Youtube comments of Sammy B (@sammyb1651).

  1. Just imagine a "relationship" where one party has to constantly remain primed to subdue acts of disrespect, lest they lose their partner's love, while the other party can behave in ways which are piteous and STILL be loved regardless.  Not only that, the culture tells them THEY'RE the one that's settling for less than their worth, too. Yeah, it's a hard pass from me.
    1200
  2.  @IamPinhead  Facts. Chandler is a monster and Kat is merely insufferable. Lol.
    1100
  3. This sh!t is hilarious. When it comes to dating, women HATE it when they have to consider anyone other than themselves.
    831
  4. When both parties start secretly recording each other for hours on end you know it's a deeply unhealthy relationship.
    795
  5. Not only do we NOT ask for reparations from Italy, we treasure and preserve cities such as Bath. Not only do we NOT ask for reparations from the Danish, we treasure and preserve cities such as York. Not only do we NOT ask for reparations from France, we treasure and preserve our castles and cathedrals. Britain says NO to victim mentality!
    536
  6. Men: Women DO NOT care. End of message.
    488
  7.  @joygibbons5482  That isn't sexual neediness. It's ANY form of neediness. Ideally they want someone who exhibits zero needs (of her) but provides endlessly for her wants and needs without question or qualification. Even to the extent that they ANTICIPATE her needs and she doesn't even have to point them out. "I shouldn't have to tell you!" etc etc. Women fight tooth and nail to avoid any performative burden on their part. Which going back to your point is explainable biologically (virtually everything is "explainable biologically") but ultimately results in utterly pathetic asymmetry in a relationship.
    174
  8. Everyone else's fault. No accountability. Zero remorse. These particular hallmarks of female domestic violence are getting more and more coverage these days. And rightly so.
    167
  9. To be honest, it's all a bit of a false dichotomy really. The women who do land their "high value" target eventually get unenthusiastic about him also. It's only a matter of time. Women are constantly in a cycle of becoming unhappy about something. As men we need to stop taking any of it particularly seriously. Starting with them.
    162
  10. Awesome testimony! And really good to see you appreciate the rarity and value of it! Genuinely happy for you👍
    156
  11. 2 important codicils: 1. Irrespective of where you are in the totem pole, she's still always going to be looking for "better" anyway, so just don't wife it. 2. If you are top 1% 5% (whatever), she's STILL only looking for the FANTASY of the top 1% man. Not the reality. HER fantasy. Ie theres a very good chance she'll want to divorce you anyway and just retain the resource element of your status. Women petition to divorce high value men every day of the week. So ONCE AGAIN, just don't wife it.
    149
  12.  @Tankology73  I'm down the rabbit hole fam!
    148
  13. And (far more directly and hence more importantly) the men she falsely accuses.
    123
  14. "Cops"?! Jarring to say the least. How about "police"?
    119
  15. I'm deliberately not going to look. They say you shouldn't judge on appearances, but sometimes you scratch below the surface of a whack job and get....more whack job.
    118
  16. 🤣Facts. Plus-in case it wasn't glaringly obvious-they're telling you what they want because that's all that matters (to them). And that doesn't change at any point during a relationship.
    115
  17.  @sarahrobertson634  Derisory response, Sarah. You're stopped engaging intellectually so I've already won the argument. Getting schooled here as anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see. Very best wishes to your son by the way. Hope he doesn't lose his kids-and you your grandkids in the process-just because his wife shares his mom's values! 😀
    105
  18.  @marinaglass  Lol! NEVER miss an opportunity to cry: "misogyny!"
    84
  19.  @sarahrobertson634  Lol! Tell me you've lost the argument without telling me you've lost the argument. Incidentally-just because I'm curious-you stated quite coldly that women can simply replace men who insist on an apology with those that don't. As a response I thought it was very admirable in its honesty, however I couldn't help but wonder; are you content for your son's future wife to bin him off like that if he stands on his principles? For someone more obsequious I mean. Perhaps take his kids and home from him in the process? It's one to conjure with isn't it, I'm sure you'd agree?  Also, do you think over the longer term the phenomenon you described simply makes for worse behaviour from one sex? I mean it's nice to get your own way and not feel like you have to atone for your errors/apologise, but if it you keep getting away with stuff it can kind of make you a sh!tty person. Over the long run. I don't know, but certainly if I were you I think both of the above hypotheticals would give me pause for thought. Certainly I think they'd make me a modicum less smug in any event. Submitted for your thoughts.
    84
  20.  @modickens1272  How they make MEN feel is irrelevant. There's an important distinction. They are very careful (or I should say, deliberate) about how they make other women feel. Observe how they are very careful about the feelings of female friends.  In regards to men, broadly speaking they take the view that a man should not have feelings. They see a man's proper function as being caretakers of THEIR feelings, but not vice versa. A women will blithely make a man responsible for her happiness while fighting tooth and nail to deny any responsibility for his. It flows in one direction and one direction only. Women are different by degree, and it's silly to say they're all alike in every sense, however one thing you would do well to remember is the following. When it comes to relationships, the ONE thing that EVERY woman has in common is the unshakable belief that she SHOULD get things her own way.
    83
  21. Thats a worst case scenario. A more common scenario is the woman (happy or otherwise) inserting herself at the centre of the relationship and making the relationship about her. That's the VAST MAJORITY of heterosexual relationships and it's soul destroying for most men.  Women think it's perfectly reasonable. They will stare at you like you've got two heads if you question the dynamic. The truth however is that it's purely extractive behaviour that hollows the man out.
    83
  22.  @UniversityofIdaho-ld9ep  Is the WRONG answer!
    82
  23. Yup. Willing to bet most men have at least one of those stories!
    78
  24.  @indiabilly  She was wholly complicit in the "push and pull". Any other interpretation is ludicrous to the point of dishonesty.
    75
  25.  @sarahrobertson634  TL;DR. It's a population level discussion. You've made the classic female error of personalising it. It doesn't matter what you want or I want, so we can dispense with all that. The fact of the matter is women (net) want more money/resources/services than they're prepared to pay for themselves. In short they consume far more than they produce, so the surplus comes from men (net). Once upon a time that surplus would have come from a male directly, within the confines of a relationships, and would have been traded for attention and other reciprocal benefits. Now it's been outsourced to government and is extracted indirectly via taxes on pain of criminal sanction. It still comes from male labour though (net), just without the reciprocal benefits. So all things being equal, applying your logic, men should be able to opt out of that if they decide it doesn't benefit them. You can pay all you want to make up the shortfall if it makes you feel any better personally. Or women could opt to receive less in govt benefits/services for crap they don't need or don't deserve. It's exactly the same argument re: entitlement to attention. Women won't go for that though. Either receiving less or paying more for their sisters. And so your whole argument fails for rank hypocrisy.
    75
  26. About 4 calls per year? Speaking as a man, that sounds blissful!  You're a keeper.
    73
  27.  @pmccoy8924  Apparently he's ex NFL so it won't have been very difficult for him to do. And that is sometimes part of the problem tbf. When money comes too easily, its not often very well deployed. Like on endless consumer cr@p and status symbols for a crazy broad. Men with money typically need to have a much better idea what has attracted the woman in their life. Men who've had to work hard for their resources hopefully understand this better than those to which money has flowed easily for playing a sport (ie something that people essentially play for fun).
    73
  28.  @alyssawoodman  Video is about women in case that wasn't astoundingly obvious.
    70
  29.  @tomspreadbury2915  Agreed. Showing an horrendous bias with comments like that. Unfortunately all too common.
    70
  30. All straight facts and very well formulated! I have some horrible news though. The woman who is looking for you to "prioritize her needs over yours" is 90% + of the female population. I would say it's anywhere between 90% and 98% in fact. So while the methodology is sound, the odds are abysmal.
    66
  31. This is a common refrain but it isn't exactly right and it needs to be put to bed.  You have to remember how terrible they are at work. I'm not being facetious here-really consider it. HR didn't exist before women entered the workforce. In the past there were just a few personnel roles in companies-they dealt with holiday/payroll and other sundry admin functions. Because women complain and moan endlessly however HR is now an industry in its own right with vast phalanxes of people ministering to women's workplace-based complaints. In fact it's one of the few growth industries in the West, scandalously. You have to consider who the ultimate "boss" is. Ignore line managers and people you have to suck up to. Ultimately the real boss is the employer. Thats who cuts the cheque. That's all that matters. And to the employer they behave fairly appallingly. So it isn't very different at all really.
    66
  32.  @sarahrobertson634  abject fail.
    65
  33. I'll provide the TL;DR Michael - Easy life. Family business which he inherited (ie didnt have to strive for). Lots of money which made him attractive to women. Clueless about why women were attracted to him (thought it was because he was special and not because he had money-which in turn made him narcissistic) Relentlessly thought with his pen15. Murderer. Jan - Principally attracted to the lifestyle on offer. Couldn't afford a swimming pool without him. Forgave Michael's affairs for material reasons. Priorities all wrong. Angela - Fell in love with Michael when she saw his swimming pool. Baby trapped him to dissolve his marriage. Had bought a new swimming costume and was ready to move right on in. Pretends butter wouldn't melt. Angela's husband - don't know where to start. The kids (of both families) - My sincere condolences. You've all been treated horrendously by some very poorly behaved and selfish adults. That about covers it.
    64
  34.  @jyc313  And I'm sorry if you're too dense to understand humour. For instance I don't actually believe his eyeballs were in single file either. Strangely enough. But there's nothing I can do about it if you're too feeble minded to get the joke. I'll file it under: NOT MY F*CKING PROBLEM!
    64
  35. A sad tale all round, this. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor. Just being real.
    59
  36. "Where have all the good men gone?" =Where are the men that offer me most benefit-and if I'm scrupulously honest-significantly more than I am able or prepared to offer that same man.
    57
  37.  @JustinaDirse  It's very much the standard narrative when it comes to the storytelling. Paints the victim as wholly innocent of any part in her own demise. It's important because people can feel more outrage about it in that case and outrage sells. In reality if it dealt with her realistically (a flawed individual with the usual selfish tendencies, greed, immaturity, normal vanity etc etc) people would be forced to examine their consciences and be far less engaged by it. Just a sad tale all round tbh. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    55
  38. He didn't look like he weighed that much tbh. The man was a racing snake!!! A lean-mean-jogging-machine...a man so lean his eyeballs were in single file. I put his weight at 40lbs max. "Dragged him?" She could have thrown him in the truck over-arm!
    53
  39. His channel used to be well populated by female viewers (if the comments section was anything to go by), but they've mainly scarpered now. They liked the original content that highlighted mens shortcomings but as soon as he turned the spotlight onto behaviour that didn't reflect well on them they all disappeared. Lol.
    52
  40. The State are clearly satisfied she's guilty. They just know they can't prove it to a criminal standard any longer due to the loss of evidence. I think they just abandoned it in the end because she'd already served 20 years. That's something at least! The fact her "innocence" team wouldn't make themselves available for comment tells a story of its own. As does the fact two of her children testified against her and her defence was based on the other child being responsible. A truly ruthless manipulator! Incidentally, re: her response to the massive pool of blood on the mattress ("He told me he'd had a nose bleed once") Ahem Said no woman EVER before or since! Women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
    50
  41.  @otimismoedoenca6749  No article. It's just observable reality.
    49
  42. Indeed. Other highlights included her response to the massive pool of blood on the mattress ("He told me he'd had a nose bleed once") Said no woman EVER in the history of human cohabitation! Women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
    48
  43.  @timizo691  If you haven't come here from the red pill space (ie you're a Matt Walsh sub) I would urge you to get some red pill perspective on what you've just described. I think you'd find it illuminating. While it's good to self-reflect, it's painful to hear you talking about not being fun or exciting enough for her. They'll all make you feel like that if you let them. It's basically how women place themselves at the centre of a relationship and appoint you the 'job' of keeping them happy. Like only their needs count. It's very VERY common.  Don't turn it in on yourself.
    48
  44. LET'S GO BRANDING!
    47
  45.  @theironson1043  Cheers! I've reached very similar conclusions to you IronSon. Happily though it does make me immune to their tactics. I could predict with certainty she'd turn to shaming. Only I'm not remotely shamed as I have zero interest in qualifying myself to her as a female. Ultimately what I tend to do is point out the proximal/distal conundrum. It's completely unassailable. In other words, just because they can do something in the short term doesn't mean it's ultimately good to do something in the long term. So she can easily get rid of a man who expects an apology? Great. No doubt that makes her feel like she has the upper hand. But what about when her son's wife does the same thing? He's lost his family, home (and possibly takes his life) and she's lost her grandchildren. Great outcome. It's the junk food argument. Yeah tastes great and is easy, but harms you in the long run.
    47
  46.  @rayzerot  In fairness, denying kids a mom is a pretty harsh step. I know single moms are happy to do that re: fathers but surely we're better than that?
    46
  47. Same.
    45
  48.  @knowledgeispower200  Brutal. But expressed with beautiful clarity.
    45
  49.  @cammey3  Yeah. Cant know for certain of course, but thats exactly what I was thinking too. Made me laugh when it said she'd "matured" I just thought: Yeah, you mean she isn't getting what she wants, so things have changed. It doesn't do anyone any good to be naive about people like Hannah. She can justify anything to herself and it doesn't matter (to her) what consequences that has for anyone else.
    44
  50. The cops were in a difficult position to be fair to them as Gabby LITERALLY admitted to assaulting Brian. Really if she was being treated fairly by the police she should have been arrested there and then for her assault and (ideally) the two should have gone their separate ways. Instead she returned to the situation. Not because she was an abuse victim with no other options but because she was doing what she wanted to do; ie driving around vlogging herself. Brian was clearly part of that instagram vlogging experience. Sadly the mutual violence clearly continued between the two and at one stage escalated tragically.
    43
  51. I 'd hate to think what would happen to this place if 8 people moved into it. It's one thing building it all up from scratch using hard work, it's quite another just being gifted it with everything already built for you. People don't value what they haven't worked for. It's likely to attract some very unconscientious people with a completely different outlook to this guy.
    42
  52.  @jyc313  Sorry. Not 40lbs.  Anywhere between about 39 and 41 lbs.
    42
  53. A woman will constantly point out your faults while you're busy overlooking hers. Basically.
    42
  54.  @Zxcvbueisn444  🤣🤣🤣That is BEYOND tragic!  (Not you...the bit about her emailing you a load of solicited "endorsements" from people who've never experienced the realities of dating her).
    41
  55. As far as being child free is concerned, women are at liberty to do whatever they want in my view. As soon as they have a child however, they should be held to a higher standard. The indirect misuse of men to pay the tax burden of single motherhood is scandalous. And the denial of a full time father figure to a child is an outrage. Frankly it's abuse.
    41
  56. I'm 23 seconds in and wondering how they can be described as: "hot".
    39
  57.  @michelstronguin6974  Yeah I understand all that perfectly. It's essentially just the: instant gratification vs deferred gratification lesson repackaged. Nothing new under the sun.
    39
  58. Women aren't held to the same standard under the law.
    36
  59. The short answer is: no. The client essentially paid for a lengthy preamble, outlining the issue (which he will have already understood) but there's no real good news for him here. It would be so exceptional as to be vanishingly unlikely. Best strategy would be to just start doing things to please himself anyway. Allied to improving himself generally. If she responds positively to that great. If not (more likely) at least find solace in the reason that he's doing it and be less defeated when she rejects the new deal that's on the table. Only other option is to carry on being the taxi tbh.
    36
  60.  @mealovesyu  No, I think I'll keep making the generalisations, thanks. Pattern recognition is valid and extremely useful as a learning tool. A fail from you. Must try harder.
    36
  61. To be fair-although the theory expounded in the video is completely sound-the practical reality is women know they can offer zero value and men will still wife it up. Including high value men. You see it constantly. They know they can get a lot for not very much.  No incentive to change.
    36
  62. That, Sir, is a win!
    35
  63. Enjoy the numbers game if it's in your favour! Have at it! It'd be silly not to! Won't help you when it comes to relationships however. Women aren't looking to date a HVM. They're looking to date their fantasy idea of a HVM. Not the reality. However good you look, it won't stop them projecting their own fantasy onto you. He's better looking, richer and more charming than you and he has zero expectations of her.  And it won't stop them rinsing you when you inevitably fail to live up to that.  If Tom Brady can't make it work (and he can't) then you'll be extremely lucky to do so.
    35
  64.  @AllHaiLKINGTIsHeRe3  Facts. Thankfully this behaviour is starting to get more exposure via the internet. It's difficult to see how the "sugar and spice and all things nice" trope can survive for much longer now we have better information about common behavioural patterns in the sexes.
    35
  65. Damn that was a very real comment!
    35
  66. 1:06:26 This was the most naive, low-resolution thinking I think I've heard on the subject. I was actually astonished to hear it coming from a person who is supposed to have studied intersexual relationships in depth. If women have a never ending laundry list of requirements in a mate....and men have very few requirements of a mate....who do you THINK is more likely going to be adjudged "at fault" for causing the end of a relationship? Women need more emotional labour, more attention, more resource investment and they place themselves (and their happiness) at the centre of a relationship. Quite simply there is a metric sh!t ton more things men can "get wrong" in the eyes of a woman to cause her to "not be happy" than vice versa. I was blown away by the ignorance of the basic premises this particular comment highlighted.
    34
  67.  @jessiesheldon-huffey1824  That's nice and all, but all you're essentially doing there is setting him up to do it all again. To put it another way, you're saying do it again and "someone deserving of it will come along". Because it serves women to have men going around with that stupidly naive perspective. No. What you SHOULD be telling him is to make sure he insists his needs are given parity to the female he shares a relationship with. That he doesn't let her place herself at the centre of the relationship and make the relationship all about her. That he insists she makes herself responsible for her own happiness and not make him responsible for keeping her happy. THAT would be a kindness. Not some soft-soap nonsense about him "deserving" someone kind. All that does is serve women by setting him up to allow the next one to take advantage. No disrespect but your gynocentric take on this is NOT helpful.
    34
  68.  @fiveleavesleft6521  It always amuses me how women have an issue with the concept of someone 'giving them away' on marriage. Or vows that ask them to obey. Yet they're perfectly content with the convention that expects a man to get down on one knee in a grovelling position in order to propose to them.
    33
  69.  @Dreweybaby  I think it's more than just societal reasons that this goes unacknowledged. At the end of the day, it IS kind of embarrassing. I mean you're basically having to honestly self-reflect and accept that you're asking for more in your partner than you're offering yourself. Yes, it might make for better harmony within a relationship but it also means you're having to humble yourself, and reject all of the self-serving validational nonsense that panders to vvomen. I think you underestimate how much vvomen want to live in a fantasy land OUTSIDE of relationships. It's every bit as strong as how much they want to live in a fantasy world inside of them. At the end of the day, they want to believe the popular narrative whereby they're constantly applauded and hyped for doing nothing. They're hugely ego invested in that. That becomes untenable if you've basically accepted you're the 'lesser' contributor to a relationship however.
    33
  70.  @DeltaV64  Ironically, she'd probably find that very attractive.
    33
  71. In all seriousness, he needs to get a grip and form a more realistic opinion of what his ex-wife was. I'm not saying he needs to defame the woman (I'm sure he would never say anything negative for the kids' sake)...but in his heart of hearts he really does need to just accept the fact she was a callous gold digger who left him at his lowest ebb in pursuit of money and unearned wealth. It's the truth and it'd give him more peace.
    32
  72. Got to say, we need to start saying the same about pregnant women who make no effort to give their child a stable home with two parents. They vastly outnumber irresponsible fathers.
    32
  73. Which is logical when you think about it because her framing of things is that the relationship is all about her in the first place. Men need to understand that this is basically the default position for women. And it's very toxic (needless to say).
    31
  74.  @LisaCulton  The decor SHE wants. He's literally not bothered.  Before she decides to change it again. And he's STILL not bothered.  Stop being so excruciatingly dishonest in your posts. PS well done to her for paying for 50% of her literal shelter from the elements. How selfless and heroic of her.
    31
  75. Using this analogy I'd say they're dream catchers. Then dream enders. `In that order.  For instance they're not going to go for the attitude Orion is endorsing in this video. They benefit most if a man dreams. Thats why they want (to receive) romance and emotionality. They want to catch a man dreaming a beautiful dream-they encourage it. They don't want a man dreaming a moderate dream with rational thoughts about her and objectively scrutinising her behaviour.
    31
  76. While I don't doubt your first clause, I'm virtually certain they're disposed to disrespect men of any stripe with the goal of getting their own way.  I'm not saying she wouldn't resist the urge for longer with someone she thought was "superior", or that it would manifest in the same way, but I don't think being "higher" than her is a panacea. I think men tell themselves that as cope.  Women care about themselves FAR MORE than they care about their partner and that-at its heart-is the single most significant factor in determining her behaviour.
    30
  77. Catering by her sister-in-law. 😂 I love how informal and wholesome it all is. Can you imagine that nowadays? The catering alone would be a bigger consideration than the likes of the sound and choreography here. The demands for instagram perfect food - and thats just from your average woman on her phone! Imagine catering to a bunch of 'artistic' divas! There'd be an absolute riot on. Kate Bush had it right and stayed true to what mattered. We're so spoiled and have our priorities so badly wrong these days.
    30
  78. 🤣
    30
  79.  @legiontepes3474  Well said. As if insulting your comment invalidated your point anyway. It's a general issue. Thats the whole point. The content creator wouldn't be making the video if it wasn't a general issue. MOST men can relate to it. It was just a very standard, feminised, ad hominem response from RobbyRaccoon and one that no longer works in 2025.
    30
  80. If you have to "hope" (said more than once I note) then you probably wouldn't. "Hope" isn't a plan. Nice sentiments but ultimately of little practical benefit to your man.
    28
  81. And even if there WAS a point, no explanation would be owed.
    28
  82. "Loyalty to your feelings" is basically just another way of saying inconsistent. Or disloyal.
    28
  83.  @marinaglass  Man-has-valid-opinion-woman-is-offended-shocker! Lol.
    28
  84. 9:30 You're fundamentally mistaken in this. It's actually one of the hardest things they can do because they aren't programmed to care about a mans wants or needs. They believe he should exhibit zero wants and needs and attend to hers instead. Abundantly. This whole thing flounders once again on the men="human doing" principle. They don't see men as human beings, they have a perspective of entitlement to mens labour, sacrifice etc. You see it as "easy" because you're self-extrapolating and seeing it through the male lens of service. So you see it's actually enormously difficult for them. Otherwise they'd do it. Obviously.  That's the cold, unpleasant and insoluble reality. Plus, the practical reality is women know they can offer zero value and men will still wife it up. Including high value men. You see it constantly. They know they can get a lot for not very much. Back to square one with this one I'm afraid.
    28
  85.  @SidewaysInTraffic  I meant he just walked into the job. He didnt have to build the business and he didnt need to earn any qualifications for it.  When people are handed things it creates a certain mindset. You're very obtuse aren't you? It really wasnt a very difficult concept to grasp.
    28
  86. The "lawyers hourly rate" thing is a silly red herring. That metric only applies when you're at work doing billable activities. It doesn't (for instance) apply when you're sat on your ass at home/going to the gym/going on a date. You don't earn $1300 per hour sat on your ass at home. Indeed part of the time you're actually at work you're not even doing billable activities. So we can dispense with that nonsense.  What IS important is how busy you are relative to the free time you're left with. That's the only thing that really matters when calculating the economics of it. If you figure you work too hard to waste precious free time with conventional dating (and you can afford to pay to play) then that's your entire equation laid out.  It doesn't come with an hourly-rate metric unless it directly reduces your productivity/billable hours at work. And even then that's probably only if you're self employed rather than salaried.
    28
  87.  @easterworshipper5579  Utter nonsense. You're treating her with less agency or personal responsibility just because she's a female. That's misogyny. The modern standard is that women are spectacular, brave, independent and MORE capable than men. By that logic they should receive MORE jail time than men. Not exemption from jail. Keep on simpin' my G!
    27
  88. We've GOT to stop this automatic assumption that the male partner is the abuser. Theres clearly evidence here that Nicole was the one abusing Doug (hitting him/texting him abusive messages about other women/general controlling behaviour). It's always the case nowadays that if the male utters one word of criticism of the female (even where perfectly valid) it's called abusive/controlling. And yet a female can be straight up beating on him, abusing him by text messages/strung out on anti depressants and we're supposed to accept that she's the blameless party acting rationally and lovingly in the relationship. This nonsense narrative is backed up by so many people even when they categorically KNOW the female is a complete liability.
    27
  89. Yup. A sad tale all round, this. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    27
  90.  @hopeful8975  Yeah I'm not familiar with American sports tbh. It said he was a footballer of some description and there was reference to him playing to a professional standard. No doubt made a decent amount of easy money nonetheless. We have a similar thing in the UK. Professional football players who attract floods of women and don't even question why they've landed a model type. Very naive. The same woman wouldn't look at them twice if they weren't loaded. Typically they end up getting rinsed in divorce after a few years. I do think a lot of it comes down to the ease with which money is made though. When you consider sports stars (this is essentially something people play literally for fun and yet they receive multi millions for it), the sacrifice is very minimal on their part so I think they spend it far less wisely. People who've had to do something hard to earn money you'd like to think spend it more wisely also. Including not entertaining the idea of bringing a lunatic woman into their life.
    27
  91. Hannah Thompson is one dangerous young lady. She can clearly accept any type of behaviour if she perceives it suits her interests.
    27
  92. I get it bro. But don't feel hatred. That really is wasted energy. Look at it like this instead...what they want is illusory. You'll get passed over for "higher value" men, sure. But they don't actually want that top tier man they overlook you for. They want their FANTASY version of that top tier man. Not the reality. Their fantasy.   Their fantasy version is what they project onto the real person. He's better looking than him, more charismatic than him, richer than him and (most crucially of all) he has NO expectations of her.  When the HVM inevitably fails to live up to that completely unrealistic standard, he gets canned too. Losing his possessions in the process. If Tom Brady can't make it work (and he can't) then theres nothing to feel envious about. You're not missing out. Women petition to divorce high value men every day of the week. Contempt and disgust probably has some utility as a response. It certainly mitigates against catching unnecessary "feels". Try to regulate it as best you can though so it serves you rather than controls you.
    26
  93. Pipe down a bit.
    26
  94. You can abbreviate this message by asking a basic, fundamental question.  Q) Why are women so scathing of men and yet so keen/adept at getting into relationships with them?  A) Irrespective of what they say, it simply MUST serve their interests do so so. On balance. Ie they derive a net benefit. And in that you also have the answer to the question, why, by comparison to women, many men eventually end up just walking away from relationships altogether.
    25
  95. Possibly that and the fact she was a female/mother. Probably just assumed she was immune from prosecution.
    25
  96. Most men in relationships unwittingly find themselves in female p!ssing contests between their partner and her friends. Sometimes overtly, but virtually always indirectly. As a male partner, your quality of life is attached to her emotions-and these fluctuate depending on whether she's up or down in the p!ssing contest hierarchy. It's practically inevitable.  The only way to avoid this is to insist that you won't accept responsibility for her happiness. Unfortunately that will typically be framed as some sort of "abuse". Which of course, it isnt.
    25
  97. Facts. A sad tale all round, this. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    25
  98. Jesse's hair has reached escape velocity.
    25
  99. Agreed. It's net zero from the point of view of a 'fairer' exchange between the sexes if it's practiced at a population level. It makes no odds whether people try harder or less hard, the dial just shifts accordingly to a new median.  Outside of that you can obviously make the point that-from a societal perspective-it's better if people try harder than less hard. As individual advice it has greatest merit. Ultimately however it's still only really worth it if it's done for your own edification principally rather than to "boost your attractiveness" in the eyes of someone else.
    25
  100. They want value to flow towards them. They do NOT want to provide value. So the video is kinda redundant.  Yes, it's correct and accurate. But it's not what they want. And ultimately they do what they want.
    25
  101. It's called due process. We invented it. You're welcome.
    24
  102. Incomplete analysis.  1. Because they marry for gain 2. Because they are likely to break their vows in the absence of (continuing) gain. That about covers it. A prenup violates this strategy.
    24
  103.  @LARA-sg4bt  Theres a reason you said that as a female. It's because you stand to benefit more if a man gives himself completely to a dream. If a man remains sensible, accepts the reality of female nature and considers himself more...you-as a female-stand to get less. Your comment came from a place of deep existential dread. Fortunately men are beginning to understand how women operate and aren't buying the dream anymore. 😊
    24
  104.  @somacruz6893  You have my sympathy! It's an all too common story. And getting worse with instagram etc. Imagine being that hung up about everything your friends are buying/how they're decorating their houses. Pretty pathetic existence when you look at it in this terms. Just take solace in the fact that-with many of them-it doesn't matter what you do, it'll never be enough. Once you embrace that truth their constant whining is just ambient noise.
    23
  105. Lunatic.
    23
  106.  @charmainer9030  I think if men were to be honest, I think most men will be able to recall being hit BY a female and most men will not have hit a female. Female abuse and violence is far more common than we like to admit but it's for the best it's starting to be publicised. Not sure about the stats on men/women causing self harm injuries (ie which is greater) but I'm pretty sure female self harm is quite high. I know I've witnessed it personally. Am I allowed to call them abusive too as you call the men abusive? If so it seems we've probably got even MORE female abusers to have to start reporting to the authorities :)
    23
  107. "Lesbian power couple" 🤣🤣🤣
    22
  108. True. To be honest you'll hear it at other times too though even when the biological clock isn't a factor.  Frequently they'll say it after they've had kids and got divorced. Ie to new suitors. It's just a way to manipulate you into making an impulsive decision rather than consider the pros and cons of her as a partner. It's made to sound romantic-like they're throwing caution to the wind and are prepared to risk it all on taking a chance with you...but the reality is they've failed to monkey branch on divorce (or the monkey branch hasn't worked out). In those circumstances they get VERY keen to secure a new financial sponsor.
    22
  109. Nah. Tell them anyway. They want you to "express your feelings".
    22
  110.  @chrisstone2506  It's a fairly reliable heuristic, even if it doesn't constitute an exact science. I don't think we need to get into the weeds over that. Incidentally if you're as fleet-of-foot as you say you are and advocate swapping out one for another at will, you're either: 1. Not married, or 2. Married but without significant assets. Either way, that probably hints at you not being as "desirable" as you like to think you are.
    22
  111. Complete nonsense talking point. Take them very, VERY seriously. Be extremely cognisant of how irrational, emotional, inconsistent (and especially how impetuous) they are. Each one has the potential to have a hugely negative bearing on your own experiences and outcomes as a man. They don't "want" to be subordinate. But they will function more optimally in that position in certain, prescribed circumstances. Those circumstances are not universal however and often are not even particularly long lived. Certainly don't pedestalize them-thats disastrous-but do NOT make the mistake of not taking them seriously.
    22
  112. This video is fundamentally wrong-headed anyway. Women breezily disrespect men all the time but it's not really what is at the heart of the matter. The problem of disrespect is downstream of a more significant issue and that is the horrendous mismatch in requirements between male and female partners. Women have a huge laundry list of reasons for getting into a relationship with a man. They view a man as an endless performer of tasks. Men have practically zero requirements of a female partner and seek a relationship mainly for intimacy. The solipsistic idea women have in their head of all the tasks a man should be performing/ways in which he should be "behaving" (essentially in support of her and her objectives) renders many of them unable to act respectfully. This is because-in many regards-the idea of his being sovereign and independent is completely in conflict with the myriad acts of service she wants him for in the first place. This is women's problem to resolve. It's not a man's fault. The 'respect' thing is dealing with the symptoms, not the cause.
    21
  113.  @modickens1272  Your point about their true feelings towards other women is taken. I completely agree, that's very often the case. Not exclusively so, but it's certainly common. That's why I intentionally used the word 'deliberate' in fact. They don't always authentically care about female friends feelings (in a loving or benevolent way), but as a rule they are exceptionally careful about how they make them feel, or to exhibit the appearance of caring about how they feel.
    21
  114. In a nutshell.
    21
  115.  @joelvinson  Will I watch? I won't watch! ..maybe I'll watch.
    20
  116. The very simple answer is (leaving all the technical/evolutionary explanations aside), they're looking for MORE than they offer to a partner themselves. in other words, they want to be emotionally supported, they do NOT want to be emotionally supportive. So you have to decide whether you think that's worth it-particularly bearing in mind (if you are a man offering more than she provides) you're unlikely to experience much gratitude for that.
    20
  117.  @Mastermind111111  I would suggest we need to stop coddling people in pretty much all environments. Be it the workplace, legal system etc etc. Wherever people know they've got too many rights/too much protection you can reasonably expect them to behave abysmally. Just let poor behaviour have actual consequences and most things should right themselves.
    20
  118.  @emelined187  Yes, obviously. And very appropriately, being as it's an American man speaking on an American platform. What's your issue with that?
    20
  119. 2:31 a lot of female "intentional dating" is like this. It's not as ill founded as you claim so no injunction for them to "act fast/leap into bed" is going to resonate. They're determining how biddable the man is. For this type of relationship (long term/kids) they're actually seeking out someone who will put her first and prostrate themselves.  They're contemplating a 5-10 year relationship timespan so they're not going to be with someone who won't do as she wants. She only thinks like that for flings.
    19
  120.  @Jeff-sp7bg  3 months. Once a quarter. Sounds like an absolute dreamboat tbh.
    19
  121. Although more typically it's just a cry for attention.
    19
  122.  @Zeuts85  What is it about the proposition that so offends your sense of proportion? That it's a "generlization"? Generalisations are perfectly valid and useful. Men are visual. Is that an "absurd generalisation"? If you honestly go through life thinking women care about men's issues you're in for a very rude awakening. Where there is ever conflict between a man's interests and a woman's prerogative, the latter will prevail. Women uphold and advocate divorce laws that prejudice mens interests in the most egregious way possible. Most of those same women have sons. They do this knowing full well the same law which benefits them will prejudice their own flesh and blood in turn. The instinct I'm describing literally has primacy over the maternal bond. If you think she's any more invested in her spouse's interests you're not only wrong, you're in cloud cuckoo land. I simply repeat: women do not care.
    19
  123. I think this is a fairly logical conclusion now tbh. And I don't think it should be viewed as "hate speech" either-theres nothing hateful about it, it's just a perfectly sensible pivot once you come to understand the reality of the situation. It's also quite clear why women are keen to suppress this understanding about them. It does make them less "lovable" on the whole, from a mans perspective. They gain most from your ignorance so I can see why they would want to suppress the information. At best all I can now offer is a transactional "love" that mirrors their "love" and that is highly conditional on performance. I feel they should be content with that if thats the same bargain that they're driving.
    19
  124. Just imagine how many "wrong" women there are out there. All eager for marriage because they only stand to gain. Truly terrifying.
    18
  125. 2:28 "Power couple" gives me the man-ick. Honestly, when you hear that phrase uttered, you realise how different men and women are. No part of it appeals to me whatsoever. It's so utterly irrelevant to anything I desire in a relationship, they might as well be describing another concept completely. When you hear how important it is to a woman though it's a massive 'tell' about how discordant we are as a species.
    18
  126. Foundationless word salad.
    18
  127. No offence, but you just spectacularly missed the point. The point was that men commit and love in the absence of this support. It's what distinguishes "love" between the sexes. You did feel a profound need to make your comment about you though. Ironically.
    18
  128.  @davyr847  If you cheated on your wife because you were being "loyal to your libido" (ie your sexual "feelings"), she would have absolutely no hesitation in calling you disloyal. I can guarantee that. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. People get too easily propagandised by nonsense, including Patrickrada it would seem. Sad to see the content creator fall for it too, however.
    17
  129.  @chrisstone2506  It was a funny story tbf. Lighten up a bit ffs.
    17
  130.  @Jackietreehorn-z5e  Yup! Good take. Both highly flawed individuals who were almost certainly the worse for getting together.
    17
  131.  @BlueCyann  Is incorrect. Generalizations are perfectly valid. It's a YouTube comments section, not a court of law. We're not dealing with rules of evidence or concerned with proving anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Her liberty isn't at stake. We're just talking conversationally based on what we saw on a TV program. Additionally exceptions that disprove generalisations are just that. Exceptions. Ergo they wouldn't result in error "half of the time", merely occasionally. Your analysis is flawed both qualitatively and quantitatively. 👍
    17
  132. 6:56 It's less about a true psychological inferiority and more to do with the fact that men are literally hard-wired to protect their partner. Or at the very least not hurt her. Ergo they're disinclined to try and wound her emotionally. Women aren't hindered by the same evolutionary handbrake. They're quite content to wound if it suits their purpose to do so. The problem is (as with most of these things) most men don't appreciate that. They live in a self-extrapolated la-la land whereby-because he wishes to protect her at all costs-he thinks she's governed by a reciprocal credo toward him. She's not. Her loyalty is to her. Just understanding that one basic thing is all it needs to level any psychological inequality of arms. I mean they're REALLY not rocket scientists most of these broads, so let's not get it out of proportion.
    17
  133. I very much doubt she believed it in the first place. She was in an acrimonious custody dispute and his murder solved that problem for her. She basically endorsed his murder because it suited her purposes to do so. Hard to then have much sympathy when she ends up in the same situation herself. She didn't appear to have any for her ex. Just being real. I think you need to develop a better understanding of people's motives and behaviour. They're often highly unpleasant and they'll frequently put their immediate wants above questions of morality or what is "right".
    17
  134.  @ephraimwinslow  Additionally you're supposed to anticipate those needs, rather than react to them when prompted. This is because failing to anticipate them would require the woman to list them, which would expose her as being the incredibly demanding/selfish person she is. It would also be exhausting for her to have to do (the act of constant listing "needs"). They'd far rather it be exhausting for the man instead.
    17
  135. Lol! Dawn is a right piece of work.
    16
  136.  @susangarrard2753  If we simply take the example of women getting the majority share of custody, who do YOU think gets the worse outcome? Stop playing silly games.  You KNOW who gets worse outcomes just as well as men KNOW that they get the worse outcomes.
    16
  137. Absolutely but only expect this to work as a self preservative. It won't be a relationship preservative. They'll be exiting PDQ if you practice this. So be it. Thats better than being taken for a ride. It's reasonable advice, it just won't "keep" a female.
    16
  138. Got to admit, I enjoy your brief-but-functional sign-off. 😂👍
    16
  139. Standard crying manipulative woman stuff.
    16
  140. Please be real and clear about what this ACTUALLY means though. In practice. Women who are seeking your investment are a PITA. They are neurotic, constantly requiring progress updates, constantly requiring reassurance, constantly needing to "know where this is going" constantly having tantrums etc etc...ad nauseam. It's good theory (I know from experience)...but the practice is utterly grinding and horrifically time consuming (again, I know from experience).
    16
  141. I'll provide the TL;DR Michael - Easy life. Family business which he inherited (ie didnt have to strive for). Lots of money which made him attractive to women. Clueless about why women were attracted to him (thought it was because he was special and not because he had money-which in turn made him narcissistic) Relentlessly thought with his pen15. Murderer. Jan - Principally attracted to the lifestyle on offer. Couldn't afford a swimming pool without him. Forgave Michael's affairs for material reasons. Priorities all wrong. Angela - Fell in love with Michael when she saw his swimming pool. Baby trapped him to dissolve his marriage. Had bought a new swimming costume and was ready to move right on in. Pretends butter wouldn't melt. Angela's husband - don't know where to start. The kids (of both families) - My sincere condolences. You've all been treated horrendously by some very poorly behaved and selfish adults. That about covers it.
    16
  142.  @vutomi9874  No. She was the manipulator. He was the killer.
    16
  143.  @chrishnah  What a profoundly silly question. Was there a single syllable within his post that came across as unintelligent?
    16
  144. Accept it for what it is-have empathy for the fact it's an evolutionary hardwiring-don't become embittered by it.  However if you decide to "play the game" and manage to increase your attractiveness through real effort, make it damn clear you're fully aware what you're valued for and what that commands by way of a fair exchange. Sexual politics have to move on now. We can't accept this binary: men=awful patriarchs superficially attracted to looks/women=downtrodden oppressed saints who see beyond looks and value 'character' nonsense any longer. The internets has exposed it for what it is: a complete fiction. Shining sunlight on that horrible misrepresentation is long overdue and will hopefully yield a healthier and more balanced view of/understanding between the sexes.
    16
  145. Interesting concession. But I sense it tinkers around the edges. Would you go further and admit the more substantive point that women have significantly greater wants/needs/demands than men do and consequently drive a pretty unfair bargain ab initio? As a younger man I always wondered why women constantly complained about how awful men were but then always leapt from man-to-man in relationships. It didn't make any sense if the complaint was actually true. Ultimately I realised it wasn't true and that women were the net beneficiaries of relationships (ie they received more from them than they put in), they were just much harder to please and constantly looking to trade up. Obviously if men were so bad women would stay single, but very few do. In fact very few can tolerate ANY appreciable period of single adult life. You live and learn. I certainly have. It's good to be able to see through female BS.
    16
  146. You misunderstand. They've raised their value. They're ALL 10's now. So they discharged any "debt" owed simply by deigning to be in a relationship with your average billionaire. Wedges tongue firmly in cheek I wish I was joking btw.
    15
  147.  @CC-xn5xi  Praise the Lord she was so committed to her children's dental health! That selfless, consummate mother. Definitely NOT a gold-digger at all. ☺
    15
  148.  @GregorioVazquezJr  I've been told all sorts of nonsense in my life.
    15
  149. Woman batters her boyfriend: "The poor alcoholic" "Heartbreaking!" "Sympathy-compassion-sympathy!" "Don't pass judgment on her" "She needs help" etc etc. Man batters his girlfriend: "Monster!" "Evil!" "Deserves to be locked up and left to rot!" "REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!' Rinse and repeat. She is LITERALLY threatening to batter him AGAIN when she gets home. For God's sake start holding adult females accountable as we do adult males. Not holding my breath. Whatever.
    15
  150.  @Panwere36  Well said. The reality is that much domestic abuse is perpetrated by females against men. It's important that these cases are highlighted because-as this comments section shows-too many women will blithely deny the reality off this.
    15
  151.  @gozer33  She felt she needed to be "nice" because the question of possible promiscuity was relevant to what had potentially happened to her. Ie if she was in the habit of sneaking about with other men, this might have hinted at a potential explanation of her whereabouts. To wit:  Q. Do you think she's been abducted? A. I think thats highly unlikely! Q. Do you think she's buggered off somewhere with a bloke? A. I think that's eminently possible! (Whoops! I shouldn't say that should I?! I mean, yes, she's very promiscuous...but I don't want to straight out SAY she's promiscuous. I mean we are friends and all!) Don't be dense. It doesn't suit you.
    15
  152.  @lynnferry291  The problem with that is, most women aren't very good either (if we're being honest), but significantly it doesn't stop the men from wanting it.  It all goes back to the same thing. The libido gap. Which-at the bottom of it all-is what women benefit from more than anything else in society.  Women are able to give very little for a huge amount of value in return from a man and men have to give a huge amount of value for very little in return from a woman. That mismatch is insoluble and no amount of food/restaurant analogising can assist.
    15
  153.  @itzablackcat  Teaching is passing on knowledge. It isn't discovery of knowledge. The discovery of knowledge is done by men. An 'F' for you I'm afraid. ☺
    15
  154. He felt cornered because he was cornered. And she wasn't lonely, she was selfish. Two fairly awful people with limited life experience on a collision course with disaster.
    15
  155.  @MariaM-up2he  The mom's options became a lot more complicated after the initial paid vacations were over I would agree. It was becoming a complete mess by that stage. Her daughter was a drug user with ready access to drugs (and many more resources besides). Her mom could have intervened but it represented a risk. She didn't want to take that risk. It was the wrong decision but it was somewhat understandable. Really the poor maternal judgment was in cheering on the relationship from the early stages-due to the perceived upside of her daughter becoming a doctor's wife and very wealthy with minimal effort.
    15
  156.  @Ismirye  Don't bother engaging sensibly with her. She's just lazily trying to invoke the lie that we always blame women. We don't. Ironically her lie actually stems from an idiotic bias in our culture that sees us more likely to excuse women of accountability. Thus if we even mention it as a possibility it's considered offensive. You have to understand how these things work.
    15
  157. The opening words to Pride and Prejudice are meant to be ironic. They're the opposite of what they mean. Despite his status, Darcy is NOT looking for a wife. He's actually resistant to the idea and fighting his better judgment.
    15
  158.  @xxxxxxxxx1652  It's true. I find women generally tend to be the most abusive in this sense. Requiring instant responses to text messages, wanting to know where you are/what time you're coming home etc etc. Of course then it's not classed as abuse, it's just a woman "showing concern" for you/the relationship. But obviously that's just a lie. He actually sounded a lot like a female abuser. Which was weird.
    14
  159. When you say Maradona "won" the '86 World Cup, that needs to be SERIOUSLY underscored. You can't neutralise that by saying eg. Paul Pogo won a World Cup too. Maradona WON the World Cup in '86. Not Argentina. Maradona. One man. The only player to come even close to that since was Roberto Baggio in '94.  Additionally, Maradona then got a (frankly awful) Argentina team to the '90 WC final. Even coked out of his mind he had an impact at WC '94 before being sent home, high as a kite. When Maradona won domestic league titles with Napoli, Maradona won those titles. Not Napoli. Napoli were simply not in the business of winning league titles. They hadn't won a league title before Maradona and they haven't since. Barcelona by contrast are an inter generational dynasty who trade titles with Real Madrid. Also newsflash: Pro footballers play SIGNIFICANTLY more international fixtures in the 2020's than they did in the 1980's. In the 1980's literally the only players to amass upward of 100 caps were 40 year old goalkeepers at the end of their careers. eg Peter Shilton, Pat Jennings etc In terms of professionalism as an athlete, longevity, playing in a more sanitised and protected era (and just not being a massive coke head) absolutely: Messi wins by every metric. To summarise, if you want to know which of the two wins you a top level football trophy, you must look out of the window and consider the weather conditions: Messi wins with the wind at his back. Maradona wins facing into a gale force wind, coked up to his eyeballs.
    14
  160. True. But at the same time, don't "objectify them as baby production machines" etc etc etc ad nauseam.
    14
  161.  @s.clignancourt1897  No. I won't be doing that thank you very much. We're not in a court of law so strict rules of evidence don't apply. I'm simply addressing common sense to the known facts. She was with him for the material trappings. I'm using "prostituting herself" in that sense. That will have felt good on the one hand (easy access to money/lifestyle) and pretty crumby on the other. She had a propensity to use drugs as a crutch in the past and she did the same again when drugs became (all too readily available to her) via him. It's really not a contentious thing to assert my dear lady so you can stop clutching your pearls.
    14
  162.  @somacruz6893  Given that "abuse" has now effectively been redefined at the behest of feminists (ie the definition has been extended beyond physical abuse, to include psychological harm, manipulation, coercion, financial harm etc etc etc) I think I can confidently say the rate of female domestic abuse of male partners far outstrips male abuse of female partners in the modern day. Albeit it sounds like you were just straight up physically abused in the good old fashioned way.
    14
  163.  @somacruz6893  wanting a 150k swimming pool when your annual salary is 150k. Lol @ that. It's actually kind of tragic as a mindset.
    14
  164.  @bdmenne  🤣👍  Definitely the common denominator.
    14
  165. Many women suffer from not having an interesting internal world though so their interests are often limited to vacuous consumerism or ways to make her friends envious. As nice as your idea is it's probably a little naive.
    14
  166.  @Fakegrape7777  In all fairness, to be loved you really need to offer love. Otherwise you're driving a very unfair bargain. She wasn't offering love. She was offering manipulation, gaslighting and selfishness. If she 'loved' her killer she certainly wouldn't have been manipulating him, lying to him, gaslighting him, goading him etc etc. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    14
  167.  @johnbrett8788  Jesus wept.
    14
  168.  @beanallene  I didn't say anything about crappy. You're over personalising it. Manipulation is an evolutionary trait/behaviour.  Population level observations are perfectly valid. It's how we understand the world around us and learn. It's important we learn the general rule and it's immaterial that there are exceptions.  Equally population level observations can be incorrect. I'm happy for women to say "all men are trash" and be wrong. Women are wrong about lots of things when it comes to men. Typically that remark is levelled against men when a man simply isn't doing what the female wants or expects them to do. Whatever that might be. So in other words, performing to her expectations. In fact that bolsters my original point. Generally speaking Western society functions by women saying what they want and men doing what women want. Men are rewarded for giving women what they want and by minimising any wants of their own. If a man starts exhibiting lots of personal wants (call them emotions if you will) which don't function in any way to serve the female imperative, watch how quickly that relationship fails. Ergo she really doesn't care about his emotions at all (where they don't benefit her).
    14
  169. Lol! Do you think women are seeking "balanced support" in a heterosexual relationship? Or do you think they're perhaps seeking a relationship where the VAST MAJORITY of the support flows in their direction? Have you ever uttered one honest remark on the subject?
    14
  170.  @johnough4893  This is a fairly absurd response if you don't mind me saying so, in the context of things. I was hardly writing a thesis on architectural history, I was commenting on how different waves of invasion and overlordship have shaped our country. And our response to this as a people. Roman parts of Bath remain - we preserve and venerate them, despite them being relics of an oppressor class Viking parts of York remain - we preserve and venerate them, despite them being relics of an oppressor class Post Norman Cathedrals and castles remain, despite them being (in the case of castles) actual SYMBOLS of an oppressor class. I appreciate you'd like to exhibit your august historical credentials, but it misses the mark spectacularly in this particular comments section.
    14
  171.  @AlexandreSNunes  So be less natural then in other words. As long as EVERYTHING is in service of not disturbing her emotions. Be honest at least.
    13
  172.  @mizzury54  Definitely some deadbeat dads but far more deadbeat/unstable moms. Just the truth. Sadly.
    13
  173.  @ultimatist  Good for you. I'll just accept your anecdote and dismiss all evidence to the contrary.  Where there is conflict between a man's interests and a woman's (and the reality is much in relationships is antagonistic), the woman will give primacy to her own interests. Virtually without exception. Men are different in that they will frequently favour the females interests to their own detriment. That's the essential difference to the "care" performed by the two. I've had plenty of girlfriends thank you. They've been "good people and I've learned a lot". I count them as positive experiences. Women don't care about men's issues however. You're getting very confused if you think that.  Laws would look very different if your hypothesis was in any way true.
    13
  174. @ It's precisely because of the seriousness of the subject that I object to "cops". What an utterly clueless perspective. Well done.
    13
  175.  @patriziapiccardo2428  It doesn't need figuring out. It's called being a statistical outlier and it doesn't invalidate the general experience (which runs completely counter to it). Incidentally you took nothing? You mean you left the kids?!?!
    13
  176. Tell her not to fake pregnancies. If you haven't already. 👍
    13
  177. True. But obviously pointless given that nobody will answer honestly. Ref women, I find it's better to simply take madness as a given. I'd rather have an answer to: "how selfish are you and in which ways?"
    13
  178. Absolutely. Selfishly pursued money. Kids had the love and protection of their biological father but Tammy wanted money and happily destroyed the family in pursuit of that. It's just possible in those circumstances and with that level of selfishness, bad things will ensue.
    12
  179. The USA Women's team behaviour appears to be perennially awful. What's the deal with that?! I know Yanks are full of themselves but this definitely crosses a line into crass. Everyone seems to recognise it.
    12
  180.  @danielle4295  Thank God for your balanced response. Genuinely! Can you imagine what system of laws we'd be living under if "heroes" like @itsmikelake had their way? Women would effectively be immune from arrest/prosecution for sexual misconduct because (and I quote) police "should be ashamed of themselves" for even thinking of holding her accountable. What the actual hell? The reality is this is the EXACT equivalent of a male pleasuring himself on a public beach with kids present. There would have been absolutely ZERO tolerance or 'forgiveness' of that and everyone would want the police to intervene. And rightly so! You can't have two separate systems of justice operating in tandem just because "hero" @itsmikelake believes women can't be treated as adults with the agency to make their own decisions. Can you even imagine what type of poor behaviour that lack of criminal accountability would foster amongst half of the population?
    12
  181. You cant have dwarfs landing planes. That's just science.
    12
  182.  @Xydorf  She doesn't.
    12
  183.  @muddydog6605  🤣🤣🤣Stop it! Honestly, you realise how much they take us for mugs when you put it like that! Probably with good reason though. Most people lap it up and they know it!
    12
  184.  @gozer33  I don't think it was said like that. It was more a 'nice' way of saying she believed her to be fairly promiscuous without actually saying that. So they were actually being kind to her rather than judgmental/scathing.  She was receiving a kindness even then rather than being looked down on. Women get exceptionally preferential treatment by and large, not discriminatory treatment.
    12
  185. This gentleman is one lint roller away from internet DOMINATION!
    12
  186. The hair evidence doesn't belong to Roosevelt Glenn and the detective's hair doesn't belong to a human being.
    12
  187.  @jetally  Generalisations are perfectly valid. We're not in a court of law here, it's a YouTube comments section. Try not to get emotional about it.
    12
  188. 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
  189. 1:20:29 Just on a point of order, you're confusing entrepreneurship with freelancing.  Entrepreneurship creates something greater than the individual, so that the entrepreneur can step outside of the entity and the business can run without him. It creates opportunities for other people and the thing created can then be sold as a going concern. It has a life and purpose of it's own. Freelancers generate their own work in a way that looks similar to entrepreneurship but if they stop doing the work, by definition the work stops. They don't create value beyond themselves as an individual. They are the work. People use the term "entrepreneur" because it's sexier but I think Americans especially should have a real appreciation of what an entrepreneur is. It's what the success of the country is built on.
    11
  190. He probably realised she was capable of making things bad enough all on her own.
    11
  191.  @VodPJ24uEgkkZT   You forgot to add that the heroine is quite plain.  But the billionaire badboy is tamed by her anyway because he's "deeper" than that and can see her inner beauty.  And by "inner beauty" please read: neurotic, fragile, constantly needing validation and various other traits that are frankly useless to anyone (but which she regards as making her "quirky and unique").  And thats "quirky and unique" because they apply to her but they'd be an absolute liability if they applied to him. etc etc etc.
    11
  192. Was looking for this comment. One of the most jarring things I've heard in a while. Made me have to stop and replay to see if I'd imagined it.
    11
  193. It only (actually) costs you that in dollar terms if you lose 4hrs of billable work because of it. Otherwise it doesn't. I'm not saying you're wrong to be critical of dating, I'm just saying Dr Taraban's costings are nonsense. The lawyer example he uses, is flawed in two ways;  1. For the reason I explained above. 2. $1300 per hour isn't what they're paid in any event. It's the rate their employer charges them out at.
    11
  194. I'll provide the TL;DR Michael - Easy life. Family business which he inherited (ie didnt have to strive for). Lots of money which made him attractive to women. Clueless about why women were attracted to him (thought it was because he was special and not because he had money-which in turn made him narcissistic) Relentlessly thought with his pen15. Murderer. Jan - Principally attracted to the lifestyle on offer. Couldn't afford a swimming pool without him. Forgave Michael's affairs for material reasons. Priorities all wrong. Angela - Fell in love with Michael when she saw his swimming pool. Baby trapped him to dissolve his marriage. Had bought a new swimming costume and was ready to move right on in. Pretends butter wouldn't melt. Angela's husband - don't know where to start. The kids (of both families) - My sincere condolences. You've all been treated horrendously by some very poorly behaved and selfish adults. That about covers it.
    11
  195.  @JakeKoenig  Well said. Absolutely agree with every word of that. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have absolutely no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour.  We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. She was doing her utmost to gaslight and abuse him into this scenario. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man nowadays if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call the female a wholly innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world and people can finally push back against hateful, one-sided narratives.
    11
  196. Male nurturing is basically encouragement. And yes, thats every bit as important as its female analogue. When women cant or won't acknowledge this they're telling you everything you need to know.
    11
  197. Lol! Yeah. This one was a swing-and-a-miss as far as formulating a universal "player" experience goes.  It's definitely one route, but the reality is there are guys who are straight out of the traps with this behaviour seemingly already hard-wired.
    11
  198. Just concentrate on not being utterly draining. In every sense. Try and have a mildly interesting internal world so you're not constantly demanding a man keeps you "entertained" and distracted.
    11
  199. Bad take. Thats a horribly naive view to have if you're a man. Ie lots is being expected (in fact demanded) of you by women, so you'd be very ill advised to go around expecting/demanding nothing in return. Indeed that would only set you up to be used. Sad but true.
    11
  200. I drew exactly the same parallel as you without having seen your comment. Correct. It's essentially The Little Red Hen parable by another name. The trouble is the parable already exists. This channel is just becoming an exercise in describing things we already know using novel analogies. Novel analogies are not solutions. Don't mistake the two things. People are literally getting mesmerised by hearing old wisdom re-packaged (in this instance using sexy Tate/business speak) and thinking it's delivering a practical solution. It isn't.
    11
  201. 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
  202.  @marcusmcgraw3519  I think "fun" might be stretching things. But I see your point.
    11
  203. In one ear (literally) out the other (metaphorically)
    11
  204. Really important comment! When you heard Mary Parkinson try to get them indulging in how :"hard it was for women" (the sort of narrative you hear on things like Loose Women)...that Yorkshire lady shut her down sharpish. Those women knew the truth. Her husband worked down the mine. That was hard. The other lady's brother died being shelled by Germans. THAT was hard. Having to get Christmas dinner ready?! Not so hard by comparison. It would have been an insult to those men to have indulged in the sort of talk Mary Parkinson was angling for there. Well done! We need more of this sort of thinking nowadays. We hear nothing but victimhood and oppression from modern women. They don't know how privileged they are.
    11
  205.  @marriagecausesdivorce7540  Agreed. Was just keeping it super simple because Susan Garrard was having such difficulty (disingenuously of course) figuring out a "way to quantify" what a bad outcome was. She knows fine well what a bad outcome is just as she knows what a good outcome is. Channels like this are exposing it and the best thing female viewers can do is feign ignorance and try to muddy the waters. Pitifully in this particular case.
    10
  206.  @LisaCulton  Most women cant provide themselves with a "luxurious lifestyle". That's a long, long way from providing for themselves. They're two extremely different standards indeed. Irrespective of what you think of the video/content creator, you have a track record of making profoundly silly comments on this YouTube channel. Just being real with you.
    10
  207.  @LisaCulton  Not really. If you hear how dismissively women talk about shorter men in general you'd have the only clue you need. It's not rocket science. Personally I just find taller women a bit freakish and unattractive, (rather than being jealous of them) but then I'm 6ft2.
    10
  208.  @somacruz6893  Straight facts. I've been called "messy" too and guess what...lo and behold I wasn't being abused. I was being told to clean up after myself. But then I'm a man so I understand the difference.
    10
  209.  @petermulinzi1288  No, she doesn't care to elaborate because she isn't a living example of that herself. Which undermines her point an extent that renders it utterly meaningless.
    10
  210.  @Shutzie27  Most of the time women don't take the "time, effort and energy" communicating for the man's benefit. It's because they want something. You make it sound like it's some sort of benevolent act they're engaged in. I've been told by women they were "worried about me" when I don't reply to texts. I know that's not true because I know women don't spend their time worrying about grown men. What they actually wanted was validation or attention (or sometimes favours/jobs etc). But I know for a fact it wasn't for my benefit first and foremost. Lol. Because of the internet people are waking up to this sh!t tbh. And a good thing it is too.
    10
  211. Crazy but rich and hence women buzzing around him.
    10
  212. I'd say distance rather than revenge, being scrupulously honest.
    10
  213. I can answer this one for you really quickly and easily. It's not that deep. See those women you describe-the ones who had kids and now profess to be "regretting" having kids. Well, had those same women NOT had kids, they would now be professing their "regret" at NOT having kids. Thats just women for you. Some (many in fact) are simply not pleasable. Like I say, it's not that deep.
    10
  214.  @carlybmail  Thats simply not how the real world works I'm afraid. A much better understanding of life is required before you're qualified to wade into this.
    10
  215. Eamonn tells it in whatever way benefits himself, let's have it right. Schofield probably is awful, but Holmes is hardly an impartial source. Get a grip.
    10
  216. Anyone else getting Frank "Hoss" Cartwright vibes from Swalesey when he starts with the: "chips, teas, pies" material? Bottles and cans, everything under one roof.
    10
  217. Some truth in this but you'll observe we're ONLY permitted to criticise men in this way. For instance if women are victims of domestic violence, we're NOT permitted to say they're complicit in their abuse by remaining in the relationship/reinforcing the bad behaviour. That's victim blaming and officially NOT okay. So which way do you want it? Are you comfortable to go there yet? Or should we just continue along the same road of only being able to criticise men? I'm going to guess the latter, right?
    10
  218.  @nicwelch  She cheated on him. She wanted to take his kids. She wanted him to just disappear (but pay for everything) once she had no use for him. Let's be accurate about what she wanted. Now let's see how many women would be happy with that outcome if the roles were reversed.
    9
  219.  @music-jj2pl  Yeah, agreed. `I think that's the important qualification.
    9
  220.  @sesaydeen  Obviously. Whether you speak Creole or not. I mean the rest of the lyrics are clearly him talking to a woman. Lol.
    9
  221.  @chrisolson84  "mommy issues' is just a slur used to refer to men that have any needs at all from a woman. Women want a man who exhibits no needs whatsoever but caters endlessly to her (apparently justifiable) needs.  If you want to use her logic, it's far more common for women to have "daddy issues" (ie because they want to be looked after) than for men to have "mommy issues" (as they ask for considerably less from their partner by comparison).
    9
  222.  @Jesusisking2pw3  I don't disagree. She probably wanted what was "best" and she will have equated "best" with what was the most materially advantageous. Well...that can often come with downsides. People are prepared to overlook many things if they feel they stand to gain materially.  I'm prepared to accept the doctor's flaws will have been well hidden, however I didn't detect any great efforts were made to discern them anyway. As they would have been had the person not been a doctor for instance. I think thats a fair assessment.
    9
  223. Trust me....they're leaving the rich guys who don't buy them flowers. IF they can separate that man from his resources via legal dissolution. They still be wanting them flowers! It never ends! Inadequate analysis this one.
    9
  224.  @emersonmanning6523  Absolutely. Toxic situation all round and Gabby's violence was clearly going unpunished, even when she admitted it to police. Also the idea Brian was a manipulator. No doubt he did have manipulative traits. But at the end of the day they were going round the country for the sake of and in service of her vlog. Which was a performative manipulation of reality in itself (principally by Gabby) that must have been difficult to sustain for the other person involved. So it's not like she didn't have manipulative traits herself.  Essentially the trip was an exercise in trying to promote a social media career for her-she wasn't being dragged around the country as some helpless victim with no options to leave-she was the active agent in putting the trip first in the list of priorities and she participated in mutual violence in service of that end.
    9
  225.  @winkA1  Whichever way you slice it it's still all performative burden on the male. It's looking to constantly assess what future value he's providing. Thats fine but I suspect you dont want to be treated that way yourself or be disposed of if you fail to provide value on a certain day despite having provided huge aggregate value over the course of months and years. Being a woman you'd probably prefer not to have to provide value constantly. You'd probably prefer the privilege of being able to be weak, be emotional, be cared for, be protected.And then STILL be taken on date nights despite having drained your man of energy. Young men shouldn't believe it's all a financial equation I agree. They should however (if they have any sense) be very clear that women are seeking far more value for themselves than they're prepared to provide in exchange. That much is a CRUCIALLY important lesson. If they get that lesson they do well.
    9
  226. TL;DR: Cherries are overrated.
    9
  227. You sound a little over "invested" if you don't mind me saying. Comes across weird. Try to not get quite so emotionally affected by comments. 👍
    9
  228.  @vcall6121  Just to let you know I responded to your comment but sadly YouTube is censoring free speech/sensible debate. In any event your comment was dragging the conversation in a direction that YouTube doesn't like so I'll have to leave it there. It also put words in my mouth unnecessarily. I'll just stand by my earlier comments.
    9
  229. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    9
  230.  @PhilosophyMeetsPsychology  Because contractual terms between individuals are rendered null and void if they're deemed to conflict with national laws. Which in the case of marriage laws, they would. The "patriarchy" hurting women again. Not.
    9
  231.  @yungchum2073  Fair comment. So we'll park the "stalker" comment and resolve upon the lesser charge of manipulative fake pregnancy/baby trapper and all the gaslighting and abusive traits that evidently came with that. 👍
    9
  232. Nah it's not even because of that. Orion's talking nonsense. If theres imbalance on chores it's typically because women are more neurotic. They're not cleaning up FOR the man, they're cleaning up because they're more neurotic/fastidious about tidiness. Ie he's not asking her to/demanding that she does an "unbalanced" share, (he's perfectly happy in less fastidious conditions), she's just doing it anyway because they're HER neurotic standards, getting angry about it and venting at him because he's there to vent at.
    9
  233. It's to demonstrate/signal (whatever) men are in a financial position to do so. Because thats what the woman wants to see. Thats literally all there is to it. It will remain this way regardless of any alternative reasons attributed to it. Positive spin is good, but it's not good to live in delusion.
    8
  234. Because this isn't a court of law and we're not a jury. We can "think" what we like. We're not being asked to decide her fate on the basis of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We're just watching a program and saying how guilty it looks.  I'd go as far as to say you'd have to be pretty feeble minded to think anything else tbh.
    8
  235.  @VoiceOvaGuy  I didn't say they were deserving of it. Far from it. I'm merely pointing out that they're unanimously looking for an exchange of time and resources that favours them. However they assess that on a personal basis-it will differ according to their individual priorities, objectives and experiences.  The other thing they all have in common is the unshakeable belief that they should get their own way.  Fully absorb that information and do with it as you will.
    8
  236. You're not comparing like with like, respectfully. Men are very accustomed to not having their wants catered to by women and to being told: no. It's basically our default setting. Men also have fewer wants and demands to begin with.  Not so women.
    8
  237. He should wear tighter clothes.
    8
  238. And crabs.
    8
  239.  @AmberRowe-gn5yd  You have to learn to appreciate your own abusiveness in the scenario though. You seek an older man because of what they offer. Which is (typically) more material wealth/resources etc. That in itself is a form of dehumanising abuse on your part-because you're viewing the man as a utility. For what he can provide you with rather than who he is as a person. It's a very common female evolved behaviour. So because you stand to gain materially, you overlook other aspects of the person's compatibility. And then you become frustrated when their personality traits don't align with your own personality.  The problem is you only view their contribution to the flawed relationship as abusive and not your own. Thats not the case however. It's mutually abusive as you've both overlooked incompatibilities because you both felt you stood to gain some form of advantage by doing so.👍☺
    8
  240.  @LisaCulton  No. Most women can't. You're literally describing a minority of women. Lol. When the meaning of words becomes an obstacle you have no argument I'm afraid. Just words that don't make sense. That should trouble the dignity of a serious adult btw.
    8
  241.  @hippychick420  It's possible that both should have been arrested. But Gabby DEFINITELY should have based on the evidence the cops had. That's the material point. Let's just say if Gabby had been driving and Brian said to the cops "Yeah I basically assaulted her WHILE she was driving us...but she's not been very supportive of my vlog you see officer and she has these REALLY dirty feet which upset me.." (having just been witnessed veering all over the road)...I'm pretty sure the boy would have been arrested.
    8
  242. Well played, Sir.
    8
  243.  @Shutzie27  Triggered and then directly to shaming. Hahaha.
    8
  244. All good adjectives and I agree. However if I was forced to condense everything into ONE word that absolutely epitomised them, it'd be "controlling".
    8
  245. In all fairness, to be loved you really need to offer love. Otherwise you're driving a very unfair bargain. She wasn't offering love. She was offering manipulation, gaslighting and selfishness. If she 'loved' her killer she certainly wouldn't have been manipulating him, lying to him, gaslighting him, goading him etc etc. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    8
  246. Lisa Nandy is FAR from stupid. She's actually one of the brighter politicians. So this makes the lie even worse.
    8
  247. I 'd hate to think what would happen to this place if 8 people moved into it. It's one thing building it all up from scratch using hard work, it's quite another just being gifted it with everything already built for you. People don't value what they haven't worked for. It's likely to attract some very unconscientious people with a completely different outlook to this guy.
    8
  248.  @luz-my-mind  Agreed. Plus, when you consider he could have gone on to have had kids with a pervert and child molester this is actually a VERY fortunate escape for him.
    8
  249. True. And just remember; the way the neighbours portrayed him/the way narrator of the video portrayed him: that also makes every stay-at-home-mom a "deadbeat woman living off of a hardworking man". Not a "dedicated mom". Just being real. One to think about.
    8
  250. More significantly, women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
    8
  251. He's correct about the fact everything you've ever done becomes meaningless. It's true. They literally forgive themselves any 'indebtedness' for the good deed you've done for them instantly.  Interestingly however they don't apply the same standard the other way. If they've done you a good turn or performed an act of service you will be reminded of it repeatedly. She will expect it to accrue continuing dividends for her well into the future. Ergo they're more than capable of understanding the credo BOTH people should live by. They just won't allow YOU to have the benefit of it. At the end of the day they mate for personal advantage. They're looking to gain more from the association than they give in return and if they're not deriving a net benefit from it they're gone.  While it's their nature and can't really be criticised...it is nonetheless difficult to have respect for a person when you realise they're looking to go through life offering less value than they expect to receive in return.
    8
  252. On a related note, Jesse's hair reminds me of a mushroom cloud.
    8
  253.  @inconnu4961  Not really. It is effectively combatted by adopting the presumption that you ARE being manipulated. Most issues arise from a failure to recognise that. Even worse, the common presumption that she must be reciprocating your benevolence towards her. Beyond that we're not dealing with Einsteins, lets be honest.
    8
  254. You've got a lot to say for yourself. Try saying less.
    7
  255. Which is logical when you think about it because her framing of things is that the relationship is all about her in the first place. Men need to understand that this is basically the default position for women. And it's very toxic (needless to say).
    7
  256.  @marinaglass  Chomp! Lol. Too easy.
    7
  257. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    7
  258. Perfectly formulated. Bravo!
    7
  259.  @hmurchison8123  Women have a variety of ideas about where power comes from. One of them is their job, certainly. Other categories include things like whatever might happen to make a friend envious. And thats principally what they're hinting at when they say "power couple". They want a man to have a certain profile that would make their friends wish they had him instead. If they see their friends/other females being attracted to him this heightens their own attraction because they're so hive minded. At any rate though it's just antithetical to how I think as a man. I don't care what power or status she has. I'm FAR more interested in her not being an utterly insufferable, selfish person.
    7
  260. Change needs to begin with two different, gendered words for the emotion "love". The love that a man has for a woman and the love a woman has for a man. It is NOT the same thing and people need to understand it is NOT the same thing. Having the same word confuses things terribly and has done forever. It's needless. Love of man for woman - honour/duty based, compounding with age Love of woman for man - highly conditional, feelings based, not compounding with age. Also the adage...women fall in love easily, however they also fall out of love easily. Men have to "get over" love. We have to start being crystal clear about these critical distinctions. It's only women who benefit from the confusion.
    7
  261.  @joez.2794  Well said! The usual misandry being expressed in the comments.
    7
  262.  @Alexxx492  You miss the point. If you want a "high value man" its because your laundry list of the things you want him to do for you is effectively EVEN LONGER still.
    7
  263.  @Proposal12  Weak attempt to undermine what I said, but ultimately you fail to do so. It's perfectly normal for a male to have WAY less of a preference about decor. That doesn't amount to a problem or something I need to 'work on' My point is, if she continues to do that then she behaves in a way which truly does violate my preferences - ie the right to a stable existence. It's chaotic and financially abusive - so you tell her she's out of the (newly renovated) door.
    7
  264.  @LARA-sg4bt  No. The point definitely stands. You treat them very much AS HUMAN rather than dreaming a dream of what they're not. That's precisely the injunction I'm making. Don't take this the wrong way but you seem a little oversensitive with the whole "villain" thing. It does suggest quite a feminine sensibility on your part. Just saying.
    7
  265. No. You were right without having to add the last sentence. Women need to "get over it" full stop. Please can women become functioning adults once more? They haven't really resembled adults for arguably the last 50 years now. Stop outsourcing blame to media.
    7
  266. Not totally convinced every read message warrants a response tbh. Certainly I don't believe you're automatically entitled to a response merely because you message someone. And particularly if it's unsolicited. Some people text incessantly and completely inappropriately. Women feel a "need" to communicate far more than men do and obviously a lot of the time it's an utter waste of time.  It's only recently we're finally hearing some pushback against the gynocentric narrative that the female experience of the world is the only 'correct' way to behave and interact. Thank goodness as it is long, LONG overdue.
    7
  267. This video is fundamentally wrong-headed anyway. Women breezily disrespect men all the time but it's not really what is at the heart of the matter. The problem of disrespect is downstream of a more significant issue and that is the horrendous mismatch in requirements between male and female partners.  Women have a huge laundry list of reasons for getting into a relationship with a man. They view a man as an endless performer of tasks. Men have practically zero requirements of a female partner and seek a relationship mainly for intimacy. The solipsistic idea women have in their head of all the tasks a man should be performing/ways in which he should be "behaving" (essentially in support of her and her objectives) makes them unable to act respectfully towards him because-in many regards-the idea of his being sovereign and independent is completely in conflict with what she wants him for in the first place. This is women's problem to resolve. It's not a man's fault. The 'respect' thing is dealing with the symptoms, not the cause, so Orion is wasting his time here.
    7
  268.  @ThorMaximus  They leave if you don't eventually offer them security. Very uncommon for any other outcome to occur. It's insoluble basically unless you're eventually prepared to offer marriage. Which is when your leverage plummets. And you'll be back to square one. Just being real. Good to hear you've "levelled up" (for your own sake) but don't be fooled into thinking you've found a panacea. You've just deferred the inevitable somewhat.
    7
  269. Nah. Oversimplification.
    7
  270.  @adamhalcyon3393  Talent. Not endeavour. Lame comment tbf.
    7
  271.  @tomyoung8563  Potatos/tomatos. 😉
    7
  272. I think we have to start recognising that taking a man's home and kids away from him IS a form of abuse/control itself. You glibly suggest he should have just "kept things moving" but I'm perfectly satisfied you wouldn't say this if it the roles were reversed. If the woman was losing her home and her children AND being put on the clock to pay the man to enjoy a family life (to her own exclusion) it would be described as some sort of mental and emotional torture. It's just plainly dishonest when women describe things in this way and I assure you men DO see it when you talk like this. It's an existential trauma. And whats most sinister is you understand this perfectly well. You don't need it pointing out.
    7
  273.  @user-yf4hv8vr3q  Cringing hard at your ability to interpret my comment as "feminist". Lol. That's clearly enough internet for you today.
    7
  274.  @Jesse-jam  Very true. Albeit they had horrible prospects under the aegis of this woman anyhow.
    7
  275.  @Dmitis-nk7xi  No, but the context is overtly legal. Ergo she's an adult and the statement was valid.
    7
  276.  @Ashtonishing1812  It's hardly some massive strategic error if he isn't planning on dating them. You can do it simply for your own entertainment.
    7
  277.  @hungrybeaverontheleaver  I particularly like the bit where she bridles at the idea of paying 50/50 and sharing basic living duties. As though a woman wouldn't have cooking to do or bills to pay in the absence of a man. Lol. Samantha, we all know you're after a free ride these days. Or at the VERY least looking for a better deal than you offer yourself. It's OK. It's female nature. But it IS difficult to have respect for it. Just saying.
    7
  278. Professionally naive. He couldn't make a living otherwise. As embarrassing as it admittedly is.
    7
  279.  @roses6564  They're rarely capable of remaining in love. So that would figure.
    7
  280. You probably satisfied them over a longer period of time than anyone else though. So that's in the credit column. It's fairly pointless comparing long term sexual relationships to one-offs and short flings. We've all had insanely hot one nighters. The only difference is men are intelligent enough to know they don't mean sh!t and you can't go using them as a yardstick for anything else. This was yet another video that didn't really move the dial tbh, when you really examine what was said. "F your woman good". Firstly, no revelations there-but I'd question how much "fun" that is (as Orion claims). This is the woman's idea of "good" after all. If you listen to women describing "good" it virtually always involves them doing very little while someone else does all the work. Well...that tends to become less fun-filled after a while. What you actually want is a woman who's an active (and imaginative) participant. Body count is just a relatively decent heuristic for assessing long(er) term exclusivity at the end of the day. Thats all that really needed to be said.
    7
  281. "Men do it too!"  Bang on schedule! snore
    7
  282. Also: "I'm a WOMAN!! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!"
    7
  283.  @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
  284. ​ @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
  285. The book thing was merely another heuristic for: how much can I control this person? Newsflash: women are VERY controlling.
    6
  286.  @Elena-tq9vs  Thanks Elena! How dishonest of you to pretend you don't recognise it! :)
    6
  287. Definitely. Sounds like he'd given her a decent life and they were just out to destroy him. Linda was well on the way to doing it before she was murdered but her son was giving it the old college try too after she'd exited stage left.
    6
  288.  @deevasquez1171  In fairness the accusations came from the actual murderer in a desperate attempt to point suspicion away from her. So we can probably discount them. If there was any foundation to them I'm sure they'd have featured pretty heavily in the divorce petition (seeing as she was wont to weaponise accusations). But no. Apparently not.  So they don't need to be disproven because they're probably just in your head.
    6
  289.  @okaySam  I think it's probably more accurate to say that, historically, all people did what they had to do to survive. It was more necessary to their survival in the past. It isn't now.  People tend to do what's easiest for them rather than what's 'best' for them. Particularly if what's 'best' for them is more difficult. The level of ability remains unchanged. It's the incentives (environmental factors) that have altered.
    6
  290. ​ @ninaballerina2807  Who hurt you?
    6
  291.  @ninaballerina2807  Crazy Karen word-salad.
    6
  292. I'm sympathetic to a lot of the views expressed but I found the exchange at 32:11 absolutely extraordinary. He doesn't understand why he was asked to take that out? A provision which creates a legal obligation for a private citizen to report members of their own family for a criminal offence? On pain of criminal sanction? Really? Is he serious? Does he know anything about English law or culture? This is isn't Soviet Russia thank you very much. Appalling blindspot 'twixt interviewer and interviewee here. I actually had chills.
    6
  293.  @NB-yu4lj  She doesn't care. Women don't care about how or if they benefit the man. They barely even think about it. That's precisely why they're usually so keen to get married. They see it as a net benefit. Ie a benefit to them, not to the man involved.
    6
  294.  @LisaCulton  1. Correct. 2. Incorrect.
    6
  295.  @emersonmanning6523  Agreed 100%. Fortunately we're now starting to see some (reasonable and very much needed) pushback on some parts of the internet. It's not a healthy situation where one sex is constantly demonised as the abuser and the other is always held up as the innocent victim. Where abuse occurs it should be called out regardless of gender (for EVERYONE'S safety) and here it was very clear Gabby was happy to do her share of punching too when she wasn't getting her way. I think most blokes know that's the reality of the situation. They're far more used to experience being hit by females than they are to hit females themselves.  A more balanced commentary on this type of situation is long overdue. Abuse has effectively been redefined by the media as something that happens exclusively TO women BY men BECAUSE they're women. And clearly that's not the observable reality of most people's lives. Ironically if Gabby had been treated with less preference/female privilege by the officers-ie been arrested for her admitted assault of Brian, it's possible she might still be alive today. Instead the intervention was very light touch because she was female-which meant she carried on straight back to her vlog and them assaulting one another.
    6
  296. Scorer of one of the greatest goals in professional football history vs Blackburn Rovers at Ewood Park, 94/95.
    6
  297. I've been driving a Chlorinated Chicken for years. Never let me down yet. Very reliable.
    6
  298.  @kimberlykidd3755  Without doubt. Agree with you 100% Men are just as responsible for the conception as the female. I guess the question here is: was there even a pregnancy at all?
    6
  299.  @DrLesleyStevens  Dunno. My guess would be he's fairly clueless with it whatever its origins.
    6
  300.  @mackeejack6731  A bit like younger children then. Perhaps we should make that distinction? Ie not merely children but specifically young children. How sad is that? Lol.
    6
  301. I'd say themselves.
    6
  302.  @jelam0721  Jessica Morris back pedalling frantically here. lol.
    6
  303. Fair! A sad tale all round, this. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    6
  304. That doesn't really disprove what the video is saying though. The video basically concedes that it's the norm for women in your age group-so obviously you won't get pressured. The point of the video is that it may be sub optimal as a strategy. You're still single so that may indeed be proof. I think it's a bit of a pointless topic though. The video fails to acknowledge it serves a purpose. Women who do this are determining how biddable the man is. For a longer term relationship the woman is screening to make sure the man will prostrate himself and put the woman first. Or as he says: one side getting what it wants at the expense of the other. It's fairly standard female stuff.
    6
  305. Thats a fair point but it's a bit of an unlikely example. The more common example we see is women requiring their partner to say when they'll be home from a night out/punishing them for being any later/checking on them (etc etc) while the same woman would absolutely laugh at the notion her man deserved to be appraised of her likely return home time. She's out with her friends and she can damn well do as she pleases.  Thats the more direct equivalent and it exposes how women are happy to behave with appalling hypocrisy.
    6
  306. The business analogy was a bit meaningless. At the end of the day it's as simple as this: they remain in one relationship right up until the switch occurs because they believe they derive a net benefit from the relationship. Whatever criticism they may have of it upon the break up. Think about it-even though they believe they're about to achieve more with the switch up-logic dictates they still believe they were getting a net benefit from the original relationship otherwise they wouldn't have remained there right up until the switch occurred. Women seldom walk away from something to nothing. The take away to anyone with a brain has to be that women derive more net benefit in a relationship than men do. Generally speaking.  Every man knows this instinctually though because-if they are in a relationship-they're almost certain to be with a woman who displays far greater needs than they do. In other words the relationship is likely to be much more about her than it is about him. That's all there is to it. And it's THAT factor you should focus on to remain sane. Focussing on the switch is heartbreaking. There may be some learning experiences in it but overall it's better to reflect positively on the reasons she chose to stay with you in the first place-because you're likely to have a far more accurate image of yourself if you do.
    6
  307. Thanks for sharing your story and I'm sorry for your loss. The most important information I've seen on any of these channels (in terms of a predictor of relationship success) is that the woman has to actually value male companionship. In it's pure sense (just the enjoyment of it) and not solely for it's associated benefits. It didn't come from this particular channel. I cant remember which one it was now. For all Orion's posts throw up some interesting little insights, I don't think any have any real significance compared to that one simple, foundational point. I was struck by what you said as you appeared to reference it yourself. Sadly it's a very rare trait! Thats a shame for men and women alike.
    6
  308. Wow!!! Really biased subtitling of this one already. Kendy "ONLY" 22 when she married Dan....suggesting she was young and easily dominated by an overbearing partner. Yet she was ALREADY coming to the marriage with a daughter from a previous relationship. Don't know the ins and outs of the case but looks like it's being tee'd up for the usual "all women are Snow White/all men are abusers" narrative...
    6
  309.  @derryshore5586  No sh!t. Your point being? My take on that would be: lots of invasion, overlordship and colonisation has gone on throughout the world since forever. In fact by insisting on those further historical distinctions (that I'm already well aware of), you're effectively proving the greater point that my comment sought to make.
    6
  310. Whenever I hear words to that effect I instantly think: that is a person who can easily justify all sorts of bad behaviour to herself. And you hear it on a semi regular basis. Women seem to be particularly prone to it. Make of that what you will.
    6
  311. Thank you for your service!
    6
  312. She might have got on his last nerve with her constant snoring.
    6
  313. If she was more switched on, she would have realised that anyone who'd had the benefit of a public school education and ended up at Durham University wasn't 'special' by virtue of that fact alone. Lol.
    6
  314. I don't think you should mistake a daft haircut for empathy.
    6
  315.  @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
  316. He didn't look like he weighed that much tbh. I put his weight at 40lbs max. The man was a racing snake!!! A lean-mean-jogging-machine...a man so lean his eyeballs were in single file. Drag him?! She could have thrown him in the truck, over-arm!
    5
  317. But lose the hat.
    5
  318.  @erickkisreal9398  Well said. They know all this of course, they're just pretending it's not obvious to them. Incidentally I'm astonished your (perfectly correct) response made it through the YouTube censorship.👍
    5
  319. Our society is completely gynocentric. Women aren't held to the same standard's under the law. Fortunately we're starting to see attitudes (gradually) start too change.
    5
  320. English history IS awesome. That's the material point.
    5
  321. Well obviously thats a risk they run. But they're not in it because they're angels ffs. They're selfishly looking to get something out of it for themselves. Silly comment altogether.
    5
  322.  @babyjane87  It's a possibility but then I suppose anyone with a brain would have mentioned that. And she didn't mention it. So we can safely assume it isn't the explanation you're looking for. PS if I was her husband I wouldn't just be sleeping in a different bedroom I'd be sleeping in a different time zone.
    5
  323. "tap into" Lol. It' not like it's some secret divining process. They lead with emotion and practically never stop emoting. They're CONSTANTLY on transmit.
    5
  324. He's talking about relationships though. In terms of short term sexual encounters you're right. In terms of LTR's though, Chads have zero prospect unless they're doing the beta provisioning sh!t too. Not saying you're wrong. Just saying your point is very limited and broadly misses the point of the video.
    5
  325. Perfectly valid narrative. She was divorced 3x, an alcoholic and a domestic abuser. It would have been better if Bruce could have just had his daughter and been "free of Barbara" but the courts don't generally permit that sort of outcome. They prefer to give primary custody to women even if they're abusers-just as here. It's actually a very favourable narrative that doesn't condemn abusive women enough.
    5
  326.  @AnteLene  Not that it matters terribly (because I'm sure he's a successful author with good sales) but that one comment actually cost him a sale from me.  I'd seen the recommendation for his book and was actually looking for something to read next week...so I was primed to buy...but when I heard that remark I just thought wow! It just struck me it would be a monumental waste of time bothering with it!
    5
  327.  @charrielyn1231  Yes, it's far more common than we'd like to admit.  Statistics show that, where DV is perpetrated, it's likely to be two way. ie both the male and female partner hitting each other. Where it's only one way however (ie one partner being violent), it's slightly more likely to be the female partner being violent than the male partner. We just don't take DV perpetrated by women seriously enough.
    5
  328.  @Khan-rz8qi  Please give it a rest with the "lead a relationship" cobblers. Practically no man on earth is "leading a relationship" long term. In reality. And those few that are are devoting way more effort to doing so than is actually worth it. Just have the self assurance to tell them to sling it when they start taking liberties. End of.
    5
  329.  @LisaCulton  "Most" hasn't changed its meaning since my last comment, or as a result of your response. Sorry. Reality doesn't work like that.
    5
  330.  @detroitvcw  🤣🤣🤣Lisa has now deleted all her comments since being exposed as delusional.
    5
  331.  @yikes6263  In the UK it's a London thing. In the other countries you mention it's an (add equivalent large city) thing. Granted none are as big as London but some are broadly comparable. London is the archetype however. It doesn't work everywhere. That was my essential point in response to the original comment (which was fundamentally misguided).  It requires a huge population density-foremost amongst which being an endless supply of global hipsters wanting a faux-genuine "working class" local food experience. I'm guessing that sort of describes you given the profile you've outlined. As I say, try it in most places and it's out of business overnight. Thems the facts.
    5
  332. How they make MEN feel is irrelevant. There's an important distinction. They are very careful (or I should say, deliberate) about how they make other women feel. Observe how they are very careful about the feelings of female friends. In regards to men, broadly speaking they take the view that a man should not have feelings. They see a man's proper function as being caretakers of THEIR feelings, but not vice versa. A woman will blithely make a man responsible for her happiness while fighting tooth and nail to deny any responsibility for his. It flows in one direction and one direction only. Women are different by degree, and it's silly to say they're all alike in every sense, however one thing you would do well to remember is the following. When it comes to relationships, the ONE thing that EVERY woman has in common is the unshakable belief that she SHOULD get things her own way.
    5
  333. Mario Coin sound
    5
  334.  @yasminogbu8929  Lol @ you praying for ignorance. Men should open their eyes, and consider ALL of the observable realities that surround them. You're just uncomfortable when some of those perfectly valid things are pointed out to them.
    5
  335. I'm pickin' up good vibrations.
    5
  336. Poor man doesn't appear to own a mirror.
    5
  337.  @LARA-sg4bt  I mean....not massively tbh. Lol. Quite telling you think I'd be that personally affected though. Anyway, the point still stands even if I misgendered you. I'm sure it's happened before.
    5
  338.  @89dungey  Good. The judge shouldn't like it. S/he should throw the book at her!
    5
  339.  @deenaeast7006  Naive seems to be a leap of faith. Manipulative is more accurate. Theres clear evidence for her manipulation. She knew what she was trying to do.
    5
  340. A more fundamental question: is the trading of time, attention, resources, protection etc etc etc for sex a particularly fair trade? From a male perspective. Seems a bit sub-optimal to me. Not disputing the evolutionary reality of it, I'm just begging the question-even where the exchange is to occur and function as well as it can-isn't it an altogether better arrangement for the female than the male?
    5
  341. Lording it over the bald Sky reporter there like a human dandelion clock.
    5
  342. And (realistically) keep doing that. Every time it happens. With each subsequent partner.  Which is the bit that doesn't get mentioned because-while good advice-it eventually becomes tedious.
    5
  343. I think the difference was in this case she was taking the children (ie his family) with her. Would you have felt differently if your husband had taken your child with him when he left for a younger woman? That might have altered your state of mind a bit. Do you think?
    5
  344. Fair comment.
    5
  345. The hair evidence can't be traced to Roosevelt Glenn and the detective's hair cant be traced to a human source.
    5
  346. Simple and fair. Beyond their comprehension though.
    5
  347.  @TriggerHappyThoughts  Best name ever.
    5
  348.  @Ashtonishing1812  I'll conclude by saying I think it depends where in your RP journey you are tbh. Some of us are quite a few years in and beyond the RP rage stage. I suspect that allows for a bit more levity. There's a peace that eventually descends upon knowing you can't change anything other than your own attitude towards it. Women become less attractive (physicality aside) so theres a bit more licence to treat them without the reverence they never really deserved anyway.
    5
  349.  @CarmaCat2024  I think this naive view is falling out of favour now. The statistics on women choosing to have children outside of stable relationships are well publicised, as are the statistics on women who break up relationships where children are involved.
    5
  350.  @ec6621  There's some truth to this but it's not as clearcut as you make it. Women will often use the argument: "you should just get me!" Ie "I shouldn't have to explain it" (to you. You should just do/know what I want). I believe that's the case because, if indeed they were to have to verbalise everything they wanted every time they wanted it, it would be abundantly clear how unreasonable and demanding she was-to the extent it would no longer have any plausible deniability. Ergo she doesn't want to have to verbalise it. So they will still also not communicate many things adequately if they feel its in their interests to keep them tacit. On balance.
    5
  351.  @ec6621  No, sorry. That simply won't do I'm afraid. It's a nice thought but at the end of the day it's because she has far, FAR more needs in the relationship than the man does and to constantly have to verbalise all these needs ad nauseam reveals that, together with her overall unreasonableness. Thus she'd prefer it for him to anticipate everything (and to some extent will try to train him to do so) You have to remember that women are stunning and brave now (in addition to being very direct, as you've stated above) so we can't also simultaneously treat them like little pre-verbal babies too and anticipate their every need just because it suits them to do so. You understand all this of course so I won't labour the point further.
    5
  352.  @abecochran4251  Can't claim to have seen "his" input elsewhere but it wouldn't surprise me. Certainly reads like a female. "pleasant guys" "undesirable guys" etc🤣
    5
  353. Discussion is all the channel offers. The channel has no solutions. (None do). The "success" of red pill channels rely entirely on how compelling their discussion of a subject is. Not on their solutions. There's discussion of hypergamy and apps everywhere. It doesn't solve anything however.
    5
  354. And men should simply ignore it, for the same reasons given in the video.
    5
  355. @ Irrespective of what the truth is, I think the point of mentioning the snoring detail was to underscore the assertion that he noticed her on the couch. Ie he could confidently say she was there (and why). But whatever.
    5
  356. 🤣 You couldn't resist! Well done on doing the hard work! Tell me you're a hopeless case without telling me you're a hopeless case . ☺
    5
  357.  @kittencatlover156  In fairness, the far more common experience is for a woman to blame men for her own mistakes. Let's not pretend otherwise.
    5
  358.  @SKBottom  Not only that, it's literally antithetical to where so much value comes from. Namely trust. Consider how many huge advances could not have been achieved without co-operation and trust. The notion that the past is irrelevant (rather than immensely valuable-where the benefit of experience comes from-and a predictor of future behaviour) is absurd.
    5
  359. In response to your opening remark: You'e incorrect-they do it far more often. You appear to have a personal anecdote and thats fine (didn't bother reading it), but we're dealing with population level phenomena. The fact you're able to cite an exception doesn't disprove the rule/the norm.
    5
  360.  @Miss_Murder1669  That sounds awful. Anything involving weapons is seriously alarming. Just to re-frame though, does the solution you're looking for involve you having custody of the kids/taking the kids away from him? Because really thats no fairer than him taking the kids away from you/controling you. I find-when you strip away a lot of these things-what women are really looking for as a solution is to have absolute control themselves. And really thats precious little difference to the thing they're complaining about from their partner. Just being real. You'll get hundreds of likes and people telling you to "just leave with YOUR kids" though in this comments section I'm sure.
    4
  361.  @StofStuiver  Well laid out and beautifully reasoned. Don't expect a response which addresses the argument though. Just some nonsense about misogyny, or some personal anecdote of suffering that doesn't disprove a perfectly valid population level observation.  And that's at BEST. The reality is a lot of female behaviour isn't very flattering. It can involve a LOT of naked exploitation and greed. Controlling behaviour is a big part of that. In today's climate when they complain of "being controlled" it frequently just means they aren't achieving as much control over the man as they would want/expect.  Women really don't like it when you hold a mirror up to them though and point this out.
    4
  362.  @LgpB  Appreciated!
    4
  363.  @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
  364.  @DiddlyD-xx2ih  Agreed. Classic female manipulation play.
    4
  365. Agreed. Classic female manipulation play. Inexcusable but all too common.
    4
  366.  @philnull  Agreed. Plus it doesn't really matter anyway, the principle is just give the other person what they want, whatever that might be. If you don't want to give it, keep it moving. To be honest, men pretty much understand this whatever "currency" is being used as the example. It's women who have the objection to it. "Never do anything for the express pleasure of a man" etc etc.
    4
  367.  @Dewane1511  I'm not saying there is any obligation to pay for the woman. I don't disagree the woman should pay if they happen to be banging the drum for female independence. I'm saying that where it occurs, the function of the male paying remains the same. It's the basic "table stakes" explanation of old and nothing to do with a new fangled job interview dynamic. Whatever creative rebranding is being proposed in the video is defective.
    4
  368. On a positive note, you were getting noticed. On a negative note, you were wearing a fedora.
    4
  369.  @loxtuf  Thats a great suggestion. They can be a lot of fun to chat to provided none of her myriad needs are deemed to be contingent upon your performance.  In other words don't wife them. The dynamic (and her personality) changes wholesale once she's projecting her hopes of "happiness" onto you.
    4
  370. How about "donkey swamp"?
    4
  371. For men: porn (making the average overweight woman less appealing) . For women: social media (making the average non-celebrity man less appealing).
    4
  372. AND all that with a fat lad at the helm. Fair play.
    4
  373. Based on the sneaker and socks combo I'd say he was dressed in the dark at gunpoint.
    4
  374.  @beowulf_of_wall_st  Nicely formulated!
    4
  375. The fact you can now get Greggs pasties Deliveroo'd to your front door-rather than having to at least waddle out of the house for them-is utterly disastrous.
    4
  376. Good luck, man! Take comfort in the fact you're living a universal male experience. Ie it's nothing to do with you/it's not your fault. I think that's where we typically err the most as men. By thinking her moods/disappointment are a product of us not doing enough and the answer is to do even more. Because thats what she's asking for, right?! Her disappointment isn't due to a defect in us. Her happiness is her responsibility.  As men we're built to be relied upon. We'll be there WHEN IT COUNTS. Our identity is built around that-but it has to come with a very healthy serving of: "No!" when we know it doesn't.
    4
  377.  @Erik_369  Yes I get all that. My point is simply that you don't get to value your time outside of work at the same dollar rate as your time spent at work. No employer is paying you $1300 per hour to take a dump at home for instance. It's all a bit of a nonsense anyway because $1300 per hour isn't what the lawyer in the scenario is actually being paid. It's the rate at which his employer hires him out. The two figures are completely different.
    4
  378.  @detroitvcw  She's got form for this nonsense, mate. She's been triggered by it for months now. She frequently weighs in with observations that speak clearly to her failures and bitterness.
    4
  379.  @LisaCulton  Lisa....you've literally got content up that reveals the reality of your non luxurious living arrangements. Sorry to have to tell you that. 😂 It's still absolutely irrelevant to what we're discussing, but you're so self-referential the point might at least resonate with you.
    4
  380.  @LisaCulton  You posted it I'm afraid. Not me. ☺ Anyway you're done. Words have no meaning to you and you cant back up your own nonsense. We always end up back at this point.  Story of your life I imagine.
    4
  381. Not altogether surprising when it's free money. Ie not money she's earned herself. You value it very differently.
    4
  382. If we're in the business of speculating (which it appears you are) it's worth saying that most physical abuse cases involve mutually abusive partners. 👍
    4
  383. At least you don't have to be concerned about it. Yes, I went there. Lol.
    4
  384. Not possible I'm afraid. They keep Jesse in hair lacquer.
    4
  385.  @paulhiggins1577  🤣🤣🤣 "Only Me!" Absolutely great shout!! Spotter's badge!
    4
  386.  @cdsnutts6449  Yup.
    4
  387.  @anyaf.6946  Someone's grumpy!
    4
  388.  @rabd3721  FACTS. Over to him. She's his problem now. And the second that happens he's no longer the escapist fantasy-reality sets in-the clock is ticking and he's already becoming less attractive to her.
    4
  389. @ Yup! Starting to become increasingly recognised amongst men now though (at long last!). It's basically the standard heterosexual male experience. Grindingly tedious and exhausting.
    4
  390.  @charlescoley6289  She was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world and people can push back against your one-sided, hate-filled narrative.
    4
  391.  @Shutzie27  I can respond to what I want. That's the material point. You're the one contradicting yourself, responding after you said you were done. Teehee!
    4
  392.  @reginasemenenko148  Opinion rejected.
    4
  393.  @georgedang449  You fail to understand the idiom.
    4
  394. I've had worse and I will again. Seriously.
    4
  395.  @adrianlydiate7197  I've done my research-turns out he wears Cor Blimey trousers.
    4
  396. This one missed the mark tbh. Too multifarious for general lessons. Shortened version: don't be a tw@t and don't let anyone be a tw@t to you.
    4
  397. It never fails with women. 100% success rate.
    4
  398. I'm not sure the "strong and independent" thing was a major factor. She was asking TikTok how to make money and saying she was scared of being alone. So not strong and independent-more like confused, naive and ill prepared/lacking independent means.  In other words just someone wanting a divorce. Nothing wrong with that but nothing like the picture you painted.
    4
  399.  @kimberlykidd3755  Sort of correct. If you're someone who has to trap/manipulate then it's fairer to say it's you that isn't worth having/don't deserve the other person. If you get my meaning. We do have an issue in our society with women being (constantly) told they're perfect whatever way they are and it's the man at fault for not making her feel like the centre of the universe etc etc etc. It's so normalised now it barely gets noticed. But the harsh reality is lots of women simply are NOT worth being with/don't deserve decent guys. Their behaviour simply doesn't support any other conclusion. Needless to say thats a terrible deal for a man. It's a horribly one-sided, unbalanced narcissistic model for relationships that seriously needs to change. We're very clear when men aren't felt to be worth the effort of a relationship (women are unapologetic about this) therefore we have to start being clearer about when women aren't worthy also. We have to normalise that side of the equation too. It's the only healthy way to co-exist. It will be uncomfortable for women to hear though so they will resist it at all costs and (doubtless) claim misogyny.
    4
  400.  @M0viLover  Lol. MOST people have a roughly similar sex drive if your experience of women is a sequence of short to mid term relationships. They virtually ALL start off with both people wanting to bang like a barn door. LTR's/marriage is a wholesale different scenario.
    4
  401.  @vanessa.jasmine  Fair enough. But you're doing the classic thing of presenting yourself (an individual case) as evidence that debunks a more general point. Which of course it doesn't.  W0men frequently have the habit of doing this. It's incredibly solipsistic. I don't know how true the assertion was in the first place, just to be clear. It sounds like it might very well be true but I have know way of knowing. What I do know for certain however is that presenting yourself as an exception doesn't invalidate it.
    4
  402. "STOP GETTING BOND WRONG!"
    4
  403.  @N.E.TGaming  Yeah, it's a great idea in theory. The practice is another matter altogether however. I'm not saying I don't hope he succeeds. I hope it does. I just think the amount of vetting required would probably exceed the work he's already put into the physical build. Without that, you're just relying on blind luck.
    4
  404.  @katarinacestmoi  I don't doubt it. I'm just saying your argument doesn't really falsify the message of the video.
    4
  405. If that is "winning" it sounds very depressing. Lol. Not meant as a burn btw. Just fact.
    4
  406.  @stalechipz450  In essence, yes. It's the mans fault for not successfully re-negotiating all the terms she's communicated (both directly and subtly).  Nothing (new) to see here!
    4
  407.  @ultimatist  Whereas you speak in personal anecdotes so I summarily dismiss them. Lol. The shaming doesn't work. It's a fail from you.
    4
  408. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    4
  409.  @stephanied9629  The "controlling" accusation is thrown about so commonly at men nowadays though. People are waking up to the fact it's usually not true. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's as common as it is because it is peak projection. Women are far, far more intent on controlling men (essentially getting them to do what they want) than vice versa. They devote endless amounts of time to it. Nowadays women seem to think men are "controlling" if they have any requirements of them at all. It's fairly pathetic.
    4
  410.  @jenfrisk996  Absolutely. When you think he could have gone on to have had kids with a pervert and child molester this is actually a VERY fortunate escape for him.
    4
  411. Of course it should. But the point being made is it's women's blind spot. They are more disrespectful, more often and this is damaging to relationships. They have a tremendous problem with this behaviour. The only object you had in raising your point was to derail the conversation. Pointing out you were disrespected once doesn't invalidate the general rule being highlighted here. It's just the standard female "what-about-ery" that everyone's tired of by now.
    4
  412.  @stevenreynolds2327  Don't yell between rooms!
    4
  413. Disagree. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    4
  414. Before he thinks about saving the world, this man DESPERATELY needs better fitting clothes.
    4
  415. @ And the kids? Are they her property too?
    4
  416. They may well have "been with you for longest" but that doesn't mean theyre the ones getting most transactional value out of you. Other blokes who have tolerated less of your sh!t will probably have gotten way better transactional value. You're conflating "length of time" with you with some sort of prize. It very likely isn't. It's just the standard female injunction for guys to "fall in line and do what I want and you get to be with me". But not a very persuasive one. Guys are really wise to this now and it's great. ☺
    4
  417.  @damalewis9277  "Abuse". Really?  Real abuse is not at all common in reality. We've just conveniently re-written the definition of "abuse" to include disappointing a woman in some way. Or not doing everything she wants when she wants it. It's beyond ridiculous. For the most part women file for divorce first because they're not happy in some way. And that isn't because the husband is a bad husband. It's simply because it takes more (and I mean much, much, MUCH more) to keep a woman happy than it does to keep a man happy. Thats the reality.
    4
  418.  @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
  419. ​ @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
  420.  @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
  421. I'll provide the TL;DR Michael - Easy life. Family business which he inherited (ie didnt have to strive for). Lots of money which made him attractive to women. Clueless about why women were attracted to him (thought it was because he was special and not because he had money-which in turn made him narcissistic) Relentlessly thought with his pen15. Murderer. Jan - Principally attracted to the lifestyle on offer. Couldn't afford a swimming pool without him. Forgave Michael's affairs for material reasons. Priorities all wrong. Angela - Fell in love with Michael when she saw his swimming pool. Baby trapped him to dissolve his marriage. Had bought a new swimming costume and was ready to move right on in. Pretends butter wouldn't melt. Angela's husband - don't know where to start. The kids (of both families) - My sincere condolences. You've all been treated horrendously by some very poorly behaved and selfish adults. That about covers it.
    4
  422. Closely followed by conventional 'closed' marriages. Consider me unshocked.
    4
  423. 🤣🤣🤣 Man that was dry! Salute!
    4
  424.  @Paul-yk7ds  No. He's saying he's Khan! The Great and Powerful! All hail Khan!!!
    4
  425. I thought it said she started an UNsuccessful business. Ie she was just as broke/useless as him? I suppose if the whole case is premised upon criticising him for being broke and useless then you have to criticise her for being broke and useless too. Obviously the murder was the truly monstrous aspect of the story.
    3
  426.  @NatalieinNevada  To be honest it just scanned as another example of something a woman shouldn't have to do for a man. So your comment goes straight on the pile of "crap women refuse to do" Along with the rest-it's a monumental pile. You moved the dial precisely zero with that contribution.
    3
  427. Family-members-excited-to-know-what-new-baby-will-look-like-shocker! Previously known as "anticipation". Now known as "racism". Along with everything else.
    3
  428. Utter nonsense. She put herself first.
    3
  429. They listened (in their droves) when the channel focussed on criticism of men. They've since left (in their droves) after the mirror was turned on them.
    3
  430.  @deborahsunflower939  Also, the social media vlog was more important than any of these considerations and she was mutually engaging in violence.
    3
  431. You Americans already have a parable for this. It's called the Tale of the Little Red Hen. I'm about done with this channel now. It's just an exercise in describing things we already know using novel analogies. Novel analogies are not solutions. Don't mistake the two things. This is not a solution oriented channel. Sorry.
    3
  432.  @EvgeniyaJZ  That's known as blithely speculating. Not "suspecting".
    3
  433.  @oneoone  Agreed 100% mate!
    3
  434. 7:01 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Good luck with that! Everything is just as you described however you fail to acknowledge the evolutionary angle that women are unable to see a man for his personhood. They have an in built sense of entitlement to his resources because he's not a human being, he's a human doing. They're programmed to receive value from a man (and view him that way, solely). If he's not performing some service for her, her response is disgust, not self reflection. Lol Men have all of the issues outlined in your video however they're still evolutionarily programmed to offer value in spite of this...ie even when it's a completely sh!tty deal on every objective measure.
    3
  435. Store profitability is the sad but obvious answer.. You're going to sell a lot less impulse buy/convenience product without people walking round.
    3
  436. It's all pretty pointless really because it doesn't account for female levels of entitlement. Women feel entitled to what they want in a male; it's anathema to them to have to work for it or offer anything of value. This doesn't work, frankly. At the end of the day, MOST relationships start off with lots of kinky sex and agreeable behaviour. It already has the function Orion is outlining. It doesn't translate into long term or "retention" behaviour however. The most eligible men on earth experience the sex drying up and a woman becoming a complete PITA.
    3
  437. Never read such delusional/deceitful nonsense.
    3
  438. Then he fell 10ft down a fire escape onto concrete. Like a mad Frank Spencer.
    3
  439.  @Juliet_Capulet  Fail.
    3
  440.  @kalbsleber  As men, I don't think we're taught about women very well. At all. But I will say this; when we learn, we really learn. Onward and upward!
    3
  441. Lol! There's absolutely NOTHING brilliant about Victoria Derbyshire. I wish these media types were less self congratulatory about the (fairly unremarkable) jobs they do.
    3
  442.  @spidyman8853  And quiff.
    3
  443. Hostages aren't typically paid $10k per month tbf.
    3
  444. ​ @mirjamweibel9678  Indeed. While they're mainly operating out of an abundance of caution until a medically qualified person arrives on the scene, it's clearly also done as a (back door) means of evidence gathering. Either way the victim's husband definitely put her on blast.
    3
  445. Put your flag away ffs.
    3
  446.  @valleygirl2530  Sorry if that upsets you! ☺ Drop some tears below! 👇
    3
  447. Why are so many people-including people in high-ranking positions of authority-unable to pronounce the word 'vigil'? It is NOT "vi-ju-al" FFS.
    3
  448. A sad tale all round, this. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    3
  449. Thats a good point-and frankly it's a shame because emotional growth is a positive-but I think the main issue there is the internet has exposed how asymmetrical that is in heterosexual relationships. In Western society heterosexual relationships are-virtually exclusively-men ministering to women's myriad needs and emotions. It really has become apparent how little women care about mens needs (or desires). So that only becomes attractive again if there is significant effort from females to meet mens needs once more. And let's face it, if it's relying on effort from females that is simply not going to happen.
    3
  450.  @davesmith826  Valid testimony my friend. And salute to you for not accepting their sh!t.
    3
  451.  @LisaCulton  Desperately trying to justify your modest living arrangements to me. 😂
    3
  452.  @LisaCulton  Hi again Lisa!🖐 Still tormented at being exposed I see. Just to be abundantly clear, I definitely believe the photo you insert into the video at 15 mins is your residence. You remember. The cheap apartment you talk about I mean.👍 Theres nothing wrong with not living in luxury btw. Switzerland is an expensive place, especially for a single mom. It's just embarrassing you feel the need to harp on about luxury so much when you're not actually a part of it. ☺
    3
  453.  @colormetakenaback  I think it was unthinkable to her principally because she prioritised the vlog, and Brian was part of that. It was acceptable to her to participate in mutual violence in service of continuing to generate blog content. Needless to say this was an absolutely reprehensible way to live and had horrendous consequences as their mutual violence escalated.
    3
  454.  @emersonmanning6523  Completely. And to highlight that glaring issue isn't "supporting Brian" either (as is then typically claimed). Essentially its just a refusal to engage intellectually followed-ultimately-by attempts at shaming.
    3
  455. 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
  456. Opinion dismissed.
    3
  457.  @AnnaMorris411  And violent. We shouldn't forget violent.
    3
  458.  @emersonmanning6523  In a nutshell. It's actually perverse when you think about it and yet the opposite is literally the mainstream media narrative. Always good to hear a sane voice out there! Keep it up!
    3
  459.  @missstargazer9174  True. Or failing that, if they're just a woman.
    3
  460. Very well said. This is just the standard propagandised BS. You'll observe we're ONLY permitted to criticise men in this way. For instance if women are victims of domestic violence, we're NOT permitted to say they're complicit in their abuse by remaining in the relationship/reinforcing the bad behaviour. That's victim blaming and officially NOT okay. So what's it to be? Is Orion comfortable to go there yet? Or should we just continue along the same road of only being able to criticise men? I'm going to guess the latter. snore
    3
  461.  @adamgd34  Very possibly. It doesn't change the material point though so they wasted their time.
    3
  462.  @LARA-sg4bt  If you can't read English Lara then I can't help you, dear.
    3
  463. ​ @susanbrowne5544  I think it would be better all round if women prioritised 'being a functioning adult' over 'being constantly offended (about everything)'. The former is far more productive than the latter. The latter involves regression to a childlike state. Disagree if you like-I'm not going to be offended by a different opinion. Shaming isn't a valid response though. Again, it's a very childlike attitude.
    3
  464. In all fairness, to be loved you really need to offer love. Otherwise you're driving a very unfair bargain. She wasn't offering love. She was offering manipulation, gaslighting and selfishness. If she 'loved' her killer she certainly wouldn't have been manipulating him, lying to him, gaslighting him, goading him etc etc. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    3
  465. Nutshell version.
    3
  466. Bingo x 2. But we're not allowed to talk about it.
    3
  467. Crass comment tbh. This was clearly a case that called for a 'mens and children's shelter', NOT a 'women and children's shelter'. However such facilities basically don't exist. Although they quite obviously should so it's an option to protect against manipulative, abusive (and ultimately murderous) women.
    3
  468. The State are clearly satisfied she's guilty. They just know they can't prove it to a criminal standard any longer due to the loss of evidence. I think they just abandoned it in the end because she'd already served 20 years. That's something at least! The fact her "innocence" team wouldn't make themselves available for comment tells a story of its own. As does the fact two of her children testified against her and her defence was based on the other child being responsible. A truly ruthless manipulator! Incidentally, re: her response to the massive pool of blood on the mattress ("He told me he'd had a nose bleed once") Ahem Said no woman EVER before or since! Women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
    3
  469.  @trinleywangmo  They're satisfied she's guilty. They just don't believe they can prove her guilty any longer (because certain evidence has been ruled inadmissible).  They're philosophical about it because she's already served 20 years. Not worth their time any longer.  No more complicated than that. You're just confused.
    3
  470. @ Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    3
  471.  @tfcig2019  That too.
    3
  472. Aaaaah! Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking. Takes me back.
    3
  473. Leave poor Doug alone. He's got things bad enough already!
    3
  474. Mainly her mother.
    3
  475. I've realised it's not really a question of jealousy with them anymore. It "shows up" as jealousy I grant you but it's more just a constant expression of their extractive nature.  Their jealousy isn't really anything you can prevent as long as they remain interested in you. It just means theres more they still want out of you that they're concerned will go to some other recipient instead. When they no longer want more from you they cease to harbour jealousy. It's sad but true. While theres nothing you can do about that-the realisation it's an avaricious instinct should at least give you a disgust response rather than (as they typically rely upon/profit from) a sympathetic response. Move accordingly.
    3
  476.  @allseeingotto2912  Agreed, however that implicitly absolves them of responsibility so I make a distinction. You have to be responsible for your own actions first. Part of the whole problem is that they're not. Yes other women are a bad influence but thats their problem to overcome, not an excuse.
    3
  477. 🤣
    3
  478. To put the most (positive) spin on it, it is because they are genuinely that "invested" in things. Ie emotionally invested. I'm not saying that that is automatically a good thing (or that their "investment" is benevolent-it's not, it's purely selfish), but it does at least indicate that they're feeling something real. Often within red pill spaces the teaching will be about how women are able to fake/manipulate emotions. This is certainly true but in these situations it doesn't tend to be what's operative. I've personally witnessed women's hearts visibly pounding out of their chest during moments like this and obviously that affects what they want/expect to see reflected in their partner's behaviour. You can't fake that so I consider it excusable behaviour. I won't engage in it though. It's utter madness to participate. We're 100% entitled to remove ourselves from the situation and tell them to deal with their sh!t themselves. Don't care what anyone says to the contrary.
    3
  479. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    3
  480.  @katarinacestmoi  And clearly the implication is that "natural pace" for you is longer than it is for him. It's pretty straightforward to understand. As I say, it's just wanting it on your own terms. One side getting what they want at the expense of the other. This is all pretty much central to the video. I'm not criticising you. I said from the outset it's pretty standard female stuff. Women will do what they want first and thats all that matters to them. I'm just explaining how-like so many other things in life-selfishly doing what you want to do doesn't always get you what you want to get. That's essentially what the video is saying too.
    3
  481.  @katarinacestmoi  No, sorry. My comment is exactly tailored to the subject of the video and specifically addresses your comments in response. It isn't a projection of mine. The fact you can't see that is entirely consistent with your inability to see anything other than from your own viewpoint. You've presented as very solipsistic in all the comments in fact. ☺
    3
  482. It isnt reconcilable. It's unreconcilable with any sense of romantic love in fact. That's where it will ultimately meet resistance and falter.  People want a sense of comfort and safety in their lives, including their personal lives. (Possibly above all in their personal lives!). Typically people seek service from others, but comfort for themselves. We're accustomed to mens preferences being shamed while simultaneously womens preferences are endorsed and lauded. That's a system that essentially seeks to offer comfort to the female while subjecting the male to discomfort.  Dr Orion is essentially advocating for a greater performative burden/greater equity in value exchange. That's fair. But it's uncomfortable. As the (main) beneficiaries of the illusion of romantic love, women have more to lose in adopting this particular methodology.  The only rational counter argument to any of the above it is to say that there is no growth in comfort. Self improvement should be practised for it's own sake. Here again though this message generally plays better to men than women. Women's preference tends to be for feel good bromides; the sort of thing that praises her for being perfect as she is while being deserving of better in her partner.
    3
  483.  @victoriasegall3404  Call it the vast majority and split the difference. Really not interested in arguing outliers tbh.
    3
  484.  @twatts1523  Great name btw! 🤣
    3
  485.  @jetally  Yeah it definitely sounds like the opposite tbh. Lol.
    3
  486. Definitely up there with around 75% of women.
    3
  487.  @hughnibley  Take a bow! You knocked that one out of the park! When you strip away the BS, all her comment really amounted to was a thinly veiled appeal for preferential treatment. Which is the OPPOSITE of what she actually needs. One woman alone (a significant other) qualifies for preferential treatment. But even that has to be earned rather than demanded. Men are basically done with entitled, creepy women demanding preferential treatment.
    3
  488.  @Ashtonishing1812  That all sounds a bit "worthy" to me. "Fun" is not the purpose, but it can be a useful vehicle. In fact comedy is the only way certain (unpalatable) truths are permitted any consideration at all. It doesn't have to be "for" women or "do anything for them" to inform a man's use of the knowledge in any environment. Why should that be any consideration of mine?
    3
  489. Can someone please explain Mark Dolan's hair to me?
    3
  490.  @lajohnson1967  The stats support my argument. Not yours. Sorry if that triggers you.
    3
  491. Nah.
    3
  492. It's virtually meaningless to be perfectly honest. You might as well just say: "love but don't expect anything back". Or at least don't get angry at not getting anything back. And thats fine, I'd agree. But you have to at least be alert to not getting anything back otherwise-as you say-you'll just get taken advantage of. The sun shines anyway. It's not going out of it's way for anyone. We just happen to benefit from it's rays-but that's neither here nor there to the sun, so it'd have no reason to resent anyones "lack of gratitude". On the other hand, people who seek our "love" are not merely seeking to bask in our indifferent presence, they're seeking something performative from us for their own ends. It's another silly metaphor really, which the channel is apparently seeking to specialise in. Just say "don't get mad at people for the things you'd do freely anyway". Not "love like the sun". How on earth (literally) are we supposed to relate to a massive ball of plasma fuelled by nuclear fusion?
    3
  493. Of course it must. But the point being made is it's women's blind spot. They are more disrespectful, more often and this is damaging to relationships. They have a tremendous problem with this behaviour. Pointing out some sub clause doesn't invalidate the important general rule being highlighted here.
    3
  494.  @HD46409  That's probably a valid observation. The sad thing is I think it's basically insoluble now for the vast, vast majority of men. I'm not defeatist, I just think the strategising of PUA's and gurus etc is a really poor return on investment, time wise. Better to make men aware that-for the most part-they can expect a fairly predictable relationship trajectory and life cycle.  1. Love bombing where you're made to feel like the best person in the world 2. Lots of performative vulnerability from her which you cater to, instinctively believing it's the right thing to do as a "good guy" 3. Numerous concessions given during that period to assuage her vulnerabilities (financial and legal commitments etc) 4. Diminishing returns as she begins to take those gains for granted. 5. Resentment (from her) as she's no longer continuing to make gains at the same rate,  6. Disposal when she decides she can consolidate the gains while no longer having to deal with the man. And start to look for novel gains elsewhere. The only real variation seems to be the exact timescale/lifecycle, but it all conforms to the above model in substance. Exceptions might be extremely high status men (not just rich, extremely famous AND rich), who might possess the added quality of making her friends jealous, but even that seems to taper off for the most part. There are countless examples of those types that also get rinsed once their careers are on the decline.
    3
  495.  @Junoj101  Yes, agreed and understood. I've done precisely as you have. I'd leave before it became insufferable. But that's my point. The PUA "frame" prescription is largely nonsense. It's more about the female having her own sh!t together in the first place. Broadly speaking. If she hasn't then all the "frame" in the world won't help you. Frame is a bit of a cope because the truth (that it's largely out of mens hands) is uncomfortable. Success is far more to do with the woman not being a raging lunatic. Obviously recognise sh!t tests for what they are but beyond that "frame" game is just cosplay to make people feel better.
    3
  496. Plus they're all as fat as you like. Not like in the movies, which is probably the image the Japanese have.
    3
  497.  @kresovk5  She means it isn't a channel that tells women what they want to hear. She can't disguise the saltiness in her comment. Lol.
    3
  498.  @fiveleavesleft6521  "Commitment phobic" is just (yet another) shaming tactic from them to get what they want. An otherwise "commitment phobic" man may well still enter a relationship if he sees sufficient benefit in it for him. And there's nothing wrong with him insisting on some value coming his way in return if he's offering enough. Gynocentrism has made that sound like an extremist position of course. But it isnt. It's extremely moderate and reasonable. I share your hope that RP content will find a broader audience and help future generations!
    3
  499.  @Celtictribes  Well said. In a nutshell.
    3
  500. It's not the government. The material is already out there all over YouTube, it's just a re-packaging of old material using new metaphors. By this stage we're re-packaging already re-packaged work.
    3
  501. Bugger! Just missed it! I wonder who it was?* *won't make sense to anyone who doesn't remember a world before mobile phones/1471.
    3
  502. You cant have dwarfs landing planes. That's just science.
    3
  503.  @elizabethkabui4076  Wrong. This woman seemed to have a history of performing poorly in relationships and not prioritising a stable family environment for her child's upbringing. She can now add stabbing someone to death with a knife to that roll of honour.
    3
  504.  @ec6621   Consider how many needs women have/bring to a relationship Consider how many needs men have/bring to a relationship. Notice which number is considerably higher There's the basis for the unreasonableness. You can deny that of course but then we're just in the realms of outright silliness.
    3
  505.  @ec6621  You can colour me unsurprised.
    3
  506.  @ec6621  They're definitely not extremes and so your point demonstrably fails. Women's relationship needs significantly outstrip mens at population level.  I don't intend to rehearse the argument however as you've ceased to engage honestly. We're at the point of diminishing returns. Cheerio.😊
    3
  507.  @emersonmanning6523  Well said.
    3
  508. @ One of two possibilities I s'pose. Snoring or dead.
    3
  509. Preceded by: 0:37 to 0:42 Seamus Levine from Family Guy
    3
  510. Women objectify themselves and most female body modification is driven by women getting into a p!ssing contest with one another. The interview is important in one sense above all however and Gluck is correct. Women are NOT inchoate or defective men. They are entirely formed human beings with complete AGENCY and autonomy. THIS is the message that needs to be driven home in society. Significantly, the interview is littered by both sides giving examples of laws etc which favour women. Laws which, for example, only men can be prosecuted for. Laws which say only women may practice a certain job. The problem is Gluck and the interviewer happily invoke these examples in support of their point while failing to highlight the obvious problem; that they are laws which treat women as having less agency in the world. This is RIFE within criminal, family and employment law. And the fatal issue is that WOMEN are content to invoke this lessened agency where it benefits them. Now for the killer. Most of the modern developments towards trans-centric thinking are driven by female thinking. By personal feelings being given primacy over objective fact. It's NOT men driving this. It's not misogyny. Women have to accept their role (at the risk of labouring the point-their agency) in creating the issue. Yes, some men will take advantage of this. Some men are perverts. Some men just want an easier ride (they recognise the legal benefits of identifying as a woman). But that isn't misogyny. And it certainly isn't being driven by men. That particular charge fails to survive any encounter with logic or evidence, for the reasons set out above.
    3
  511.  @bonteprete  Changing the argument like a whiney little girl. Embarrassment.
    3
  512. Same. Knowing what I now know the best I can offer these days is a very conditional affection, which is strictly performance based. It's a highly unusual state, (ie it doesn't come naturally), however it's the only thing I feel is reconcilable to the maintenance of self respect, long term. When you examine it, a settlement where the man must provide value, but the woman gets to insist you "love her as she is" is an unconscionable deal.
    3
  513. "Not in this case, no!" Sheesh. Sounds like someone who's knowingly put away innocent people in other cases. 😳
    3
  514.  @LynxStarAuto  In al fairness, to be loved you really need to offer love. Otherwise you're driving a very unfair bargain. She wasn't offering love. She was offering manipulation, gaslighting and selfishness. If she 'loved' her killer she certainly wouldn't have been manipulating him, lying to him, gaslighting him, goading him etc etc. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    3
  515. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    3
  516. Could really go for a combo bucket right now.
    3
  517.  @em-dy3hn  Not a valid argument I'm afraid. Merely "what-about-ery".
    3
  518. I think we have to start recognising that taking a man's home and kids away from him IS a form of abuse/control itself. You glibly describe it as "entitlement to revenge" but I'm perfectly satisfied you wouldn't say this if it the roles were reversed. If the woman was losing her home and her children AND being put on the clock to pay the man to enjoy a family life to her exclusion it would be described as some sort of mental and emotional torture. It's just plainly dishonest when women describe things in this way and I assure you men DO see it when you talk like this. It's an existential trauma, not a case of treating someone "as property". Whats most sinister is you understand this perfectly well. You don't actually need it pointing out.
    3
  519.  @arsenal4444  "Yeah I gotcha. Guess I was moreso digging to see if there's any more thoughts on it, but also just hoping to offer something worth reading to whoever might be interested..." I see you, brother! I recognise exactly where you're coming from. I'm not dismissing the very real pain that lies underneath it all. I'm not immune to it myself by any means.  The reality that they're not capable of loving you in the way you'd thought (or at least hoped) can be a source of torment. Certainly trying to square the circle can in any event. Going round and round in your own head trying to reason a solution into being in that very male way we have. And at the very, VERY worst it can act as a de-motivating force-given that so much of our instinctive motivation as men comes from wanting to protect and provision a female that we love. The last bit is by far the worst and the saddest, so I urge anyone and everyone to fight against that if nothing else. Although we're the self sacrificial sex, we HAVE to find sufficient motivation and purpose in ourselves. Arguably if you can do that, you can be the best version of yourself and more positive things can flow from your time here than you might have achieved had you remained on misguided, blue-pilled autopilot.
    3
  520. 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
  521. Which, sadly, is not as common as it ought to be.
    3
  522. Inspirational channel, James. Always glad to see it when your efforts are recognised. If a national publication choose to cover this type of story it's only natural they should go to someone who has immersed themselves so completely in narrow boating! A story doesn't get any more "from-the-ground-up" than yours!
    3
  523. I don't think this one is a novel take. I believe the factors/consequences of porn use and it's social media analogue in the female are quite well established now. Incidentally, what's a porn account? Do people genuinely have accounts to watch porn?
    3
  524. "STOP GETTING BOND WRONG!"
    3
  525.  @XwwXr  WTAF?!
    3
  526. What are you talking about?! She literally IS the law. She even has her own rights named after her.
    3
  527. Have some self respect.
    3
  528.  @Remianen  👌
    3
  529. If anyone can, Khan can.
    3
  530.  @katielowen  All hail Khan!!!!
    3
  531.  @Khan-rz8qi  Well said, Sir. A very healthy attitude. But it's 180 degrees btw. Don't make that mistake!!
    3
  532.  @latebloomer7191  I don't think it's as complicated as you make it sound. She's clearly abusive.
    3
  533. Lording it over the bald Sky reporter there like a human dandelion clock.
    3
  534. "The past is an unpredictable place"
    3
  535.  @mpettway6982  No. I'll just continue to point out some uncomfortable realities. Whether you like it or not. ☺
    2
  536.  @trialgoddess  A far more common form of "financial abuse" is a woman who spends more than she earns and puts her partner in financial jeopardy by placing the couple into debt. "Financial rinsing" (as it's known) is the female version of financially abusing a partner. Of course, it's not considered abuse because the perpetrator is female. Because women consider themselves entitled to the mans labour and resources (they actively select partners on that basis) they breezily think it's acceptable behaviour and excuse themselves for it. It isn't however. It's abuse every bit as much as "financial control" is.
    2
  537.  @terrorsquadlith  Yup. Sad reality.  I don't know where the truth lay in this case but the narrative that she was "always smiling" seemed really unhelpful. I know the program wanted to set things up in a way which heightened suspicion, but I think there should have been some pushback on this recurring remark. It had the potential to cause misunderstanding of suicide. Theres been loads of awareness raised around this point in recent years and yet the program seemed indifferent to it.
    2
  538.  @StofStuiver  🤣 God! It's both pathetic and hilarious in equal measure.  I'm glad people are beginning to wake up to it all though. That's a start.
    2
  539.  @Miss_Murder1669  No. That won't do I'm afraid. Your threat to take the kids away is indivisible from your threat to leave. You're clearly only going to leave if you can take your kids. And from his point of view that means he loses his kids. Thats when the shotgun incident occurred. They were your own words. Not mine. Anyway you didn't even attempt to address my more damning point. Which was that you continued to try to have kids with him even though you think he's (apparently) violent, unstable and incapable as a father. So that makes you as culpable and irresponsible as him. You don't address that point because you can't address that point. It reflects terribly on you. It's sad because I was always taught to believe women. However the more life experience you accumulate the more you realise thats very bad advice. But at some point the BS has to stop so I make no apologies for exposing your sham story.
    2
  540.  @Miss_Murder1669  No, that won't work either I'm afraid. You're resorting to that because I've highlighted valid criticism of your own behaviour. 👍
    2
  541. "allowing" 🤣
    2
  542. Most men are romantics and this WILL be used against you. So be wary.
    2
  543.  @MatgoStyles  The material point is that FAR too many of them have overheads they simply don't need however. Including (in many cases) vanity head office buildings in major cities. Sadly the human instinct involved in running charities is to stay in business, rather than what it should be, which is to be so effective as to put themselves out of business. In some cases (horrifically) the objective is actually to GROW their business by ever expanding mission creep and activism.
    2
  544.  @brucetillerson3329  The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    2
  545.  @ladvita32  No timestamp for you as I watched the vid 4 months ago. It is stated in it though that both of their businesses were struggling (which means weren't profitable). My comment merely addresses the OP's remark. Women tend to be very scathing of men who make no money but very lenient on women who do the same. Here the man is considered useless because his music wasn't profitable. However the woman is described as "strong" merely for starting a business. Yet this conveniently ignores that it wasn't a profitable enterprise so it was about as "useful" as his musicianship (ie not remotely according to the criticism) in terms of providing them with any means of support as independent adults. Just pointing out a silly double standard that women tend to happily perpetuate.😊👍
    2
  546. Correct.  The "lawyers hourly rate" thing is a silly red herring. That metric only applies when you're at work doing billable activities. It doesn't (for instance) apply when you're sat on your ass at home/going to the gym/going on a date. You don't earn $1300 per hour sat on your ass at home. Indeed part of the time you're actually at work you're not even doing billable activities. What IS important is how busy you are relative to the free time you're left with. That's the only thing that really matters when calculating the economics of it. If you figure you work too hard to waste precious free time with conventional dating (and you can afford to pay to play) then that's your entire equation laid out. It doesn't come with an hourly-rate metric unless it directly reduces your productivity/billable hours at work. And even then that's probably only if you're self employed rather than salaried.
    2
  547.  @DiddlyD-xx2ih   FAIL! 😂
    2
  548. And rescuers.
    2
  549.  @LisaCulton  All of your posts are the absolute epitome of cope btw. Just saying.
    2
  550. That's actually a fantastic point though. The "perfect business" is actually a business which has a vastly superior product. That's what virtually everyone (including Alex) lacks. This is a useful instructional video about optimising so-so products in hugely competitive marketplaces. ALL of the effort goes into marketing because the product itself isn't that great. The alternative method is to put all your effort into making sure the product is superior. Be in love with the problem that the product solves for and focus on that endlessly. That then stands you apart from the competition, not Facebook ads that stop achieving results the moment you stop paying Facebook. Or salespeople who join the competitor just as easily as (Alex) hired them from a competitor.
    2
  551. Lol. What's to stop you "making your own money" while being with a man on his way up? I doubt he's preventing you from making money. The only person preventing you from making money is you. You know this of course, so it still (basically) circles back to you being mercenary.
    2
  552. 🤣
    2
  553. Good comment. Always good to question everything tbh. The skill is not going tinfoil hat in the process yourself.
    2
  554.  @سارهاحمد-ت2ش  Dunno. That's a different point altogether though. Your original comment was silly.
    2
  555.  @Not_Always  Women don't get neurotic. Got it. I'm convinced now.
    2
  556. @ You're literally describing the process of having "feelings" and then not acting on them. Precisely out of loyalty (to someone else).
    2
  557. ​ @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true.  In reference to your more general point however, yes; it's far easier to kill womens love because womens "love" is far more conditional than a mans. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all.  Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it. The really good thing is that the message is becoming widely understood amongst men now and they're beginning to wake up to much of the nonsense that women have benefitted from for so long. 👍
    2
  558. "Men do it too! Reeeeee!" lol! Bang on schedule. So predictable.
    2
  559. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    2
  560.  @johannesdolch  Commented in response but it was deleted. I'll try to re-phrase below: I think your thesis is flawed tbh. You're entering the realms of fantasy. Women with basic women bills to pay will get fed up of buying Chad's groceries or paying to fix his car. If they're earning more than him they will eventually feel superior....and they don't like the feeling of looking down on a sexual partner. In ANY arena. It acts as a v@ginal desiccant. Chad aint immune from the stressors of this particular relationship dynamic. Just facts.
    2
  561.  @scarletamazon3455  No. A state senator doesn't suggest she was a professional of any kind. I certainly didn't hear any such evidence mentioned. She was just in local government. He on the other hand was a lawyer and a judge. It sounds like he took her on with kids from another relationship also. It's fairly clear who was elevating who's quality of life by the association and where the money for the businesses would have come from.
    2
  562.  @user-jb1mb5xh9t  Don't cry.
    2
  563.  @waitwhat1029  I'd actually say it's more to do with the fact the police are on camera so they behave better now. To the point they're pandered to. Which can then embolden the arrestee to behave like a total diva.
    2
  564. Imagine if we'd only lost 3-1!😳
    2
  565. Practically all heterosexual relationships are men ministering to women's myriad needs in some way or other. Women position themselves at the centre of the relationship and make the relationship about them. Apparently everyones s'posed to be okay with that and if you're not you're either "weird" "insecure" or (the catch all) "misogynistic".
    2
  566.  @snowbear163  Yup. Unless they're backing it up with lots of personality. Which frequently isn't the case. They literally never give a thought to how their laundry list of qualities a man must have: "be interesting, make me laugh etc etc" results in a complete nil balance in their own personality as they just sit there and passively consume. But that's our fault too of course. We're supposed to just be bowled over by them and overlook absolutely desolate (or horrible) personalities.
    2
  567.  @mjaybee  THEN add a zero.
    2
  568.  @hmurchison8123  I agree. Positive steps would include men understanding that endless sacrifice for a female is not the way to live life. Also, that you don't exist as a man solely to make womens lives easier. Both of which attitudes are a genuine problem btw.
    2
  569.  @manifest2203  It's not "as simple as that". Far from it. Bringing in resources for the family is just basic adulting. Beyond that, anyone placing focus on being part of a 'power couple' is telling you they have a preoccupation with how the couple is perceived by third parties. Rather than how well that couple functions as a unit, how they co-operate with one another, how their values are aligned etc. They're also (essentially) putting you on notice they won't be tolerating any bumps in the road where you may experience downturns or hardship. Now, I actually don't have a problem with this-people are at liberty to negotiate the partnership they want-I just don't believe it's compatible with certain forms of relationship. It emphatically is NOT an acceptable basis for marriage for instance. The marriage vows quite clearly disqualify it. But PROBABLY it's not compatible with any sensible form of LTR either.
    2
  570.  @marcusmcgraw3519  It's shorthand tbh. There is some conditionality to it (arguably 'attractiveness' is a factor) but it's such an order of magnitude different as to be wholly distinguishable and hence distinct. The female conditionality is performative. The many, many things a man has to do/continue to do as a performative burden. The male conditionality is not. Women do not have a performative burden to discharge. In as far as they say the do, typically it's things they're doing for themselves/to make other women envious rather than for the pleasure or benefit of a man. Straight facts and not apologetic for saying so.
    2
  571.  @BritishNaturalist-vb8hj  No. What you're saying is wrong in fact and law. If you don't understand this (and why it's important) you're operating at a level that's simply too basic to seriously participate in a debate.👍 It's a very longstanding principle of English law that you are under no legal obligation to report other people's criminality. This is especially true of family members. Theres a very, very good reason for this and you depart from it at society's peril. I repeat: this is NOT Soviet Russia. You do not set a legal precedent compelling family members to inform on one another. A legal duty to report only arises in very particular cases (typically in public office, where a particular responsibility is assumed as part of an employment). This makes the man sound utterly clueless about very important tenets of British culture I'm afraid. I don't know what else to say.
    2
  572.  @he1senbergshat78  Of course I would. I'd feel morally compelled to do so. It's the right thing to do. You're answering a completely different question and the man remains clueless I'm afraid.
    2
  573.  @crazymonkeyVII  Completely agree and I've actually made a similar remark under another comment to the video.
    2
  574.  @detroitvcw  I agree it's sad..and pathetic. Significantly though her first instinct is to put others down-and that puts her in a very unpleasant category of person. That's why I refuse to tolerate her BS and call her out on it when she surfaces. I think most men are familiar with that 'type' of woman. And most men who've found this type of content are done with them.
    2
  575.  @detroitvcw  Well said my guy! Sounds like a similar experience and mindset to myself (United Kingdom).
    2
  576.  @AmysAttitude  Based take. Well said, Amy. Really need more voices like yours.
    2
  577.  @colormetakenaback  Fair enough if you're not persuaded by my opinion. Instead, why not simply take Gabby;'s word for it? She literally admits to assaulting Brian. 👍
    2
  578.  @colormetakenaback  I didnt appeal to you to sympathise with Brian either, funnily enough. Tell you what, you just keep seeing and reading what you want to eh and ignore anything that happens to conflict with that.  Might as well be arguing with yourself tbh.
    2
  579.  @colormetakenaback  You've still not said one sensible word I'm afraid. Quite a feat really. Lol.
    2
  580.  @steph6109  Men frequently have very little sex within marriages/LTR's, so sex is no metric. Women have far more wants/needs/demands of men than vice versa. They don't get everything they want (because its utterly unrealistic). This explains their frustration and scathing nature. But they do still derive net benefit by the association simply because they receive more than they offer. That's the only metric that matters. Your analysis is defective.
    2
  581.  @abecochran4251  Did you honestly just say you were "really charismatic?" Unironically? Jeez! You must be REALLY charismatic!! Lol.
    2
  582. They don't care. Literally. And that should tell you all you need to know.
    2
  583. It's even worse. She could find a man her own age. And she STILL needed to nonce kids.
    2
  584.  @autarko  Nah. That doesn't cover it either I'm afraid. He doesn't buy them flowers-they leave because their friends are getting flowers. PROVIDED they can separate him from his resources. Everything is downstream of the divorce rights. If she cant separate him from his cash she's unable to achieve an upper hand and only in THAT scenario she'll put up with no flowers. That scenario is fantasy however. So I go back to my initial comment.
    2
  585. Sam Harris was a young and impressionable acolyte of Christopher Hitchens. For all of the mellifluous appeal Hitchens had (and the internet has still to cease fawning over him years later) you only really have to watch a few of his videos to realise a great deal of his argument strategy was ad hominem of opponent. Ancillary to that he would (with great success) seduce his audience with flattery. It typically manifested in a down-the-nose "we're morally better than (opponent)" invitation to the audience, who would lap this up feverishly. The guy was permanently bristling with hubris. Harris is not substantively different, he merely lacks Hitchens' superficial charm and vocabulary.
    2
  586. As opposed to when you treat them the other way and they don't like it and start complaining.
    2
  587. It's just because it's London tbh. Theres such population density loads of basic food businesses get by. Would go out of business in 5 minutes anywhere else; this guy would be peddling his inane patter down the bankruptcy courts.
    2
  588.  @samhardingham5591  Ok no worries. I suggest you're actually describing something quite different.
    2
  589.  @samhardingham5591  I'm not describing anything. It's literally depicted in the video.
    2
  590. Don't accept any financial assistance/contribution from him then. Oh wait...
    2
  591. Definitely a true statement in part. The second part however ignores the fact she's likely to have majority control of the children. Ideally the person filing for the divorce should become the part time/'visitation parent and then it's a fairer outcome. It's easier to "move on and forget" if you haven't had your status as parent severely diminished also.
    2
  592.  @Proposal12  Another fail from you. You've exposed yourself as a fantasist in the comments now so your credibility is done.
    2
  593. Should be reading us our rights after the introduction tbh.
    2
  594. More climate potatoes! So brave. Real, modern-day Steve Bikos. Not.
    2
  595. NEWSFLASH: Women are terrified of even having to accept men are humans that have problems. They are utterly REVOLTED at the prospect of having to expend time and resources on addressing mens issues. They are looking for someone with ZERO needs. Even when women have sons, their empathy stops short of anything which threatens to undermine their own position of control within a family. You only have to look at how intensely relaxed women are about divorce/custody laws - even where they have sons and know that the very same laws would CRUCIFY them a generation later.
    2
  596.  @blackrain6ft5  As I say, she SHOULD have been arrested. She admitted the assault.
    2
  597.  @meganrmz.3865  Just not a real world take really given the circumstances the officers found themselves presented with.
    2
  598.  @GKW76  As comments go, I have to tell you, that one is a little naive to say the least. I suspect you're taking the fact they mightn't have got exactly what they wanted out of relationships as evidence of them having been "walked all over"  You have to remember we're very disposed to project "nice" qualities onto people if they're good looking. If they're as gorgeous as you contend you've probably been guilty of projecting lots of positive qualities onto them that-realistically-they couldn't lay claim to. In fact I'd go further and suggest you're probably guilty of casting yourself as the hero of the piece. "If only they could see what I could see" etc etc. In reality, if they had low self esteem they were probably fairly insufferable to be around (trust me, thats how it works) and THAT will have been the real reason for their relationship woes.
    2
  599. @ Yeah thats definitely not "the problem".Lol.
    2
  600.  @LARA-sg4bt  Bless you, Lara!
    2
  601. I'll provide the TL;DR Michael - Easy life. Family business which he inherited (ie didnt have to strive for). Lots of money which made him attractive to women. Clueless about why women were attracted to him (thought it was because he was special and not because he had money-which in turn made him narcissistic) Relentlessly thought with his pen15. Murderer. Jan - Principally attracted to the lifestyle on offer. Couldn't afford a swimming pool without him. Forgave Michael's affairs for material reasons. Priorities all wrong. Angela - Fell in love with Michael when she saw his swimming pool. Baby trapped him to dissolve his marriage. Had bought a new swimming costume and was ready to move right on in. Pretends butter wouldn't melt. Angela's husband - don't know where to start. The kids (of both families) - My sincere condolences. You've all been treated horrendously by some very poorly behaved and selfish adults. That about covers it.
    2
  602. What in God's name was that parting question for? Stop trying to put the blame elsewhere. Who cares whether he was "worth it" or not. Are you suggesting she'd have been justified killing to acquire someone better? Says more about you tbh. What a messed up moral compass.  She killed because she's a vile, controlling, entitled woman who thought anyone getting in the way of what she wanted deserved to die. There are millions of vile entitled controlling women out there. Fortunately few go on to actually kill.
    2
  603. Think this one was another Nothingburger tbh. I reckon most people understand it's a psychological FOMO thing (rather than a pure biological phenomenon).  Just as with so many other ways in which females are disposed to act.
    2
  604. It's not what they're paid. It's the rate their employer charges them out at.
    2
  605.  @JS-mh1fh  A man likes to feel appreciated for the work he does that is necessary to make the household function. What he doesn't want is to be taken for granted and put on and endless treadmill of labours that a woman feels are appropriate for him to do. Most of them are not. And I mean that either directly or by proxy (ie buying a load of crap that isn't worth having).  Most of them are simply borne of the female's greed, vacuous consumerism or her desire to make her friends envious. This last one is extremely significant. Ultimately a man learns the things he is being tasked to do/buy don't really make her happy anyway (as she's already pointing to the next thing on the list). She is in a constant p!ssing contest with her friends for status and she has made the man's function to discharge whatever tasks allow her to compete on that totem pole. Most men know that a woman will do very few things for his express pleasure or even with any consideration or thought towards him at all. He can reconcile himself to this though (as he asks so little of her) provided his effort is deployed on things that are actually meaningful and beneficial to his family.
    2
  606. You're rude and unprofessional.  Meant as a kindness.
    2
  607.  @georgedang449  If you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
    2
  608. 8:19 Original Hawk Tuah girl.
    2
  609. I was on their side til they ordered chocolate milk with food. Throw the key away tbh.
    2
  610. It would honestly look more convincing on Roosevelt Glenn.
    2
  611. Theres a reason you said that as a female. It's because you stand to benefit more if a man gives himself completely to a dream.  If a man remains sensible, accepts the reality of female nature and considers himself more...you-as a female-stand to get less. Your comment came from a place of deep existential dread. Fortunately men are beginning to understand how women operate and aren't buying the dream anymore. 😊
    2
  612. Beautifully put.
    2
  613.  @Voting-does-nothing  Responded but censored I'm afraid. Ironically.
    2
  614. She was definitely lacking in moral fiber herself. Nothing like as bad as her murderer of course but definitely a case of two thoroughly unpleasant women.
    2
  615.  @murphsviews  Thats probably true of virtually any situation a narc finds themselves in. You only inserted a narc clause here to try to invalidate the OP's point. Which it doesn't. Your comment was just a failed ad hominem. Theres a valid conversation to be had around this but it doesn't benefit from brainless narc comments.
    2
  616.  @Irishcoleen948  Your statement was wilfully naive, bordering on thoroughly dishonest. 👌
    2
  617.  @DiddlyD-xx2ih  FACTS.
    2
  618.  @paisleyrae207  Miles better off without her tbh.
    2
  619.  @houndmother2398  Exactly. And yet women ignore the man and think only of themselves.
    2
  620. She seemed happy enough to get married in a castle. To a prince. Did it not occur to her that a queen lived there? Hence all the curtsying. In any event she's comfortable when everyones genuflecting for her and bending over backwards to indulge her whims so what's the difference?
    2
  621. Absolutely! You nailed this one. Probably catch flack for it though because we have to pretend people are wholly innocent and not active participants in their own downfall. A sad tale all round. A female with mental problems anaesthetising herself because she was prostituting herself in order to be with an old doctor. A doctor who was completely self absorbed, unethical and unscrupulous. A mom who knew the score and went along with it anyway because of the upside she and the daughter clearly identified in the association with the doctor.
    2
  622. You shouldn't. Dr Grande running cover for her poor character by painting a naive, flowery portrait of her. "She had always put others first" etc etc. How often do you hear this garbage when women are discussed? I mean she was married previously and left her husband after a couple of years so she clearly wasn't putting anyone ahead of herself there. And she wanted to be a stripper but had always been "unlucky in love". I mean; great marriage material right there. Any man would be lucky to have her! Time for lazy, selfish women to be called out in the same way we call men out. 👍
    2
  623. What relevance to this video?
    2
  624.  @RH-td7vc  Nicely formulated.
    2
  625. Bish, bash boche!
    2
  626. I think he was clear on where the bulk of the work lies and which gender has the greater burden.
    2
  627. "Relax into their feminine" Lol! Give me a break with this hackneyed fantasy talk.
    2
  628. HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE collars!
    2
  629.  @KarinaLaamri  😘
    2
  630. The Lord Chancellor's name was Derry Irvine. Not "Irving". You're wrongly pronouncing a 'g' because he's Baron Irvine of Lair(G).
    2
  631. 🤣👌
    2
  632. Precisely.  Which is probably what is called for. ie MUCH better clarity of thought. Generally speaking, only women benefit from the original, intoxicating love fee fees on divorce. Far better for men to wake up.
    2
  633. Some truth in this but you'll observe we're ONLY permitted to criticise men in this way. For instance if women are victims of domestic violence, we're NOT permitted to say they're complicit in their abuse by remaining in the relationship/reinforcing the bad behaviour. That's victim blaming and officially NOT okay. So which way do you want it? Are you comfortable to go there yet? Or should we just continue along the same road of only being able to criticise men? I'm going to guess the latter, right?!
    2
  634.  @amytheoptimist  Yup.I guessed right.
    2
  635.  @katarinacestmoi  You're changing the formula somewhat now. I didn't say men wanted a woman "forcing herself on them". I was just pushing back on your idea that expecting men to wait was completely in line with their preferences and yielded optimal results for you. I doubt that's the case and suspect it's just what you want. And no doubt that will be all that matters.
    2
  636.  @DNA350ppm  You think a man is "needy" and "despotic" (for which read: has to get their own way) compared to a woman? Lol. Is this supposed to be a serious comment?
    2
  637.  @alex-qd6of  Don't cry.
    2
  638. TL;DR Everything's a trade-off.
    2
  639.  @B__L  It's not a competition I quite agree. So much so it's not even a valid comparison. The harm suffered here was by the wrongly accused man.
    2
  640.  @drewyetti  She's fairly awful herself. Although she's not unhinged like Smurthwaite.
    2
  641.  @Ashtonishing1812  What are you talking about? If you think it's "hidden" (I agree) then ventilating it is hardly going to be to anyone's detriment. It will only bring it more to light. It's such a depressingly harsh reality I think you're entitled to have fun with it. It's very healthy in fact.
    2
  642.  @Ashtonishing1812  Rollo says don't bother sharing it with women in the sense it's not going to "impress" them that you understand the way their minds truly work etc etc. Nor turn them on. I quite agree. I wasn't contradicting that, or suggesting you could go about "converting" women by red pilling them as to their nature. Most women I'm not trying to bed however, so I'm supremely indifferent to whether it does or doesn't impress them. In that capacity it's quite cathartic letting them know I don't believe a word of their sh!t. And I do, as and when I feel the situation deems it appropriate. I wouldn't bother showing them RP videos though, personally. I get that. But then I'm not in the habit of going round showing people YouTube videos generally.
    2
  643.  @Andy-xx3tt  Thanks Andy. That was very well written but equally naive.
    2
  644. I'm satisfied my comprehension is not an issue so that won't work I'm afraid. Keep trying though by all means, I dare say you've got the idle time available.
    2
  645.  @lajohnson1967  Divorce/separation doesn't take "two to tango". Chosing single parenthood for a child doesn't take "two to tango". Quite the opposite in fact. Thats the material point.  No father should have to "fight for custody" of a child. The very idea is absurd and lies at the heart of the matter. I fear these concepts may prove too taxing for you though so I won't bother developing them further in this comments section. Especially given YouTube censorship. Trust you understand.
    2
  646.  @daisymiano925  Agreed. But we need to call it out for what it is rather than allude to it obliquely. @Multimonica nailed it previously in this comments section. The guy was wealthy and she was looking for access to that wealth. It's naked greed. She was selfishly pursuing this murderous idiot for his money. If she'd actually been judging him using other metrics (ie common sense) she wouldn't have become involved with him.
    2
  647.  @daisymiano925  No, we need to stop sugar coating it as a naive hope he could change for the better. That thinking wouldn't have applied if he hadn't had money. The explanation begins and ends with greed. Just being real.
    2
  648. ​ @daisymiano925  I agree. There's nothing "wrong" with wanting financial stability. It's just better to honest about what that means. Ie accessing someone else for their resources and placing the financial burden on them rather than shouldering it yourself. It's the opposite of being financially responsible (whereby you offer someone ELSE financial "stability" by bearing that burden on their behalf). Basically she was wanting to be "kept". It's the sort of arrangement that should be reserved for children though, not grown adults. Children have reduced agency because they're children. Grown women don't because they're adults. Sadly when they act this way and exhibit reduced agency they can end up ignoring lots of psychopathic traits.
    2
  649.  @HD46409  Essentially correct. In other words, make sure you're appreciated. For a very high level analysis however you neglect to mention the bit that makes this (virtually) impossible in most cases. This being the law of diminishing returns. Sadly much of the benefit of the association (as perceived by women) is front-ended. Marriage typically brings the house and children...both huge objectives and typically achieved in 20's/30's. After that, what's the perceived benefit? Keeping the house and children? They've already got that so the appreciation factor is waining anyway. Plus they can retain those 'gains' without having to continue to deal with the man or show him appreciation because the law grants them continued access to his resources after divorce. So why put up with the man? The gains have already been made. At that point it's off to indulge other feelings and "re-discover herself" after years of endless slaving etc etc yawn.
    2
  650.  @HD46409  Fair assessment. PUA advice has efficacy in short to mid term (at very, very best) relationships. And short term relationships are easy anyway, so it's virtually a non-factor. Manufacturing "dread" (lol btw) over a longer period of time sounds like the most draining, waste of energy endeavour possible. And going back to what I said before, virtually none of them achieve it.
    2
  651. And yet women typically have no problem doing so.
    2
  652. Does better now he's got a modicum of fame and recognition. No long term success to report however. Not knocking him. Most relationships fail. Women need/demand much more in a relationship than men do.  We're each responsible for our own happiness though. The good shift thats (finally) starting to occur in society is that men are starting to resist the idea that it's their job to make women happy. That's a losing game from the first whistle to the last. 👍
    2
  653. Good stuff!
    2
  654.  @pauldh62  If this was a response to my post then you failed to discern it's essence. Spectacularly. I don't really know what to tell you other than that.
    2
  655.  @jenerin905  This is a lot about perspective. You will notice many "victims" willingly make themselves "dependent" on other people. In the sense they're looking for people who they can outsource the majority of adult responsibility to in a relationship. It could be they voluntarily allow them to have the majority of the financial burden. Women will frequently do this by looking for men who have/appear to have money/status rather than paying attention to their values and character. This creates horrible dynamics that are more akin to adult/child and the "victim's" behaviour does need to be examined and criticised too as part of the matrix. This woman seemed to have a history of performing poorly in relationships and not prioritising a stable family environment for her child's upbringing. She can now add stabbing someone to death with a knife to that roll of honour.
    2
  656.  @stalechipz450  I strongly suspect its the former/genuinely pity them if its the latter.
    2
  657.  @ec6621  Nope. Once there is a huge imbalance they become unreasonable by definition. You're using the 'negotiation' analogy. Hint: that's typically when you'd step away from a "negotiation". The exception would be if you're contemplating a relationship between an adult and child/adult and invalid. In that instance an imbalance wouldn't be unreasonable. But then I know you're not comparing a woman to a child or an invalid. So your point fails and I refer you back to my original comment.
    2
  658.  @frankG335  I didn't say they were "bad". I said they don't care.  I'm talking at population level. I'm generalising. Because it's IMPORTANT to generalise. Pattern recognition is one of the ways in which we learn and understand the world around us By contrast you're citing exceptions. Which is fine but they don't disprove the rule. Thats the material point. I'm right btw. Men are very alive to this since the internet permitted them to share their experiences and learn from one another. You're wrong-to the extent you have to put words in my mouth. Which makes you in bad faith so I don't propose to engage further. Trust you understand. ☺
    2
  659.  @richardw3347  I think you're probably right in the way that you've characterised it there. The only codicil I would insert is-albeit women undoubtedly find non-reactive men more attractive-that does not mean they won't try, continuously, to provoke a reaction. They will. And that in itself is exhausting to deal with. It may relent eventually or it may not. Personally-on balance-I think that has more to do with the individual female's appetite for drama than the individual male's ability to 'hold frame'.
    2
  660.  @pisstakecentral  True. And actually a huge percentage of them are incredibly basic.
    2
  661.  @shmariona  Silly comment.
    2
  662. @ "hone"
    2
  663. @ And we have a winner! That covers all bases! 🤣 Well done everyone! I knew if we explored enough angles we'd eventually get to the filthy, unwiped bottom of it. Comments now closed. Thats a wrap!
    2
  664. Agreed. Doesn't matter what "agenda" people believe was at work behind it all. Women believed the message because they wanted to believe the message. Women believe what they want to believe.
    2
  665. Well said Delia Smith.
    2
  666. She dazzled a no-talent, feeble-minded prince.
    2
  667. Like how old? You look like you're about 6.
    2
  668. "Mo money mo problems" - Thomas Sowell
    2
  669. 🤣Nice reference! Might be a bit outdated to get the appreciation it deserves though. Lol.
    2
  670.  @E1ucidate  Fair comment.
    2
  671.  @sc4112  Do you want to have a go at answering the question?
    2
  672. They've already stopped watching months back because-you know-he was telling the truth.
    2
  673.  @kristencobb230  Yep! Very balanced view. Well said.
    2
  674. ​ @legiontepes3474  Well said. As if insulting your comment invalidated your point anyway. It's a general issue. Thats the whole point. The content creator wouldn't be making the video if it wasn't a general issue. MOST men can relate to it. It was just a very standard, feminised, ad hominem response from RobbyRaccoon and one that no longer works in 2025.
    2
  675.  @katielowen  Getting second hand cringe from your post there tbh. Congrats on proving your ignorance and complete inability to listen though, Katie. Lol.
    2
  676. ​ @arsenal4444  You're quite right. This is the point I think everyone eventually gets to if they give it their full consideration. My comment was only addressing the point about argument tactics. That really IS all you need to level the playing field with a woman. I'd actually go as far to say that if you're a male of reasonable intelligence it gives you the upper hand in most cases. I can only repeat; if you insist on logic and facts and call her out on emotional manipulation, you really don't have anything to fear in the typical exchange.  The notion that women have super-brains and men are rhetorically un evolved is for the birds. If anything I'd say they're really quite basic. Beyond that it offers no additional benefit or comfort. Male instinct remains what it is and female behaviour remains what it is. Their inability to love a male partner (as we understand 'love') or have empathy for a man is untouched by what I mentioned above. You can't change that by winning arguments with them or pointing out the logical defects in everything they believe. That is insoluble. And that's probably the reason why many-over time-will ultimately arrive at the conclusion that it isn't worth the stress of dealing with them. Particularly with the laws against you.
    2
  677.  @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
  678.  @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
  679.  @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
  680.  @vaska1999  Profoundly silly comment from a silly person.
    2
  681.  @samiamgreeneggsandham7587  As a useful rule of thumb, you can reliably assume the woman isn't doing anything FOR the man. In this scenario, the idea she's dutifully compensating for a shortfall in wages is for the birds. It was an alarmingly naive comment. Whatever she's doing, you can assume she's doing principally for her own reasons. No need to look beyond that.
    2
  682.  @MsInsaneNMembrane  Sorry, but what GI D said was just patent nonsense until the nature of the relationship is established and behavioural expectations are negotiated and settled. You're not entitled to expect reciprocation from someone merely because you've shown interest yourself. Imagine a man (you weren't attracted to) taking that attitude to you. Lol. You've just heard what you wanted to hear and allowed it to confirm your biases. Congratulations! You managed to watch the video, miss the lesson and fail the litmus test in one fell swoop!
    2
  683. And it'll be your fault she hasn't got it.
    2
  684. It's an inchoate formulation. They do partly like men who approach because they think it "shows confidence"
    2
  685. Honestly it would look more convincing on Roosevelt Glenn
    2
  686. Something needs to change? I'm pretty sure murder is already illegal tbh.
    2
  687.  @JB-jg1tc  No. But I suspect you haven't read the book whereas I have. It's a commentary on societal expectations at large rather than the female perspective. Darcy is the most established/highest status man in the book from the outset. We're dealing with hereditary wealth and title after all. He isn't building his status or material wealth in the hope of attracting a wife. He has all the wealth and status and is actively avoiding at least 3 named suitors. In vain as it turns out in the case of Elizabeth Bennett but then that of course is the central love story. It used to be my favourite novel but sadly it's a blue pill nightmare. Theres only one major red pill moment in it that justifies my reading or watching it any longer.
    2
  688.  @toxicmale2264  What an absolute sh!tshow! All round. Lol.
    2
  689. You cant have dwarfs landing planes. That's just science.
    2
  690. He hasn't "built a business". He's a self-employed psychologist. A business is something that operates independent of the founder and is something that somebody else would therefore pay money to acquire. If he wasn't there to do counselling sessions then the practice would cease to exist. No. What he has is a psychology practice and has recently enjoyed some traction on YouTube.
    2
  691.  @annesmith9181  Very good comment. It's really worthwhile remembering the adjustment that ought to be made. PsycHacks (just like every YouTuber) is obviously tailoring his message according to his audience/catering to their biases.  Most people do end up married (with a question mark over how happily, as most will probably also end up divorced). But yes, the viewership of this channel are probably statistical outliers. I'd challenge what you said about most people being physically ugly though. I don't think that's been accurate historically. From a male perspective I'd say most girls looked reasonably attractive when young and became fairly unattractive as they reached their late 30's/early 40's. Nowadays though girls particularly are incredibly overweight even when young. Many are no longer even that attractive at their most attractive time of life. It's astonishing. Again, talking about the West only.
    2
  692.  @joecurran2811  Funny you should mention that as I've actually posted a couple of additional responses in this comment section and they've been deleted.
    2
  693.  @IfSemper  Jesus wept.
    2
  694. I'm not sure how much "societally benefitting, meritorious wealth" was actually represented here. It seemed to be a poorly designed craft, a cavalier operator and much inherited money. So a poor take overall from Andrew. It didn't fit his narrative no matter how much he would have liked it to. Aside from that however, ANY pleasure taken in their demise was abhorrent. Irrespective of their social status. In fact I found the minute-to-minute fascination with their fate unpleasant full stop. I had absolutely no appetite to intrude into their grief/turmoil and tried to avoid the coverage altogether.
    2
  695.  @JerdMcLean  Yup. To the extent we're now seeing "battered spouse" defences used in circumstances where a man is trapped by his "spouse" in a suitcase to suffocate to death. All while she films it. Accountability for women left the building decades ago.
    2
  696. There will have been some incentive/perceived advantage in dating him for you. So maybe not "damaged" as such but yes, you'll certainly have been equally to blame.
    2
  697.  @DNA350ppm  Shall we be reasonable people and agree that an overwhelming abundance of anecdotal evidence vs a few exceptional anecdotes to the contrary is a sufficient standard of proof? Bearing in mind this isn't a court of law or a PhD submission? You might also want to consider that "research" into topics that threaten to make females look anything less than pristine is usually strongly discouraged/suppressed.
    2
  698. Well said. Plus: 2:30 No Kerry, she battered someone over the head while they were in bed.
    2
  699. You don't remember Robert Robinson?!! He had...instead of a rucksack yeah, he had a suitcase on wheels. And you started his nickname which was Terminal 3 You don't remember that? Robert Robinson! You don't remember?! Year 6 camping trip, he brought in an old camping bed and it had blood on it! We used to bogwash him so much the bleach in the toilet actually turned his hair white! Oh my God! He had about three unruly deaf brothers yeah? And he used to get picked up after school in a dirty old Land Rover full of flailing arms! You DON'T remember that?! He used to write everything out in that calculator font because he thought it was really cool! We made him eat a f*cking bark sandwich for f*cks sake! You DON'T remember that? NOTHING?!!! Right! Im gonna get Sluggs over. He was in our class, he'll remember! Robert Robinson yeah...he had a fat woman arse and tiny short little legs like a troll! His school jumper was the most faded out of everyones-he used to chew his sleeves to just threads! He brought in a bit of meteorite yeah for Show and Tell and Darren Lacy called him Apollo 13! OH MY GOD! He was OBSESSED with salamanders, yeah?! And we saw him at the school fete and he was carrying around a little bank bag full of coppers and his face was painted like a salamander and he was hissing at dogs! HOW D'YOU NOT REMEMBER ROBERT F*CKING ROBINSON?!!!!!
    1
  700.  @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
  701.  @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
  702.  @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
  703.  @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
  704. It's true. The default in heterosexual relationships is that the female is the controlling partner. Usually everything has to be done on her terms/texts need to be responded to quickly etc etc. We're okay as a society with that because we're a gynocentric society. If it's the man in control however and the female starts asserting herself then he's almost certainly guilty of mental abuse.
    1
  705.  @Jeremiah_29  Yes but he did this in response to her telling him she was taking his kids away from him. Which is an act of violence in itself. You will find that many women would act in similar desperate/horrendous ways if you did that to them. Tellingly she also just "drops it in" as a snippet of info after she mentions other grievances. That suggests he's not violent per se, otherwise she'd be leading with a litany of allegations of violent abuse/firearms threats. But she doesn't.  You have to be very careful to sieve through womens BS.  What they actually want is the control to be able to dictate how families function (controlling in itself) and where they cannot achieve that, they want the presumption that they should just be allowed to "leave with the kids" (another act of control and violence). Women's storytelling on matters of this nature is well practiced. They know the things to say to create an appearance that theyre a victim. You have to understand you're being manipulated though and point out the BS. You also need to point out their hypocrisy and lay out where they're actually seeking exactly the thing they're complaining of. Namely control.
    1
  706.  @StofStuiver  Yup. Another inconvenient truth that will just be ignored. Until it can no longer be ignored. Tbh so much of the workforce is now part of the non-job economy we're already in dire straits. Ie jobs that play no part in producing anything of value. HR has become one of the biggest employers in the West. And all HR does is deal with grievances. And grievances multiply exponentially when the female workforce increases. Because women *drum roll*...complain more. They feel like an employer should exist to solve all of their problems and dispense 'meaning'. Rather than just provide a job of work in exchange for remuneration. The more you understand the problem, the more you see evidence of it everywhere. It's pretty depressing.
    1
  707.  @Miss_Murder1669  This is all over the place now and starting to sound EXTREMELY dubious.  On that account you're continuing to have kids with him despite calling him an unfit father and clearly having reservations about his suitability to share a home with. You HAVE to start accepting your own participation in this nonsense. You're equally at fault for creating the situation for your children. If there is ANY credibility to the accusations you're making AT ALL, then creating additional children with him is irresponsible behaviour ON YOUR PART. You simply CANNOT have it both ways. Incidentally the story you're giving where you work more than he does is a very common story in reverse. Ie it's typically the man who works more hours. Women are perfectly okay with that scenario however so you can't really re-brand it as abuse when it just happens to be you doing more hours than him. Additionally this is only your account. No doubt there could be a huge litany of complaints he could make about your character. I had a feeling this (extended version) of your suffering would be on its way before too long. If this was a case of genuine DV then I really feel the allegations of DV would be front and centre. Not indirect accusations of him putting a gun to his own head after you'd threatened to take his kids away and leave. I can see it's clearly being steered towards a DV angle though as you explore DV tactics with lawyers....
    1
  708.  @Miss_Murder1669  This is contradictory now. He's all kinds of terrible and he's unsuitable as a parent (apparently) and yet you're having more kids with him? No. At some point you have to accept your own responsibility in this chaos. If you believe he's as bad as you claim he is then you're blameworthy yourself for trying to birth more children by him into it. It has to be called out.
    1
  709. As usual, there aren't any practical solutions. Red pill content is just people pointing out the same thing in different ways.
    1
  710.  @dharmadasa66  Yeah but woefully inadequate where children/divorce laws are involved. No workable solution is ever offered because it doesn't currently exist.
    1
  711.  @daisychain9713  The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    1
  712.  @brettstarks1846  Are you new to the human race?! Why do you think people want "influence"?  No offence but that sounds like a terrifying level of naivety for an adult.
    1
  713.  @AJW3B4L  🤣Triggered!
    1
  714.  @TheChoralist  Echo that, Sir! As men I think it's important we point nonsense out when we see it being presented as fact!
    1
  715. Frame is everything
    1
  716.  @DiddlyD-xx2ih  No. It's nothing to do with "society". It's everything to do with what a female feels she's entitled to. She happened to want a relationship with him. He didn't want one with her. She gave him sex. What she wanted in exchange was commitment. A feminist such as yourself will know that (since the sexual revolution and birth control) the fair trade for consensual sex is....consensual sex. It USED to be more (before feminism/birth control a female could argue a fair trade for sex would be commitment), but nowadays that no longer applies. So she got a completely fair exchange from him. Sex for sex. What she wanted however was an unfair exchange. COMMITMENT for sex. Commitment he didn't want to give and wasn't obligated to give. One of the triumphs of feminism! No. If a woman doesn't want a relationship with a man then I assure you she experiences absolutely ZERO feeling she's obligated to marry him. Similarly, if a man wants a relationship with a woman, the argument that he's "had sex" with her will carry zero weight with her if she doesn't want a relationship with that man. Complete lies and dishonesty as I would expect from a feminist. We all see through it now btw. The lies have been successfully exposed for a few years online.  This was classic female manipulation. Pure and simple. She didn't get what she wanted/felt entitled to so she she embarked on a baby trap manipulation with horrendous consequences.
    1
  717. I've said it before, Sam Harris was an acolyte of the late Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens personified orgiastic hubris. He was enormously listenable and well read, but a huge amount of his output effectively amounted to a mellifluous English accent and an invitation to join him on the moral high ground. It's a sad indictment but audiences would frequently be seduced by his feel-good misdirection at the expense of intellectual rigour.  Harris' followers display a similar appetite. At this stage it's little more than an intellectually dishonest jamboree.
    1
  718. Who's this hairy cornflake?!
    1
  719.  @talianun3259  What do you mean? I wasn't repudiating the existing system, I was just rejecting the alternative explanation put forward in the video. It doesn't bear any relationship to reality. But as you ask, men should do as they see fit. They should pay if they see value in paying and they should tell the woman to pay for herself if they don't.  If the woman sees herself as an independent, modern woman, (and more importantly, expects you to regard her as such) I don't see much controversy in inviting her to pay for her own food. Do you?
    1
  720. Douglas Murray's lapels are spiralling out of control!
    1
  721.  @GhossupGurls  It's mainly the women following them that are the problem tbh. Absolute buffoons.
    1
  722. 32:11 You don't understand why he asked you to take that out? A provision which creates a legal obligation for a private citizen to report members of their own family for a criminal offence? On pain of criminal sanction? Really? Are you serious? Do you know anything about English law or culture? I'm sympathetic to a lot of the views expressed but I found this exchange absolutely extraordinary. This is isn't Soviet Russia thank you very much. Appalling blindspot 'twixt interviewer and interviewee here. I actually had chills.
    1
  723. This woman is TERRIFYING!
    1
  724.  @conlawmeateater8792  For sure. Marketing is always an important discipline and will deliver rewards. The future will be more specialist though. We have 20th century legacy household brands that essentially don't stand for anything and are all mid range crap. Thats a relic from when you just had to go on TV and buy commercials for your soap powder. Those things have to be marketed to within an inch of their lives because they're unremarkable. Thats essentially what Alex is talking about when he's referencing Facebook ads and salespeople cold calling. Gradually better quality products are being developed by people who care. The craft beer market is an example of that, because mid-range crap had driven standards through the floor. The taste/quality of a superior product literally spoke for itself. These things are nascent at the moment but the growth will be organic/word of mouth rather than Facebook ads cold-calling etc. Cold calling is the hallmark of a "me too" product/service which is no better than it's competitor. It's a commodity and no more. Marketing then becomes the exponentially huge price you pay to stand out in a thankless race to the bottom.
    1
  725.  @AlexisTwoLastNames  Men aren't getting carried off of mountainsides by women though (while refusing to acknowledge any form of gratitude)....so theres that. Lol. Nice try but the whole of society can see what (ie who) the issue is in 2024. ☺
    1
  726. Plus you have to bear in mind the obvious: if you just listened to your stomach all the time instead of exercising self-discipline you'd soon become a fat bast@rd.
    1
  727. Really important comment!  When you heard Mary Parkinson try to get them indulging in how :"hard it was for women" (the sort of narrative you hear on things like Loose Women)...that Yorkshire lady shut her down sharpish. Those women knew the truth. Her husband worked down the mine. That was hard. The other lady's brother died being shelled by Germans. THAT was hard. Having to get Christmas dinner ready?! Not so hard by comparison. It would have been an insult to those men to have indulged in the sort of talk Mary Parkinson was angling for there. Well done! We need more of this sort of thinking nowadays. We hear nothing but victimhood and oppression from modern women. They don't know how privileged they are.
    1
  728. Saw the guy behind this brand on one of the DTC marketing channels that hypes up ridiculous sales growth nonsense. Could tell it was all complete fluff.  People fail to understand these aren't manufacturers who own production facilities focussed on quality and legacy. They're marketing companies that source crap from anywhere around the world without the first hope of QC or consistency. Loads of these brands cropping up! Same people wondering why their "True Classic" Tees are different sizes in one pack to the next oblivious to the fact one pack is made in Vietnam and another in a different factory on another continent. We need producers spending time and money on product, not marketing. And reward them accordingly. Good to see you taking them to task. No scam brand survives an encounter with the bandsaw!
    1
  729.  @Wildeheart79  Is the wrong answer.
    1
  730. Facts.
    1
  731.  @admirallily  Congratulations. You missed the point. Profoundly. SOME men are not held to the same standard. ALL women are held to a lesser standard. Ps that was the absolute classic female deflection tactic. Fortunately it's all being exposed now by the internet and people are getting wise to it. Society's understanding is changing. Eventually the courts will have to acknowledge this and finally hold women accountable as adults.
    1
  732. Guessing it was money. Which in fairness is why she wanted custody in the first place. Ie he had no money. Then she tried to make money and was about as successful as him (ie useless/broke). Then he came into money so I suppose by that logic the kids have to go back where the money is. If you play by those rules then thats fair enough I guess.
    1
  733.  @Lostsoul_123  Haven't got a clue what you're waffling on about tbh.
    1
  734.  @Lostsoul_123  Do you want to be more specific? Is this just a world view you have or are you accusing me of something in particular?
    1
  735.  @josephrkennedy845  I'd say not many. Statistically speaking.
    1
  736.  @annt7384  I beg your pardon? Is she a man? What a silly, silly comment.
    1
  737. @ That's very interesting. But also a load of BS. For instance if I was married to a woman and slept with her best friend (because I was being "loyal to my c0ck's feelings"), do you imagine she'd regard me as "loyal" or "disloyal"? Because my instincts tell me she'd regard me as disloyal. And have very little trouble telling me so either. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. Don't get propagandised by nonsense.
    1
  738. @  That's very interesting. But also a load of BS. For instance if I was married to a woman and slept with her best friend (because I was being "loyal to my c0ck's feelings"), do you imagine she'd regard me as "loyal" or "disloyal"? Because my instincts tell me she'd regard me as disloyal. And have very little trouble telling me so either. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. Don't get propagandised by nonsense.
    1
  739. @ You're literally describing the process of having "feelings" and then not acting on them. Precisely out of loyalty to someone else. You're an actual moron.
    1
  740.  @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes. It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isn't something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman in a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it. The really good thing is that the message is becoming widely understood amongst men now and they're beginning to wake up to much of the nonsense that women have benefitted from for so long.
    1
  741.  @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however, yes; it's far easier to kill womens love because womens "love" is far more conditional than a mans. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
    1
  742.  @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive.  Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman in a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
    1
  743. ​ @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive.  Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isn't something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman going into a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
    1
  744.  @michellesmith7363  Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
    1
  745.  @nomada6789  This is possibly the most chilling aspect of it. Everyone praising her for coming through the trauma (rightly so) but unless she can appreciate the fact her mom is a horrible, irresponsible abusive adult herself then she's only learned half a lesson. Women have shared responsibility in creating toxic environments. They're not perennial faultless victims. Unless you can integrate that knowledge then you risk perpetuating these horrendous crimes.
    1
  746. Indeed. A simple "I 'ate you, Butler!" in the style of Blakey would have sufficed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M2EO3ZltYs
    1
  747. In saying you're not typical of all women, you're VERY typical of all women.🤣🤣🤣 Please don't personalise this and make it about yourself. It's such a very typically female thing to do. The general messaging in the video is sound. That's literally all that matters.
    1
  748.  @moskie325  Based on a misunderstanding of women, clearly. Time that changed in light of new information. 😊
    1
  749.  @cinnababe53  I'd argue very few and even fewer still for any appreciable length of time (which is the only thing that really counts). By that I'm talking 20 years plus. The divorce stats are clear on this. It's conclusively damning of just how awful women's behaviours are and very good evidence that they don't deserve to be offered marriage in the first place. Thankfully the internet has exposed this for the first time ever and the knowledge is beginning to get pretty widespread in the mainstream amongst men.
    1
  750. Wrong. They want it all whether they have children or not. Stop using children as an excuse, everyone can see right through you. And men don't want it all, period.
    1
  751. Oh No!!! Poor Morgan!! Boo hoo!
    1
  752.  @HalfBackCrack  Congrats on arguing like a pre-teen.
    1
  753. Please be real and clear about what this ACTUALLY means though. In practice. Women who are seeking your investment are a PITA. They are neurotic, constantly requiring progress updates, constantly requiring reassurance, constantly needing to "know where this is going" constantly having tantrums etc etc...ad nauseam. It's good theory (I know from experience)...but the practice is utterly grinding and horrifically time consuming (again, I know from experience).
    1
  754.  @jth_printed_designs  In short: diminishing returns.
    1
  755.  @DigitalNeb  Silence, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  756.  @johannesdolch  Nah. No disrespect but I think you're entering the realms of fantasy there. Women with basic women bills to pay will eventually get sick of buying chads groceries and fixing his car if they're earning more than him. However you look at it it's an arena in which they'll feel superior....and they REALLY don't enjoy looking down on a sexual mate. It's a serious vaginal desiccant.
    1
  757.  @0000FFz  I think it's essentially "beta provisioning" the second you depart from any position where you've got Chad being rewarded simply for being Chad and naming what HE wants on HIS terms. That's kind of the whole rationale behind the Chad trope. Just being real. Once you depart from that you're essentially accepting you have to provide other things. If you have to provide other things, you're not getting what you want simply on the basis of being "Chad". QED. It's also a false dichotomy. He needn't be "broke" to suffer from the same problem.
    1
  758.  @0000FFz  It's beta provisioning the moment you depart from the standpoint that "Chad" is rewarded for being Chad. Ie given whatever he wants and on his own terms. That's the whole rationale behind the Chad trope. If he cant rely on that and has to "provide" something else...thats beta provisioning. The "Brokie" label is a red herring btw. He needn't be broke. He could have decent money. But if he's expected to show up with this in some way to make her feel good about herself then it's beta provisioning. By definition.  However even if he were broke that shouldn't matter if he's Chad. Chad gets what he wants just for being Chad. Except he doesn't. Obviously.
    1
  759.  @0000FFz  It's beta provisioning the moment you depart from the standpoint that "Chad" is rewarded for being Chad. Ie given whatever he wants and on his own terms. That's the whole rationale behind the Chad trope. If he cant rely on that and has to "provide" something else...thats beta provisioning. The "Brokie" label is a red herring btw. He needn't be broke. He could have decent money. But if he's expected to show up with this in some way to make her feel good about herself then it's beta provisioning. By definition. However even if he were broke that shouldn't matter if he's Chad. Chad gets what he wants just for being Chad. Except he doesn't. Obviously.
    1
  760.  @0000FFz  It's beta provisioning the moment you depart from the standpoint that "Chad" is rewarded for being Chad. Ie given whatever he wants and on his own terms. That's the whole rationale behind the Chad trope. If he cant rely on that and has to "provide" something else...thats beta provisioning. The "Brokie" label is a red herring btw. He needn't be broke. He could have decent money. But if he's expected to show up with this in some way to make her feel good about herself then it's beta provisioning. By definition. However even if he were broke that shouldn't matter if he's Chad. Chad gets what he wants just for being Chad. Except he doesn't. Obviously.
    1
  761.  @0000FFz  For some reason completely unable to respond to your comment. Keeps deleting. In any event disagree with your response. It's beta provisioning the moment you depart from the standpoint that "Chad" is rewarded for being Chad. Ie given whatever he wants and on his own terms. That's the whole rationale behind the Chad trope. If he cant rely on that and has to "provide" something else...that's beta provisioning.
    1
  762. Basically just keep asking every patient to confirm their gender relentlessly. I'm sure that'll make the average person feel good about themselves. Should manage to alienate the entire population in no-time.
    1
  763.  @VioletJoy  Yeah but she's still insufferable.
    1
  764.  @BatteredRose  There's nothing adorable about a grown adult hugging soft toys and asking for pinky promises. Get a grip immediately.
    1
  765.  @jomoland  That's why she was into him. He was a grandiose liar and she was into his lies as it sounded like a sweet life. He was "moving to" his Space X job and she was following him without a clue or a job of her own because she perceived a personal benefit in it. When you go through life like that; being emotional, hugging soft toys, asking for pinky promises and clinging to some lunatic's coat tails because they talk a good game-all rather than taking personal responsibility as an adult-you end up making some stupid decisions. She's far from adorable, she's a vapid, covetous moron that's deeply lacking in conscientiousness.
    1
  766.  @user-jb1mb5xh9t  Lol. Get a grip.
    1
  767.  @skatardrummer1  I don't think Chandler made Kat question her sanity. I don't think Kat had any sanity to question.
    1
  768.  @user-jb1mb5xh9t  It's another fail I'm afraid. Lol.
    1
  769.  @smidgen  Don't mess with the bull, young man. You'll get the horns!
    1
  770.  @VivPhotography  Are you suggesting that a woman's instincts for cash support could be greater than her instincts to protect her child from being in the company of a murderer?! I've got to say, that sounds a bit sexist. Surely women are perfect? That's what media and culture tell me anyway. Are you able to clarify as this has TURNED MY ENTIRE WORLD VIEW ON IT'S HEAD!!! 🙄
    1
  771.  @BaremetalBaron  Grossly misstating the odds there but tell yourself what you like.
    1
  772.  @BaremetalBaron  I'm not disputing your summary of the content. I'm saying that it's inaccurate. If you think the odds are favourable I'm happy for you. I don't agree with you but I'm sure it brings comfort.
    1
  773.  @okaySam  It's not "easy". That's the material point. Exactly how difficult it is is a speculative exercise. My sense is the Dr thinks it's easy because-from a male point of view-it is. And thats the mistake. I didn't gender the historical point btw. I said everyone did what they had to survive. I think that's broadly true.
    1
  774.  @okaySam  It's "easier" for men in the sense it's more natural. They're more hard wired to be of service to women.  And the childlessness stat is a bit of a manosphere red herring. A significant female demographic has kids increasingly later-but they virtually all still have them. Not that it's optimal for the kids being born to older mothers, but that's a different story altogether.
    1
  775.  @okaySam  If I shift the measure of childlessness to be defined as "childless by age 30" the rate may indeed increase. A lot are indeed leaving it later. Doesn't mean they're not mothers by 31, 32, 33, 40 etc though.  There will be some additional childlessness but I think it's fairly negligible. Certainly we're not experiencing it yet and the internet/social media/female careers have been around for a LONG time now. Re: your other point, I don't know I'd say it's easier for women to be of service to children than it is men (if by that you mean having a natural disposition). I think it is fair to say it's natural for them to be DIRECTLY more of service. I'd contend that men are equally disposed to be of service but they express it indirectly. However I don't really see how that has a bearing on the original point in any event.
    1
  776.  @perd8777  Well said!
    1
  777. Let's be real. It's principally females in these meltdown arrest videos. This is at epidemic levels now. When did women become this ridiculous? I mean when exactly? What year in history? Because it didn't always used to be this way. The entitlement and drama is through the roof these days. It's got to be the decades of being told they're perfect and that the world is wrong for not accepting their emotional BS.
    1
  778.  @ezioauditore3128  Nah. Poor take. The parents are entitled to be mad, however it sounds like the child was an adult. It's misleading to be calling them the parents' 'child' now that criminality has been ruled out. For instance you're someones 'child' yet you're probably a middle aged woman. I'm not saying he isn't a bit sad and pathetic-and it's likely he ought to no longer occupy the same position of prominence after all this-but it's not the blood lust moral frenzy you and others were hoping for. Just being real. ☺
    1
  779. Certainly an absolutely awful woman.
    1
  780. 🤣Fair!
    1
  781.  @brendanthompson2082  Sorry Brendan, I don't recognise that characterisation at all. I fear you may be over estimating your influence over a woman.
    1
  782.  @K92834  I mean that ultimately the female believes the relationship is essentially about her. So her needs should be given primacy over his.  Women don't care what a man wants. They may say that they do, but that is only to the extent it aligns with (or promotes) what the female wants. So essentially even that circles back to it being 'about' her. The majority of relationships are men ministering to women's (never ending) needs in some way or another. Men really do not ask for much from women in return.  Sadly most of what a man does is taken for granted, which makes the female even more miserable as they're unable to experience gratitude and the male miserable because they're constantly cast as either a villain or an incompetent.
    1
  783.  @K92834  You're welcome. Thanks for the courteous exchange.
    1
  784.  @kalbsleber  Gives me no pleasure to hear that my friend! Hopefully you can console yourself in the fact that you are far from alone. I would say it's most men's experience.
    1
  785. Just warn the boys about female perverts already. What was with all the hand-wringing and agonising over this from Hansen? Stop prioritising a grown adults feelings over a child's safety. We don't have this issue when the sexes are reversed. Clearly women's feelings are considered more important than the safety of boys. Okay...I get it...we pander to womens feelings in literally EVERY other facet of society. That's how our culture works. But NOT here. That is a hard line.
    1
  786. Who cares if he's a doctor? What's that got to do with the price of fish? His profession has no relevance to the cause. All that sign did was demonstrate how much he thought of himself. Which-not accidentally-is something these protestors all seem to have in common. "I'm a doctor therefore I've got to be right!"
    1
  787. Thanks. We're awesome. Signed: The Brits.
    1
  788. Don't worry. I'm 5 minutes in and a more attractive, younger female officer has arrived to assist. I'm sure that will calm Becky down a bit.
    1
  789. Well....thats the last Jack Black film I'll be watching!
    1
  790. REEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!111ONEONE
    1
  791. Not many fatties kicking about in the 1970's tbf. Granted they were scruffy as hell but they were a lot thinner. Unbelievable how fat we are as a nation now.
    1
  792. Careful. You sound like you could sleep-walk straight into the next simping opportunity that presents itself.
    1
  793. Probably gaslighting. Everything else is.
    1
  794.  @manifest2203  It's not "as simple as that". Far from it. Bringing in resources for the family is just basic adulting. Beyond that, anyone placing focus on being part of a 'power couple' is telling you they have a preoccupation with how the couple is perceived by third parties. Rather than how well that couple functions as a unit, how they co-operate with one another, how their values are aligned etc.  They're also (essentially) putting you on notice they won't be tolerating any bumps in the road where you may experience downturns or hardship. Now, I actually don't have a problem with this-people are at liberty to negotiate the partnership they want-I just don't believe it's compatible with certain forms of relationship. It emphatically is NOT an acceptable basis for marriage for instance. The marriage vows quite clearly disqualify it. But PROBABLY it's not compatible with any sensible form of LTR either.
    1
  795.  @jonrazo7912  What this guy said, too!👍
    1
  796. Women don't have interesting internal worlds. Basically.
    1
  797. She was a domestic abuser though and they had a child together.
    1
  798. ​ @theinngu5560  It's the morally right thing to do but it absolutely should NOT be a legal requirement. He's lost the plot on this point and comes across as completely stupid. It's a very longstanding principle of English law that you are under no legal obligation to report other peoples criminality. This is especially true of family members. Indeed it was once the case that spouses could not be compelled to testify against one another in court cases. Theres a very, very good reason for this and you depart from it at society's peril. This is NOT Soviet Russia. A duty to report arises in very particular cases (typically public office, where the role is assumed as part of employment). Aside from that you leave well alone. It is a moral obligation. This makes the man sound utterly clueless about very important tenets of British culture.
    1
  799. @James-o2u9x On the contrary. I'm intensely relaxed about personal flaws. I think this is a seismic defect however. I understand why Connor doesnt understand the problem. He's a young man who doesnt know very much and is trying to signal to his interviewee that he's allied to him and his cause. I am absolutely astonished that a 67 year old accomplished English patriot doesn't understand the issue however. It was a horribly telling exchange.
    1
  800.  @danielgreen4213  No again. Your'e wrong both in fact and in law. He's talking about a positive legal duty to accuse a (family member) of a criminal offence. Nothing to do with "aiding and abetting" them, which naturally, would be a crime in its own right. You can't alter the nature of his statement by adding clauses to it that were not present I'm afraid. He said what he said. I'm sorry but it not only exposes him, it exposes Connor and also the numerous commenters who don't identify a profound issue with it. If you create a law like this you change the nature of English law and society in a material way.
    1
  801.  @DavidMartin-ym2te  What you're saying betrays a fundamental ignorance of law. I'm not saying that to put you down, just explaining that you don't understand what you're talking about. It's one thing for punters on a YouTube channel to fail to understand the issue. For a sophisticated English patriot with aspirations of Parliament/PM however it is quite another. Frightening stuff.
    1
  802. ​ @anonanon7553  Yeah I know. Some work can't be billed. A lot of work isn't done but is billed anyway (ie the firm just pretends its been done and claims it fraudulently). Other work is carried out on a flat fee basis and so the hourly rate becomes immaterial.  The whole point though is that the $1300 headline figure isn't what the lawyer actually earns as take-home pay. It's an horrendously naive misreading of remuneration packages. The $1300 figure is what the employer hires the lawyer out to the client for. But clearly the employer has all sorts of overheads/tax to pay. And EVEN THEN...you still don't use the $1300 figure as a metric for valuing your time outside of work/on dates/sat on the toilet etc. An employer can't bill a client $1300 per hour for you to take random women out on dates. It's a seductive idea for the more ego driven, but in reality it has zero value to a client.
    1
  803.  @anonanon7553  Yeah I know. Some work can't be billed. A lot of work isn't done but is billed anyway (ie the firm just pretends its been done and claims it fraudulently). Other work is carried out on a flat fee basis and so the hourly rate becomes immaterial. The whole point though is that the $1300 headline figure isn't what the lawyer actually earns as take-home pay. It's an horrendously naive misreading of remuneration packages. The $1300 figure is what the employer hires the lawyer out to the client for. But clearly the employer has all sorts of overheads/tax to pay. And EVEN THEN...you still don't use the $1300 figure as a metric for valuing your time outside of work/on dates/sat on the toilet etc. An employer can't bill a client $1300 per hour for you to take random women out on dates. It's a seductive idea for the more ego driven, but in reality it has zero value to a client.
    1
  804.  @anonanon7553  Yeah I know. Some work can't be billed. A lot of work isn't done but is billed anyway (ie the firm just pretends its been done and claims it fraudulently). Other work is carried out on a flat fee basis and so the hourly rate becomes immaterial. The whole point though is that the $1300 headline figure isn't what the lawyer actually earns as take-home pay. It's an horrendously naive misreading of remuneration packages. The $1300 figure is what the employer hires the lawyer out to the client for. But clearly the employer has all sorts of overheads/tax to pay. And EVEN THEN...you still don't use the $1300 figure as a metric for valuing your time outside of work/on dates/sat on the toilet etc. An employer can't bill a client $1300 per hour for you to take random women out on dates. It's a seductive idea for the more ego driven, but in reality it has zero value to a client.
    1
  805.  @anonanon7553  Yeah I know. Some work can't be billed. A lot of work isn't done but is billed anyway (ie the firm just pretends its been done and claims it fraudulently). Other work is carried out on a flat fee basis and so the hourly rate becomes immaterial. The whole point though is that the 1.3K headline figure isn't what the lawyer actually earns as take-home pay. It's an horrendously naive misreading of remuneration packages. The 1.3K figure is what the employer hires the lawyer out to the client for. But clearly the employer has all sorts of overheads/tax to pay. And EVEN THEN...you still don't use the 1.3K figure as a metric for valuing your time outside of work/going on dates/sat on the toilet etc. An employer can't bill a client 1.3K per hour for you to take random women out on dates. It's a seductive idea for the more ego driven, but in reality it has zero value to a client.
    1
  806.  @bearclaw5115  Well if it's literally encroaching on work time and he loses an amount of money commensurate with the time lost then his hourly rate is literally what it's costing him. At least in terms of a loss of opportunity to earn. I already made that clear though.
    1
  807.  @LisaCulton  No. Most women can't. And THAT's all there is to it. That's literally why I made the point in the first place. I repeat; your comments are mindless and idiotic. Consistently.
    1
  808. ​ @LisaCulton  No. Most women can't. You're literally describing a minority of women. Lol. When the meaning of words becomes an obstacle you have no argument I'm afraid. Just words that don't make sense. As I stated earlier, your posts are mindless and idiotic. Consistently.
    1
  809.  @Sb1214nl  Indeed. So the question becomes why on earth did she return to him? Was it; A) She was an abused female suffering the crippling effects of long term coercive control and she was simply paralysed to detach herself from Brian out of fear; or B) She wanted to keep vlogging about her life and Brian was part of that process (both as a driver and a prop in the photos). Yes, yes, yes... he had dirty feet and yes they hit each other a lot...but what's the harm in a bit of mutual violence in a confined environment for weeks on end...it's more important to get content for the gram, right?! RIGHT???!!!!
    1
  810. You're kind of missing the point. You think you're saying something different by presenting a woman who "wants sex"...but that woman ALSO wants emotional investment, support, financial contribution etc etc ad infinitum. That she wants sex is nice for the man. And that it's something she enjoys means thats nice for her also-it doesn't represent anything onerous. But let's not pretend she's not still charging the same price on the other end in terms of all the other things she wants. And if she's not getting all the standard female stuff she demands, she'll probably go off the idea of sex pretty soon too. So we're back to the beginning. You're not presenting a scenario as interesting or novel as you thought you were tbh.
    1
  811. Indeed. A simple "I 'ate you, Butler!" in the style of Blakey would have sufficed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M2EO3ZltYs
    1
  812. What a useless human being.
    1
  813.  @demonkingbadger6689  Interesting! And very weird if true. What strange times we live in.
    1
  814.  @immanuelcan3310  Yeah. Noticed this absolutely on-the-spot. Hopeless cause.
    1
  815.  @autarko  Naturally. However, moving things along (being as time doesn't stand still and relationships progress)...once she's got him on the hook legally, if he doesn't start jumping through flowery hoops the "attraction" frequently stops there too. If she sees her friends are getting flowers for instance. And she's not. Just being real.
    1
  816. 🤣"Borderline misogynist" Like borderline personality disorder. "I've got borderline misogyny".
    1
  817.  @yikes6263  Nah. It's a London thing.
    1
  818.  @supr_9661  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  819.  @buffcommie942  Literally couldn't care less about your input tbh.
    1
  820.  @buffcommie942  Merely evidence of dismissal tbh.
    1
  821.  @stevehaddon151  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  822.  @stevehaddon151  Don't cry.
    1
  823. Pobody's Nerfect.
    1
  824. I think "narcissism" is probably over diagnosed now thanks to the proliferation of internet 'experts'. That allied to a seemingly insatiable appetite for hearing about 'narcissists' means we never hear the end of it. It's just supply and demand.  In any event, I'm not convinced that narcissism isn't just within a range of 'normal' human behaviours. At an extreme end no doubt (a particular form of selfishness) -and clearly unpleasant to endure-but still within a range of normal behaviours nonetheless. I'd conclude by adding that most male/female heterosexual relationships exhibit this general type of behaviour to some extent. Broadly speaking the contract seems to be the female offering the male the job of keeping her happy. Her (myriad) wants are given primacy and his (comparatively few) wants are largely marginalised and treated as unreasonable demands. This is then cosigned by society at large as the 'correct' state of co-existence.
    1
  825. Starkey about 50% too shouty in this one.
    1
  826. ​ @rhuiden4086  Agree. At the very heart of the matter is that women don't have very interesting internal lives (compared to men). You only have to look at the things they value and how easily they become bored. They're fundamentally consumers rather than producers.  Because of this their instinct is to insert themselves at the centre of a relationship and make the relationship about them. Men are typically awarded the "job" of keeping the woman happy. Men need to resist this at all costs. They need to insist that a woman takes responsibility for her own happiness. Anything short of this is (essentially) akin to dating a child and more needs to be done to shame women for thinking this is ok. It isn't. Ps...women: If you're bored, it's because YOU'RE a boring person.
    1
  827. Said in her insufferable accent.  Stunning and brave, Lucy!
    1
  828.  @LisaCulton  No it isn't. They're just far more consumerist in outlook and covetous of what their friends have. They also want to be the ones controlling those decisions. Once again. Pure dishonesty from you. Channels like this (there are many others out there now) have exposed this nonsense for what it is.
    1
  829.  @annesmith9181  You abject clown. He said she wanted to build a swimming pool. Not that they did. I'd have said "no" too. And if she spends 40k on decorating with minimal equity in a property then she'll end up in a tiny apartment whether she initiates the divorce or not. Why are women so clueless?
    1
  830.  @SixteenVoice  She just has an ugly misandrist take on everything if you're unfortunate to read enough of her comments.
    1
  831.  @summerrr1  🤣 Facts!
    1
  832. It's often also cited because they believe it absolves them of liability (blame) for a breakup they caused. Ie she would have stayed and worked through it if only the guy had just been willing to fight for her! So the blame was actually with the guy! Righto! Once you realise EVERYTHING circles back to a self-centred, zero accountability model for them you begin to prioritise your sanity and refuse to participate.  @whocarescrapsa 
    1
  833. "Love means never having to say you're sorry!" Oliver Barrett IV (talking horse sh!t)
    1
  834. Yup. Canadian in fact. Stunningly beautiful and an incredible performance as Anne.
    1
  835. I'm sympathetic to a lot of the views expressed but I found the exchange at 32:11 absolutely extraordinary.  He doesn't understand why he was asked to take that out? A provision which creates a legal obligation for a private citizen to report members of their own family for a criminal offence? On pain of criminal sanction? Really? Is he serious? Does he know anything about English law or culture? This is isn't Soviet Russia thank you very much. Appalling blindspot 'twixt interviewer and interviewee here. I actually had chills.
    1
  836.  @bigdig8119  Wrong in fact and law. You're showing very basic levels of ignorance.
    1
  837.  @tarablue4472  If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. Women are already lazy enough without making sex even more one-sided. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little women actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue.
    1
  838.  @tarablue4472  If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. W0men are already lazy enough without making sex even more one-sided. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little women actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little w0men actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue.
    1
  839.  @tarablue4472  If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. Women are already lazy enough without making sex even more one-sided. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little women actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue.
    1
  840.  @tarablue4472  If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. Women are already lazy enough without making sex even more one-sided. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little women actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue.
    1
  841.  @tarablue4472  If men were going to direct energy anywhere in life I'd say that would be one of the least productive pursuits available to them. Women are already lazy enough without making sex even more one-sided. Additionally, a female orgasm isn't necessary for reproduction, whereas a male orgasm clearly is. And it's tremendously easy to achieve. We are where we are because of nature. You're defaulting to the standard, lazy female position of: "men need to do more". Fortunately the tide is changing somewhat now and the culture is starting to shine a light on female behaviour and how little women actually do in relationships (across the board) relative to how much they expect in return. It's a very good thing indeed and long overdue.
    1
  842. "..or whatever the FU©K that was earlier!" 🤣 Gold!
    1
  843.  @lhistoireenvideo5877  Fair comment! Your move, Monster rat!
    1
  844.  @JohnSmithEx  I think you're confusing "sour" with realistic. It's not that deep. The OP's comment is self serving. Beyond that we've no idea of it's veracity. Orion literally says men love women even when they don't get this support (and typically they don't). This confuses women into imagining they must be a very helpful and supportive partner. After all, why else would their husband love them?  They can only process the thought through their own experience of the world....ie if their partner wasn't supportive of her she would withdraw her 'love' from him. Ergo the fact he loves her must be evidence she's really supportive. Nb their delusion typically goes one step further than "supportive" and they believe they "always putting themselves last". Thats what you'll hear a lot anyway. Usually none of this is actually true though.
    1
  845.  @JohnSmithEx  Not a very thoughtful response I'm afraid. It also demonstrates a very high level of naivety. I won't develop the argument further in light of that second factor. Trust you understand. 👍
    1
  846.  @LARA-sg4bt  You're talking out of your non-binary, gender fluid ass, now with respect. I don't view them as "villains". I view them very much as humans. THAT's the entire point. Women benefit when men dream about them being more than (ie better than) human. You don't dream about what they're NOT. You sound butt hurt tbh. In addition to a little too needy for everyone to hear about your "success" with women. 🤣
    1
  847.  @LARA-sg4bt  So I'm saying to literally treat them as human. Ie not to dream about them. But you (wrongly) conflate that with treatment as a "villain". Presumably because it doesn't amount to preferential treatment.  All of which leads me to suspect you are actually female. Or a very feminine man. Lol. ☺
    1
  848. It's just the law of diminishing returns. Re-packaged. All of this stuff is already out there and has been since forever.
    1
  849.  @Resnullia  And yet I feel no pressure to trade insults as I've seen your profile photo. 🤣
    1
  850. Random internet account diagnosing fake illness. What could possibly go wrong?
    1
  851.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone.  It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  852.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  853.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  854.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  855.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  856.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of women are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  857.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of vv0men are fully on board with w0kery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  858.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of w0m£n are fully on board with w0kery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  859.  @amandabell8827  "Most" implies upwards of 50%. I don't say this simply to be antagonistic but I disagree with you. I genuinely believe more than 50% of females are fully on board with wokery and the culture of taking-offence-at-everything-on-behalf-of-everyone. It's incredibly dysfunctional behaviour. Sorry, but there it is.
    1
  860. Good old Captain Pugwash.
    1
  861.  @artisticagi  Women should have reasonable needs and expectations of their partner. Stop straw-manning. It's such a typical female response. The issue is women have VASTLY more needs, expectations and DEMANDS of men than men do of women. It's a near comical mismatch. It isn't that men ignore those needs, it's that it gets to a stage where their needs get so preposterous it becomes impossible to satisfy their constantly ungrateful ass. As well you know if you'd bothered to examine the state of the culture or self reflected at all.  It's precisely why channels like this are getting traction and its long overdue.
    1
  862.  @meepo4212  No you don't.
    1
  863.  @lawrencekelli  Zip it, Kel.
    1
  864.  @Leoo117  Being real, it's just an entitlement thing. It's not much deeper than that. Women have a far greater sense of entitlement (to most things) than men.
    1
  865.  @JohnBoy234  No idea really. To the extent they're both "knowledge economy" jobs it might be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will principally be the same thing (high commercial rents, recruitment costs, professional/regulatory compliance etc). Investment banking is more gambling however so I don't know how much they have to set aside to capitalise themselves against trading losses. Possibly nothing given that they rely on the taxpayer to bail them out.
    1
  866.  @chica212  There are different types of partner. Equity partner/salary partner. In any event, it doesn't follow that if your firm charges you out at $1300 per hour you will take home more than that just because you're a partner. It depends on all sorts of variables; not least the profitability of the law firm overall and your equity share/salary package. It was a silly analogy to begin with for several reasons. It's just defective thinking to suppose your time away from work is "worth' the same as your time at work, in terms of a dollar amount.
    1
  867.  @JohnBoy234  I couldn't say definitively. In as far as they're both part of the knowledge economy however then I suppose it could be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will be similar (big corporate rents, recruitment, professional and regulatory compliance). Investment banking has a large gambling element to it however. I don't know to what extent banks are required to capitalise to guard against trading losses. (Possibly not at all given that it's the taxpayer that typically bails them out).
    1
  868.  @JohnBoy234  I couldn't say definitively. In as far as they're both part of the knowledge economy however then I suppose it could be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will be similar (big corporate rents, recruitment, professional and regulatory compliance). Investment banking has a large gambling element to it however. I don't know to what extent banks are required to capitalise to guard against trading losses. (Possibly not at all given that it's the taxpayer that typically bails them out).
    1
  869.  @JohnBoy234  I couldn't say definitively. In as far as they're both part of the knowledge economy however then I suppose it could be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will be similar (big corporate rents, recruitment, professional and regulatory compliance). Investment banking has a large chance element to it however. I don't know to what extent banks are required to capitalise to guard against trading losses. (Possibly not at all given that it's the taxpayer that typically bails them out).
    1
  870.  @chica212  It's all speculation of course. By your math: $1300 per hr x 8hrs day x 5 days wk x 52 wks yr = $2,7000,000. While that's entirely possible, on balance its unlikely. Hence my comment.
    1
  871.  @JohnBoy234  I couldn't say definitively. In as far as they're both part of the knowledge economy however then I suppose it could be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will be similar (big commercial rents, software, recruitment, professional and regulatory compliance).
    1
  872.  @chica212  Yeah I know. I'm just pointing out that you were in error given that you simultaneously claimed the $1300 hourly figure was likely too low. The two figures didn't equate.
    1
  873.  @JohnBoy234  I couldn't say definitively. In as far as they're both part of the knowledge economy however then I suppose it could be in the same ballpark. Their overheads will be similar (expensive office leases, recruitment, professional and regulatory compliance). Investment banking has a large gambling element to it however. I don't know to what extent banks are required to capitalise to guard against trading losses. (Possibly not at all given that it's the taxpayer that typically bails them out).
    1
  874.  @melocomanTV  Yup. Typical self-absorbed nonsense. Nothing exists outside of them.
    1
  875. Q. What should I do with my life? A. Buy a T-Shirt
    1
  876. Of course, but thats a universal truth. It isn't gendered. Everyone could improve by being more stable. She could also be highly unstable (its very frequently the case) but we don't examine that aspect.  If we're honest men would do FAR better to examine exactly what sort of unstable creature is coming swinging their way to begin with!
    1
  877.  @jaythenihilist4689  I am a man and yes, I agree with all of that. It's observable fact. My post didn't contradict anything you said.
    1
  878.  @EliShh-n2n  It's not only true but women are the most complicit in it's being allowed to function. Happily, both things are becoming increasingly common knowledge. ☺
    1
  879.  @lostandfound5145  Please leave and for God's sake do NOT run straight into another mans arms. You see this so often-as was the case here. That poor man does NOT deserve you bringing your toxicity, abuse and instability into their lives. Women (particularly) seem to feel so entitled to do this rather than admitting they're horrible, toxic, irresponsible people too. They need to go away and work on themselves ON THEIR OWN to resolve their issues. If they don't, you have very compelling evidence the woman is comfortable as an abuser herself.
    1
  880.  @monikanikolova1099  That's something a defence lawyer would probably have got an acquittal for however, prior to the DNA advancements. Very powerful evidence for the defence and any charging decision at the time would probably have meant he walked free.  Criticism of the investigation is valid but it's important to see it in it's proper context.
    1
  881. Just warn the boys about female perverts already. What was with all the hand-wringing and agonising over this from Hansen? Stop prioritising a grown adults feelings over a child's safety. We don't have this issue when the sexes are reversed. Clearly women's feelings are considered more important than the safety of boys. Okay...I get it...we pander to womens feelings in literally EVERY other facet of society. That's how our culture works. But NOT here. That is a hard line.
    1
  882. No. You're naive to think that. More a case of Dr Grande running cover for her poor character by painting a naive, flowery portrait of her. "She had always put others first" etc etc. How often do you hear this garbage when women are discussed? I mean she was married previously and left her husband after a couple of years so she clearly wasn't putting anyone ahead of herself there. And she wanted to be a stripper but had always been "unlucky in love". I mean; great marriage material right there. Any man would be lucky to have her! Time for lazy, selfish women to be called out in the same way we call men out.
    1
  883.  @lifeisblessed4802  That's cobblers I'm afraid. The difference is legit millionaires live modest out of choice. Drug dealer millionaires don't have that choice. If they live modest it's because they have to otherwise anything flash gets confiscated off em under proceeds of crime legislation. Sorry to burst your bubble.
    1
  884.  @TheMCat11  Yes, I'm saying thats the alternative. But it brings the relationship to an end. Just being clear about how these things play out. You retain 'control' (if you want to look at it that way) but probability wise it still ends. In other words you don't "level up" and then complete the game as winner. You just defer when the relationship ends a bit.
    1
  885. WTF is going on with that Court Officer's twitching face?
    1
  886. As others have said, you're not alone in this. Albeit the knowledge is earth shattering-it doesn't actually affect the one key thing that needs to be in place for a decent relationship. The woman HAS to be able to value and appreciate male company for it's own sake.  All off the red pill knowledge/blue pill ignorance is secondary to this. Meaning you could be a completely self maximised red piller or a totally oblivious "high value" blue piller....you will still end up in a miserable relationship if the woman can't recognise a goodness in your personhood outside of serving her own needs. Irrespective of what other "value" you bring to her life. I believe most women can't do this, sadly. That's my experience anyway. And it's one of profound sadness. However it does allow you to value the few who can in a whole new way and this in turn can help to offset red pill despair somewhat.  Don't get me wrong, ALL of the learned red pill knowledge must still be applied to them, but I think in realising the rarity of them possessing that one quality you can begin to build something meaningful that is reconcilable with your own sense of self respect and self worth. Remember, red pillers will self maximise to the moon and blue pillers will do the same, (just less consciously).They'll BOTH still end up miserable if the woman is simply unable to appreciate male company for it's own sake. You would have found this out one day in a state of blue pill ignorance or in a state of red pill awareness. It wouldn't have mattered.
    1
  887. Well said. That's how it works. Take it or leave it.
    1
  888.  @justRight72  They don't need a Civil War. They're not perennial victims, no matter how it's portrayed. They decided to join it. They can decide to leave it too. It's on them. That's literally my point. Thats how it works. Take it or leave it.
    1
  889. Men are sick of this type of thing. We all know women like this exist (and are a serious danger) and yet it's never truly recognised by our gynocentric society. This would probably never even reached trial if the roles were reversed. The tweets/texts etc alone-if they'd been authored by a man-would have resulted in him being regarded as an abusive and controlling partner. Well if thats what it makes a man-thats what it makes a female too.
    1
  890. Men are sick of this type of thing. We all know women like this exist (and are a serious danger) and yet it's never truly recognised by our gynocentric society. This would probably never even reached trial if the roles were reversed. The tweets/texts etc alone-if they'd been authored by a man-would have resulted in him being regarded as an abusive and controlling partner. Well if thats what it makes a man-thats what it makes a female too.
    1
  891. Men are sick of this type of thing. We all know w0men like this exist (and are a serious danger) and yet it's never truly recognised by our gynocentric society. This would probably never even reached trial if the roles were reversed. The tweets/texts etc alone-if they'd been authored by a man-would have resulted in him being regarded as an abusive and controlling partner. Well if thats what it makes a man-thats what it makes a f3male too.
    1
  892.  @finleys_mama5891  😂👍
    1
  893. Amazing support!  Imagine if we'd only lost 3-1!😳
    1
  894. Just tell her to F*ck off! The game's too obvious now. It's all been laid bare.
    1
  895. Poor take from you for a change, Konstantin. Throughout history women's behaviour was supposed to incentivise men's performance and vice versa. Unfortunately nowadays women's behaviour does very little to incentivise men's performance. In that sense men's rights movements do have a very valid role. I take your point about biological hardwiring (making male sympathy plays meaningless), but beyond that there's much good work that they do. Also Jordan Peterson-for all the good he has achieved-is emphatically NOT a masculine man. His daughter is proof conclusive of that.
    1
  896. You were determining how biddable he was. You will have acted differently for other men when you were just contemplating flings etc. For a longer term relationship you will have been screening him to make sure he would prostrate himself for you and put you first. It's fairly standard female stuff.
    1
  897. 6:34 They want to be seen for who they are "deep down inside" just like they couldn't give AF who a man is "deep down inside". Lol.
    1
  898. It's more profitable to algo-speak. Make it make cents.
    1
  899.  @Voting-does-nothing  Youtube is a conundrum. It's managed to be democratic enough to get an important red pill message popularised (that wouldn't otherwise have been), but it's also intent on squashing it.  Theres perverse incentives everywhere. The better messages are often suppressed and the junk-food ones (using the 'correct' (inane) speech) get pushed.
    1
  900.  @Voting-does-nothing  Youtube is a conundrum. It's managed to be democratic enough to get an important red pill message popularised (that wouldn't otherwise have been), but it's also intent on squashing it. Theres perverse incentives everywhere. The better messages are often suppressed and the junk-food ones (using the 'correct' (inane) speech) get pushed.
    1
  901.  @superwoman6413  Yup. Deftly corrected.
    1
  902. Quite the opposite in fact. It's a privilege that comes exclusively from being female.
    1
  903.  @amcl7  Simply not the reality of UK courts I'm afraid. It's dishonest of you to cite exceptions to try to prove a rule. The sentencing of males and females for identical crimes is virtually always more lenient towards females.
    1
  904.  @agm5424  No. It's more a function of them not having to "grow up" beyond a certain stage of development. They can outsource a great deal (including rational thinking) so they do.
    1
  905. Straight up weirdo vibes from this chick.
    1
  906.  @edenbreckhouse  Well said. Women believe what they want to believe.
    1
  907. 2:07 Both sides getting less of what they want from each other = accurate Both sides being "cheated" of this = not accurate. "Cheated" implies being unfairly being denied something you have a legitimate expectation to. There's very few genuinely legitimate expectations out there amongst these broads.
    1
  908.  @peternolan4107  Don't cry, Peter. 🥲
    1
  909.  @M0viLover  Yeah, I'm not sure that counts tbh. A 7 year relationship where you broke up 3x total. It sounds like your experience is a succession of short to mids, generally. Just being real.
    1
  910. @3BK235Y 😉👍
    1
  911. @3BK235Y 😉👍
    1
  912. The usual gynocentric media narrative in full effect. Of course it's a perfectly appropriate thing to say. It's the very initial stages of an investigation and literally nothing has been proved. It'd be alarming if she said anything else.  We've reached the stage now where you're effectively forbidden from saying anything which suggests women can be guilty of wrongdoing. Despite the absolute tidal wave of evidence to the contrary. It's extremely worrying for due process.
    1
  913. Acceptance of the natural order we inhabit - yes Acceptance of the legal order we inhabit - err.....you'll have to do a LOT better than that! Lol! Total unjustified gynocentrism. Basically I think most people can achieve red pill acceptance of evolved nature. "Take it up with Darwin" etc etc. Doing anything else could drive you insane. What any sane man should have an issue with however is subjecting himself to societal laws that grotesquely benefit women. That's the completely insoluble part. Don't hate. Of course not. And look for common ground where you can find it. But when you reach this stage it remains an impasse, because NO woman will relinquish all the laws that unjustly benefit her. Even when you lay it out plainly and dispassionately. Simple as that. I think this is the limit of the channel's usefulness. Good that you made it this far but please don't imagine you've stumbled upon some magically fair re-settlement between the sexes.
    1
  914.  @dharmadasa66  Yes, she's absolutely saying that. Without any sense of irony. And that-of all the things this channel reveals-should be the scariest thing of all. Compared to the average wife, the average husband is not a lot of work. Women demand far more attention/time/resources/emotional labour than men do. Given how much women want to be "taken care of", it's far FAR more accurate to say that women have daddy issues than men have mommy issues. That's literally how women think though. As though the husband is "needy" and by comparison they're a selfless, productive entity that just constantly keeps giving and asks for nothing in return.  For the most part they're completely blind to their own neediness and totally contemptuous of the male's contribution. And because they think like that it's insoluble I'm afraid.
    1
  915.  @Irishcoleen948  No, women typically get the children as a default. Men get "visitation". Another dishonest contribution, but this time even more obvious.👍
    1
  916. @ No, women typically get the children as a default. Men get "visitation". Another dishonest contribution, but this time even more obvious.👍
    1
  917. ​ @Irishcoleen948  Women tend to be awarded custody. Men get "visitation". As well you know.
    1
  918.  @sarahrobertson634  That's a completely fair comment. The corollary of it however is that women aren't entitled to mens tax dollars for their myriad and ever expanding demands of big government. Men=net tax payers, women=net tax consumers. Women state men aren't entitled to their attention yet consider themselves perfectly entitled to mens labour. That's where women typically lose sight of the argument however. Obviously. No axe to grind btw. I don't want female attention and I don't want to subsidise feckless, entitled females either.
    1
  919.  @sarahrobertson634  You've failed, Sarah. All your arguments amount to is "women do x therefore y". As though this trumps everything. I might as well counter with: women can't give birth without men providing semen. Or, most farmers are men, ergo if they didn't farm then women/society would starve. Or most builders are men, ergo if they didnt build and maintain buildings, people would be exposed to the elements...so they wouldn't even live until old age let alone have hospitals for women to nurse the elderly in. They're all pointless arguments. They have no bearing on the only material point. I'm going to leave it there as, in fairness, I suspect you lack the education required to have the discussion. By contrast my profession (attorney) utilises critical argument on a daily basis and allows me to see right through your nonsense. Incidentally it's telling how you avoid the question about your son. I'd be ashamed too if I was you. Lol.😘
    1
  920.  @sarahrobertson634  You're done, Sarah. You've been rode hard and put away wet. Simply not worth my time.
    1
  921.  @sarahrobertson634  Uproarious stuff. You can have my share that I don't want. Haven't you got fake patients to attend to? Lol.
    1
  922.  @beanallene  I don't believe women disregard mens emotions because "society has taught them men don't have emotions". Women KNOW men have emotions. They don't disregard them either for that matter. Quite the contrary; they're very attuned to them as this allows them to manipulate them to their own advantage. The most accurate way of putting it is that they do not care about mens emotions, where those emotions offer no perceivable opportunity for advantage to the female. If a man exhibits any emotion which the female sees no personal advantage in, compassion is set at zero and it does not move. Women are interested in emotions that benefit them.
    1
  923.  @W47689  Sport is something people play for fun. Thats my point. The dedication shown is to an activity people do for recreational enjoyment, so by any measure t's demonstrably less of a sacrifice.
    1
  924.  @adamhalcyon3393  Sport is something people play for fun. Thats my point. The dedication shown is to an activity people do for recreational enjoyment, so by any measure t's demonstrably less of a sacrifice.
    1
  925.  @rillyjo5810  Yeah, I know. He failed to make it in 2009 I (now) understand.
    1
  926.  overlordfemto7523  Defective logic. Not even going to waste my breath mate.
    1
  927.  overlordfemto7523  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  928. Nice! It's like society completely forgot that women can be total a$$holes (whereas in actual fact they have an almost limitless capacity for it). For so long men were told that any criticism of females was toxic misogyny. Only criticism of men was valid. Much more of the type of forbearance you've exhibited here is going to be needed as a re-calibration of the social narrative is finally occurring. Women will be shocked to learn just how ludicrous and unappealing they've become.
    1
  929. Possibly. Although realistically the dynamic may well have continued up until they became married. She may have postponed exit until then, when she could have left with assets and money. There's lots of things going on here. I've no doubt she wanted to leave but she probably wanted to have control over the conditions of her leaving. And obviously the doctor will have had a conflicting interest to hers.
    1
  930. This is possibly the most chilling aspect of it. Everyone praising her for coming through the trauma (rightly so) but unless she can appreciate the fact her mom is a horrible, irresponsible abusive adult herself then she's only learned half a lesson. Women have shared responsibility in creating toxic environments. They're not perennial faultless victims. Unless you can integrate that knowledge then you risk perpetuating these horrendous crimes.
    1
  931.  @SherryONeill  The adjective is redundant in that sentence.
    1
  932.  @BOOSIEHUBBARD  Once more in English, please.
    1
  933.  @BOOSIEHUBBARD  I'm sorry, Sir. I'm struggling to understand your point!👍
    1
  934. TL;DR version: flattery will get you everywhere.  For a while, anyway. But the price is you'll create a monster. Make no mistake about that.
    1
  935. Too lazy, sadly.
    1
  936. On one level they definitely want that. It needs to be acknowledged. And simultaneously, on another level, they don't. It "disappoints" them. You couldn't make this ish up. For all these channels elucidate (and they're useful-make no mistake-they shine a light) the basic problem is insoluble. I think you either decide to "live with it" or you don't. Literally.
    1
  937.  @EE12CSVT  Strikes me as an increasingly wise choice!
    1
  938. (Actual) high value women may select men on that basis, but that is only a condition of selection. Unless those women are prepared to carry their OWN financial weight, they're not actually high value women. They're children. And men don't want to sleep with children. It's perverse and illegal.
    1
  939.  @matt5977  That's absolutely correct. Unfortunately the doctrine of 'spousal abuse' has become so frequently invoked (and misused) by women, that we have to equally be prepared to accept men using it in court proceedings too. That has to be right. To your point; women should ALWAYS "walk away" in the face of abuse, however they often choose not to and instead blow the mans head off. In those circumstances they'll frequently be found not guilty of murder. Women especially typically believe this to be a just outcome. Well..that same standard then has to apply to a man that does the same. It's only fair. It's a stupid approach but we've got there because (realistically) we've traditionally been overly sympathetic towards female killers who should have been dealt with more harshly.
    1
  940. 2:30 No Kerry, she battered someone over the head while they were in bed.
    1
  941.  @Theineluctable_SOME_CANT  It's not TECHNICALLY theft. Correct. However, had she been apprehended prior to returning the bike (a clear possibility) she would have been very hard pressed to make this distinction successfully. Which makes her a profoundly stupid lawyer. Explanation by a fellow lawyer who is not a psychopath.
    1
  942.  inconspicuous-new--account  It's not TECHNICALLY theft. Correct. However, had she been apprehended prior to returning the bike (a clear possibility) she would have been very hard pressed to make this distinction successfully. Which makes her a profoundly stupid lawyer. Explanation by a fellow lawyer who is not a psychopath.
    1
  943.  inconspicuous-new--account  You're wrong on two fronts there. Firstly it is simply an idiotic legal position for any lawyer to put themselves in. If she had been apprehended whilst out on the bike (let's say the police were informed and she was seen by them using it), theres only her word that she would have intended to bring it back. You know. As opposed to keeping it or even just abandoning it because she couldn't be bothered bringing it back. Yes, of course she could argue she had planned to return it but theres a clear litigation risk this would not be believed by a court. And if she was convicted of a dishonesty offence then she'd be barred from practice. As I say, it's just idiotic. Secondly you're wrong in law. Her psychopathy wouldn't provide a defence to the dishonesty element. If anything it would probably be evidence she didn't particularly care about the dishonesty element and make her look more likely to be guilty. In any event, "how people were going to react to her" would not be an issue that fell to be determined. At best it would be a matter for the sentencing stage (ie the degree of pain caused to the victim). This second point is trivial compared to the first point though. It was an idiotic thing for a lawyer to do, psychopath or not. There are only two scenarios here. Either 1. she understood all of this in the precise way that I've described (ie as any competent lawyer would understand it) and took an idiotic risk, or 2. she didnt understand it as I've described because she's an incompetent lawyer.
    1
  944. ​ inconspicuous-new--account  I'm from England. Your analysis is flowery but nothing I hadn't considered. It strikes me you're more concerned with exhibiting your knowledge of the law of theft than actually applying grown up common sense. "Tell me you're young without telling me you're young" etc etc. Criminal law isn't particularly difficult to understand. I have no doubt she was capable of conjuring with all of those concepts quite easily. It doesn't change the fact it would be a stupid thing for her to do. If you got apprehended prior to returning the item (not likely but not impossible) you would have every chance of ending up in court for theft. That is an absurd position to put yourself in as a lawyer, regardless of your neurobiology.  The potential upside is pedalling around on a rusty old bike for a few hours. The potential downside is possibly losing your licence to practice and consequently your livelihood. You can't overturn that reality I'm afraid.😊
    1
  945.  @captaincat1743  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  946. Absolutely. It's the whole premise of this series too! Do everything for women's approval otherwise you're somehow defective. 🤣  A hugely significant number of women are actually worth avoiding, never mind "qualifying" yourself to.
    1
  947. Logically flawless, however the reality is their wild abandonment is triggered by ideas of gain and fomo. It's completely effortless to them when those conditions are in place. Once they've got the financial commitment, kids, house and know they can retain all of that post divorce however it becomes a case of diminishing returns. No more to gain. No fomo. Thus it takes effort to get freaky. And if you haven't noticed, they're not keen on effort. It's not sexy. It isn't a 'vibe'. Sorry to say but there really are no answers in the space. It's well meaning and all but it's not going to move the dial.
    1
  948. Indeed. A simple "I 'ate you, Butler!" in the style of Blakey would have sufficed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M2EO3ZltYs
    1
  949. Yes. Thats a start. And attempt to have empathy for the person you're "disappointed" by because you're probably a consistently MASSIVE disappointment to him too. It's not good to constantly portray yourself as a victim in your own mind.
    1
  950.  @valentinavsl4148  I suppose you could ask yourself how soon would you want someone to leave you if you were consistently disappointing them? That might be a starting point.
    1
  951.  @healthymindhappierlife5089  Yup.
    1
  952. It would honestly look more convincing on Roosevelt Glenn
    1
  953. Women are just as bad for telling women untruths. Women understand as well as anyone what other women want to hear is whatever makes them happy. So they fuel the problem just as badly as men, but for other reasons. Women are terrible at holding other women to account, frankly.
    1
  954. Much to be said for your musings here Orion and I largely agree. It's somewhat cursory/incomplete however. In instances where the relationship involves pooling of resources, much of that attention/time has been expended (often exhausted) in a work context first. In other words, like it or not, you've traded that energy rich portion of your partner's day in exchange for access to the resources they've brought into the household. Ie roof over your head/warmth/food etc etc. Ergo you are actually experiencing that attention, just in an indirect way. It has been sublimated into other things. And residual energy is much depleted after that. It just boils down to whether you feel that's an adequate trade-off. I think a lot of the antagonism lies there because for men it usually isn't. Men aren't bothered about a woman's resources so therefore it's more difficult to accept a sh!tty, exhausted attitude on top of that. For women I think it's different because they ARE intensely interested in the man's resources for the myriad of consumer crap they want/so they can indulge in status game p!ssing contests with their female friends etc etc. So much so that it forms a central part of their mate selection: "So what do you DO for a living?" It's fairly obvious the only way sanity can prevail is in some form of reciprocated performance. That has to be negotiated on very individual terms in each relationship. The trouble is the culture prescribes that only men have a performative burden and women have full self actualisation privilege. Worse still, that any appeal to the female to live up to a performative burden is "misogyny/patriarchy" Men would do well to consider their position very, VERY carefully in light of this.
    1
  955. I'd say women ignore it tbh. In the main. So it's red pill at best. Ultimately no solutions are offered because it's insoluble. In that sense it's indistinguishable from any other red pill content. It's just a novel formulation of already well established principles.
    1
  956. Absolute paraffins.
    1
  957. Whichever way you formulate it, they date for gain.  What Orion is describing is the placing of a performative burden on the woman. This is something they successfully re-branded as "misogyny" decades ago. So it's not going to change. They enforce a performative burden on the male. They don't discharge one themselves.
    1
  958.  @LisaCulton  The word I used was: 'women'. Just to be abundantly clear.
    1
  959. Say fair enough and ask her what her thoughts are on signing a pre-up? Bear with me: Assuming you both want children (this is virtually always the case), you're both gaining equal benefit from a union. In other words, you're not getting some unearned benefit from her-she WANTS children so she isn't doing you some sort of one-sided service in having your children. It has to be fully understood and agreed upon that the getting of a family is the main objective/benefit of marriage and that that benefit is completely MUTUAL and equitable. Once that point is established, ask her if she'd be prepared to agree to a negative financial settlement on divorce if SHE ends the marriage, or in the event of her infidelity. This would be mirrored by a similar commitment on your end. I'm just talking about the principle here (not presenting her with a formal document), for the sake of a discussion/thought experiment. In the scenario above, her concern about you leaving the marriage and "robbing" her of her youth is addressed. You're committed to the union and you agree to a financial penalty if you renege on it in future. If she says "no", you can reasonably dismiss her arguments. Her concern isn't around the risk you'll leave her in future, her concern is actually that she'll lose her optionality of leaving you in a financially advantageous way. Nb she can argue all sorts of other things (possibility you'll become abusive etc etc) in an attempt to de-rail the discussion, but resist that and point out you're not presenting her with a binding document. It's a thought experiment and you're judging her responses to gauge where her true motivations lie.
    1
  960. Like that hit button!
    1
  961. The thing is, even if you can make a technical defence of it (citing whatever exculpatory nonsense they have done), the greater point is people were motivated to GIVE/PURCHASE due to charitable inclinations. It is the harm they've done to charitable giving generally that is their horrible legacy in all of this. People will be way more suspicious of "good" causes in future. By it's nature, that harm is incalculable. We will never know. But you can guarantee they've been a force for bad rather than good. Trust is what is eroded. PS Piers' involuntary wink at 1:33 is caught on camera. To get his "exclusive" he's obviously agreed to prime the family about the questions beforehand and had their responses in advance so he can soft ball them through it. You can see him encouraging her as she gives the prepared answer to the question she was expecting. They've neglected to edit it out. Lol. Suffice to say they're opportunists and were never fit and proper people to occupy the roles.
    1
  962.  @helpmeImpoor5314  The "cornering" seems to have occurred when she possibly pretended she was pregnant. Or was pregnant and pretended to be drinking the baby to destruction. Or was drinking the baby to destruction. All while having sole discretion over whether she kept the baby or not. Or harmed the baby through drink or not. Or just tormented him pretending to harm the baby through drink.  So yes, they were both equally responsible for conception. But only she was responsible for (possibly) lying about conception. Or harming the baby. Or (possibly) lying about harming the baby. Do you understand how the "cornering" works now. I mean...of course you do. You know how this works. You're not stupid. You're just running cover for female manipulation by PRETENDING to not get it. Problem for you is that this type of behaviour is finally starting to get the push back it so readily deserves. Thanks to the internet.
    1
  963. Disagree and casual insult.
    1
  964. TL;DR What you're describing is the placing of a performative burden on the woman. This is something they successfully re-branded as "misogyny" decades ago. So it's not going to change. They enforce a performative burden on the male. They don't discharge one themselves. They date for gain.
    1
  965. Logically flawless, however the reality is their wild abandonment is triggered by ideas of gain and fomo. It's completely effortless to them when those conditions are in place. Once they've got the financial commitment, kids, house and know they can retain all of that post divorce however it becomes a case of diminishing returns. No more to gain. No fomo. Thus it takes effort to get freaky. And if you haven't noticed, they're not keen on effort. It's not sexy. It isn't a 'vibe'. Sorry to say but there really are no answers in the space. It's well meaning and all but it's not going to move the dial.
    1
  966. Logically flawless, however the reality is their wild abandonment is triggered by ideas of gain and fomo. It's completely effortless to them when those conditions are in place. Once they've got the financial commitment, kids, house and know they can retain all of that post divorce however it becomes a case of diminishing returns. No more to gain. No fomo. Thus it takes effort to get freaky. And if you haven't noticed, they're not keen on effort. It's not sexy. It isn't a 'vibe'. Sorry to say but there really are no answers in the space. It's well meaning and all but it's not going to move the dial.
    1
  967. Looks like Brian May's plughole.
    1
  968. Sweden=incorrect. The correct country is Latvia.
    1
  969.  @jenne8180  Perhaps she should have listened to what he told her. You know. The bit where he said he wouldn't be monogamous. If thats what she'd wanted. You know. D'you think?
    1
  970.  @ballen0360  This is why it's all a bit academic really. However it's laid out by YouTube "experts" and whichever novel analogies are employed to illustrate a point. Nature's gonna nature. I don't have an issue with it anymore. I accept women are the way they are just as I accept men are the way we are. Tom Brady probably is the exemplar, as you say. I simply take the view don't be dumb enough to give them marriage. Give them the freedom of their hypergamy by denying any form of commitment that comes with legal penalties. And if you are hell bent on achieving HVM status (as if thats any kind of panacea-it isn't), do it solely for your own edification. That much is vital because it's only going to make you even more of a mark.
    1
  971.  @bazookacat8421  Appreciated bro!
    1
  972.  @pro5702  I used 'codicil' because it has the power to revoke an offending part of the original formulation.  I want men to understand marriage (or more specifically divorce) is a terrible option whether women can be reached by Orion's formulation or not.  For the avoidance of doubt, I'm deliberately trying to put the point more strongly than a mere corollary.
    1
  973. To be fair you hear this in just about every context from any woman. And once you've noticed it, it's something that stays with you. You'll even hear it in the most dire circumstances eg. appeals for missing loved ones on crime docs. Mom: "My baby!" Dad: "Our baby!" You'll hear the mom say it directly in front of the father. If the father did the same I can only imagine what the reaction would be.  You have to integrate the knowledge of how women truly feel about things otherwise, sadly, you'll be walked over.
    1
  974.  @DNA350ppm  What women feel they are "burdened with" is one thing. What women are ACTUALLY burdened with BY THEIR HUSBANDS is another. And let me be rightly understood, it is a FRACTION of the performative burden they themselves place ON their husbands. That is literally the only material issue in a conversation of this kind. Whatever other sort of burdens they chose to place on themselves with "friends" "needy relatives" etc etc is entirely their own affair. Even the "burdens" of kids are complicated by women themselves. Men despair at how idiotically expensive women make kids, as they attempt to keep up with other "friends" in their intra female p!ssing contests. The level of analysis on this has been sub par for too long. Men are not "needy" relative to women. Quite, quite the opposite.
    1
  975. Most female subs have deserted ship by now. They're not fond of honest introspection.
    1
  976. Hakuna Matata
    1
  977.  @brendi9822  Yeah I get where you're coming from. He wanted to "own her" and she was a willing participant in being owned. In the sense she wanted into a lifestyle that was bought and paid for. It does require active participation on her part you know, he cant just go around "owning people" against their will. I think I made the point perfectly reasonably tbh. I shan't apologise if it triggers you-thats a you problem.
    1
  978. ​@ Sorry, you don't avoid the point that easily. The point is (quite clearly) if a man does that, he's seen as not contributing/a deadbeat. If a woman does that, she's seen as a "dedicated stay at home mom, committed to her kids" Interested you should comment on his domestic chores btw because you're not even permitted to comment on a woman's chores. If she doesn't do them it's because she's too "committed to her kids". Do you see how it works? It's just very interesting how little women value domestic chores/child rearing when it's not them doing it. But when it is them doing it they're Superwoman. Lol! Just demonstrating I can see through your nonsense. 👍
    1
  979. Exception to the rule. It's not the norm and your only object in raising it is to attempt to derail the discourse.  Find your own way to deal with it, you're a grown adult.
    1
  980.  @MsInsaneNMembrane  Pathetic.
    1
  981.  @FienDeLaere  Lol. You're just offended because you recognise the truth in it tbh. It's not that deep. Nice (failed) attempt at shaming though. 😚
    1
  982. It's also the surest way she cheats on you/ditches you sooner. Not saying thats a bad thing necessarily (on balance its good to be rid of trash sooner rather than later), just the advice is incomplete if it doesn't come with this codicil.  Put differently, it doesn't guarantee she'll respond positively to your enforcing of boundaries. It's just as likely (perhaps more likely) to see her running to a simp who's more "understanding" of her.
    1
  983. "All men are awful". Simultaneously Women = still desperate to get married. I wonder why that is? I wonder who stands to gain most from marriage? Guess who STILL dissolves most marriages? Men don't need this nonsense any longer. We can see the sh!tshow for what it is. Incidentally Orion....the opening words to Pride and Prejudice are meant to be ironic. They're the opposite of what they mean. Darcy is NOT looking for a wife. He's actually resistant to the idea and fighting his better judgment.
    1
  984.  @Kellyfox98  You're not saying anything unreasonable there. I don't know a man who wouldn't agree with that as a fair settlement between the sexes. My point however-and I made it very plainly using an extremely common example-is that most women don't behave in that way. They behave utterly hypocritically.
    1
  985.  @B__L  Pipe down a bit, yeah?
    1
  986.  @WreckItRolfe  Basically. As per usual,
    1
  987.  @B__L  I thought I told you to zip it!
    1
  988.  @B__L  I forgive you, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  989.  @robertthomas7176  The usual gynocentric view of the world. The idea that women are generally disadvantaged by society. All the standard stuff. She's had her worldview challenged somewhat by the whole trans thing (which meant she was cast out of mainstream feminism), however she still choses to perceive that as the result of some inherent male oppressor instinct.  The fact a few men want to dress as women and be recognised as such isn't the result of a misogynist society, as she would have you believe. It's happened due to feminist/female thinking that peoples feelings are what's most important. That's literally gynocentric forces creating the conditions.  Men on the other hand are generally protective of women and were extremely (instinctively) sceptical of the trans movement's demands for people to be able to identify as whatever they liked. Because we're a gynocentric society however (rather than actually misogynistic as she claims), we've pandered to women's desire to empathise and give effect to peoples "feelings" above all else. The result is a mess and it's women's fault, frankly. Although as per usual they have difficulty recognising their own responsibility for the problem and chose to point the finger at men instead. As I say, in this respect she's a classic feminist, utterly dishonest and an awful person. Smurthwaite on the other hand is merely vile and unhinged.
    1
  990.  @robertthomas7176  The usual gynocentric view of the world. The idea that women are generally disadvantaged by society. All the standard stuff. She's had her worldview challenged somewhat by the whole trans thing (which meant she was cast out of mainstream feminism), however she still choses to perceive that as the result of some inherent male oppressor instinct. The fact a few men want to dress as women and be recognised as such isn't the result of a misogynist society, as she would have you believe. It's happened due to feminist/female thinking that peoples feelings are what's most important. That's literally gynocentric forces creating the conditions. Men on the other hand are generally protective of women and were extremely (instinctively) sceptical of the trans movement's demands for people to be able to identify as whatever they liked. Because we're a gynocentric society however (rather than actually misogynistic as she claims), we've pandered to women's desire to empathise and give effect to peoples "feelings" above all else. The result is a mess and it's women's fault, frankly. Although as per usual they have difficulty recognising their own responsibility for the problem and chose to point the finger at men instead. As I say, in this respect she's a classic feminist, utterly dishonest and an awful person. Smurthwaite on the other hand is merely vile and unhinged.
    1
  991.  @robertthomas7176  I've responded to your question a couple of times however YouTube keeps deleting it due to censorship. Sorry.
    1
  992.  @Ashtonishing1812  👍
    1
  993. You cant have dwarfs landing planes. That's just science.
    1
  994.  @vcall6121  I'm saying there is a far higher incidence of women ending relationships and forcing their dependent children into single parent households than men making that call. Just the observable reality. Sadly. It's not a comment on them feeding their children. I'm sure for the most part they manage to feed their children (or the state does etc etc). I'm just talking about the selfish decision to leave the child's other parent and deny them a two parent home. It puts kids at a huge disadvantage.
    1
  995.  @mizzury54  Sorry if the truth triggers you.
    1
  996.  @helena3631  Thats true. And it only takes one person to not want stability to mean that "both parties" dont want it. By definition. Ergo one de-stabilising mom is sufficient to create instability even with a stable dad.
    1
  997.  @lostineggsaisle  Absolutely. It's become extremely common now. As I said earlier there's an awful lot of naivety on display in this comments section.
    1
  998. @1694cgrnt Cry harder.
    1
  999. @1694cgrnt Triggered single mom.
    1
  1000.  @cheeky6397  It's all perfectly reasonable and fair comment.
    1
  1001. @1694cgrnt Sorry you're so triggered.
    1
  1002.  @mp7140  Naive is one way of putting it. They're also quite selfish and this can equally be part of their downfall. For instance she was selfishly pursuing this murderous idiot for his money. If she'd actually been judging him using other metrics she wouldn't have become involved with him. We're not honest enough about female psychology. We always have to cast them as "naive" etc. In actual fact a lot of their selectivity is based on predatory and selfish factors. They ignore common sense as a result of naked greed.
    1
  1003.  @daisymiano925  The hopes of him changing would be exactly what I would characterise as ignoring all common sense in favour of naked greed. I doubt she'd have been entertaining any such hopes if he was broke. No, I think we need to be real about female psychology. We're always trying to sugar coat the greed and call I something else. Something innocent. Fortunately the internet has started to expose this for what it is and we're seeing some pushback against the gynocentric narrative thats dominated the culture for decades. . She chose a murderous narcissist psychopath because he was wealthy. Sad but true. She was hoping to gain so she rolled the dice with a lunatic.
    1
  1004.  @JohnSmithh644  Someone's grumpy!
    1
  1005.  @HayMan-k9x  Hi! Thanks for chiming in with absolutely nothing new. Please see all of my previous replies!👍
    1
  1006. We know she meant to say that. I don't think we can flatter ourselves that's what she actually thinks though.  Not hating, just saying we can hope for solid messaging at best.
    1
  1007. 12:27 "Loredana may have fallen into the habit of slapping Robert" Or as it's known if a man does it: domestic violence Sorry-not a nice person.
    1
  1008.  @Barbara-nv1ll  🤣Triggered.
    1
  1009.  @TF80s  Very well formulated. I've also seen footage of him boasting about how certain programmes "couldn't afford (him)" as a host. But hey, he's just trying to help the little people here. If he's guilty of anything it's just being a GREAT guy. Righto Eamonn! The truth is TV/show business is full of odious people competing for a few plum jobs and all of them ready to tear each other down to get there. GB news has some good (I'd go as far as to say necessary) takes that run counter to the mainstream narrative, but it's not averse to playing the same bandwagon-jumping, insincere, agenda-driven game that every other media outlet is steeped in. Disappointing watching people lap it up like zombies without engaging their own brains, nonetheless.
    1
  1010. Eh? What's the difference?  Answers on a postcard, please.
    1
  1011.  @Junoj101  Yes, that's all great (and known throughout the manosphere now), however it's not a blueprint for a successful relationship. By "successful", I mean a relationship that isnt a COMPLETE PITA. In other words, you can behave rationally (thus discharging the masculine performative burden alluded to above) however it doesn't stop the relentless sh!t tests that make your life hell on earth. Having a blueprint for "success" doesn't actually result in outcomes worth the considerable effort. That's where the PUA's are being dishonest about their magic formulae.
    1
  1012.  @annatalig2565  Salty is all you're capable of. If I was to hazard a guess.
    1
  1013.  @annatalig2565  And yet there it is, served up for your edification. You're welcome.
    1
  1014.  @annatalig2565  And yet there it is, served up for your edification. You're welcome!
    1
  1015. 0:37 to 0:42 Seamus Levine from Family Guy
    1
  1016. Oh good! An AWFUL, shouty woman on the internet is talking!  I must remember to thank her.
    1
  1017. One up the bum-no harm done!
    1
  1018.  @gretchencline5124  Good perspective. Women are extremely difficult to please. They're in a constant cycle of becoming unhappy about something (anything) so you've probably spared several people a lot of thankless grief! 👍
    1
  1019.  @gretchencline5124  Good perspective. Women are notoriously difficult to please. They're in a constant cycle of becoming unhappy about something (anything) so you've probably spared several people a lot of thankless grief! 👍
    1
  1020.  @gretchencline5124  Good perspective. XX are notoriously difficult to please. They're in a constant cycle of becoming unhappy about something (anything) so you've probably spared several people a lot of thankless grief! 👍
    1
  1021. ​ @gretchencline5124  In fairness, you've probably spared several people much thankless grief! 👍
    1
  1022.  @stepbackandthink  Good for them. Have a gold star.
    1
  1023.  @sean-jorvikvanlife  Jesus wept.
    1
  1024.  @thepoliticalhousethatjackbuilt  With qualifications in History and Law I'm perfectly satisfied my "grasp" of our nation's history is superior to yours. Thanks. You've chosen to ignore the essence of my point and focus instead on immaterial (not to mention fairly well known) distinctions between Normans and Norman French. Etc. Well done you.
    1
  1025.  @thepoliticalhousethatjackbuilt  You're a reasonably nimble witness, but you're still wasting your time with meaningless distinctions. It's purely academic as far as this level of discussion goes. As though people in modern day Northern France don't have any connection with the Norman's who conquered Britain. Lol. I mean I suppose we could ask France to divest itself of Normandy so we could pursue a spurious reparations claim against the perpetrators descendants but I don't imagine there'd be much appetite for that from Paris.  Well the same level of nonsense applies when you expect modern day Britons to compensate Caribbeans for slavery.  Or perhaps you'd like to pick Indian and Pakistani Britons pockets to foot the bill? A double colonial whammy for them. Lol. We're a very diverse society these days in case you hadn't noticed (in your middle class white ghetto). Get a grip.
    1
  1026.  @johnough4893  My "errors' weren't material to the point being made. Moreover, they weren't errors at all, they were deliberate shorthand. Why on God's green earth would I embark on a thorough chronology in a YouTube comments section? It's self evident York existed before the Vikings etc etc etc. It was obviously just an opportunity for you to say something you thought sounded clever about the Normans etc. Things which practically everyone knows anyway. Lol. Well done you!
    1
  1027.  @johnough4893  I didn't say I had a degree in law. I do happen to have a degree in law (in addition to post graduate professional qualifications in law). Re: my 'standard' of English, I reiterate that this is a YouTube comments section. We are not in the High Court of Justice so my knock about prose shall suffice. Elegantly. I'm sorry you were incapable of resisting the temptation to sound clever. I am of course indebted to you, Sir, for your breathtaking treatise on the Normans. Yours etc.
    1
  1028.  @johnough4893  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  1029.  @kooringagnd  Well said. It's this type off confounding nonsense that lies at the very heart of the standard lefty exculpatory argument. You'll note it's only ever Britain (consistently) that should have to pay reparations. Italy-for instance-shouldn't have to do so because Italy didn't exist at the time of the Roman Empire. Okay then, very convenient. In that case-in lieu of reparations, might we as Britains alternatively ask that they completely bulldoze the Coliseum and all other remnants of their history. After all, to an enslaved Brit, they're offensive symbols of oppression.  They may pre-date "Italy" but they are literally national symbols of Italy and Italy glorifies them. Only of course we wouldn't ask for them to do that because it'd be both barbaric and stupid. We're reasonable people who understand the past and what it means.
    1
  1030.  @diesel-soul  Much truth in this. The badly disadvantaged situation of men is starting to become more commonly recognised now after decades of shaming. It's very clear that it's unfair. I'd also add: in answer to the OP's why not "just divorce"? I find that a really dishonest question. It's well known that women don't tend to "just divorce". They cheat in order to line the next man up so they've got the next sucker to move on to. They don't tend to leave to nothing, they jump from one man to the next. She could have "just divorced" years ago if she was so unhappy, but instead she chose to line someone else up-which is clearly an additional inflammatory step. Just being real.
    1
  1031. ​ @donzell1945  It was a really dishonest question from the OP. It's well known that women don't tend to "just divorce". They cheat in order to line the next man up so they've got the next sucker to move on to. They don't tend to leave to nothing, they jump from one man to the next. She could have "just divorced" years ago if she was so unhappy, but instead she chose to line someone else up-which is clearly an additional inflammatory step. Just being real.
    1
  1032. Fairly measured statement. Clearly nothing justifies murder and I don't read anything you said as condoning of what happened. I'd possibly add: not only do men merely have feelings, they're also capable of being abused. If this was a male doing this to a female I think it would be characterised as "abuse" (Most things are considered abuse of women). For instance if the woman was left home to look after the kids, while the guy went out to cheat and THEN (in all likelihood) the woman was facing the prospect of being kicked out of her home and torn away from her children on dissolution of the marriage....my instinct says every woman alive would be calling that abuse. And in all likelihood a defence to murder via temporary insanity. We're finally starting to see a change in the cultural narrative here. Women are starting (at long last) to get some pushback against the way they think that men should be treated. It's very badly overdue.  Just to reiterate, NOTHING justifies murder. However it's become really obvious that many women don't justify (the institution of) marriage either. By the opinions they express, there's really no other conclusion.  If you want to be absolved of marriage commitments so easily, don't ask for marriage in the first place. Accept you're not worthy of the institution. It's really that simple*.  I think we need to really start again with how we look at these things as a society. *Not directed at you btw, Michelle. Your opinions show more mature and balanced thinking and a respect for the institution of marriage.
    1
  1033.  @Leoo117  Granted. But if we can agree it's more of a female trait to look to a partner to "provision" so many things, surely we can agree the "unpleasable" state is more a female state than a male one. Not necessarily that women are more "displeased" than men. Thats the material distinction. Many men and women alike are displeased with their lot. But the phenomenon of them taking their displeasure out on their partner who they feel is responsible FOR pleasing them is the quality I feel George is referring to.
    1
  1034.  @Mataylor17  I mean it's definitely frequently mommy's fault, yes.
    1
  1035.  @GregDeman  Well said. This is one of the biggest lies perpetrated against society (and against men in particular)
    1
  1036.  @oneoone  That's just the exact equivalent of what the male brings to the female by virtue of biological existence and therefore doesn't count. Think harder. What value that is uniquely female, that the male actually prizes, that the male cannot get from any other source. I'm talking value found in the discharging of performative burdens which equal the numerous performative burdens she's going to be placing on the male.
    1
  1037.  @mark9294  Additionally, its nothing more than the exact equivalent of what the male offers the female by virtue of mere biological existence. What he fails to do is mention anything amounting to value created by the discharging of performative burdens. Ie stuff the male actually prizes, that only the female can uniquely perform and that somehow begins to even out the numerous performative burdens she's going to place on him as the male.
    1
  1038. He's got the gab of the gift!
    1
  1039.  @Zeuts85  What is it about the proposition that so offends your sense of proportion? That it's a "generalization". Generalisations are perfectly valid.  Men are visual. Is that an "absurd overgenerlization?" If you go around honestly thinking that women care about men's issues you are in for a very rude awakening. In as far as those issues conflict with any of their own prerogatives they simply do not. I don't know what else to tell you. Women will literally argue for divorce laws that prejudice men. Most of those same women have sons of their own - knowing full well the same laws will prejudice their own flesh and blood in turn. The instinct I'm describing literally has primacy over maternal bonds. If you think she's more invested in her spouses outcomes you're a certifiable lunatic. I simply repeat; women do not care.
    1
  1040.  @ultimatist  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  1041.  @ultimatist  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  1042.  @ultimatist  Zip it, tinsel t!ts.
    1
  1043. Disagree. As a society we're dishonest about a lot of female behaviour and motives. At the end of the day, women are just as flawed and as ill behaved as men. We have no trouble accepting the reality of men's poor behaviour, however we're completely deceptive and dishonest about female poor behaviour. We prefer to think of women as innocent and pristine perennial victims (nb it's women who peddle this narrative the most, despite it being women who are most aware of female nature). This does untold damage to the men's lives it affects. The young lady in the video was a baby trapper. She was determined to manipulate the killer into a relationship/future he clearly didn't want. When a man does this we call it coercive control. Women can virtually get off with murdering a man now if they can prove coercive control. When a woman does it however we do not forgive the man, instead we deludedly call her an innocent victim. The internet is (thankfully) showing us a clearer, more balanced view of the world.
    1
  1044. 12:27 "May have fallen into the habit of slapping..." Or as it's known if a man does it: domestic violence
    1
  1045.  @richardw3347  Absolutely agree with you. The risk jumps exponentially once you have kids with her though. And I don't mean that increased risk is shared evenly. Quite the opposite. In other words the approach you outline is correct, however it gets harder to apply after certain key milestones are reached, not easier.  You can be as stoic and steadfast as you like (and ideally should be), but unless she's mentally defective, she will understand she has leverage over you (via the law) that she did not previously have. If she's had the kids she wants with the man she wants, but now wants someone more pliable (for whatever reason at all, it need only seem like a better idea in the moment), she's out. And many frequently are.  That happens even IF you remain stoic because it is a factor entirely extraneous to your person. If you're completely at your ease with that though then there's absolutely nothing stopping you.
    1
  1046.  @themick6586  For sure. I'm just saying discussion of the subject already abounds. People consume the message as though it's the solution. They're always looking for more message ("discussion") because they hope a solution is going to finally appear within it at some point. It won't.  When it eventually doesn't materialise a new creator appears re-formulating the message in a novel way but with no new info. At that stage they gain traction because people confuse new packaging with the possible offer of a "solution". At the end of the day it's only worth asking for more discussion if you want to hear the same thing for the millionth time. By that stage theres a danger it becomes more of a crutch however. Content creators have got no end of this so don't worry if thats your thing. They'll gladly cater to it. Supply and demand.
    1
  1047.  @richien8472  No, clearly I didn't think that women would "magically change". That's heavily implicit in my comment that its pointless just listening to people discuss things ad nauseam. If that was the case I'd suggest they did in fact simply keep listening (as women would be changing anyway in the meantime). A bit of a salty effort on your part, all things considered.
    1
  1048.  @adamg6711  Based.
    1
  1049. Sounds pretty chaotic. Kids with other men. Inserts an entire family into his house. "Isn't happy" but "doesn't want to leave him" (presumably because she's there for his house benefits). That's the profile of someone in a constant cycle of becoming unhappy (about anything) and making it everyone else's problem. It puts a huge pressure on partners and is very messy and unfair on her kids. Incidentally if "silent treatment" is abuse now then every man in the country is being abused. Let's just be real. We've got to stop portraying everything men do as abuse while simultaneously taking the view that when women do the same thing the man "deserves it" for doing "something wrong/being "insensitive".🙄
    1
  1050.  @sprig.sprout  No. I definitely didn't say that. You just keep replying to made up quotes though by all means.👍
    1
  1051. The cops were in a difficult position to be fair to them as Gabby LITERALLY admitted to assaulting Brian. Really if she was being treated fairly by the police she should have been arrested there and then for her assault and (ideally) the two should have gone their separate ways. Instead she returned to the situation. Not because she was an abuse victim with no other options but because she was doing what she wanted to do; ie driving around vlogging herself. Brian was clearly part of that instagram vlogging experience. Sadly the mutual violence clearly continued between the two and at one stage escalated tragically.
    1
  1052. The correct and proportionate response in the circumstances. As a philosopher and polemicist Dr Peterson will always have my ear, however I cannot imagine his keepy uppies break into double figures. I'm actually going to take a guess that his record stands at 3. And that's me being charitable just to be clear.  You do right to pull rank on this one, Gad. If you hadn't inserted the clip I would have insisted on it's inclusion quite frankly.🤣
    1
  1053. The Parliamentary letter was a gift for Rumble and a gift for Brand if truth be told. It will galvanise and swell his nutjob following just as it will Rumble's. YouTube has lost the plot on free speech now and Rumble will eventually mop up the market on crackpots while pretending to stand for high principles.
    1
  1054.  @angrydragon4574  No and that's irrelevant anyway.
    1
  1055.  @angrydragon4574  It's really not. Women believe what they want. If feminism was selling something unpalatable that they didn't want to believe, then they wouldn't follow it. There's lots of things they chose not to believe/follow (irrespective of how true they are) simply because they don't like the message. Look how much they prefer believing in lies like body positivity rather than listening to medical professionals. They'd far rather get fat than put in physical exercise and stop poking themselves full of treats
    1
  1056. 2:07 Both sides getting less of what they want from each other = accurate Both sides being "cheated" of this = not accurate. "Cheated" implies being unfairly being denied something you have a legitimate expectation to. There's very few genuinely legitimate expectations out there amongst these broads.
    1
  1057. It's getting fairly well covered now online. This message isn't original, it's merely re-packaged.
    1
  1058.  @Wizard080  Well.....uuwe proved his point then. Lol. Cos that looked AWFUL. Female students are just as "consensual". They're flattered to be the object of their teacher's attention. Their consent is utterly invalid however because they're children. We have to stop treating women more leniently just because they're women or just because we believe males can't be victims. The system favours females and that cannot be right in a civilised society. Women have campaigned for equality under law and they need to start experiencing that equality.
    1
  1059.  @PhilosophyMeetsPsychology  Well of course it depends entirely on where you live and what those laws say. Typically though-in the Anglosphere-the experience is prejudicial to men. On balance.
    1
  1060.  @alwayswoke4664  Nah, that aint it. It's just that the females are getting exposed more nowadays for the perverts that they are. Thankfully.  Girls are more likely to report, boys are less likely to, so women teachers get away with it more.
    1
  1061. Sounds like that little Yorkshire girl who went viral complaining about the price of ice cream. Lol.
    1
  1062.  @neohermitist  🤣 Now THAT's how you do satire!
    1
  1063.  @russ9921  Yup. Exactly. Because female culture of complaining has set that precedent. Now lots of men know they can behave like that, thats precisely what they do too. It's human nature. I make exactly that point in a later comment. People clamour for women to be removed from the workplace but nothing that discriminatory is necessary. Wherever people know they've got too many rights/too much protection you can reasonably expect them to behave abysmally. Take those rights and protections away. Just let poor behaviour have actual negative consequences and most things should right themselves. Most men will stop behaving like the worst kind of women and many women will leave the workforce of their own volition (or at the very least learn respect).
    1
  1064.  @frakismaximus3052  female privilege for sure.
    1
  1065. Yup. Dr Grande running cover for her poor character by painting a naive, flowery portrait of her. "She had always put others first" etc etc. How often do you hear this garbage when women are discussed? I mean she was married previously and left her husband after a couple of years so she clearly wasn't putting anyone ahead of herself there. And she wanted to be a stripper but had always been "unlucky in love". I mean; great marriage material right there. Any man would be lucky to have her! Time for lazy, selfish women to be called out in the same way we call men out.
    1
  1066. If you've ever watched 'Speak Greek Speak' (on Stath Lets Flats) you will be unable to take Yanis Varoufakis seriously any longer. Fortunately I never took him seriously to begin with.
    1
  1067.  @chantallvardas0730  Appreciate the endorsement!
    1
  1068.  @Phoenix_cataclysm_in_2040  I'm pretty sure its a wink. A subconscious one that escapes him. Both eyes close-I understand that-but theres a definite emphasis there.
    1
  1069.  @AfriqueNY  That's not a substantive issue. Getting into relationships is generally the easier part. Making them work is the hard part-and always has been. Most relationships fail anyway.  "Negotiations" may change a bit due to red pill awareness. Men (principally) have better counters to womens nonsense nowadays. So women will have to suck that up a bit and stop believing their own hype. But the upshot will still be pretty much the same. Most relationships will continue to fail and for the same reasons.   I don't think this affects the bottom line.
    1
  1070. Yeah good luck with that. I'll give you one guess which sex is least used to hearing the truth.
    1
  1071.  @aprilbouknightmarquez6340  For you. NOT for your husband. Lol. That's the material point.
    1
  1072. No politics, please. 🤣
    1
  1073. Lol! Would that feel fair if you were making 4x as him? You'd be straight out the door. Women are so untethered from reality they're beyond help.
    1
  1074. You cant have dwarfs landing planes. That's just science.
    1
  1075.  @HawkGTboy  Possibly. Generally speaking though if you aspire to speak for other people and wish to present a manifesto for a better world, it's preferable to demonstrate you can dress yourself first.
    1
  1076. @ Oh no! Adamdoeslife disapproves of me! I don't know how I'll overcome such CRUSHING news!😂 Plenty of people were irked by the same thing you dimwit. Off you trot!
    1
  1077. GOLD!!!
    1
  1078. Just an observation, but can I assume you're an Asian female in a majority white country? In that case wasn't it just statistically more likely for the rudeness to have come from a white woman? As your Latina friend correctly guessed. I don't think there's much to be gained in racialising topics like this. Or most things in fact. Women are rude and disrespectful regardless of creed or colour.
    1
  1079. @ No. I don't believe so. But I believe she will have regarded them as her property. Thats how women think. And it's implicit in @areinahensley2739's earlier response also. That's my point.
    1
  1080.  @sc4112  No. I don't believe so. But I believe she will have regarded them as her property. Thats how women think. And it's implicit in @areinahensley2739's earlier response also. That's my point.
    1
  1081. @ What are you talking about? My point is a general one, as you very clearly understand. You're being deliberately obtuse to avoid the (very valid) point I'm making.
    1
  1082.  @Useryofcsdnx  So she was so desperate (possibly because she was such an horrendous relationship proposition) she became highly manipulative? Fair enough. Lets stay consistent in that case and keep the same energy we have for men who are so "desperate" they become manipulative. 👌
    1
  1083.  @DiddlyD-xx2ih  AND her inability to understand that-by his not directly telling her that-she was just a friend with benefits/sex. Burden of proof also falls on her to engage brain. 😀
    1
  1084. Awesome. Another analogy. How helpful.
    1
  1085.  @damalewis9277  Wrong.
    1
  1086.  @RobbyRaccoon  LOL! Triggered. Insulting @legiontepes3474 hardly invalidates the point being made. At the risk of stating the obvious, it's a general point concerning a general issue. If it wasn't a general issue the content creator wouldn't bother making the video. It's hardly like he's made it because only @legiontepes3474 relates. Most men relate.
    1
  1087.  @lajohnson1967  Gonna have to dismiss your opinion as worthless once again I'm afraid. Doubtless you're accustomed to that though.
    1
  1088.  @lizc6393  I am a lawyer as it happens. But that's by the by. Yeah I understood the point; it was basic enough. Equally, the fact a few women aren't fastidiously tidy doesn't invalidate the general point. It's the general point that prevails. 👍
    1
  1089.  @lizc6393  Okay. I think we can agree to disagree on that. You're respectful about it so I've no wish to argue. 👍
    1
  1090. Would have made for a very short film.
    1
  1091. True. Plus Dr Grande running cover for her poor character by painting a naive, flowery portrait of her. "She had always put others first" etc etc. How often do you hear this garbage when women are discussed? I mean she was married previously and left her husband after a couple of years so she clearly wasn't putting anyone ahead of herself there. And she wanted to be a stripper but had always been "unlucky in love". I mean; great marriage material right there. Any man would be lucky to have her! Time for lazy, selfish women to be called out in the same way we call men out.
    1
  1092. AND....(MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL) they're looking for SIGNIFICANTLY MORE FROM YOU in exchange for those few things you want, (but that they don't want to give). This is why the information in the video is fairly limited in its usefulness, really. Whatever the recommended "hack" it always circles back to the same, insoluble issues. Minimising the things you want/ask for from women is a good process of clarification. But it only serves to make the bargain they're driving even less attractive. Because it then becomes even more apparent how uneven the value exchange is.
    1
  1093.  @vv-cv6ud  It's clearly an ad for her podcast, man. Don't confuse authenticity with a desire for publicity. She's got a perverse incentive.
    1
  1094.  @trinleywangmo  No. That one won't fly I'm afraid. Jane is one of those women where-conveniently-everything is always someone else's fault and not hers. The program erred in saying the legal team chose to not allow her to testify. It was HER decision alone whether to testify or not. Lawyers don't get to make that decision for you. They will have ADVISED her to not testify I have no doubt. That will have been on the basis that she would have been torn apart by the Prosecutor under cross examination because her story was full of holes and not believable. That was almost certainly GOOD advice. If she'd testified back then the case against her would probably have been even more overwhelming because none of her responses would have withstood scrutiny. Blaming her daughter was bizarre in the extreme but it said more about her than it did about her legal team. As did the testimony of her own sons against her. You're quite wrong in your analysis. She's just capitalising on the fact she didn't testify now and pretending it was down to poor representation when it simply wasn't. Some women are just that ruthless and manipulative. A hallmark is how everything is everyone else's fault. You know it when you see it.
    1
  1095. Well known name in England. If you're over the age of 40 anyway. I don't give much for the intellectual condition of internet generations that followed. Sadly.
    1
  1096. NOW imagine what NOT having a father in your life does to a child. I'm looking squarely at you, single mothers.
    1
  1097. How did we get to the (universally accepted) notion that all women are good, functioning adults and all men are bad, dysfunctional adults? It's so demonstrably absurd and yet it's somehow become regarded as scientific fact.  It has to be our society's biggest sickness.
    1
  1098. Precisely. And the other woman already on her 2nd marriage looking for number 3. Not a chance she would have stayed faithful. People seek marriage for selfish reasons however. That much is fairly obvious.
    1
  1099.  @terry9238  What they offer is a very conditional love. When what they're seeking is something approximating unconditional love. In other words they're asking for more than they're offering. Which is a fairly poor bargain from the male point of view. On balance.
    1
  1100.  @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
  1101. ​ @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
  1102. Not remotely honest. Delusional if anything. She sounded like as big of a nut job as he was. She murdered the first DA by knowingly driving her husband to the scene and then celebrated with steak after the second murder.
    1
  1103.  @Promet17  Fair enough! I can't claim to know the woman!
    1
  1104.  @Doberman_6773  I've had numerous experiences of this down the years (in it's various incarnations) to know it's nothing to do with compensating for wage discrepancies. One female I was seeing recently had a nervous breakdown whenever I set a cup down or moved the 'wrong' cushions on the sofa. She found it difficult to understand why I didn't want a relationship with her. Can you imagine the lack of peace trying to relax in a home like that? I'm not a farmyard animal-I don't sit wallowing in my own filth-yet that was essentially how I would have been treated. No thanks. It's zero to do with making up for a wage gap. It's entirely to do with the woman having her own neurotic standards and enforcing them on you as a man. There is zero empathy or consideration involved (the opposite is in fact true) and the video was fundamentally flawed in as far as it touched upon this.
    1
  1105.  @Macheako  Learn something new every day! Had no idea this was even a thing.
    1
  1106.  @btchiaintkidding7837  Yup. Agree with all of that. Just pointing out an error in the original premise of the video.
    1
  1107. Just warn the boys about female perverts already. What was with all the hand-wringing and agonising over this from Hansen? Stop prioritising a grown adults feelings over a child's safety. We don't have this issue when the sexes are reversed. Clearly women's feelings are considered more important than the safety of boys.  Okay...I get it...we pander to womens feelings in literally EVERY other facet of society. That's how our culture works. But NOT here. That is a hard line.
    1
  1108.  @sudilos1172  Of course not. I didnt say it protected her or was an effective deterrent. You've even got the death penalty in multiple States and that hasn't stopped the crime of murder. I was just responding to your silly remark that things "need to change". As though it was in any way illuminating. 🤣
    1
  1109.  @jimwerther  Indeed. Thats a very valid point.
    1
  1110. 'Conscience'. Although the misspelling is horribly apt.
    1
  1111.  @94462  Sadly because his level of consciousness was so badly impaired by the fight. Both immediately and long term. I mean the very fact he's asking his sister for details of it is evidence of that. As well as other cognitive damage.  He wasn't conscious soon after taking a knee and hasn't regained full consciousness since. I wasn't having a pop. I was just saying it was sadly appropriate.
    1
  1112.  @94462  It's apt because, sadly, his level of consciousness was badly impaired as a result of the fight. Together with other cognitive function. After he took a knee his consciousness never fully recovered to original levels. The fact he has to ask his sister about it (and she has to interpret a lot of the world for him) attests to the fact. I wasn't having a pop btw. It was just a sadly apposite error of language.
    1
  1113. It's wild no women sprang to her defence and pulled him off of her immediately. Women are always saying how men should do more to protect women but they'll barely even raise a voice themselves. Women have to do better and risk their lives more instead of just volunteering men to risk their own lives. Smh.
    1
  1114.  @montana-road-kill-harvest  Also wrong. Very poor reading of things. Btw "Gaslighting" Lol. Indoctrinated much?
    1
  1115. 8:06 Getting close to a YouTube ban with that. Be careful. Modern credo is that you're not permitted to have any needs of a woman. To have needs of a woman has been re-packaged as misogyny and controlling/coercive behaviour.   Women by contrast are allowed and encouraged to have myriad needs of men. That's entirely reasonable and realistic.
    1
  1116. Indeed. You have to bear in mind the obvious: if you just listened to your stomach all the time instead of exercising self-discipline you'd soon become a fat bast@rd.
    1
  1117.  @gracerules2008  But not just listen to your stomach either or you'll quickly become a fat b@astard. Exercise self discipline and say "no" to your stomachs constant cravings.
    1
  1118.  DelGTAGrndrs  Nice!
    1
  1119.  @Letsplay222  Not really. Businesses are a risk. Careers come with "career paths" And don't come with equity. Both involve work but the risk element is fundamentally different. So different in fact as to not be comparable.
    1
  1120.  @Letsplay222  The risk/reward factor is critical to the point of the video. Ignoring that means you fail to grasp the point of the video to begin with. Even if the video is itself flawed.
    1
  1121. A simple "I 'ate you, Butler!" in the style of Blakey would have sufficed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M2EO3ZltYs
    1
  1122. Yeah, this was fairly wayward tbh. A girl who's in "love" is NOT going to be satisfied with just remaining "in love". She's going to want to put the 'label' (of marriage) on it. And you can reasonably predict that she will exit the relationship if you refuse. The idea she's going to remain loyal to the emotion providing you "kindle and maintain" it is naive. Make no mistake, she wants the label because she knows the benefits that accrue. Conversely it's why men often try to resist the labelling exercise. At the end of the day, genuine love is sacrificial. "Feelings" by contrast are simply a warm and pleasant sensation that you're getting something you want. They're acquisitive, not sacrificial. They're two very different things. Hence it wouldn't matter if you kept "kindling" them, unless the person is offered the actual benefit they perceive (the label), they'll be out the door.
    1
  1123.  @chipsteve  Nail on head re: the lack of "grow stronger together" intent. The biggest revelation for me was the complete absence of honour-based thinking amongst women. As a man I think you genuinely confer relational equity on a woman for any good deed done. The sort of thing you believe will see you through harder times as a couple. You're giving her a form of future credit in recognition of any good thing she may have done for you or the relationship.  It's an honour/duty based way in which men tend to think and naively I assumed the same applied to how women viewed relationships. It was particularly appealing because (typically) you're doing far more for them than they do for you, so you figure you must have laid a reasonably firm foundation with them. Not so however. On mature reflection you come to realise that every day is day 1. The clock is re-set every day and all former good works count for very, very little if the tally for the day or week is down. It's not "what have you done" but "what have you done for me lately?" Once you understand this though you begin to see it everywhere. Every song by male artists is some form of what they'll sacrifice for her and every song by female artists is a variation of: "what have you done for me lately?" Happily then at least you know it's not just you and you're not going mad. Every clown in a band throughout history (who would be lauded today as HVM) is just some guy with the same Operating System. If anything they're even more desperate to offer sacrifice and service-so much so they sing about it to anyone that'll listen. Ultimately you come to realise the one thing you can never do is self-extrapolate in terms of your thinking. They have a completely different Operating System. It would disgust us if a man behaved that way (hell, it'd disgust THEM if a man behaved that way)...but it is what it is. However from that point on you put yourself first unapologetically. Not because you're selfish but because you know you can't rely on the reciprocation you once believed to be possible. That's not on you, that IS on her.
    1
  1124. ​ @markrcca5329  I agree. I mean it really shouldn't be necessary for someone entering a relationship to have to "fight" for or justify the concept of "fairness" in a relationship (it's ludicrous in itself when you think about it)...but it can work and you should certainly try to. From the earliest opportunity so it sets the tone from the start. In most cases however it doesn't or won't work. Most heterosexual relationships are men ministering to women and putting the female's interests first. That's literally why the female is in the relationship to begin with. They're looking for a net benefit and they pursue this by extractive behaviours.  Her interests first. Her at the centre of the relationship. The relationship being about her. It all amounts to the same thing. Incidentally it's usually done subtly, not by force. I've had women (in the early stages of a relationship) "open up" and cry etc etc. Saying how difficult things had been before I showed up (or variations of the same). Usually its some form of how awful or neglectful their ex was. It's a form of flattery-you're being held up as "better"-but it's real function is to condition you to understand that her feelings have primacy and your role is to ensure they're prioritised at all costs.
    1
  1125.  @markrcca5329  I agree. I mean it really shouldn't be necessary for someone entering a relationship to have to "fight" for or justify the concept of "fairness" in a relationship (it's ludicrous in itself when you think about it)...but it can work and you should certainly try to. From the earliest opportunity so it sets the tone from the start. In most cases however it doesn't or won't work. Most heterosexual relationships are men ministering to women and putting the female's interests first. That's literally why the female is in the relationship to begin with. They're looking for a net benefit and they pursue this by extractive behaviours. Her interests first. Her at the centre of the relationship. The relationship being about her. It all amounts to the same thing. Incidentally it's usually done subtly, not by force. I've had women (in the early stages of a relationship) "open up" and cry etc etc. Saying how difficult things had been before I showed up (or variations of the same). Usually its some form of how awful or neglectful their ex was. It's a form of flattery-you're being held up as "better"-but it's real function is to condition you to understand that her feelings have primacy and your role is to ensure they're prioritised at all costs.
    1
  1126.  @Khan-rz8qi  😅👍
    1
  1127.  @ny2ct187  If anyone can, Khan can! All hail Khan!!!! The Great and Powerful!
    1
  1128. I see what you did there.
    1
  1129. k bye!
    1
  1130. ​ @kandykane2160  I think we have to start recognising that taking a man's home and kids away from him IS a form of abuse/control itself. You glibly describe it as a "tantrum over money" but I'm perfectly satisfied you wouldn't say this if it the roles were reversed. If the woman was losing her home and her children AND being put on the clock to pay the man to enjoy a family life to her exclusion it would be described as some sort of mental and emotional torture.  It's just plainly dishonest when women describe things in this way and I assure you men DO see it when you talk like this. It's an existential trauma, not a "tantrum over money" And whats most sinister is you understand this perfectly well. You don't need it pointing out.
    1
  1131.  @kandykane2160  I think we have to start recognising that taking a man's home and kids away from him IS a form of abuse/control itself. You glibly describe it as a "tantrum over money" but I'm perfectly satisfied you wouldn't say this if it the roles were reversed. If the woman was losing her home and her children AND being put on the clock to pay the man to enjoy a family life (at the exclusion of herself) it would be described as some sort of mental and emotional torture. It's just plainly dishonest when women describe things in this way and I assure you men DO see it when you talk like this. It's an existential trauma, not a "tantrum over money" And whats most sinister is you understand this perfectly well. You don't need it pointing out.
    1
  1132.  @saraha5847  It's a searing indictment that anyone would even think this is how far "battered spouse syndrome" has become extended. But it's certainly being ever increasingly extended given the female accountability crisis so was thought to be worth a try..
    1
  1133. Oh No!!! Poor Morgan!! Boo hoo!
    1
  1134.  @honestreignn  I mean...you are basically making excuses for her behaviour.
    1
  1135.  @DNA350ppm  You sound like a pleasant and thoughtful person to be fair and I appreciate a lot of what you wrote there. It's received with gratitude. Those stated philosophies can represent good actionable advice and it can still remain the case that women "monkey branch" far, far more frequently than men however. They're not mutually exclusive. I actually don't think it's a particularly controversial or contentious point btw. It's just an observable reality.
    1
  1136.  @DNA350ppm  In fairness, our understanding of the world relies on observations and pattern recognition. Darwin didn't have any published reports to go on when he noticed patterns in different bird species. The patterns were there to be observed nonetheless and now form the basis of our evolutionary theory. Monkey branching in females is an observable reality. I can't provide the reports you deem to be necessary but that doesn't invalidate the ample evidence that is available if you merely choose to look.
    1
  1137. Superbly formulated, Sir. There was a beauty in the clarity of that comment. I am stealing it.
    1
  1138.  @DonnaChamberson  Ignorant comment.
    1