Well first these are the frequent talking points of incels when they harp on what they consider “low value females”. If you find yourself constantly repeating such devaluing talking points, maybe a break from the internet would do you good. Secondly, and more generally, it is usually more attractive to talk about the things you love than the things you hate. Unless you have already established that you and the other person hate the same things, then you can bond over that too.
This. She probably wasn’t disgusted by the content, but by the form of what he said.
I can almmost guarantee this is what it is. One of those isn’t even a big deal. If I was single I wouldn’t date a single mom, not because there’s anything wrong with them but because I’m looking for a serious relationship, and I know I’m not emotionally ready to be a father and I know I never will be.
I don’t want kids for that reason. I was raised by a single mom and have seen how difficult it is. Nothing but respect for all of them out there.
My boi here knows how to hold a conversation.
A skill OOP seems to be severely lacking in
Incels? there are plenty of family men that think this way. They stuck to their preferences and have a much better life for it. We shouldn’t marginalize them for it and give them names that don’t make any sense also being afraid to speak about preferences is not good.
If an incel becomes a family man, he isn’t an incel anymore. It’s part of the definition of incel. Also, they don’t have a better life for it, but a better life despite it (if they even have a better life, incels tend to sabotage their own happines). And you say we shouldn’t marginalise men,but it’s okay to marginalise women?
All this inclusivity talk but keep shitting on incels?? How does that work?
Preferences are fine. It still matters how you express them. In the current zeitgeist, with inceldom being a thing, the way these preferences were expressed smacked of that. The fact that you want to defend this specific trifecta of otherwise completely unrelated preferences, claiming they lead to a better life, makes me think you might be an incel yourself, or maybe just a conservative who’s consumed a few too many such videos promoting “family values” and purporting that these are threatened by a woman’s weight, or her having to raise a child on her own, or her seeking love and attention on dating apps. Truth is these are pretty much unrelated to whether one values family and to each other. It’s just a collection of caricatures, stereotypes, and cautionary tales circulating in conservative circles. If all one can think of when asked for their preferences regarding a partner are these known talking points, it is a little suspect. FWIW, I do not think we should marginalize conservatives. But I do think we should marginalize misogyny.
How you express them is crazy lol… express them by not being afraid. Never be afraid to say them so it can be heard and respected. You talk all this inclusivity and shit on incels.
There are more appropriate ways to say this:
"Nobody with kids. I might want kids some day, but I’m not ready yet, and it feels like there would be too much pressure to either be involved with her kids or be cut out of a major portion of her life until we’re really serious. And again, not ready.
And somebody athletic, since I’m into biking and hiking and other activities that require a certain level of fitness.
And… well, somebody who isn’t into the whole casual sex thing, honestly. I think sex is special and, for me, requires a strong emotional connection. I want someone who has similar views on sex."
See, I feel like it changes it when you’re not focusing on the other person, but yourself. I’m not ready for kids, I’m into fitness, I’m a demisexual. It sets up the same thing without disparaging people who aren’t what you’re looking for.
I’ll first say that from a social standpoint it makes sense to focus on yourself when asked that. But the person asked “tell me what you look for in a girl”. You would have to be pretty damn masterful at thinking on your feet to take that question and immediately flip your answers into I statements. Especially if you’re anon and obviously don’t get asked things like this a lot.
No kids is a common wish although the reason for it can make or break how fine it is to have.
My guess is that anon is overweight, and the person they were talking to was thinking of friends they had that were overweight and were great people.
Anon betrayed that their preference was a bit delusional and/or didn’t understand that it can take work to be in shape and takes it for granted that women should be expected to be fit for him without him having to do anything. That’s a pretty sour fart of an opinion.
The no dating apps thing is pretty cringe. And could certainly make you seem like a pariah to most people. It definitely betrays a sense of superiority if it’s in your top 3 dating requirements. I feel like anon knowing the word demisexual is slim to none but that would be the best thing you could say.
Actually my guess is that this is fake and anon is just stirring the hate mongering pot.
I also casually declare strangers I meet at a bar for 20 minutes to be great catches and offer up any of my single friends phone numbers. Dont you?
friend’s gf
few hours
I agree that it’s likely made up, and that the guy likely has a lot of misogynistic views, but you at least don’t need to misrepresent the post.
My only gripe with this is that nobody should have to defend themself for not wanting kids. If you don’t want kids then you don’t want kids and should be able to just leave it at that.
Nobody SHOULD have to explain anything. So it’s okay to not do it. but if you’re on a date, where you’re trying to put yourself out there and establish at least a friendly relationship, you probably want to be cordial and share your thoughts on the matter. Instead of just shutting down mid-date.
I don’t consider it a defense, exactly. It’s more clarification. Just saying “no kids” might suggest he doesn’t want kids ever, which would reduce the potential partners unnecessarily (and if he does want kids eventually, being paired with someone specifically because they don’t want kids would just create problems later). Saying “no kids yet” sets them up with someone who doesn’t have kids but might in the future.
This is an actualized response. In the moment a lot of people can’t pull this off, it does take practice. You’re right, of course, this is better…I just wish people would more commonly be willing to ask a clarifying question or two before pulling out the butcher’s knife.
Some folks just aren’t good with their words and may otherwise be great people. In this situation, true or not, they were talking for some time. I think that level of interaction is worth some benefit of the doubt and the tiniest bit of patience. Instead, despite hitting it off and having a great conversation, shallow lady over there judges him by a single moment amongst probably a dozen leading up to it.
…but that is how it goes. That’s the game. It’s all just a bit silly though.
This is an actualized response…
I agree with you 100%, but I’d say it’s easier than it seems. It does require practice, for sure, but I’d argue that talking like an incel also requires practice. (Lee’s assume the fictional guy in the Green text got his practice on 4Chan).
I think the thing is that bro is making a choice; whether that choice is to consciously talk about the things he dislikes in low value females, instead of just himself or what he likes (as you would do in date), or to spend his day on 4Chan, unconsciously practicing and learning how to be more like Andrew Tate.
Either way, the problem is not lack of skill, it’s the choice to do nothing or even dig in harder into poor communication skills.
Then comes the lack of appropriate feedback, without judgement, to help them realize that it is them who are turning themselves into “low-value men” if there were to judge themselves by the same measure.
I like how you put this. Anon was asked requirements and all he gave were deal-breakers. It comes off as desperate, crass, or both.
Its also fake. I could rewrite the ending.
“Friends GF laughs uncontrollably at my list of dealbreakers, as she’s drunk and at a bar, not sober at a coffee shop”
“Friends gf proceeds to go around the bar posing my list to every woman, and eventually also all the men, hysterically laughing the whole time while I try to hide by the jukebox.”
Also, this is just a really negative set of statements. “I DON’T want X, Y, and Z.” Even giving anon a pretty big benefit of the doubt and assuming they didn’t state it like “No fatties,” they aren’t really saying what they want in a partner, just a bunch of standards by which they would judge somebody.
The search for a romantic partner should involve more positives than negatives. You should have ideas about what things you like in people and yourself, and what interests and activities that you’re passionate about and would like to share with someone. If you start with a laundry list of things that you don’t like, that’s not just going to be off-putting, it’s going to be limiting you to thinking only in those terms, rather than finding something that brings you joy, and finding someone that has that in common with you.
not having positive preferences to look for but instead having multiple dealbreakers suggests that all women are functionally the same to you except for the ones who you think are lower quality… that is to say, you are not meaningfully valuing other people
Deal breakers are things that are limits. Limits are–in general–a good thing. It’s not that you’re saying that women–or people in general–are fungible, but you’re saying that people that fit any of these criteria won’t work.
IIRC, Dan Savage has said that there’s no settling down without settling. You can–should–have limits, but if it’s more than five things, you need to look at yourself very, very closely. You aren’t going to like every single thing about your partner, but you have to be able to accept them.
I could say, for instance, that I prefer people that are heavily tattooed, pierced, scarred, branded, and implanted. (…Which limits me to about .0001% of the US population.) But that’s not a deal breaker; I’m not going to reject someone because they don’t fit that particular preference, even though my body modification is important to me. On the other hand, I absolutely will not date anyone that doesn’t have a worldview that’s grounded in reality, e.g., is religious/“spiritual”, or believes in any conspiratorial nonsense, because I couldn’t have respect for a person like that. THAT’S a deal breaker. I won’t date someone that wants children; I’m unfit to be a parent, and I had myself sterilized a number of years ago. Again: that’s a deal breaker, because as with religious garbage, it’s a question of basic values.
But when people ask for your preferences they want to know your actual preferences (the positives), not the dealbreakers.
For example, if I asked someone out to lunch and asked what kind of food do they prefer (their preference) then I don’t want to hear a list off all the foods they dislike.
But the point of saying that certain things are dealbreakers is that, outside of those, anything is within the realm of possibility.
Do I prefer people with “extreme” body modifications? Sure. Is that a requirement? No.
With food, maybe I prefer Brazilian steakhouses, but the only thing I really dislike is pasta, sandwiches, and deep-fried everything. I’m not going to exclude Thai, Indian, Ethiopian, or Polish food, just because it’s not my favorite kind of restaurant. I’m literally going to be fine with anything that isn’t on my dislike list.
Continuing with the food analogy.
The problem is that I’m basically up for trying almost anything.
I know what I foods I probably wouldn’t like (paprika for example).
And there are certain foods that I like more than others, but there is no hard preference.
Asian food? No problem.
Pizza? Love it.
McDonald’s bit plain but always reliable.
Kebab? Nice.
There simply is no preference, as long as I like the taste and it fills the stomach, I am happy.
My preference is women not yet blessed with children, in good shape, and not whoring themselves out on dating apps like tinder.
It’s actually really simple to use positive language!
It actually is -
-I’m not interested in having kids, so I’d want a partner that feels the same.
-I like exercising, so I’d want to be with someone who does as well, particuarly if they’re into (insert physical hobby you enjoy)
-I like to go out and do (insert activities in meatspace that often involve meeting people), so I’d be interested in someone who likes to do that kind of thing over just sitting at home scrolling the internet.
These are good qualifiers that more or less equate to the same thing as OP states without coming across like a dick. From there, if someone was to introduce someone to OP, they can make a further determination of compatibility, and if someone doesn’t match due to the blunter version of the above it can be as easy as “I didn’t really feel a connection, [and unless she’s actually kind of a bitch] but she’s a great person and I hope she meets someone awesome”.
Edit: That said, if you’re the version of yourself that doesn’t match what you’re looking for, you should be working on that before seeking a partner IMO.
Meanwhile women: 6 foot, 7 figures, 8 inches or move along.
“I just want a manic pixie dream girl whos never known the touch of a man but is an absolute nymphomaniac and doesn’t have sharp knees is that so much to ask???”