Comments by "Sammy B" (@sammyb1651) on "The Diary Of A CEO" channel.

They're just invisible to you, thats all. For a number of reasons. You have to examine yourself to understand the reasons for that though. This takes work so is generally avoided.
11
Glad to hear that your grandparents had a good marriage. The notion that marriage operates by men breaking a woman's spirit whereas a woman somehow benevolently and miraculously raises a man's is both toxic and absurd however. I can see how she was seduced by this message-it's extremely self serving-but it bares no resemblance to observable reality. Most women seek out relationships (and marriage) because they gain more from them than they themselves give to the relationship. They happily place a performative burden on a male and resist any performative burden being placed on themselves. Most women insert themselves at the centre of a relationship and make the relationship about themselves.
11
@truejoie Completely! It is self evident that marriage requires sacrifice and service from both sides. It's primarily for the raising of children, not for "the ability to live freely". Sadly for several generations is has been normal to label anything required of a female in marriage "limiting" or worse "spirit crushing" (apparently). Yet a female can place significantly more performative burden on a male in a marriage and yet thats supposedly evidence of her "lifting" his spirit. How kind and magical of her. Fortunately we're now experiencing some long overdue pushback against these entitled and unpleasant attitudes. Nothing as important as marriage should be viewed as being so one-sidedly oppressive of one party. Particularly where the opposite is actually true. It's been misinforming people's thinking for way too long and needs to be consigned to history.
7
@lilboosiedralls6813 It's actually the exact opposite. It's demonstrating he understands "how women operate". Just because thats "how they operate" it doesn't mean it's right. It's needy and shows you have to constantly validate them by showing you're thinking of them. Women typically place themselves at the centre of a relationship and make the relationship about them and their happiness. That isn't a generous or thoughtful act. It's quite the opposite in fact.
6
@imconfused1237 Brilliant response! Absolutely no comeback to that. Completely reasoned and a laser-like insight into the psychology behind it. Expect nothing but further ad hominems as they flounder trying to defend their fragile world views.
5
@JosueMartinez-kx7et 16:39 Sadly Real Men Real Style is mistaken though. He already owned numerous gyms at this stage so he was experiencing (and outwardly exhibiting) success. She just turned up and "ran" the gyms for him, which is nice and all but is a far cry from backing somebody who had nothing. He's minimising his achievements at this part of the video and giving her way too much credit as it's far harder to build something from nothing with everything on the line (as he had done) than to come along and "run" an existing business on a salary (as she did). A poor take from Alex Hormozi, which then went unchallenged by the podcast host and finally a fundamentally mistaken observation from Real Men Real Style. So in other words awful information all round. Lol.
4
@adrianbrrghs You'll have to direct me to where I said it was "oppressive to men, exactly". I didn't say it was oppressive to men. I said it emphatically was not oppressive of women. I said it was the opposite of that. Ie it is advantageous to them. They derive a greater (net) benefit from it than they themselves contribute. On average. That is why (despite being so eager to say how "oppressive" it is) women remain so keen on marriage. They're not stupid. I mean you'd agree that they really would have to be stupid to genuinely believe it was oppressive and yet be the party typically most keen on becoming married.
4
@adrianbrrghs Adrian you couched that very respectfully so I will assume you're asking in good faith and are genuinely inquisitive. Just to reiterate, I don't believe men are oppressed. Marriage is entirely voluntary. I make no claims to victimhood on behalf of men. Turning to your other points, I can only make the case that your argument is very low resolution. The reason women are "unhappier in marriage" is because women have a greater list of demands of a partner than their partner typically has of them. Consider the endless list of requirements a woman has of a potential partner compared to the very modest list a man will generally ask for in a partner. And I mean seriously and soberly consider that difference. So point number one is that, just because they're "unhappier in marriage:, that doesn't mean they're either 1. oppressed, 2. made unhappy due to the fault of a partner or 3. would be happier outside of marriage. The reality is women simply have a greater sense of entitlement to their partner's time/efforts/resources to make them happy. They view that as the function of the man. Few men by contrast will go around with the view that it is their partners job to make them happy. And thats just as well because very few women would regard it as their function to make the man happy. So...yes, they may be unhappier but that doesn't translate to failure on the part of the partner and it doesn't translate to oppression. Women will leave marriage and be just as unhappy outside of marriage and begin looking for marriage again. Usually very quickly. Now why would that be if they genuinely believed it was so oppressive, unhappy and disadvantageous? You HAVE to credit women with far more intelligence than you have. I am fully on board with the feminist mantra that women are sovereign agents. They make their own decisions based on what suits them. You're being lulled into the oldest feminist trap in the book however. That is to say they're both sovereign human beings with the will to determine what's in their own best interests....but at the same time they're always the victims of society...and particularly men. They aren't. They benefit hugely from men. On balance. I could go into further detail about the performative burdens women place on men which vastly outweigh the corresponding ones men place on females but this post is already long enough, frankly. I'll refer you back to the dating wishlist analogy I made earlier though as a taster of what I meant and develop it in due course if you remain genuinely interested. I do have to be careful though as YouTube regards anything that is vaguely critical of females as misogynistic, even when it is just pointing out observable realities in the differences between the sexes. I'm actually surprised I've even been allowed to make these limited points to be totally honest.
4
@kathleenphillips7145 Yeah but basically thats the exception rather than the rule. Typically women just leave and take the kids because they'd rather do that, not because they're being abused. I think that's the point that needs underscoring in terms of general learning.
4
I guess the logical riposte to that would be: at least you've been that younger woman. So you've been seen and "valued". A huge proportion of men have always been and will always remain invisible/not "needed". Theres also absolutely zero integrity in blaming the pandemic to be honest. That was a period of 2-3 years a couple of years ago; not an entire young adulthood's worth of missed opportunity. Just being real.
3
You're definitely right to feel guilty about up-ending your kids' lives. It was a selfish act and very clearly put your needs before theirs. It's very, very common though as all the statistics on divorce prove.
3
@XwwXr WTAF?!
3
@adrianbrrghs Adrian thank you for such a thoughtful and instructive response. The information on your background and the culture you grew up in was particularly illuminating. I concede that I'm not in a position to contradict any of the points you've made there in support of your argument. In as far as they relate to your personal experiences they're totally valid and I accept them more or less at face value. What I will say however is-valid though they are-they're in the minority for the average woman alive in the West today. Most women nodding their heads in agreement at your diagnosis of "disadvantage" will live lives that bear absolutely no resemblance to the ones you've just depicted. For the most part the average Western woman in secular society enjoys greater personal power within a relationship than her male partner and more legal rights over the family than her male partner. That is very firmly embedded in the culture and the law.
2
@adrianbrrghs You misunderstand. Even where women are not "upper middle class" and are of a lower socio economic status, they are not "oppressed" by their husbands. That is the material point. Husbands in lower socio economic groups have lives which are every bit as hard as their wives...indeed they are frequently harder. They are not "oppressed" by their wives however. That is the material point. Women are disposed to think of themselves as "oppressed" by their husbands (and by marriage) because they are disposed to think of men as being responsible for making them happy. That is the material point. It's an incorrect view. It is not men's responsibility to make a woman happy. It is a woman's responsibility. And if she can't find that within marriage then she should not get married. Not finding happiness within marriage is not "oppression" however. That is the material point. This all stems from a psychological view of the world that is flawed. Not from what is observable reality. I fear you're missing this central point entirely however so I'll leave it there, (respectfully). Thanks for the exchange.
2
@CatalinaFOIA I don't think it does. It sounds like she did what was best for her and she decided that was therefore best for her kids too. Which is a fairly common position women take in divorce. Nothing noble about that. Just selfish. Not saying it wasn't her legal right to do so, but the two things can both be true at once. Still selfish and put herself first.
2
@vaska1999 Profoundly silly comment from a silly person.
2
@lilboosiedralls6813 Thanks for the well wishes. Of course relationships are about giving. And-by dint of how a relationship works-they're about receiving. That's the bit you're deliberately (and dishonestly of course) leaving out. Women are, by nature, set to: 'receive' mode. They have resource demanding instincts that men simply do not have-whether that be money, time or attention. And ultimately unless they're receiving significantly more than they're having to give, they feel the relationship is 'not working'. Just stating facts I'm afraid. Women's nature isn't as loving, generous or thoughtful as you're trying to make out. Incidentally, "wanting to feel someones presence all the time" is a controlling and possessive instinct. Again, it isn't generous; it's demanding and extractive. That's certainly how it would be described if a man said it anyway. It should be enough for a woman (a grown adult for heaven's sake) to just be happy they have a bond. And be more secure in that. Women are not children. Men can't be expected to look after adult children as well as actual children. ☺
1
@lilboosiedralls6813 Thanks for the well wishes. Of course relationships are about giving. And-by dint of how a relationship works-they're about receiving. That's the bit you're deliberately (and dishonestly of course) leaving out. Women are, by nature, set to: 'receive' mode. They have resource demanding instincts that men simply do not have-whether that be money, time or attention. And ultimately unless they're receiving significantly more than they're having to give, they feel the relationship is 'not working'. Just stating facts I'm afraid. Women's nature isn't as loving, generous or thoughtful as you're trying to make out. Incidentally, "wanting to feel someones presence all the time" is a controlling and possessive instinct. Again, it isn't generous; it's demanding and extractive. That's certainly how it would be described if a man said it anyway. It should be enough for a woman (a grown adult for heaven's sake) to just be happy they have a bond. And be more secure in that. Women are not children. Men can't be expected to look after adult children as well as actual children. ☺
1
@lilboosiedralls6813 Thanks for the well wishes. Of course relationships are about giving. And-by dint of how a relationship works-they're about receiving. That's the bit you're deliberately (and dishonestly of course) leaving out. Women are, by nature, set to: 'receive' mode. They have resource demanding instincts that men simply do not have-whether that be money, time or attention. And ultimately unless they're receiving significantly more than they're having to give, they feel the relationship is 'not working'. Incidentally, "wanting to feel someones presence all the time" is a controlling and possessive instinct. Again, it isn't generous; it's demanding and extractive. That's certainly how it would be described if a man said it anyway. It should be enough for a woman (a grown adult for heaven's sake) to just be happy they have a bond. And be more secure in that. Women are not children. Men can't be expected to look after adult children as well as actual children. ☺
1
@lilboosiedralls6813 Thanks for the well wishes. Of course relationships are about giving. And-by dint of how a relationship works-they're about receiving. That's the bit you're deliberately (and dishonestly of course) leaving out. Women are, by nature, set to: 'receive' mode. They have resource demanding instincts that men simply do not have-whether that be money, time or attention. And ultimately unless they're receiving significantly more than they're having to give, they feel the relationship is 'not working'. Just stating facts I'm afraid. Women's nature isn't as loving, generous or thoughtful as you're trying to make out. Incidentally, "wanting to feel someones presence all the time" is a controlling and possessive instinct. Again, it isn't generous; it's demanding and extractive. That's certainly how it would be described if a man said it anyway. It should be enough for a woman (a grown adult for heaven's sake) to just be happy they have a bond. And be more secure in that. Women are not children. Men can't be expected to look after adult children as well as actual children.
1
@adrianbrrghs You don't. But women genuinely do. And for the reasons I mentioned. But those reasons are flawed. And that's the material point. Happy Easter!
1
@Batmans_Pet_Goldfish Well said. Very thoughtfully laid out. I don't agree with all of it, but I agree with much. Ultimately however I think the distinction between the two roles is epitomised by Warren Farrell who observed: When a couple has a child a woman has three choices. She can work full time and use childcare, she can work part time, use childcare and spend some time with her child, or she can leave the workforce and spend a lot of her time with her child. When a couple has a child a man has three choices. He can work full time. He can work full time. OR, he can work full time. That's a general statement (ie exceptions exist) but it's true. Now...the REALLY telling thing is you will not find a woman alive who would swap the optionality of the woman's position in marriage with the (lack of) optionality of the man's. But apparently marriage is "oppressive" of the woman.
1