♂♂ from ♀♀'s point of view


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Male engineers, maybe.

That reminds me of an "engineer" joke I once saw:

Engineer 1 arrives at Engineer 2's house on a very powerful motorcycle.

Engineer 2: Where did you get the wheels?

Engineer 1: Oh, a lady rode up to me on it yesterday, stripped off her leather suit and said: "Take what you want!" So I took the motorcycle.

Engineer 2: Wise choice, mate! The suit probably wouldn't have fit! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

i got a warning point for telling that joke and had my post deleted.

Maybe that was where I originally saw it (before it got deleted).

My last warning point on this forum was over 10 years ago, but I had two before that. If I get one for this post, do you think I'll be banned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a few years ago there was a Dear Abby bit that had me livid.

 

The letter was from a woman who was on her second marriage, this time to a wealthy man who was a widower. 

The woman wanted diamond jewelry, and was frustrated that while he bought her jewelry, none of it was diamond. She figured that because he was spending all sorts of money on his kids but wouldn't get her diamonds, it meant that she was in second place as far as his attentions went. Abby responded by telling her to purchase her own diamonds. 

The thing is?

In the letter the woman listed some of the ways she tried to tell her husband she wanted diamonds.

...Such as "leaving jewelry catalogs open to the pages depicting the jewelry she wanted" and "having his sister talk to him". 

In other words, indirect methods of communication rather than simply asking for anything.

What both Abby and the woman missed is that the husband clearly knew she wanted jewelry, but that her indirect methods meant that he didn't get that she specifically wanted diamonds. 

In other words, the heart of the problem was that the woman and her husband weren't communicating effectively. Telling the woman to just get her own diamonds merely kicked that can down the road, and could have easily led to the marriage imploding. 

Instead, what the woman needed to do was sit down, take a look at other areas where she and her husband were seemingly miscommunicating, and take a hard look at what was leading to it. 

If it was *just* the issue of the diamond jewelry, then she should count her blessings and likely not press the matter further. But if it was multiple areas in which they were not communicating right, then it might be time for her to get with a neutral third party and broach the issue with an eye towards getting counseling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

I remember a few years ago there was a Dear Abby bit that had me livid.

 

The letter was from a woman who was on her second marriage, this time to a wealthy man who was a widower. 

The woman wanted diamond jewelry, and was frustrated that while he bought her jewelry, none of it was diamond. She figured that because he was spending all sorts of money on his kids but wouldn't get her diamonds, it meant that she was in second place as far as his attentions went. Abby responded by telling her to purchase her own diamonds. 

The thing is?

In the letter the woman listed some of the ways she tried to tell her husband she wanted diamonds.

...Such as "leaving jewelry catalogs open to the pages depicting the jewelry she wanted" and "having his sister talk to him". 

In other words, indirect methods of communication rather than simply asking for anything.

What both Abby and the woman missed is that the husband clearly knew she wanted jewelry, but that her indirect methods meant that he didn't get that she specifically wanted diamonds. 

In other words, the heart of the problem was that the woman and her husband weren't communicating effectively. Telling the woman to just get her own diamonds merely kicked that can down the road, and could have easily led to the marriage imploding. 

Instead, what the woman needed to do was sit down, take a look at other areas where she and her husband were seemingly miscommunicating, and take a hard look at what was leading to it. 

If it was *just* the issue of the diamond jewelry, then she should count her blessings and likely not press the matter further. But if it was multiple areas in which they were not communicating right, then it might be time for her to get with a neutral third party and broach the issue with an eye towards getting counseling. 

If you were wondering why the MGTOW movement seems to be gaining momentum, look no further than Exhibit A above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vort said:

If you were wondering why the MGTOW movement seems to be gaining momentum, look no further than Exhibit A above.

If I wasn't a member of the church (and didn't already have an amazing wife) I would probably be right there along with them. I have so many young cousins that say the dating scene right now is a complete nightmare. So much entitlement and laziness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scottyg said:

If I wasn't a member of the church (and didn't already have an amazing wife) I would probably be right there along with them. I have so many young cousins that say the dating scene right now is a complete nightmare. So much entitlement and laziness.

Satan laughs and his angels rejoice.

Here is my opinion about MGTOW from four years ago. It pretty much expresses my current feelings on the subject.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Vort said:

If you were wondering why the MGTOW movement seems to be gaining momentum, look no further than Exhibit A above.

While I agree that such behavior is extremely annoying (I'm glad I have a wife who simply tells me what she wants) I disagree that is the reason for MGTOW.

I believe it is two reasons:

  • Someone else posted a while back about The Husband Store.  
  • Women have made the decision to have a career before a marriage.

Put those two together, and yeah.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSrof_oCrFg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Vort said:

Satan laughs and his angels rejoice.

Here is my opinion about MGTOW from four years ago. It pretty much expresses my current feelings on the subject.

 

From what I hear (which could be one sided) women are now actively seeking "starter marriages". This gives them the opportunity to "practice marriage", and then upon their planned divorce, they get to take a large portion of their husband's monetary assets which "moves them ahead" while they progress in their careers and ssearch for their real Mr. Right.

This is of course all unknown to their first husband, who knows nothing of their wife's true intentions. I have seen many bitter and angry commments from "red-pilled" men that this has hapened to warning others not to fall into Delilah's lap.

The adversary has many tools in his arsenal. Anything teaching or practice that disrupts the family, or potential families, is right near the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

While I agree that such behavior is extremely annoying (I'm glad I have a wife who simply tells me what she wants) I disagree that is the reason for MGTOW.

I believe it is two reasons:

  • Someone else posted a while back about The Husband Store.  
  • Women have made the decision to have a career before a marriage.

Put those two together, and yeah.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSrof_oCrFg

I shared the story with my wife. I chuckled at it, but she said it was unfair. Yet...she can't explain to me why she thinks that way. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, scottyg said:

I shared the story with my wife. I chuckled at it, but she said it was unfair. Yet...she can't explain to me why she thinks that way. :)

My wife didn't laugh at the Husband Store, but she did laugh at the Wife Store.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, scottyg said:

From what I hear (which could be one sided) women are now actively seeking "starter marriages". This gives them the opportunity to "practice marriage", and then upon their planned divorce, they get to take a large portion of their husband's monetary assets which "moves them ahead" while they progress in their careers and ssearch for their real Mr. Right.

This is of course all unknown to their first husband, who knows nothing of their wife's true intentions. I have seen many bitter and angry commments from "red-pilled" men that this has hapened to warning others not to fall into Delilah's lap.

I'm not sure why this is considered "new".  They were called "gold-diggers" in past years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I'm not sure why this is considered "new".  They were called "gold-diggers" in past years.

A bit back on YouTube there was a video that was ostensibly based on a real-life message exchange between two individuals.

A woman called up a college friend of hers who was now working for a law firm. The woman said she was getting divorced, and wanted as much money as she could get from her husband. 

It turned out that the divorce was because of the *woman* cheating on her husband. 

The friend had to explain that in a situation like this, the woman would be the one paying her husband as the woman was the one whose actions caused the marriage to collapse. Not only that, her affair partner would likely have to pay as well. 

Cue the woman having a meltdown because she didn't have the money and her lover ghosted her the moment she told him what was going on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of gender-based humorous videos—I was floored yesterday to learn that Monica Barbaro, who plays the female pilot from the new Top Gun film, was also the female lead in the infamous “It’s Not About the Nail” video from a few years back.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Speaking of gender-based humorous videos—I was floored yesterday to learn that Monica Barbaro, who plays the female pilot from the new Top Gun film, was also the female lead in the infamous “It’s Not About the Nail” video from a few years back.

I've never seen that before.  That was hilarious!  Yes!  That's what it's like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share