I have the best idea.
A social networking site dedicated to matching men and women.
However, a requirement, women that do not judge based on money and looks, rather personality. (you know, how like 90% of the women out there say they behave)
www.nonjudgementalwomen.com
basically guys could log on and find women that are actually honest about what they seek.. and all "dates" require no cross-payment. each person pays for themselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
You know, I find this amusing.
There are countless blogs, forums, youtube videos, etc, on the net right now with African American men dissing Af-Am women left, right and center for being greedy, argumentative, aggressive, gold-diggers who don't know how to "treat a man".
These same men are glorifying non-black women - whites, asians, hispanics, etc, as understanding, patient, calm, nurturing, feminine women who know "how to treat a man" and are even willing to share the financial burden.
But here we have HMF, complaining about non-black women (I'm assuming). I'm assuming, and maybe I'm wrong, that his encounters are with Asian-desi women and maybe the rare white lass or two.
So what gives?
Are these black men all over the internet excluding Desi women from their "asian" category? When they say "asian" are they referring to Koreans, Vietnamese, etc?
Are we to believe that Desi women are to HMF what Black women are to these Black men?
Or is this just another think to chalk up to the fact that men are IMPOSSIBLE to understand?
And then, where are all these wonderful, white, east-asian and hispanic women when HMF is out on the prowel? How come HE is not meeting these humble, nurturing, willing-to-share women?
What is the demographic of his dating pool?
where are these blogs? I'm not making any claim on different types of women. Female hypocrisy I believe runs the gamut, but usually occurs in western cultures where women clamor for selective equality.
Does thoughtful analysis always amuse you?
by the way I see you had no response to the previous post. because all you know how to do is talk about some other nonsense and avoid logical analysis.
Respond to what post?
Am I under obligation now?
How much are you paying?
The blogs are too numerous to mention. I have not saved any in my favorites.
Just google;
"black men black women gender wars"
"why black men love white women"
"black women and white men" (yeah, tables are turnin' now and the bros are pissed)
"angry black women"
"tired black men"
You will be overrun....
There's an Indie movie just released as well: DIARY OF A TIRED BLACK MAN.
(Bros answer to Diary of an Angry Black Women, I guess.)
Now it's time for bros to exhale.
Dayum! Can a brother breathe?
"Am I under obligation now?"
To make sense? no. continue to pretend like you have a logical framework.
Either way, I've discussed the pro-white bias many minority women have. that's not the purpose of this post.
So if women can only judge based on personality (not on money or looks), do men also only judge based on personality (and not on looks)?
When and where have women been saying looks don't matter? Your rhetorical excercise makes no sense to me HMF which I assume is to higlight female hypocrisy. I like many men could never ask women to not care about looks since I'm totally moved female beauty.
"So if women can only judge based on personality (not on money or looks), do men also only judge based on personality (and not on looks)?"
nala, glad you've jumped back into the lion's den. welcome. I dont get what you are asking here though. my point is women judge based on looks (primarily) and money, but like to have the world think they don't. if they are honest about what they look for, it wouldnt be hypocrisy.
However, the real hypocrisy is what I described in my last post, and no one seemd to be able to contest.
"When and where have women been saying looks don't matter?"
ask any women to rank the importance of looks in their determination. I guarantee you it will rank fairly low.
Most women I know don't rank looks first, but it's not far behind.
For me looks is probably 2nd or third in importance, but if they aren't there to some degree, that nixes any chance of romance and allows for only friendship.
For me to engage in a sexual relationship with someone, I have to be turned on, not turned off, by the way they look.
"For me to engage in a sexual relationship with someone, I have to be turned on, not turned off, by the way they look."
exactly. but what you're leaving out is, for you to engage in a sexual relationship, being "turned on" is not only necessary, but sufficient.
Basically. you're just like us, only you don't admit it.
and again... why the f*ck are you still using that handle. give me a real explanation or switch.
"Most women I know don't rank looks first, but it's not far behind."
Look, there's no distance here. It IS extremely important to you, if not THE most important.
"ask any women to rank the importance of looks in their determination. I guarantee you it will rank fairly low."
I meant high. I mean the # will be low, as in #1.
"I like many men could never ask women to not care about looks since I'm totally moved female beauty."
Im not saying ask them to not care, but they themselves say they don't care, or at least they don't care about it as much as men. It's the double speak that I contest.
You are wrong here HMF, looks, for me, are not neccessary, NOT sufficient. Someone could be as hot as Lenny Kravitz but if he does'nt have good character and share the same values that I do I will not date him, what to speak of entering into a long-term relationship.
On the otherhand, if someone is of high character and possesses those values, they don't have to be as hot as Lenny Kravitz to turn me on, they just have to be at least moderately cute. I have to be physically attracted to them but they don't have to be an Adonis or anything.
And I think most people, at least those over 30 and looking for a real relationship and not just a jump-off, are of the same opinion as me.
Correction:
"You are wrong here HMF, looks, for me, are not neccessary, NOT sufficient..."
Should read:
"You are wrong here HMF, looks, for me, are ONLY neccessary, NOT sufficient enough in and of themselves..."
"Someone could be as hot as Lenny Kravitz but if he does'nt have good character and share the same values that I do I will not date him,"
Yes you will. Ask Lenny Kravitz himself how many women he has dated. I'll tell you he's pretty devoid of character and values as well.
The point is, the gap between the importance placed on looks between men and women is miniscule, if not negligent. Men also only want to fuck hot girls, not have long term relationships with them (who wants those prissy bitches for life ?)
No. I would NOT date Lenny Kravitz. But he does look good.
I will only date someone who shares my religious/spiritual beliefs.
You don't know me so stop telling me who I would and would not date. I think I know myself better than you do.
"No. I would NOT date Lenny Kravitz. But he does look good."
You are just saying that for the sake of argument, and missing the larger point. The larger point here is, the difference in evaluation of mates between men and women is fairly negligible.
Looks can be solidly be a deterrent for a man, and no matter how kind-hearted, considerate, nice, etc.. he is, he can still come up short, completely based on looks. if women freely admit that, there is no double speak (in that realm, the selective "equality" they clamour for is another story)
You might not date Mr. Kravitz, but you'd let him hide the salami. How do I know this? very rarely do you hear people like Mr. Kravitz lament of not having any place to hide the salami. so by pure stats this would be the case.
Now, I agree that not having a personality is a dealbreaker for most women, but money and looks makes that personaliy bar pretty F*cking low., and the same is true for women (that is, men will put up with all kinds of shit if the girl is a hottie...) see what Im getting at here? we aren't that different, yet women claim they are these superb evaluators of character while men are lusty short sighted horny guys that aren't mature enough to evaluate "true worth" its that hypocrisy that I contest.
I wouldn't let him hide the salami either. Salami gets put in my fridge only after an exclusive long-term relationship commitment.
alright whatever, say what you want.
but i've met tons of women, smart women phds from ivy league schools that turn into complete idiots when selecting male mates, and react to all the evolutionary markers that make mates attractive in the first place.
So stand on your high horse all you want, maybe you're the 1 out of 1000 that actually uses logic when deciding on a mate, but its doubtful.
Post a Comment