First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
Post Reply "The Beautiful Ones" (Male/Female relationship Topic)
Posted 11/16/15
Herbivore. Huh.
2988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Fort Worth, Texas
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

"Actual marriage."


The difference between the two in the eyes of a tradcon, mgtow, mra and neo feminist would be the laws and regulations made to modify marriage. Men are still required to uphold the same bargain they always have while what the women originally did is becoming smaller and smaller. For example, money is still very much a part of marriage as is family, both of which is given to females far more of the time than men. Men are still required to share wealth but the female still retains full rights(and use) of her sexuality.

Men married for sex and women married for wealth and stability. Wealth and stability are even procured after marriage but sex is no longer a requirement on the woman's part. Originally, women had a right to men's surplus wealth, and men had a right to women's sexuality. It was enforced that women got stability and wealth through government, and nobody would lend a woman an ear if she got raped by her husband if she wasn't putting out enough or at all, since back then, that's the reason why he married and she understood that.

Now, rather this is moral is beside the point, the reason for detailing this is to illustrate the differences between 1960's marriage and the current one. Now it was still unlawful to harm your wife with malice intent. You couldn't beat her, that was still wrong, but using enough force to simply rape her for a personal need was perfectly okay.

It's common for social justice mainstream to assume this was barbaric and lead to much depression and low morale, but it was actually higher than today. female depression and suicide is actually higher today than it was when their husbands raped them occasionally.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcus-buckingham/whats-happening-to-womens_b_289511.html

http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2304424/Men-happier-life-women--especially-comes-appearance.html


Women are a minority in comparison to men. Furthermore, we have unconscious biases pertaining to sex as well. Societal roles, upbringing, and instinctual biases could easily influence the process of who and who doesn't get an education. So I can see why women were included as a beneficiary of affirmative action.

Also, could you please cite your source for making the claim that it was hijacked. Colored people are still benefiting from affirmative action, as far as I'm aware.


By basically, I meant they've become the cultural focus, since 'women in leadership' is now the main focus, education and court laws are favoring women, I meant more than just the work force, but I'm sure blacks still get function from affirmative action. The reason why I cited it is because women aren't a minority nor is there any discrimination against them.


If women only care about their sex being placed on a pedestal, why are they seeking to allow females to fight in military combat? Why is there such a push for that if all they want is to be treated like princesses? Do you think that going into intense combat situations where one is at constant risk of death is the same as fearing danger and wanting men to protect and shield them? How about women's suffrage? If all they care about is being taken care of by the "big, strong, burly man" of the household, why did so many of them seek to make their voice heard in the complex and nuanced system that was (and is) politics? That doesn't really have anything to do with them on a personal level, at least not within the traditional families of the time


They aren't. No women's group ever has ever pushed to extend the draft to women. Combat is something all nations typically make a male activity and the suffragists didn't not attempt to push women into combat roles. There is no female collective pushing women to put themselves in front of a gun. The military has been feminized by putting women in leadership positions in the military by virtue of their vaginas, their fitness requirement is lower than that of men, and it's not by a biological % either.

This also goes for the Fire Departments and Navy as well. Even in STEM fields, they are trying to lower the requirements for women, such as lower math standards because women aren't as intelligent historically. They earn better grades, and more degrees, but their education and success is largely manufactured by feminized teachers who give boys lower scores for the same work.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/female-teachers-accused-of-giving-boys-lower-marks-6943937.html

The education system has been largely feminized since the 1980's when they they decided to shift scores and focus from tests(where boys excelled) to homework assignments(where girls excelled).

So even though girls have had their scores artificially inflated and there's more of them in University, they are now talking of lower requirements for women in STEM fields to get them more representation. The unfortunate truth may be that women inherently may in fact be less intelligent than their male counterparts, as most things are turned in their favor, both socially and lawfully, that they still perform much worse across the scientific board.

Women do only care about being on a pedestal because they'd rather lower requirements of male dominated fields to accommodate them rather than meet the standard that everyone else does. Female self interest(manspreading, wage gap myth, double standards) dictate that women have own group preference, they prefer whatever the collective does until they are affected personally through their brothers, sons, etc. As stated by GirlWritesWhat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlvMAS_20K4

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/its-time-for-women-to-woman-up/

For example, it's more important to the female collective that their whims are catered too(manspreading, rape culture, etc) than it is to actively erase male suffering on a larger scale.

By nature, humans are less tuned in on male suffering than female suffering, studies show. Despite men the majority of victims across all violent crimes, we still tune in on female suffering, and not, say, the men who are complaining about divorce rape, or circumcision, or male disposability. We'd rather entertain false rape accusations like the Duke Lacrosse case or the UVA rape scandal since women are the victims. And men kinda fit into the "gray" area and don't count as a collective group -- or didn't until 2004 largely, even though their groups have predated that.

Anytime a male group crops up with male interests in mind, it is instantly shamed and portrayed as a negative thing, such as Red Pill Men, MGTOWS, PUAs or any group that hosts male interests solely. Any such group is seen by gynocentrism as an attack on female privilege and is deemed to be disgusting, misogynist, etc. PUAs are losers, they should feel ashamed. MGTOWs are cowards, they're running away.

Herbivore men are the problem, etc. It's even men's fault when women aren't happy and the high divorce rates are seen as men not keeping their wives happy even though it has nothing to do with the "Jerks" but the women who chase them.

This is pretty much only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to female self interest. It's much deeper than that, but this is enough for the audience here on Crunchyroll.


And even if what you were saying was true, you wanna know what would happen if women didn't like a society that treated sexes the same? The culture would change. People would adjust to their new environment and the majority would prefer/tolerate the system for what it is. Traditional mindsets crumble and fade away when traditions die. They're dependent on one another. While some would protest against the system, they would be few in number and would decrease as time marched ever onward. Then the majority of females would be fine with this treatment.

It's as simple as that really.


To most people here, they don't care for gender topics -- and if they do, they typically adopt a gynocentric mindset to cater to the masses if a gender discussion ever crops up. To most people, they don't know why men are getting married, they don't know why they were raised by single parents, they don't know why there's rampant misandry in the mainstream media(man up, where have all the good men gone), they don't know why people are talking about gender at all. Hell, I'd reckon most people here are sold on the idea that gender is a social construct and everyone is a white blob and everyone is the same.

They don't know why taxes are rising, they don't know why welfare is draining their money faster than it ever has. They don't know what kinda world they're sending their children and grand children into. The only thing the thing the mainstream Feminist/SJW can see is the very next day. They don't think long term. The End of Civilization video said this perfect, self absorbed and narcissists are the majority today. The reason why all this is said because the average SJW thinks life is perfect and this is the happiest humanity has ever been, they think smartphones, game consoles, music and aligning interests in studies make a perfect and most prosperous society.

It is not, this is the lowest morale, highest suicide count ever in history for any generation. Absolutely any of them. More people are depressed today than any during any war in history and it's heading down a destructive path.

Oddly enough, a lot of this has to do with the relationship between the sexes. When human companionship and biological needs aren't met, they turn less productive, more parasitic and more likely to ruin the person next to them, and also they're more likely to commit suicide. After divorce, many men commit suicide after their family, money and emotional values are stripped from them. Is this a problem? Most people will say "Yeah" then go back to a monotonous life without any more introspection.

This isn't to make anyone get up and run into some protest to change this or change that. That's not going to work, the only thing worth doing at this point is educating, discussing and observing. Which wakes up men(and to a lesser extent, women) about how their choices can affect their immediate life and others.

That excessive female self interest and hypergamy might lead her down a not so bright path after all.


Not purely in favor of men or women but the tribe as a whole. in regards to males being superior both psychically and mentally, please provide actual studies and empirical evidence to prove your point on that matter if you wish to persuade me.


If history won't persuade you, nothing will. I'll still give you studies and links to further my point. Just a little talk first.

If you honestly believe women and men are physically equal, you might be insane as history and nature dictates quite the opposite.

Why are women's sports teams and men's sports teams segregated? Because biological says men would have an advantage. Men have stronger hand strength on average compared to female athletes. Men are stronger, faster, have better reflexes, more resilient and have higher pain tolerance than women. They are also more likely to fight than to flee.

Which are stronger and faster, male gorillas or female gorillas?

What about male or female dogs? What about male or female chimpanzees?

Now, if we leave our feminist/egalitarianism behind and deal with nature as it is. Any intellectual person would obviously say.

"Well, yeah, men are biologically superior. That's why even feminist don't support putting women MMA fighters in the ring with men."

Because they'd get wrecked. Nature is biased, and it's sexist, you have a much better chance of survival submitting to the man rather than compete with him. If social justice ad feminists didn't poison our minds too far, we can admit that women are physically inferior, no. "Well, men are better at X and women are better at-" Just no. Men are better than women physically and you'd have to be completely detached from logic and science to say otherwise. But lets get on with those links and studies, even though I shouldn't need links to tell people that women are physically inferior, this is just a bit...strange.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0XVuU-iF5U You don't have to watch the video, you can view the relevant links in the description, but the video will obviously explain why disregarding gender as a factor in physical or psychological evaluations are stupid at best or downright insane asylum mentality at worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKWoKxC-tQk

Turd Flinging Monkey is cited often because his studies and math are very accurate, even though his theories may not be. Also because he brings up numerous studies from across different countries or nations. I could use GirlWritesWhat, Diana Davison, Sargon, etc.

Or I could go raw and I could just link to sources and statistics without the YouTube middle man, but they explain better than I will in a text box. Fact of the matter is, the fact that I have to show how men are physically superior to an adult man might to troublesome to some, but interesting to myself, that through some stretch of contemporary logic, that men and women are physical equal. Despite all evidence everywhere at all times to the contrary, from women normally asking men to open tight jars to lifting heavy boxes. You never explicitly said men weren't physically superior, you probably just wanted to test me or you liked seeing me perform or grab links. I'm not sure. But I highly doubt any reasonable adult will say men are physically superior because it's utterly untrue to say anything else, they're not better and women certainly aren't physically superior.

The only thing left to really prove is who is more intelligent. Now, men of course are smarter than women.

Not every man is smarter than every woman. Of course not. But as history have shown, men are definitely the driving force behind science and technology, and this isn't the result of oppression as even with all the easy routes and lowered standards for women, they seem to do worse at nearly everything other than bitching(Which can also be factual proven, see manspreading, and tropes of women in video games).


Let me elaborate what set's us apart from other animals is that were are conscious and can be conscious of our unconscious actions if we so choose to reflect and question are actions, which adds a whole other level to the complexity in comparison to mice. were not subject to just our biological actions we can be influenced but that doesn't necessarily mean that were gonna follow them, though sometimes we do, thus is the beauty of consciousness.


Men and women aren't equivalents, so "humans" isn't accurate to this particular topic. Now I'm not suggesting that women are incapable of being conscious or using higher intelligence, but currently, they aren't doing that. There are(very few) exceptions to this rule but this is how it is. The reasons why "humans are complex" arguments don't work because MGTOW and Female MRA philosophers are somewhat past this fallacious wall and they can determine where people are led by their biological impulses rather than higher intelligence.

Ever heard of "Nice Guys" and "Jerks"? Ever heard of "Female Hypergamy", "Female Hypoagency" or "Female Narcissism"? The mere mention of these things paint the poster as a misogynist and bigot without further inspection into it's validity. Too many men(and few women), they view current society as hostile to men and towards masculinity in general(see Toxic Masculinity and Male Privilege). Men are being taught "not to rape" and that they are inherently rapists because of their genitals. Their interests are shoved aside 98.5% of the time in favor of the female collective. They can't even show interest in a woman without being a "creep" or a "harasser". Men can't even defend themselves properly from rape claims, accusations of abuse, they can't even defend themselves from actual assault from women without being put in jail.

To them, these women(and "manginas" as they like to call the gynocentric men) are far from civilized creatures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3jFwoi_JrM

By Diana Davison(yes, she's a woman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_Kx3VryPXM

This second video by Diana is examining how the legal system treats women are perpetual children that cannot be punished equally to man, if at all, due to cultural beliefs instilled by feminism(and biology) that women should be protected and they're always victims of...something.

"Humans are complex and we can't understand them fully" is blown out the water when we have people who fully understand them(including women themselves) saying. "Yeah, there's a gynocentric problem and women are a large focal point."

Basically, the main problem right now isn't even male suffering, males have suffered quite a bit, despite being superior objectively, they are less necessary for the survival of the species, so they were always expendable. 1000 men and 5 women wouldn't produce many children. But 5 men and 1000 women would be perfectly fine as a starting point for population growth. The problems mainly stem from male rebellion, which is intentionally or unintentionally being under productive, opting not to have a wife/girlfriend and kids, and starving out the government for taxes which they need to support the numerous women's programs. I don't like government that much, but that's how they operate and that's how men are hurting society by extension. Male productivity has always been the driving force behind technology and scientific and economic progress, if they in large numbers decided that women aren't worth it and family is for noobs, they are gonna be less content and more likely to play video games/watch anime and simply entertain themselves until they die.

If it was a few men doing this, no one would complain, but since there's a large amount of men who simply don't wanna get married, don't wanna deal with women for x and x reasons, etc.

In one of my next posts, I may need to define how female hypergamy plays a large role in this. But this comment is long enough already.
14992 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 11/16/15 , edited 11/16/15
Holy shit, i'm out
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/16/15 , edited 11/16/15
It's so much easier being single.
2988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Fort Worth, Texas
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

dotsforlife wrote:

It's so much easier being single.


Men are less productive when they're lone wolves though.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

Magical-Soul wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

It's so much easier being single.


Men are less productive when they're lone wolves though.


That's merely an opinion. Doesn't work the same way for everyone. Some people work better alone.
2988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Fort Worth, Texas
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

dotsforlife wrote:


Magical-Soul wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

It's so much easier being single.


Men are less productive when they're lone wolves though.


That's merely an opinion. Doesn't work the same way for everyone. Some people work better alone.


Nobody is talking about individual men. Men in general are more productive with wives/girlfriends and children. Men who do not have sex have a MGTOW or Herbivore lifestyle, such as they just indulge in entertainment and amuse themselves until they die without any other purpose or utility.

Compare the family man of the 1960's to the current single man. Most men don't have sex, they either pursue women incorrectly or not at all, they play Xbox(or whatever) and watch Internet videos or whatever most of the time. They sit on forums, etc.

There are exceptions, but exceptions are exceptions and the majority of successful men who changed the world and made ground breaking inventions had wives and girlfriends. With either one of those things, men are happier and they take higher paying jobs and more aggressive approach to work which ripples into benefits for everyone.

Your modern forum browser is more like a "Beautiful One" he doesn't pursue women for whatever reason, he doesn't have many aspirations and his mediocre paying job is enough to purchase games/Internet/entertainment/porn and he goes into a monotonous cycle until he dies.

Not productive, and not fulfilling, especially since you could pair up and enrich your own and another's life rather than just both be "content" but err on the side of slightly depressed.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/16/15 , edited 11/16/15

Magical-Soul

Nobody is talking about individual men. Men in general are more productive with wives/girlfriends and children. Men who do not have sex have a MGTOW or Herbivore lifestyle, such as they just indulge in entertainment and amuse themselves until they die without any other purpose or utility.

Compare the family man of the 1960's to the current single man. Most men don't have sex, they either pursue women incorrectly or not at all, they play Xbox(or whatever) and watch Internet videos or whatever most of the time. They sit on forums, etc.

There are exceptions, but exceptions are exceptions and the majority of successful men who changed the world and made ground breaking inventions had wives and girlfriends. With either one of those things, men are happier and they take higher paying jobs and more aggressive approach to work which ripples into benefits for everyone.

Your modern forum browser is more like a "Beautiful One" he doesn't pursue women for whatever reason, he doesn't have many aspirations and his mediocre paying job is enough to purchase games/Internet/entertainment/porn and he goes into a monotonous cycle until he dies.

Not productive, and not fulfilling, especially since you could pair up and enrich your own and another's life rather than just both be "content" but err on the side of slightly depressed.


Guess that makes me an exception. By your opinion at least. Kudos to me I guess?

And the men you describe sound like children, not men. Then again I'm not of that generation you describe, so maybe that's the norm. Sounds like a bunch of generalizing either way though.
2988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Fort Worth, Texas
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

dotsforlife wrote:


Magical-Soul

Nobody is talking about individual men. Men in general are more productive with wives/girlfriends and children. Men who do not have sex have a MGTOW or Herbivore lifestyle, such as they just indulge in entertainment and amuse themselves until they die without any other purpose or utility.

Compare the family man of the 1960's to the current single man. Most men don't have sex, they either pursue women incorrectly or not at all, they play Xbox(or whatever) and watch Internet videos or whatever most of the time. They sit on forums, etc.

There are exceptions, but exceptions are exceptions and the majority of successful men who changed the world and made ground breaking inventions had wives and girlfriends. With either one of those things, men are happier and they take higher paying jobs and more aggressive approach to work which ripples into benefits for everyone.

Your modern forum browser is more like a "Beautiful One" he doesn't pursue women for whatever reason, he doesn't have many aspirations and his mediocre paying job is enough to purchase games/Internet/entertainment/porn and he goes into a monotonous cycle until he dies.

Not productive, and not fulfilling, especially since you could pair up and enrich your own and another's life rather than just both be "content" but err on the side of slightly depressed.


Guess that makes me an exception. By your opinion at least. Kudos to me I guess?

And the men you describe sound like children, not men. Then again I'm not of that generation you describe, so maybe that's the norm. Sounds like a bunch of generalizing either way though.


They're not children, children do not pay their own bills, children do not perish in the bed they've made. Men can try harder to achieve pair bonding success which is difficult in a gynocentric society that prioritizes women over him. With hypergamy as rampant as it is and narcissism at an all time high.

I'm not trying to insult these men, as plenty of women understand that most women available to them are blobs of narcissism and quivering piles of spoiled rage.

I was just pointing out how "some men are better single" is normally a guy who had issues at some point with women or don't want pair bond at all. Which is unnatural given primate psychological and her position as a social animal who are rarely found alone and derive no benefit from being alone. They'd have to make a conscious decision to say. "I'm better single" than to naturally come to that conclusion.

Again, a couple of very few exceptions. Leave it open, whatever. But there's nothing inherently wrong with these men. So "children" might be unfit.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

Magical-Soul

They're not children, children do not pay their own bills, children do not perish in the bed they've made. Men can try harder to achieve pair bonding success which is difficult in a gynocentric society that prioritizes women over him. With hypergamy as rampant as it is and narcissism at an all time high.

I'm not trying to insult these men, as plenty of women understand that most women available to them are blobs of narcissism and quivering piles of spoiled rage.

I was just pointing out how "some men are better single" is normally a guy who had issues at some point with women or don't want pair bond at all. Which is unnatural given primate psychological and her position as a social animal who are rarely found alone and derive no benefit from being alone. They'd have to make a conscious decision to say. "I'm better single" than to naturally come to that conclusion.

Again, a couple of very few exceptions. Leave it open, whatever. But there's nothing inherently wrong with these men. So "children" might be unfit.


Didn't think you were you were insulting anyone. I can read this over and over and you can phrase it any way you like but it still sounds like a bunch of generalizing to me. There's a bit of truth to some of it, but that's about it. At the least it's very funny to read through, so there's that. I get my kicks at least.
2988 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Fort Worth, Texas
Offline
Posted 11/16/15

dotsforlife wrote:


Magical-Soul

They're not children, children do not pay their own bills, children do not perish in the bed they've made. Men can try harder to achieve pair bonding success which is difficult in a gynocentric society that prioritizes women over him. With hypergamy as rampant as it is and narcissism at an all time high.

I'm not trying to insult these men, as plenty of women understand that most women available to them are blobs of narcissism and quivering piles of spoiled rage.

I was just pointing out how "some men are better single" is normally a guy who had issues at some point with women or don't want pair bond at all. Which is unnatural given primate psychological and her position as a social animal who are rarely found alone and derive no benefit from being alone. They'd have to make a conscious decision to say. "I'm better single" than to naturally come to that conclusion.

Again, a couple of very few exceptions. Leave it open, whatever. But there's nothing inherently wrong with these men. So "children" might be unfit.


Didn't think you were you were insulting anyone. I can read this over and over and you can phrase it any way you like but it still sounds like a bunch of generalizing to me. There's a bit of truth to some of it, but that's about it. At the least it's very funny to read through, so there's that. I get my kicks at least.


Generalization is largely the truth. Wanting to be undefined and "unique" is a psychological flaw of being fear of being viewed as "simple" or lower status.

If 99.9% of women are X. To make myself feel better, I could just insert myself into the .1%

That's what most people do to protect their egos and esteem, which is fine. But generalization in and of themselves aren't inherent wrong. They're actually inherent "right", but people fear broad blankets because being like everyone else seems to be an irrational fear among first world people.

Regardless of how much anyone recognizes "generalizations" they still hold true, whether the person critiquing it fits under that broad blanket or not.

But considering there's large percentages of men who don't routinely have sex or relationships (about 80% of college campuses are anything to go by), it's safe to say "most men" fit under this banner, and if I apply this study to the rest of the men, there's about a 80% chance each man has to be one of these unproductive men. Even if we do a margin of error to deal with about 7-10%

That's still 70% of men, which leaves us stop with a very high chance of each man being under this generalization.

So 7/10 men on Crunchyroll would be your typical no sex male who leads a rather unproductive life.
Posted 11/16/15

Ryuouka wrote:

Holy shit, i'm out


^
Not quite sure if I should even touch this one. Spent too much time reading it.
7597 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 11/16/15
Don't overthink the room.
20979 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 11/16/15 , edited 11/16/15

Magical-Soul wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:


Magical-Soul wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

It's so much easier being single.


Men are less productive when they're lone wolves though.


That's merely an opinion. Doesn't work the same way for everyone. Some people work better alone.


Nobody is talking about individual men. Men in general are more productive with wives/girlfriends and children. Men who do not have sex have a MGTOW or Herbivore lifestyle, such as they just indulge in entertainment and amuse themselves until they die without any other purpose or utility.

Compare the family man of the 1960's to the current single man. Most men don't have sex, they either pursue women incorrectly or not at all, they play Xbox(or whatever) and watch Internet videos or whatever most of the time. They sit on forums, etc.

There are exceptions, but exceptions are exceptions and the majority of successful men who changed the world and made ground breaking inventions had wives and girlfriends. With either one of those things, men are happier and they take higher paying jobs and more aggressive approach to work which ripples into benefits for everyone.

Your modern forum browser is more like a "Beautiful One" he doesn't pursue women for whatever reason, he doesn't have many aspirations and his mediocre paying job is enough to purchase games/Internet/entertainment/porn and he goes into a monotonous cycle until he dies.

Not productive, and not fulfilling, especially since you could pair up and enrich your own and another's life rather than just both be "content" but err on the side of slightly depressed.



Just saying having a child and family and sex (which some people are just not into) doesn't seem any more productive or fulfilling :P
I would rather get a high paying job to support my friends and Girlfriend and then that's enough for me as that's very productive.

I don't plan to have kids nor is sex important to me as i have a low sex drive.


Having sex doesn't mean your life is more productive or fulfilling and even if it did....why should someone make there life what other people see productive if they enjoy life to it's fullest as it is?

Nothing wrong with wanting to be alone and heck some people are even wired to be better off alone i know most people with my disability function better alone.

What you see as productive is not the same for everyone.

All i want out of life is to become a programmer and play video games and that is productive...getting a girlfriend who won't cheat is a bonus but not a necessity.

It's my hopes a time will come where humans become immortal biologically and reproduction stops.
355 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/16/15 , edited 11/16/15
I think the older you get the more you worry about time and how things are changing. You also worry about what part you play and how you can be useful. I accept that i'm not in control and there are millions of events beyond my control. To correct them is not my job.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.