Comments by "Rose S" (@roses6564) on "The COMPLAINT of modern WOMEN: the downside of being high-value" video.

  1. Yes, that was called co-dependency, not love. People had no choice but stick with whomever they were able to find fast and early. Some got lucky, many didn’t.
    5
  2. Solutions: women must satisfy their hypergamy in substance, not in form. Unfortunately, most people can't tell substance from form. For example, a woman does not need to marry a man who has as much or more formal education than she does (degrees). She only needs to marry a man who is naturally more intelligent than she is, but this assumes she possesses enough intelligence to recognize the man who is more intelligent than she is, despite being less formally educated than her. Most women can't do that bc they are 50 shades of "not so bright" so they must rely on external authority to vetting men as high-value (degrees, money, status, etc). Too bad. The most unequivocally "superior to me" man I have ever met had significantly less formal education than I do and probably makes less money too. In reality, he is hundreds of times more well-read, erudite, informed and accomplished in intellectual matters than I ever could be. I looked up to him so much I actually broke my neck (and soul too). There are ways to satisfy hypergamy that do not involve tangibles like money and formal status, including education.
    1
  3.  @profet1385  on point.  In fact, women on average are much more empathetic to what men want, it’s just that feminism allowed them to not have to give it to them at any cost, in exchange for the mere privilege of dodging spinsterhood.  Women know full well what men want. Very well. It’s just that they don’t have to fake the willingness and interest in giving those things anymore. There’s a condition there: she must be in love with him, he must inspire. A woman in love is the most giving, selfless, sacrificial creature God has every created. But she must be in love first. When she’s not, expect the nagging, the cold transactionalism, etc. Most women don’t have a chance to marry men they’re in love with. This means now they have the luxury to stop faking the giving. It’s “in love” or nothing. Unsurprisingly, this was an unfavorable development for men who do not need maximum emotionality in the marriage, just function. In this sense, virtually all men are a lost cause when it comes to understanding, empathizing and accepting the needs and nature of women.  Now that women can afford to say no to a relationship that doesn’t inspire and fulfills, there’s gnashing of male teeth. This makes sense, because the balance of power has shifted in favor of women, emotionally speaking. Transactionally, no - because fewer women can now marry up in status and money. Your average woman is a materialistic idiot so it’s tougher for her now  Dirty little secret: a woman of substance cares squat about hpergamy games and a lot about an excellent match that makes her heart sing even if he’s below her in tangibles (money/status).
    1
  4. Lower status is fine. Lack of PIES is not. Physical, emotional, intellectual, spiritual connection between the two. If that magic happens, the transactionalism becomes secondary.
    1