relationships. So are women, but in different ways. As others have pointed out, your experience is not really generalisable, and there may also be more subtle expressions of the value exchange implicit in your personal relationships.
1
A reaction to decades of feminist rhetoric blaming men for everything and saying they are bad. The denigration of masculinity is so pervasive that it is even difficult to acknowledge that women have agency in these matters and their actions are not always for the best. Men are sick and tired of all with misandry and when there is a rational discussion of women's behaviour they like to push back a bit to show how women contribute to social problems. Otherwise, how will women come to appreciate how their actions individually and collectively are perceived? Or do you think women don't have roughly equal levels of negativity? That they are somehow better. Or should men just shut up anyway and not be entitled to critique women?
1
Decreasing day by day, month by month and year by year. As a whole, society is organised against reproduction. Hence the collapse in the birth-rate. What is your point from a societal perspective as discussed in this video?
1
Socialism massive increases the problem as only one sector of society provides the value and the rest absorb it to the loss of the productive. There is no benefit to being productive as your autonomy is taken away. Everyone becomes a parasite and the State becomes coercive. That is clear from history. All life, from amoeba to humans, wish to minimise work expended and maximise resources acquired. When the system encourages both, the society eventually fails, or goes totalitarian.
1
No, it is because the divorce courts are rewarding women for leaving. That is a major reason why men do not wish to get married. Men calculate the odds and they are highly unfavourable. Even when 'value' is adjudicated properly, men end up the losers, almost always. Divorce increases suicide risk in men 800%. Think about that. Why? No doubt feminists would argue that is because men are trashy scum at all times and the loss of their partners leaves them floundering and unable to cope because the perfect women are the only things providing any value to men. Men sort of think that the system is unfair and they are considered disposable by society. So they are checking out.
1
#1 incoming
1
Patriarchy is a hierarchy of competence, not raw power, and is sustained by female hypergamy.
1
I agree with your synopsis as to the origins of hypergamy being rooted in reproductive necessity etc. Nonetheless, modern society tends to deprecate such considerations. We can either deny biology or embrace it. A vast stream of Western intellectual thought seeks to deny it. This empowers social engineers of all types. Modernity has gone badly wrong due to this power impulse. One of the problems today is that denial of the existence of hypergamy, it's origins and purpose, has gone so far that the counterbalancing considerations (that Dr. Talaban mentions) cannot be considered either. The decline of marriage and the family ensues.
1
@cosmictreason2242 Pride is definitely in the mix. To justify wanting 'up' they must convince themselves they are priceless just as they are. Delulu.
1
@salivadriven If that is a fairy tale, then what basis is there for long-term relationships? To what end? BTW, the evidence suggests men are giving up much more than women - not surprising in that the exchange of value has shifted markedly away from them.
1
@salivadriven I have been married for 33 years to the same woman and we have adult kids of both sexes who also wish to marry. My interest in the matter concerns my kids. I am not intimidated by my wife, nor do we view each other as unequal in dignity. Do not try to shame me personally as it is not a valid logical position and reveals your inferior intellect. Your query about equal status should be directed towards most women who wish to marry up. The willingness of men to marry down the social hierarchy is to be commended and is required for female hypergamy. You are not addressing female hypergamy at all, because it inconveniences your world-view, despite the massive evidence for this phenomenon. You say it is outdated but female hypergamy is on over-drive in the modern world. What has changed is that people are now talking about it, whereas previously the denial of this reality was widespread.
1
@andersnielsen6044 Women are massively incentivised by the divorce courts and many many lawyers attest to this. You are deluded.
1
Hypergamy refers specifically to social status, not simply wanting the best. It is derived from anthropology. The desire by men for youth/fertility and other positive feminine attributes is well, well understood, however the corresponding hypergamy of females has been overlooked for decades. That is why it is now receiving more attention, as a corrective to the lop-sided views of feminism and gynocentrism. I would point out that female hypergamy is every bit as biologically based as the male equivalent, it goes to resource provisioning and protection from pre-caveman days. If women are to bear children, they need the help and support of the fittest males. Women also massively select on genetics as do men. There are countless studies proving this. One consequence is that women have a 'dual-mating' strategy that men do not, wherein they get pregnant to the most dominant males and get the more committed faithful type to help raise the ensuing progeny. Before you dismiss this, remember that non-paternity is huge and ever present, proven by DNA testing.
1