Shinichi Haku on Nostr: >Men aren't going to be motivated to strive for success if there's no one waiting for ...
>Men aren't going to be motivated to strive for success if there's no one waiting for them at the end of the day
90% true, but maybe you just phrased it badly.
Men are not, as a whole, motivated by "somebody waiting at the end of the day", to which I interpret as "at the finish line, and as long as you're always finishing first".
No, men are the true romantic sex. The idea of women being the romantic sex and men being the horny brutes who don't care is a simple projection in the greater population's collective consciousness (which has been disastrous, btw). No, men have always been the romantic sex out of necessity, to court the woman, who is selective by nature. And men do this in such great lengths and desperation because of his deeply rooted, almost genetically predisposed need to find a companion who will not just be waiting for him, but be there for him always. By his side, even when he is alone.
Men want a woman who is like a man, but female. Which is to say, she understands men's struggles, and will journey with him through all of life's hardships, even though she lacks the same (cap)abilities as a man. He wants somebody who will stay, and remain, and not just be waiting to be claimed as a prize to be won.
And yet most women exist as exactly that, with no clue that men don't want that, only begrudgingly accepting that because it has become the new norm. In way, it is its own humiliation ritual, to try and fight so hard for a "prize", and a prize that is living and nebulous at that. Not like a physical trophy which will always exist in perpetuity as it is, but a prize that can change its mind as soon as you falter.
Men don't want that. Maybe in the moment, but not as a deep desire.
idk. I'm drunk, I think we agree, and I just disagreed because I'm druk. No, you're right. We agree. Men want something to hold onto via loyalty. Not constantly exercising flexing just to impress an inherently nebulous concept.
https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1679773053795438603/xlarge/
90% true, but maybe you just phrased it badly.
Men are not, as a whole, motivated by "somebody waiting at the end of the day", to which I interpret as "at the finish line, and as long as you're always finishing first".
No, men are the true romantic sex. The idea of women being the romantic sex and men being the horny brutes who don't care is a simple projection in the greater population's collective consciousness (which has been disastrous, btw). No, men have always been the romantic sex out of necessity, to court the woman, who is selective by nature. And men do this in such great lengths and desperation because of his deeply rooted, almost genetically predisposed need to find a companion who will not just be waiting for him, but be there for him always. By his side, even when he is alone.
Men want a woman who is like a man, but female. Which is to say, she understands men's struggles, and will journey with him through all of life's hardships, even though she lacks the same (cap)abilities as a man. He wants somebody who will stay, and remain, and not just be waiting to be claimed as a prize to be won.
And yet most women exist as exactly that, with no clue that men don't want that, only begrudgingly accepting that because it has become the new norm. In way, it is its own humiliation ritual, to try and fight so hard for a "prize", and a prize that is living and nebulous at that. Not like a physical trophy which will always exist in perpetuity as it is, but a prize that can change its mind as soon as you falter.
Men don't want that. Maybe in the moment, but not as a deep desire.
idk. I'm drunk, I think we agree, and I just disagreed because I'm druk. No, you're right. We agree. Men want something to hold onto via loyalty. Not constantly exercising flexing just to impress an inherently nebulous concept.
https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1679773053795438603/xlarge/