2
0

Women on the Hunt


 invite response                
2016 Feb 20, 4:01am   32,468 views  73 comments

by resistance   ➕follow (0)   💰tip   ignore  

When interviewing at a new company, I alway notice a small flurry of interest in me by all the women who I come into contact with.

The effect seems subtle until once aware of it, but then it's unmistakable and not subtle at all. From the receptionist to the HR woman to potential co-workers, there's a feeling I'm being watched, judged, and talked about. An unlikely number of new random women just happen to walk by and look into the room where I'm being interviewed, no doubt informed explicitly or implicitly by the other women that there is a new man to evaluate. They cannot let the competition get there first! They smile and say hello, as if that were normal on the street. But it's not.

The receptionists and HR women clearly have those jobs partly because it's a way to check out a continuous stream of men for short- or long-term mating potential, and a way to block hot women from getting jobs there through various deliberate accidents and omissions in their application and interviews.

Alas, within a few days or weeks of starting a new job, the women have all had their look or chat, and their attention is back to checking out whatever new man comes in the front door, smiling and saying hello at him now.

« First        Comments 53 - 73 of 73        Search these comments

53   Patrick   2016 Feb 22, 4:28pm  

http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/france-upholds-the-ban-on-paternity-tests/

Theres no mistake in the title. It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not. In fact, it has been illegal for men to attempt to find out if their child is theirs for many years. But a few days ago, the ban was challenged once again–and the government upheld the ban. Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too? Whats even more striking is that there is NO mainstream media...

54   turtledove   2016 Feb 22, 4:32pm  

Dan8267 says

Why do people have the wrong reasons?

For a million different reasons that cannot be neatly explained with "girls do this and boys do that." Society isn't Wild Kingdom. We have complex psychologies. Experiences affect why one person might choose a particular path over another. Abused, mistreated, popular, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, two parents, one parent because of divorce, one parent because of a death, large families, small families, families with pets, families without pets, working mom, stay-at-home mom, siblings with disabilities, siblings who are superstars, a traumatic event, struggling to learn, being a genius, suffering from an illness... there are literally a zillion things that help to shape the people we become. And even then, we are still changing. What you wanted at 20 probably isn't the exact same thing you want now.... and I'm sure it will change again as the years go by. To say that "men must do this because that's what men do is to deny your very own individualism and marginalize the richness of your past experiences. Why would it be any different for women?

55   Heraclitusstudent   2016 Feb 22, 4:36pm  

rando says

It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not.

Probably because that would lead to them not having to pay, and then no one would.
The other approach of course is to force men paying for kids they know aren't theirs, which I think is done in the US.

Incidentally, I think in most cases a man can tell whether the child is his or not. In many cases it is obvious.

56   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 4:37pm  

rando says

worked for me. we were both 25 when we got serious

And that seems to be the pattern I've notice for all successful marriages. It's always a woman, alpha or beta, marrying a beta man who she started dating in her late teens, early 20s, or mid-20s at the latest. The age of the beta male doesn't seem to matter, but most of those marriages were ones in which the beta male was the same age or up to five years older.

rando says

women should get married at 22 and men at 32 imho

I would have loved to have dated the love of my life starting at 18 or earlier and then married her straight out of college at 22. That way you get to spend your whole life, especially the part in which you are making all the important decisions in life, with your life partner. Plus, men need women a hell of a lot more when they are young and extremely horny. To be quite frank, sex is mostly an ego boost in middle age. It feels psychologically good, but it's not mind blowing and all-consuming like it is when your 18. Young men need, enjoy, and appreciate sex way more than middle age men. I don't know if the same holds for women or not. I never had sex with a woman over 27.

rando says

women should stay home until the kids are at least 10, for optimal happiness all around (not perfectly happy, just the most you can realistically be)

I'm not sure about that. There's something to be said about having the income of two doctors and a really nice house and no financial worries. That said, it's not really an option for the vast majority of Americans anyway. It takes two median incomes to raise a family with a modest middle class lifestyle today. Granted, you can still do it on one income if that income is in the top 10% (six figures).

Just for the record, if I were to marry Taylor Swift, I'd have no problem being a stay-at-home husband and dad. My career is great, but hers is more valuable. So I'd be willing to sacrifice my career in that scenario. I'm generous like that.

57   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 4:45pm  

turtledove says

For a million different reasons

On that I disagree. There simply isn't enough diversity in our species for there to be a million different reasons for any human behavior. It may come at a shock to most people's egos, but human beings really aren't that unique. Online marketing proves this every single day.

At most there are a dozen or so reasons for any single human behavior. And in most situations there's only three or four. We are all far more alike than different.

turtledove says

that cannot be neatly explained with "girls do this and boys do that."

Certainly one should not judge individuals based on group behavior. However, one can most certainly judge and measure group behavior.

It would be foolish to ignore the incredible influence that gender has on people. No, it's not the only factor, but it is the single biggest factor of life that changes how you behave and how you experience life. This is not a judgement, just an indisputable observation.

Also, acknowledging and understanding gender differences is not ammunition for zero-sum games. Understanding a problem is the only way to fix it. Gender studies are extremely important for helping both boys and girls in all aspects of life including academics, career, romantic relationships, and parenting. I have no problem with scientists trying to enlighten us on gender issues regardless of how politically charged such issues are. Ultimately, the more we understand, the better decisions we can make.

turtledove says

What you wanted at 20 probably isn't the exact same thing you want now

I want today exactly what I wanted at 14, 20, 25, and 30, a beautiful, intelligent, nice, and faithful 18-year-old woman who finds me sexually irresistible and all other men disguising. Oh, and a pet dinosaur.

58   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 4:48pm  

rando says

http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/france-upholds-the-ban-on-paternity-tests/

Theres no mistake in the title. It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not. In fact, it has been illegal for men to attempt to find out if their child is theirs for many years. But a few days ago, the ban was challenged once again–and the government upheld the ban. Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too? Whats even more striking is that there is NO mainstream media...

Not only should this ban be overturned, but the state should have to pay for universal paternity tests and any man who was duped should be compensated with high interest at the expense of the personal wealth of the politicians, judges, and lawyers responsible for the ban.

59   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 5:00pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

rando says

It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not.

Probably because that would lead to them not having to pay, and then no one would.

That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.

In fact, one could argue that it is a human right for a man not to be forced to pay for a child that is not his as doing so is effectively slavery.

60   Heraclitusstudent   2016 Feb 22, 5:13pm  

Dan8267 says

That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.

I agree it's not justifiable. I'm just giving the rationalization: the French state puts kids welfare ahead of a man's right.
Once men were forced to pay for child care, they were deprived of their main leverage within a family cell: that if they don't like it they can leave.
But here it's even worse: they are seen as wallets on legs, and generally, as subhumans with no rights whatsoever.
It would be much better to give taxpayer financed welfare to single women.

61   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 5:21pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

Dan8267 says

That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.

I agree it's not justifiable. I'm just giving the rationalization: the French state puts kids welfare ahead of a man's right.

Actually, that's exactly NOT what the state is doing. The state is putting its own financial interests before both the man's rights and the welfare of the children. The children are gravely hurt by having misinformation about their family's medical history.

If the state were to put the children's welfare ahead of everything else, the state would require paternity testing and knowing exactly who the father is and it would also guarantee state support of the child in the case where the man finds out he is not the father and leaves.

62   anonymous   2016 Feb 22, 5:27pm  

we have divorce courts, we have the concept of "equitable division of assets

--------------

DA PATRIARCHY!!

63   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 5:31pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

It would be much better to give taxpayer financed welfare to single women.

Here's the plan I would propose, and I understand that many people will hate it, but it is both socially just and provides anti-parasitic selection.

The state will pay for anyone's essential needs (food, shelter, education, medical care), but the person must pay the state (society) back in the same real dollars at no interest. Until that happens, the person and all of his or her living descendants must accept temporary chemical sterilization or a physical barrier like a chastity belt. Once the person has paid back the state, this measures ends. However, until then that person can have no more descendants.

Some people will never pay back the state and the taxpayers will have to eat the cost of those people's living expenses. However, the inter-generational dependency on welfare is eliminated and there is an evolutionary incentive not to fail to pay back society. In the worst case scenario, society ends up paying to remove unfit people from the gene pool. Not a bad deal for society, and it makes future generations better off.

There is also an incentive for people to take care of their aging parents and grandparents.

Granted, there are also bad incentives like wanting to off grandma so you can have kids. And some people will try to use the system for eliminating those they find undesirable. However, I do think that such a system could be built while preventing those two things.

There is a moral question as to whether or not human beings have the right to reproduce. However, for men, reproduction has never been a right. It's always been a privilege that they had to earn. Personally, I don't think that reproduction should be a right since many people are incapable or unwilling to take care of the children they produce. But I do appreciate the other side of the argument.

64   turtledove   2016 Feb 22, 5:31pm  

Dan8267 says

It would be foolish to ignore the incredible influence that gender has on people.

I've done no such thing. Of course a person's sex is an influence. It's just not the only influence. To say that there are only a handful of experiences that shape us is ridiculous. A woman who was molested as a child is going to perceive men differently than a woman who wasn't. A woman who grew up in an all-male family; a woman who grew up in an all-female family; strong/weak male figures in her life; strong/weak female figures in her life... educated/uneducated... those who have more than the normal amount of responsibility at a young age (like a dead mother and the girl fills in as caretaker for her younger brothers/sisters).... Daddy's little girl who was spoiled non-stop.... and so many other possible experiences that can and do affect the way a person acts in adult relationships. Like I said, you seem to want to simplify the issue by saying that "we as a species act like such and such... and therefore, "this" is always the reason why women do x,y,z..." Forgetting for a moment that not all women do x, y,or z and for those who do -- their motivations are influenced by the multitude of individual experiences had throughout their lives.

65   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 5:37pm  

I don't agree with what Dan Savage is saying below, but he is a smart and honest guy.

www.youtube.com/embed/w8SOQEitsJI

Seems like lowering one's standards to accept a mate who cheats at all.

Also, I don't think most people believe that because you are in love with and committed to a person, you don't feel lust towards others. You just sacrifice your own selfish interests for the interests of the relationship understanding that what you get out of the relationship is worth far more than what you are sacrificing.

However, Savage is right that humans are not evolved to be completely monogamous. Hell, the shape of the penis is a dead giveaway. It's shaped like a plunger for a reason.

That said, human beings are closer to monogamous than the vast majority of sexually reproducing animals. Monogamy is extremely rare in nature.

There are advantages and disadvantages of monogamy, but you simply don't find a high degree of paternal (father) investment without the females being sexually loyal. Paternal investment requires paternal certainty.

66   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 8:50pm  

Dan8267 says

o be quite frank, sex is mostly an ego boost in middle age.

As expressed in the most honest song ever written.

www.youtube.com/embed/lQlIhraqL7o

67   Patrick   2016 Feb 22, 8:52pm  

Dan8267 says

the great deforestation

lol!

68   MMR   2016 Feb 22, 10:41pm  

thunderlips11 says

I bet you $10 when she was in her 20s, she dated older men

alpha males for sure...she still has a good rack though

69   Dan8267   2016 Feb 22, 11:08pm  

thunderlips11 says

Absolutely. Take Naomi Wolf. I bet you $10 when she was in her 20s, she dated older men. Now she is writing about how terrible it is that 30s-50s men are bringing hot young things to parties instead of dating "Wonderful Women" like herself.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/a-wrinkle-in-time-twenty-years-after-the-beauty-myth-naomi-wolf-addresses-the-aging-myth/2011/05/11/AGiEhvCH_story.html

From article...

And yet I did not feel the frisson of envy among the men present, nor did I see a bristle of jealousy from any of the stylish, accomplished women in their 40s. In fact, the mood of both genders was tender, almost pitying. The man may have imagined that he was showing off the youth of his date the way he might show off a new Maserati; but parading her around like an acquisition seemed only to make his friends feel sorry for him.

Yeah, that's not what's going on. That's a older woman's fantasy about what she wishes was going on.

70   Patrick   2016 Feb 23, 8:03am  

Dan8267 says

accomplished women in their 40s

both genders wrongly assume the other gender thinks the same way that they themselves do. this quote is a classic example. there should be a name for this phenomenon, since it's so common.

men tend to assume women are primarily interested in looks, but that's wrong. women mostly want confidence, dominance, and accomplishments and will put up with quite a lot of ugliness to get it. evolutionary theory predicts this, since women needed a protector and provider to raise children historically.

women tend to assume men are interested in their accomplishments, but sexually, accomplishments in women are invisible. men couldn't care less about that. it really is mostly about looks for men, which makes evolutionary sense too, since men were after their fertility historically. accomplishment was largely irrelevant to raising children.

maybe that's not completely true. being a geeky guy, i was impressed that my wife was in the phd program in physics in ann arbor when we met and could help with my engineering homework. though i was definitely more interested in certain other features.

71   MisdemeanorRebel   2016 Feb 23, 8:46am  

MMR says

alpha males for sure...she still has a good rack though

She looks damn good for 50+, I gotta say.

72   dublin hillz   2016 Feb 23, 9:41am  

It has definitely been liberating that men are no longer expected to be exclusive bread winners in the family. The past has brought undue pressure, stress and early death to male gender. The present is bright and the future looks brighter. Enjoy the progress and embrace the change. You are free to believe what you want and live your life accordingly, but if you try to force the "return to 1950's" beliefs on others, you will get justifiably steamrolled.

73   Ceffer   2016 Feb 23, 10:31am  

rando says

women tend to assume men are interested in their accomplishments, but sexually, accomplishments in women are invisible. men couldn't care less about that. it really is mostly about looks for men, which makes evolutionary sense too, since men were after their fertility historically. accomplishment was largely irrelevant to raising children.

How about a woman who fits neatly on the plywood pillory, but doesn't have one of those piercing, shrieky, screaming voices. Perhaps just an attractive Sotto Voce.

Women should be rated by how well they can be muffled with pillowcases and linens. Ought there not be a standard?

« First        Comments 53 - 73 of 73        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions