all 198 comments

[–]joaquim56 165 points166 points  (27 children)

Hey, the ladies wanted to be independent. They got it. Additionally, there are a lot of great men, but they're plumbers, carpenters, blue collar guys.

However, even though those men may make bank. Plumbers can make a nice living, but modern woman's hypergamy dictates that they want another white collar drone to marry.

Additionally, why would any man marry when:

-They can get no strings attached sex without commitment. And women start rationing sex after commitment and marriage.

-Divorce laws being what they are.

You ladies wanted this. Now reap the consequences.

I'm just always baffled how most women miss this. Men always wanted sex. In past generations, marriage provided that incentive for men to "grow up". Now what's the point? Most women marry way past their physical peak, after being pumped and dumped by bad boys. If you find your unicorn, you can still get cleaned out in divorce. And having kids is a liability due to child support payments.

You reap what you sow.

[–]Endorsed ContributortrpSenator 24 points25 points  (3 children)

marriage provided that incentive for men to "grow up".

I can go on an entire post about just this topic. Previously, men had to "grow up" really fast and get their shit together. Mainly because women were looking to get married and settled at an early age and were only looking for the best guys to commit their life with. So as the sexual market dictated, men quickly got their shit together to raise their SMV in hopes of snagging a quality wife.

That's all changed now, obviously. Now men have far less incentive, socially speaking, to get their shit together. I mean, why would they? The job market sucks, and pussy is easy.

[–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 13 points14 points  (2 children)

Also in years past mommy and daddy couldn't support the kids into their thirties, besides in a good portion of generation X we never wanted our parents to support us. We wanted to make it on our own, and we did. The number of younger men who have that "Fuck you, I will do it myself" mindset are growing more rare, but they are still out there.

Some of us, like myself, had no choice. We had to make it on our own or never be able to do anything with our lives.

[–]_Dog- 1 point2 points  (1 child)

A lot of blame is put on generations, but we as men we rise to expectations. If no one expects anything from us nothing is what we will give. If everything is handed to us...

[–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There have been changes in recent generations, and mine, the X'ers, are complicit in some negative changes. Bubble wrapping kids, helicopter parents, everyone wins, no losers, and a host of other shit that does not prepare a child for the real world were implemented by people my age.

We were spanked, beaten and grew up in a relatively violent era, but we spared the rod with our kids and created far too many entitled brats unwilling to put forth the effort. It holds them back and does them no favors, but life is a very harsh yet effective teacher, they learn eventually despite my peers falling down on the job.

[–]the99percent1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It could be fiscally cheaper to; a) fuck prostitutes. b) find a surrogate mom and have an IV kid. c) hire a nanny to take care of your kid. d) fuck more prostitutes.

You get no strings attached sex and the joy of raising children.

rather than go through the hassle of courtship (beta bucks), spending big on a wedding for people you never even wanted in your life (in laws), only to be divorce raped later in life.

If having kids are the only reason for marriage these days, then you can take them out of the equation and find better, more cost effective alternatives of having them.

As your networth grows and you maintain a healthy relationship with money, you'll be richer and far more affluential as you age.

If you remain unattached, you definitely can do as and what you please, buy what you please, travel to wherever pleases you. Unshackled by the heavy burden of thinking about the SO who cock carouseled her way through life to end washed up in some beta bucks lap. There's true freedom to be found from not playing your role as the stick bitch of society.

If alpha males can fuck for free, why am I not allowed the same? My anger becomes fuel for self actualization and when I do mature and women are suddenly giving attention to my sky rocketed stock value, I have the choice of turning my back on them and going my own way. That's beauty of true power and freedom affords you.

[–]Traz_Onmale 6 points7 points  (17 children)

Women don't like marriage, they are the ones who most often divorce their men.

[–]cat-tasrophic 33 points34 points  (9 children)

They don't like it, they love it.

You'd divorce and remarry more often if it came with all of the benefits afforded to women.

[–]JustReward 25 points26 points  (6 children)

If men had these benefits in marriage:

When you choose to marry there is no expectation that you buy an expensive ring or pay for a ceremony, nor do fathers chip in for their daughter's wedding. You go with your wife to a courthouse and obtain a marriage certificate. Any party you choose to hold comes after the fact and is a simple gathering of immediate family.

You are entitled to the things that you crave. Instead of marriage providing the female partner with legal commitment, a guaranteed income, potential alimony, and half of your assets, you are guaranteed a woman who keeps herself in shape for you and who cannot deny sex with any real frequency. The societal expectation is that she is excellent at cooking, cleaning, and maintaining your home for when you return from work.

You are free to divorce your wife if she fails to uphold any of the above or if she can't easily bear you children, and there is no stigma against "trading her in for a younger model." In fact, half of all marriages end this way, and it's accepted.

Now, is it not clear that a hell of a lot more divorces would be initiated by men?

[–]icyhot39 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Now, is it not clear that a hell of a lot more divorces would be initiated by men?

That sarcasm doesn't translate easily over the inter-webs. I'm going to suppose it wasn't sarcasm for a moment.

While men would like 'younger models' it's not a primary need/desire. Women who make good wives wouldn't easily find themselves cast aside. Why? men aren't short-range thinking animals. Young sex isn't the best (or often very good even). Men love completely differently than women (and are the true romantics according to Rollo).

Frankly I find it insulting to reduce men's interest in women solely to our sexual desire to fuck the prettiest of them... which, while you may not have said explicitly, is the inference.

EDIT: 'it's not a primary need/desire' would more accurately be: 'it's not our only competing need or desire'

[–]QQ_L2P 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Mens only biological desire is to fuck as many of the prettiest women they can. Barring the limitations of game and logistics, if they can, they will.

Frankly, I find it insulting

Where the hell do you think you are? r/TBP? Biological facts don't give a shit if you're insulted, and neither do we.

[–]icyhot39 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mens only biological desire is to fuck as many of the prettiest women they can

Ignoring the fact that I wasn't talking only in terms of biology.. you're grossly over-simplifying. You're saying that:

  • Men don't have the biological need/desire to reproduce? No biological need/desire to see my offspring succeed?
  • Men don't don't have a biological need/desire for human interaction? That we could simply live our entire lives alone without any human contact (besides a little fucking)?
  • Men don't have any biological need/desire to create & build things?
  • etc.

All in all, I see this type of reductionism insulting because it's TRP's version of the crazy feminist who claims that all men should be castrated... because, apparently, our only biological need is to fuck, and we obviously can't be trusted to do anything but rape and pillage.

It's insulting because I am more than just one desire. I have competing desires, and I do my best to find a balance which provides the most agreeable outcome and happiness for myself.

[–]JustReward 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I wasn't being sarcastic, but I do agree with you to some extent. Or, at least, I'll entertain the theory that you're right, as I've never been married. I look at my father and mother's relationship and see they've had a long and mostly happy marriage. I know my father, being of high status in his field, could easily have the opportunity to leave my mother and "trade her in," but I know he'd never do that. He certainly values her as a person, and she does to him. When I was young he'd tell me that it's important to be with someone you're attracted to, but at some point she's going to lose her looks due to age and due to the fact that people simply get used to each other and want what they can't have, and at that point it'll become clear that you need to be with someone you actually like,` deep down, apart from physical attraction.

I think what he says holds true for long term relationships, at least in terms of what I'd be looking for if I cared to have a LTR.

I stand by my point, anyway. If divorce and marriage favored men the tables would be turned.

[–]AnotherLostCause 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Except history doesn't support that view. Divorce rates were very low when men got everything. Men deal in matters like loyalty and honor, women don't, they just help each other hamster. Other men did not respect men who turned their backs on their family obligations and that lack of respect came with real world consequences. Women just shout "you go grrrrllll."

If we went back to a system where in the event of a divorce: men kept everything they earned, they got custody of of their (DNA tested) children, and phony "abuse" claims were treated with the respect they deserved and prosecuted with penalties for a false accusations equaling the penalty for the actual crime then the divorce rates would plummet. Even if you let women leave at anytime for any reason, if they had to go out and support themselves they wouldn't leave. Actually throw in an automatic DNA test at the birth of every child and things would go even better. Women would of course get any children born out of wedlock but they would not be entitled to any support payments. Marriage was originally an exchange of sexuality for the products of labor, it would be much better for society if we returned to that.

[–]cat-tasrophic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Icyhot39, you're absolutely right. From the dawn of mankind, we've actually be interested in a deeper desire. To have meaningful conversation with the most interesting one.

In fact we see this in all mammals. They aren't seeking the best sexual mate, they're just seeking the one they're most emotionally compatible with! :) :) :)

To be clear, just for you. Your hamster is running a million miles an hour to try to give further meaning to every girl you've had oneitis for. But strip down every external bullshit thing (things that aren't ingrained in our biology, like what kind of music she likes and what art she finds interesting) and what do you have? You have guys trying to find the most genetically blessed woman that they can reasonably have sex with. Biology.

[–]Traz_Onmale 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except nobody wants to marry a post wall divorced woman.

[–]PerniciousOne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They like marriage, but they love divorce.

All the benefits of marriage, with none of the accountability.

[–]1independentmale 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They don't like marriage but they sure do love the shit out of a wedding.

[–]95wave 4 points5 points  (0 children)

marrying beta men is like a pinata for women, the woman puts on a blindfold to put up with him, beats the shit out of him emotionally and financially, takes half his candy, and leaves with it.

[–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Why have only one special day all about you and the white dress when you can have two, three, or twenty, and still get paid by all those suckers she cheated on.

[–]mr_kat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Women don't want marriages; they want weddings.

[–]ShinyBrah 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Is women hating and looking down on blue collar guys an American thing? In Australia, most women respect and like tradesmen a lot more than white collar men.

[–]Rush-into-the-fray 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It is an american thing. Blue collar work, even top tier work is seen as special ed of the working world. The joke is on them, I don't have to fix your toilet, let the poop water rise, ya cunt. As for the women hating, imagine building a cardboard/paperboard go cart, and asking $5000.00 for it. People are going to get mad.

[–]Prattler26 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And having kids is a liability due to child support payments.

Money is nothing! If you love your children, it's getting part of your soul being ripped off!

[–]Manuel_S 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Independence goes both ways. As women became independent of men and pushed them off - men understood they could do exactly the same.

It was obvious, but of course, the obvious is never understood.

[–]jmg83 51 points52 points  (3 children)

Woman does what makes her happy, she's "liberated". Man does what makes him happy, he's "immature". Does this seem right to you?

[–]Traz_Onmale 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Women who don't want to settle down and be mothers are also called immature and selfish even.

[–]-Tyler_Durden- 34 points35 points  (6 children)

Some of the greatest contributions to humanity were given to us by "Peter Pan" men. Issac Newton, Friedrich Nietzsche, Plato, John Locke, Beethoven, and Nikola Tesla to name a few.

Unless you are Genghis Khan, you will have a negligible effect upon the gene pool, even if you have a dozen children. What does matter is how much freedom you have in living your life. Slavery can exist without shackles and without you realizing it.

[–]topspeedj 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Yes but women don't think in terms of contributing to help wider society as a goal, quite the inverse in fact. They are incapable of considering such a deed by their own volition. That's why female solipsism is talked about here.

[–]Traz_Onmale 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yet they are attracted to men who accomplish something.

[–]colovick 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Because accomplishments raise your social standing, which is what they want to cling to. They want to be associated with your higher status because it makes them look and feel better to other women.

[–]clear_lights 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Exactly.

Found a post that resonated well with me regarding pursuing a relationship with women:

Why am I doing this?

Followed by:

And for what? Most of these people already look down on my hobbies, what I like doing in my spare time, so why the hell am I trying to win their affection?

I like the female body, right? Yeah... but do I like the generalization of the female brain?

It dawned on me that my whole life in the pursuit of "love" was also a systematic betrayal of who I like being.

So I decided:

Why bring myself the angst and depression, of seeking out something that seems like it will bring me angst and depression?

Because why is it more important that I have a girlfriend than "Are you happy?"

Because truly I am.

If you're happy doing what you're doing, fuck what other people say. You can contribute to society with or without a female partner.

[–]Rush-into-the-fray 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Slavery can exist without.... I hope this hits home for some people.

[–][deleted] 59 points60 points  (2 children)

Why won’t these Peter Pan manboys man up and marry aging flighty selfish career gal sluts already?

Fox news has an opinion piece by social conservative Penny Young Nance titled Why Does America Have So Many ‘Peter Pan’ Men? (H/T dragnet). She opens with:

Working in an office full of women, many of whom are young, single gals, I hear all the time, “Where are all the good men out there?” Even in this post-feminist age of asserting independence from men and having both a career and a family, women still want their prince and these days, he can be really tough to find.

If Ms. Nance was a conservative and not a feminist, what she would point out is that it is perfectly fair for women to unilaterally dictate the terms on which they will become wives, but it is also perfectly fair for men to decide what is in their own best interest in response. Women are free to assert their independence; men are free to let them have it. Women are free to try to extend courtship into a lifelong process, but men are free to make their own adjustments. But of course Ms. Nance isn’t a conservative when it comes to issues of the family, she is a feminist.

[–]Rush-into-the-fray 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I extend all of my relationships/one night stands with women into a life long courtship. Mainly because i will never run out of awesome. Mainly because men have no expiration date. Women have a few good years, after that, they have to find a man that enjoys being with them. They can't find those guys because we're all looking for better. Feminism has insured that i will keep looking. Elsewhere.

[–]GeneralCal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why do we have so many? Because the media loves them. They are mindless consumers with disposable income a decade after they should have stayed saving for a house.

[–]curiousthis 60 points61 points  (20 children)

And notice how this is about the "never married" men, not the divorced.

Damn, just thought of another way to get the hamster spinning. If you're over 35 or so and never married, just tell women you're dating that you're divorced. And when they ask for specifics, just say I'm sorry, I don't talk about that part of my life, and watch the hamster spin.

I wonder what will happen in online dating if you switch your status to divorced?

More experimentation is required...

[–]jiveraffe 30 points31 points  (2 children)

More experimentation is required...

I've always wondered about pseudo-mistress game. Buy a cheap, plain gold band and see what difference it makes.

I'd hypothesize that it ups pre-selection, while divorced game is the opposite: pre-rejection.

[–]kindlebluemoon 20 points21 points  (7 children)

In her mind, divorced just means less resources for her to consume.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 11 points12 points  (6 children)

Except that Divorce is also the ultimate in pre-selection.

A woman thought you were a prize that she wanted to (in theory) spend the rest of her life with you. It also means that you had at one point made the ultimate level of commitment which also makes you a good bet on granting that level of commitment again. Also remember Child Support and Alimony isn't forever these days. Eventually she will get all the resources she wants in her mind.

Net result: A minor boost to SMV.

[–]gensyms 5 points6 points  (3 children)

remember Child Support and Alimony isn't forever these days

Two decades is still a very long time.

Divorce is also the ultimate in pre-selection

Yeah, but who'd want an empty beer bottle when she could open a fresh bottle?

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah...

Women (especially post-wall women) look at divorced men like an alcoholic looks at a half empty bottle of beer. It'll do if they can't afford to buy a full bottle.

[–]cascadecombo 1 point2 points  (1 child)

since when do women think like men?

[–]abcd_z 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I see it a little differently. To women, men exist on a sliding scale between Lover and Provider. A 100% Provider is a beta male, good for raising her kid while she's out partying but not much else. A 100% Lover is the guy she'll sleep with for a one-night stand, but she may not even try to follow up because she feels like there's absolutely no chance of a relationship (if she even wants one). Generally to get the best long-term results you want to be around 85% Lover/15% Provider. In other words, mostly lover and just enough provider to keep her from flaking on you.

It also means that you had at one point made the ultimate level of commitment which also makes you a good bet on granting that level of commitment again.

This is Provider mentality. Shame on you.

Eventually she will get all the resources she wants in her mind.

You should not want her to see you as a Provider. You should want her to see you as a Lover. Being seen as a Provider is something to be mitigated against, not something to be worked towards.

Net result: A minor boost to SMV.

No, the net result is she sees you as another potential provider. That's exactly the opposite of the effect you should want.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was engaged about 15 years ago, honest. Really! That's what I'm saying anyway.

[–]16 Endorsed Contributornicethingyoucanthave 4 points5 points  (0 children)

More experimentation is required

The magic words are, "divorced; no kids" - it's like the root password for single moms. It's true in my case. I don't ever lie. I'm just saying that this works. I also don't lead with it because I'm not trying to use it for advantage.

But if a woman likes you, she'll ask you questions about yourself, and when the topic comes up, I definitely do better with that demographic (over 30 single moms) than my never-married buddies, even though I realize they're not necessarily the cream of the crop. I know the consensus here is to avoid them, but there actually are advantages. You just have to set boundaries with regard to the kids.

[–]witchyboi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

My status on OKC is "divorced". Doesn't seem to help.

[–]tsudonimh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Widower" would probably work better.

[–]truchisoft 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love this, i'm gonna try it.

[–]buffalo_slim 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Can you explain? I'm not being critical I'm just not entirely following your reasoning here.

[–]Traz_Onmale 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He's using the term hamster incorrectly. He means she'll be more attracted to a divorced man because it proves desirability and willingness to commit.

[–]curiousthis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And when they ask for specifics, just say I'm sorry, I don't talk about that part of my life, and watch the hamster spin.

The hamster spin here is having her start to wonder: why isn't he talking about his ex? Most divorced men I meet keep trashing their exes. Is he still seeing her? Are they good friends? Are they talking about getting back together?

in short, that makes you something she's wondering about. And we all know where that leads.

[–]wow_dead_huh 28 points29 points  (2 children)

We need to discuss "Cinderella women"

[–]95wave 1 point2 points  (1 child)

you mean those with the princess complex?

[–]Rush-into-the-fray 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, those girls who were worshiped by their fathers because they were (1)the first person who actually needed dad in their delicate years, (2) Way hotter than the wife could ever be, and that scares him.. Then used him for their first car, college money, wedding ceremony, etc. These guys are men who were born to protect their family, but found themselves in a world where it did not matter how strong they could provide. Their girls had it all, and the actual rape/abduction/murder/violent crime troubles were extremely changed to keep him in the house. He is not the leader, he is the battery that keeps the matrix warm

[–]Doctor_Mayhem 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Having been raised a conservative Christian, it does hurt to have to say it, but it's the truth. Why get married when modern girls prove time and time again that they're not worth it? Yeah, keep shaming me for not playing your game, society. You can't convince me to give up my very life and sacrifice for a society that can't even fucking be grateful.

[–]2jagrmeister721 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"Growing up" to them means suppressing our own wants and goals for lifelong servitude to their baby rabies instinct, their nesting instinct, and their vapid life of constant trips to Bed Bath & Beyond, and a life of Keeping up with the Joneses.

To a woman, a man "Growing up" means surrendering his quality of life. It is code for submission. It has nothing to do with maturity, earning a solid income, net assets, or responsibility.

Have a look at this:

The study, "Lifting As We Climb: Women of Color, Wealth, and America's Future," found that while the median net worth of single white women ages 36-49 is $42,600 -- 61 percent of the median wealth for same-aged, single white men -- single women of color in the same age group have a median wealth of just $5. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/women-of-color-have-media_n_495238.html)

Single men earn and save considerably more than single women. Single women are grown up children. Have you heard a single woman babble on about reality shows and "boys" lately? That they consider themselves the arbiters of maturity is simply preposterous.

We have nothing to prove. Women want us to believe the marrying them is somehow a "rite of passage" to real manhood or maturity. Don't make me laugh.

[–]HelloJapan1 31 points32 points  (5 children)

can we just ignore what feminists are saying? I dont really go on Tumblr or read these god awful articles written by bitter women. fuck em.

[–]Jack41096 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I wouldn't recommend fucking them. they'll be crazy or fat. neither of which are fun or a good idea

[–]Cousieknow 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You don't stick your dick in crazy

[–]nrjk 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, you can stick your dick in crazy, just don't a) give her your real name b) let her know where you live and c) let her find you the next day.

[–]Rush-into-the-fray 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We can ignore them, but every one else is paying attention. Media loves hatred. So they start some shit. It is our job to cut through the fake..

[–]1thrownaway_MGTOW 0 points1 point  (0 children)

these god awful articles written by bitter women. fuck em.

Nah, let em buy a vibrator.

[–]TheD_ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Shame only works if you want the shamer's approval.

[–]FiveRows 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I've been hearing the 'Peter Pan' thing for decades now. It's not new at all, its usage just comes and goes in waves along with other ways of telling men to "man up".

The new stuff is feminists claiming that men who are attracted to young women have some sort of perverse sexual fetish. It's like telling a woman who's attracted to Channing Tatum that she belongs in the looney bin.

[–]Position5hero 56 points57 points  (17 children)

I mean at the end of the day they can come up with as much shitty terms or whatever as they want, but who cares? Who cares what dumbasses think? At the end of that, that's all it is: the opinions and judgement of an idiot.

[–]Antibuddy[S] 63 points64 points  (16 children)

Absolutely incorrect. It's dumbasses who are in the position to make you look bad to other people who you are either 1.) going to have sex with or 2.) going to make money off of. Your image is one of the most valuable things you have. You need to know how they intend to attack it if you are going to be able to protect it.

[–][deleted]  (11 children)

[deleted]

    [–]1runnerrun2 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    This peculiarity of language to embed us with deeping lying patterns (as information technology would call them and is called a frame here) is in itself a neutral thing though, wanted to add that. In essence all of our communication is catered to provide us with a practically useful framework to deal with the all the practical complexities of the world around us. As you describe it is a good example of how it can be used to spread discord. And then I'm being polite.

    I've gotten intruiged lately by where these leftist ideas keep coming from. Considering they are enforced from higher hand as can be seen in that speech Emma Watson gave before the UN, I mean those men and people aren't idiots.. there has to be some kind of desirable bottom line (for regulation of society) that is driving this. I don't get it tbh.

    [–]Jack41096 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    if we're going to jump to societal control, let's be very hypothetical for a moment.

    the president/entire upper govt is having to answer to the general public due to outcry over an issue. their answer doesn't suffice and a revolution is sparked.

    how many men with a wife and kids are gonna risk their lives and upset the status quo of occasional sex and the illusion of happiness with their life.

    people with no ties (no wife/kids/etc) would be the majority who would stand up for change. it is in the best interest of the 'powers that be' to contain the populous by enslaving them to their own decisions.

    [–]1runnerrun2 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    I completely understand this argument but I have to say it paints such a grim picture. Do the people screaming about oppression of the white male have a point then? Are there alternatives for society regulation?

    Seeing all these things creates more questions than answers.. is there any literature about this or meaningful discussion?

    [–]Jack41096 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I can't say I've found any resources on this but it is common sense although there are likely some who agree with my thinking, that post was my own worst fears played out.

    of course the people screaming of oppression have a point. the oppression of any is the oppression of all. a society cannot be free until it is free as a whole.

    societal regulation is a very grim topic as it stands. either you run on fear or hope. hope is expensive and forces you to provide opportunities to those who conform and punish those who don't. fear is cheap but doesn't last because eventually people will stand up for change.

    people spend their whole lives trying to answer those questions. I can't pretend I have the answers, but as a group I hope we can discover it soon or were fucked.

    [–]geenomike 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Thanks. My biggest problem with feminism is the claim to be pro-gender equality, yet the name inherently devalues men.

    [–]Hatorader 12 points13 points  (2 children)

    I would want marriage and kids if there were any women that were marriage material left.

    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Its a hell of a risk getting married, even with what seems like a 'good' woman.

    [–]16 Endorsed Contributornicethingyoucanthave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I can think of another example to support your position here. What's it called when a woman buys frivolous crap to go in a house? It's called decorating. Now don't get me wrong, I have art in my house. I have plants. I even have a few decorative objects, but every one of them has personal meaning.

    When men buy frivolous things, those things are relegated to one room of the house. What's that room called? "Man-cave" which is something of an insult.

    When our fathers had a single room it was called a study.

    [–]MightyTaint 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    If you think women don't care what societal norms are, and what other people think, you don't know the first thing about women. The vast majority of things women do aren't for the purpose of doing them, it's because they care about what everyone else thinks and wants to influence it in some way. Que how much time and energy they put into their appearance, gossip, status, etc.

    [–]Position5hero 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Plates aren't gonna care what they say,

    They're gonna be like 'Fuck some fat bitch on tumbler said the most desireable high value men are [INSERT DUMB SHIT HERE] now I won't fuck them'

    As far as guys, I'm married with a daughter, but like I see single guys my age and I'm like you know, good for you, cause I know how much fun it is.

    I certainly don't get mad becuase they want other things than I do

    [–]Andress1 8 points9 points  (4 children)

    The future looks good.I want to get a crew full of these guys when im >35 so we can do alot of things together,maybe even live together.Just like that tv show where new divorced guys in their 40's were living the dream,doing whatever the fuck they wanted and fucking women.

    [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    I want to get a crew full of these guys

    This is my social goal for the next several years.

    [–]wow_dead_huh 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    You go guy! Can you imagine if 1 episode of a guys SITC was aired on network tv? Just reverse the stereotypes and watch the for outrage and calls for legislation against mens hate comedy!

    [–]dhump 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Rule #1 of any sitcom - you HAVE to portray the primary male character as a bumbling idiot who could not make it through the day uninjured or otherwise in a livable condition without the primary female character coming to his rescue. Sooooo true to life, right?

    [–]cheeruptitty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    What tv show is that exactly? :P I would love to see it hah

    [–][deleted]  (7 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]1thrownaway_MGTOW 0 points1 point  (5 children)

      Hey Noober... nice try at using modern feminist "shaming" language redefinitions.

      But no soup for you; here is the actual definition:

      A bachelor is a man who is neither married nor cohabitating and who lives independently outside of his parents' home or other institutional setting.

      And a "confirmed" bachelor (or "lifelong" bachelor) is simply a man who has been a bachelor (maintained an independent household) for a number of years, and/or reached an age where he is highly unlikely to marry or form any kind of "cohabitational" relationship.

      From "Whatever happened to the Confirmed Bachelor?: Bachelordom used to be respected."

      Sherlock Holmes, John Steed from The Avengers, Godfrey (the one who lived with his sister Dolly) in Dad's Army, Percy in Coronation Street, Winnie the Pooh - did we question their sexuality in the past? As Alan Bennett writes in the preface to his stage version of Kenneth Grahame's Wind in the Willows: 'Bachelordom is a status that had more respect (and fewer undertones) in Grahame's day than it has now' - a fact that seems to be borne out by the reluctance of real-life bachelors to use their names when discussing the issue with the media.

      [...] In the past, if a bachelor was seen to enjoy the company of other men, people did not assume he was homosexual. Now we get single men who want to find a relationship with a woman feeling that if they share a flat with another man - or even go shopping to a supermarket with another man - they somehow have to establish their credentials as heterosexuals.'

      The absurdity of this scenario is heightened by statistics: in the last decade marriage rates among men have fallen by almost a third, and single people in the 25-29 age group - who 10 years ago were outnumbered two-to-one by married men - have now come to outnumber the married.

      This ridiculous (feminist-insecurity) attempt to (via the often ridiculously hilarious "Urban Mythictionary Dictionary") is akin to redefining "Old Maid" being the same as "Lesbian" -- it's actually pretty pathetically obvious IMO.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]1thrownaway_MGTOW 0 points1 point  (3 children)

        First off, I swing both ways and the only time I've ever heard this term used by straights, gays, and anything in between is when it is used as a euphemism for a homosexual;

        Well, rather obviously your PERSONAL anecdotal experience needs to prevail (and to replace any/all human historical use of language) -- as it has been empirically proven that YOU are in fact the center of the universe.

        I'm no BPer, feminist apologist or other shill.

        Your willingness to regurgitate "shaming" euphemistic redefinitions, says otherwise.

        However, I think the battle was lost on confirmed bachelor decades ago and I didn't want OP to end up with egg on his face. We accept that women are the way they are here. Accepting changes in language is no different.

        Language goes through a variety of fads & fashions. Submitting to an agenda-driven group's attempts to redefine terms is just yet another aspect of obeisance.

        Of course we could say fuck that and take it back!

        Whatever... ya little porch monkey.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]1thrownaway_MGTOW 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          LOL, shaming?

          Yes dude... YOU are engaged in that... your insinuation to OP that he edit (censor) his language based solely on the fact that your own (very limited) exposure to and understanding of the term is one that is essentially homophobic.

          Which, given your "swing both ways" claim... is really hilarious.

          I'll keep lifting, stacking paper, and getting laid.

          Well, that's certainly impressive. My dog chases around sniffing/lick butts and trying to mount everything in sight too.

          [–]Str8tuptrollin 6 points7 points  (3 children)

          I've read a few articles on that as well, there's definitely man children that never grow up but the articles I read were basically saying if you don't have a wife and you sleep around you're a Peter Pan man child. Fuck that shit.

          [–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 6 points7 points  (2 children)

          Women don't need to grow up, why should men?

          Am I right?

          [–]Str8tuptrollin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Definitely they either get their parents so take caw of the them or beta beta bux to.

          [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

          As somebody here pointed out in different thread ... "What do you mean not wanting to get married? I'm always on lookout for wife material!", said with a right smirk works like a charm.

          [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

          I'm in my 40s, never married, I'm ripe "Peter Pan complex" territory. Right now I'm having a bottle of wine, doing my thing, on my own at home. No drama, no bother with exes. Am I to be shamed for this?

          Okay I'm not getting as much pussy as I would like, ie very little, but other than that I'm actually quite happy with life, my desire to conform isn't very strong (although I have to confess I would like a child of my own).

          I resent the "Peter Pan" tag, just because I'm not some worn-out family man who in quiet desperation hangs on in there wishing he could be doing what I do, doesn't mean I have to feel ashamed of it.

          In fact the women down the years who have thought that maybe I'm not the to-settle-down-with type, who have moved onto other things, they're the ones who should be questioned about their decision. Why should I feel ashamed for not being selected?

          Someone once said "If you find yourself unmarried after 30, you're free", I guess some women can't handle this.

          [–]psychoswab 7 points8 points  (0 children)

          I was diagnosed with PPS decades ago. Was so proud I got a Peter Pan tattoo. Wifey knew going in I was a warrior man child. I have just as much fun drinking in a bar, climbing a mountain, shooting my firearms or playing with my 5 & 6 y/o grandkids.

          [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (3 children)

          Whenever I say that I don't want children(they're fun to be around, just can't see myself raising one) or marriage, girls and Beta men always tell me things like, "That's very selfish of you" or things like, "That's immature." Hell, even my own aunt told me, "You will fall in love some day and a girl will be the center of your life whether you like it or not" and I'm only fucking twenty years old!

          Might as well get used to it because it's not going to stop any time soon...

          [–]dhump 5 points6 points  (1 child)

          The moment you make someone else the center of your life, you might as well just put a bullet in your head. If you aren't living for yourself, you aren't living. Even where kids are concerned. I love my daughter more than anyone on the planet, but I still live my life for me. What good does it do someone in your life if you're miserable?

          [–]oldneckbeard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          plus, there's no better way to show your daughter how to live a good live than to live one yourself.

          [–]icyhot39 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          My dad uses that tripe on me often. I usually just tell him he's being selfish for wanting me to provide him with grandkids and continue his 'legacy'. He then looks butthurt and tries another tactic...which is to state that my life will be sorely lacking in richness without a family.

          It's a delicate situation since I don't want to sound disrespectful of his sacrifice for his family (me). But I can attest firsthand to the amount of rationalizations that are spouted to justify his sacrifice.

          [–]morph85 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          Remember the line 'It is not important what girls say, but what they do?" well, since we live in a world where the opposite applies, play the game...

          Instead of "I was never married and don't plan to" say "I'd like to get married but have been unlucky in love so far and haven't found the right women yet." Instead of "there's something wrong with him" the hamster will be "Well, you haven't met me!".

          [–]Isaiah4verse1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          By the way, Peter Pan rocks! He was all about tha green if you know wut I mean... ;-)

          [–]Rush-into-the-fray 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          Peter pan complex? Now we are going to label it? Fine, let's label it. Marriage is a woman's thing, not mine. I want to go off into the woods for a weekend, i'm going into the woods. I want to go to the grocery store, i'm going, you are putting on your make up to watch t.v. because i'm at the store. I want to buy something, i pull out my money and go home, you pull out your third credit card and look like an idiot. No one said you had to have those extra shoes. I am Peter pan because i make sense, you are wendy because you need to be rescued. End of fucking thread.

          [–]watersign 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          this is me for sure. pretty good job, no responsibilities...lol..just trying to keep it this way. id be open to marriage but all the girls who are interested in me are garbage and all the worthy women are shacked up with alphas who make 3x what i make. oh well, id rather have a new sportbike than a fucking liability

          [–]thepillwastaken 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          Yep - been called both. Been asked why I'm single as well. I find it hilarious really. The girl I had over last night gets it. She respects my independence and as a result we get along well and have really good sex and communication.

          Its curious how feminists can be extremely vocal against lifestyle judging, especially in the case of homosexuality, since it sits next to their agenda. But they have no problem criticizing a guy like me - professional and single with no criminal record and a good income, because I have so far chosen not to get married and have children.

          [–]dhump 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          The feminist (and generally leftist) agenda loves to implement the tactic of "tolerance through intolerance". What they believe is right should be tolerated by all; however, what they do not believe is 100% intolerable, and you are wrong for believing it.

          [–]1kick6 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          Divorced men are called bitter, misogynistic, spiteful, and other shit when they don't want to be married again. If you're not supporting some bitch or want to spin plates and enjoy the fruit of your labor without having to waste it on a female, they will try to shame you.

          Let them say whatever they want, keep doing what you need to do, and what you want to do, who gives a fuck what they think.

          [–]Fallout99 8 points9 points  (7 children)

          I have a question. What's TRP's ideal life trajectory for women? Meet a guy in college and get married, have kids around 25. Then when kids are starting school the wife can start her career? (Serious question)

          [–]gensyms 21 points22 points  (0 children)

          Disclaimer: I can only speak for myself. I have no idea what TRP's ideal life trajectory for women might be.

          I think biology determines the ideal life trajectory for women -- just like it does for athletes.

          There are a number of Wall Street professionals who were once professional football players. Why? Because as the linked article begins, "Anyone who plays football professionally knows that they won't be able to play forever. That means they need to have post-football career plans in mind".

          There are things we are able to do effectively only at certain points in our lives.

          And women are in their prime early in adulthood -- whereas for men, that prime happens a couple decades later.

          So if women want to be married with kids, it's foolhardy to choose to do so after they've passed their prime. Just as it would be foolhardy for a 50 year old Wall Street professional to try out for the Denver Broncos.

          Where are all the good football teams???

          [–]SgtBrutalisk 8 points9 points  (1 child)

          Keep low N count, work on yourself and develop useful skills, anything other than just coasting through life because of beauty and youth. Help your man be the best he can be and start looking for a proper man right after high school.

          [–]harkrank 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Keep no N count. Being a virgin is the absolute minimum requirement for a woman to be considered for marriage.

          [–]dhump 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          I would say the ideal varies per individual. Above all (and I am instilling this in my daughter starting from a young age) is to not be dependant on any other person. If you can't have a viable life based on your own skills, you're doing it wrong.

          [–]psycho-logical 3 points4 points  (1 child)

          Also fitting because college chicks never get older for us bachelors :P

          [–]gensyms 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          [–][deleted]  (9 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (4 children)

            This is something I've been thinking about a lot recently. I tend to wear tshirts and jeans, I play some videogames, I read SF, I like technology. My musical tastes are varied and way beyond the charts; I'm comfortable in my taste in things generally, it's quite geeky.

            But is this holding me back? Most geeky women are with some uber-geek men by their late 30s, so all I'm left with is some bitter conformist divorcee or career woman who wouldn't touch me with a bargepole because .... I'm a manchild who likes geeky stuff. Cue shame tactics.

            So I could just sell all my geek stuff, all my old computers, games, books etc, buy some suits, ties, shirts, be a man that they want. But I see no value for me in it.

            There comes a point where you have to be there for you, don't change just because you're being shamed into it.

            [–]dhump 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            This x1million. Live for you, or don't bother living.

            [–]harkrank 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            Here's the value in getting rid of your games and sci-fi: They waste your time and teach you very little. Find real-world games instead like picking up women or traveling or finding your full professional potential or your full potential in any other area. Why play in somebody else's reality when you can create your own?

            [–]jmg83 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            I concur. Why the hell am I going to change my entire lifestyle just to transform into someone "suitable". I don't care about fancy restaurants, flash houses, or whatever these women think I should care about. I'd be a damn fool to pretend to be that kind of guy just for some woman. That's no way to live. I keep hearing women say that they don't owe men sex. This is true, they don't, but men certainly don't owe women relationships.

            [–]stealthcreeper 1 point2 points  (3 children)

            you can do what you want man

            [–][deleted]  (2 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]clear_lights 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Sort of. PPC is retarded in the sense that the definition is skewed depending on which editorial is describing it to strengthen their feminist views.

              For example, lifescript describes it as:

              Mr. Peter Pan Syndrome

              Though he’s in his 30s or 40s, at heart Mr. Peter Pan Syndrome is still a frat boy. Life’s a nonstop, movable kegger and he’s the affable host.

              He’s on a first-name basis with all the bartenders in town, thinks 401(k) refers to computer stuff and is always ready for a trip to Las Vegas.

              But if you run into hard times – say, you’re in a serious car accident or you lose your job – he’ll be way, way out of his depth. Difficult situations aren’t in his repertoire, and when the going gets tough, you’ll be going it alone.

              Playing video games and dressing like a geek because it's fun and it makes you happy is more in line with MGTOW, I'd say.

              [–]scubar 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              I don't care what women call me, I am self made and self sufficient. I'm sorry I don't want to risk years of hard work and sacrifice. :)

              [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

              I've been a "confirmed bachelor" (that term makes me smile for some reason) long enough to have some advice for you younger guys.

              Be careful.

              Particularly at work it's pretty easy to suffer quiet but negative consequences for your refusal to go along with "the norm". You won't be able to dodge every question about your personal life. If you want to get off the hook with the least possible drama just say that you don't want to have children. The majority of people will let it go right there. Most people get that marriage is really a structure for people who want to be parents.

              If someone pushes past that it will usually be something along the lines of "who will take care of you when you're old". To that just suggest to them that they go tour a few nursing home and see what becomes of old people, even those who have kids.

              But don't think you can just simply dodge the question because if you do people will pin you as a weirdo and that's bad for your career. you want the conversation when you're not there to go like this:

              "Oh that PedalSphere in accounting. Yeah, he's never been married but he doesn't want kids so I guess what's the point for him right?"

              You don't want it to be:

              "Oh PedalSphere in accounting? Yeah he's never been married and when you ask him about it he gets all weird and defensive...something's off about him."

              [–]gensyms 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              "confirmed bachelor" (that term makes me smile for some reason)

              It is such a happy term. In times past, you might even say "gay" instead of happy.

              [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              heh, indeed. I used to just let people at work think I was gay. now that isn't such a great strategy because almost no one stays in the closet anymore.

              [–]Prattler26 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Why not go for "I am looking for the right woman!"?. Don't provide any more details though, leave it for everyone to fill in their own story.

              [–]HeinousFu_kery 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              This is just a retread of the "Men are immature" nonsense. I didn't marry until 51 (and then with a prenup as thick as your wrist) and soaked up a lot of that BS. My life, my choice. Your life, your peer pressure.

              Finally it's up to you - getting married just because it's "that point in your life" is nonsense used to put you on the treadmill to sell tampons, mortgages and diapers. Caveat emptor.

              [–]Ak_Float_Flyer 2 points3 points  (2 children)

              It's true. If I (M49) try online dating again I'm going to claim "divorced" instead of "never married".

              You'd think that not having to share my paycheck with an ex would be a good thing, but instead it seems to mark me as somehow defective. Of course, they always seem surprised to find that their advanced degree, demanding career and adorable kids are somehow negatives as well.

              Just goes to show how poorly the sexes understand each other.

              [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              It doesn't matter how the marriage ended, divorce makes a man more desirable simply because at some point in the past another woman thought this guy was worth committing to marriage with.

              I'll be doing exactly what you're doing, 40s and never been married, you may as well not bother.

              [–][deleted]  (1 child)

              [deleted]

                [–]gensyms 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                [–]icallmyselfmonster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Fortunately I am a Dorian grey sort of guy.

                [–]Isaiah4verse1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Ahhhh I love these thinly veiled white flags of theirs. It's usually one foot away from full on supplication.

                [–]fuckeh 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                In the words of Gustavo Fring, "A man provides".

                That's not necessarily true, but if you only provide for yourself society might look at you in a negative light. It's just something that you have to deal with. I suggest stop caring what other people think, if you can't do that then you'll have to conform.

                [–]seedang 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                I've gotten this question a lot from girls. "What are your goals/plans?" "Don't you want to start a family?"

                My response is always "This is my plan, I'm already doing it. My life is awesome."

                This generally shuts down that line of questioning immediately. I guess women are confused by someone who isn't in a constant state of searching for the next upgrade.

                [–]ThePragmatist42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I agree with the post. Except for the quiet weekend part. If you are married with kids your house is NEVER quiet. You have to lock yourself in your room and blast Netflix to watch it.

                [–]mainst 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Can't use gay shaming anymore because it's not PC and would imply she is a "homophobe" so now the new buzzword is commitment-phobe.

                [–]MakutaProto 1 point2 points  (4 children)

                I'm afraid of becoming like your friend. I'm 16 and I have no idea how car insurance works and I have lapses in remembering to do the laundry, in which case my mom does the laundry and lectures me about not doing the laundry.

                Someone please explain to me how car insurance works.

                [–]GruntStyle0311 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                You pay a bill every month. A time comes when you need to get what you're paying for, and they make it very difficult. You hit a dear, or run into a pole trying to avoid a wreck... Brand new car is totaled but they try to get away with only paying half the value because depreciation occurs every time you go to the store. A short circuit causes an electrical fire... You have to wait weeks, maybe months for the check because they want to investigate for fraud, even though you've never made a single claim in your life.(That one happened to me just 6 months ago. Luckily I had full coverage so they ended up paying everything) All the while, your premium rises. Get a ticket for failure to use a turn signal.. Rate goes up. File a claim for an accident in a no fault state... Rate goes up. Car gets damaged in a storm, your rate may or may not go up. Or even worse, they don't pay because you didn't get comprehensive coverage, and nature ain't covered.

                Insurance is a pain in the ass. But it's saved my ass from going bankrupt before. Just watch out for loopholes in the contract, and do some homework on the agency you consider using.

                [–]GruntStyle0311 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                There's a special place in hell for claims adjusters. Though, I've met a few that were good men, so no offense to any that may be lurking here. Ha. It's just there job to try and short you.

                [–]FearlessBurrito 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Yep it all depends. When I got hit, my adjuster was my best friend for a month. Then again, it was as much their case to win as it was mine.

                [–]trpcounselor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                It's so funny reading this.

                I did laundry for four years of college and my mom REFUSES to let me do it. I don't usually make my bed, and she does it without asking or telling me to first.

                I could care less what anyone thinks.

                [–]Gotmilkyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                "You have to laugh, or it might make you cry."

                There is a bit of gold to this statement.

                [–]leodoestheopposite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Well said. Actually that shame tactics also applied to divorced guys, I've been married twice and of course divorced twice; I still live alone in my 3 BR single family house in the suburb with the yards and all, in a town where everyone is married with kids; and I have no intention to get married again.

                I too have been shamed with the Peter Pan life and I could not care less. Been there, done that, not it's all about me me me me me.

                [–]clear_lights 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Is "Peter Pan Complex" what the Western culture calls "herbivore men" or "grass eaters" of the East? Is this the best these feminists can come up with?

                Since they seem similar, I'm guessing this "complex" follows a bit from the MGTOW movement as well? If so, this is fantastic and I hope more men adopt it.

                [–]openmindedprometheus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Peter Pan complex? Sounds more like a honorary title. If someone told me I had that I'd take it as a complement. I'd be all "Yeah have fun and an enjoyable life vs. being a slave drone like you. Flattery will get you everywhere."

                [–]-_-zzz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                It's funny how Peter Pan was the main villain for a season or two of the ABC show "Once Upon A Time". It was definitely a metaphor for single men by choice, and was pandering to the predominantly female audience of that show.

                [–]Night--Writer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                If anyone tells me I have a Peter Pan complex in the future I'll take it as a compliment.

                And women have HUGE Peter Pan complexes. The reason is because they're all waiting for Dr. AlphaBucks Thundercock Moneypockets. They might all be turning 30 soon, or even older, but it'll happen, just you wait!

                [–]1thrownaway_MGTOW 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                The supreme irony of course is that "Peter Pan" wanted to "play house" and sought out "Wendy" fetching her back to his island to be the "wife/mother" to him and his "lost boys" supporting his pretentious role of a pseudo "husband/father" -- to take care of his house, and so on...

                IOW the exact opposite of an (never married, and never gonna marry) independent man.

                [–]futur1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                can i use this as an excuse to get blackout drunk every weekend?

                "I'm not irresponsible, i just don't subscribe to your bullshit feminist theories"

                ??

                /s

                [–][deleted]  (2 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–]Antibuddy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  No, it's just that your reading comprehension is for shit. Want what you want.

                  [–]AmazonExplorer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Can you prove such a stupid thread existed?

                  [–]MaegorTheCruel -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

                  I'm a woman and I approve of OPs text.

                  [–]icyhot39 7 points8 points  (0 children)

                  and we care because? Add to the conversation if you're going to post.

                  [–]1exit_sandman -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                  It would be interestinh to know whether the idea that George Clooney is actually gay (or at least bi) because of his notorious bachelorhood is at least partically motivated by the intention to shame him into a more conforming behavior.