Back the camera off a bit, try to look like you're listening to somebody you're mildy interested in talking to you - don't beam a smile, smirking or even looking a bit surly beats grinning like a moron.
Fear. Just like the fear of nuclear war which prevents total war in the modern world.
Animals that live peacefully are the ones under a permanent threat of some description - like rabbits, rabbits can breed in abundance and never conflict with other rabbits over resources because the rabbit population is constantly kept in check by a predator. Nuclear weapons to us are the equivalent of the fox to the rabbit, only they don't provide a population check which means that Humanity, unlike rabbits, comes to overpopulate the globe.
Or at all. Most people grow up and they adopt the broad mindset of the status-quo, now if the status-quo has been proven to be an inept failure - in the way it has so conclusively - then the children are more sensible and correct than the adults.
The child knows nothing and knows that it knows nothing, the adult knows only failed way but actually believes in them - a belief so religious and irrational that they will murder themselves, their culture and their own children in service to their "morality".
So no, wisdom does not come with age, wisdom comes with accordance and exposure to reality.
I would also suggest that wisdom is genetically predisposed and this is why the "lemming" and "free-thinker" is not a Black & White status, but a series of gradients between the wise and the decadently silly, even when comparing closely-related groups and backgrounds the diversity remains which means that inborn Human nature exists! We're not a blank slate or mere putty to be moulded as the Fascististically-minded would wish us to believe.
Once upon a time in functional civilisation then experience did equal wisdom. However, uniquely to our modern epoch(because of unparalled debts, welfare and sweatshop labours)the Western person can be dysfunctional(or at the most, materially resourceless)their entire life and still manage to stay alive. Only in this era can one be reality-illiterate from birth to old-age without dying inbetween.
Now there's a mature and responsible attitude that will secure civlisation for generations to come.
It's not that anti-civilisational actions don't have consequences, it's just that people in power can shirk these consequences and make someone else pay for them.
"my life, my choice - someone else's responsibility!" Is the ethic of the banker(even if it does sound more like a Feminist motto).
Yes, of course they can. But statistically speaking;
They're less likely to get married. If they do get married, they're more likely to divorce. She is more likely to cheat on her Husband. She is much less likely to have kids. If she does have kids, she is more likely to be unhappy about it. He will be unhappy if she makes more than him. She will be unhappy if she makes more than him.
And saving the best until the last: the Husband is more likely to fall ill. A study found that a Wife who works under 40 hours a week had no impact on her Husband's health, but a Wife who worked over 40 hours a week had, and I quote, a "substantial, statistically significant, negative effects on changes in her husband’s health over that time span". Awesome.
We're a strange nation. We're either wonderfully and weirdly individual or incredibly uniform slogan-shouters or proles - with little middle ground.
And this newfound, modern sense of feigned and insisted upon individualism where you are an individual even if you've never been/done/said/thought anything original in your life seems to be killing off the last of the eccentrics.
In resource-rich environments where the pie is ever-expanding then yes it is. However, where wealth and growth are limited by practical realities then greater thought has to be given to how wealth is distributed to avoid concentrating wealth into too few hands and denying the poor/young the right to pursue opportunity.
She's saying it's putting men off. I'm saying this will help. You don't wanna help. You want make to failings more comfortable - it's nurturing!
And it didn't matter in the past because not having a cell phone didn't make you unsociable and weird to people that would not know better(assuming they were wrong).
But no, I didn't ask about scammers. I've never asked anyone about scammers. One of my greatest flaws has always been assuming intelligence in the other person.
She obviously wants to meet a guy and not having a phone isn't helping. When she finds one she can get rid of the phone if she wants to.
It doesn't matter if it's fair or not that not having a cell phone gives a bad impression to people that barely know her, but nonetheless people she wishes to attract.. The rest of the world exists and you have to live in regard of this fact. Life is conditional, get over it.
I can believe that, I've seen women(to be fair: Leftoid women)get up and leave the room when some innocent, commonsensical, apolitical guy came forth with a sliver of crimethink.
And as for the point of older women, I'm not sure if it is their age itself that makes them allergic to reason and against the enlightenment, or the fact that they come from a particularly dysfunctional generation of loudmouthed losers and moralising misfits. I'd say both.
The good news is marriage and motherhood is at least a partial remedy to this female narcissism. If her children's lives and welfare depend upon her being objective and reality conscious, then her vain solipsism will soon be forgotten about.
Rhetorical nonsense, perfect example. Where did I say negative 2? Or water in a vapor form? What's the need to twist what I've said into something I did not say?
What I'm saying to you is that your position is both indefensible and irrefutable. If everything is perception, then what you think can NEVER be wrong - which is the appeal for women.
And like I've just said, this mentality means that the merit of every point made rests upon its rhetoric, its style and its appearance. And we wonder why modern politics is nothing but spin since women started voting en masse.
Obstinance_Works Forum Posts (3,514)
RE: why wont women message me?
Back the camera off a bit, try to look like you're listening to somebody you're mildy interested in talking to you - don't beam a smile, smirking or even looking a bit surly beats grinning like a moron.