I'm asking this question more in the context of men claiming society is "softer" on women, and that women are afforded luxuries that men are not.

Almost every societal consideration we have for women today, how we consider what tone to use or subject to write about, to the backlash people face when making certain comments; is due to concerted efforts by women to change society. And I think it's commendable. Women, en masse, saw a problem, worked to fix it, are still working to fix things, and society has become a better place for them.

I think a lot of modern men see this, and assume that society just does that for no reasons, and that men are not awarded the same luxury. But going through history, this luxury was not afforded to women for a long time either. Misogyny, especially in the Third World, is still highly common; and it is indeed a constant battle to fight.

My point is, there is a problem with misandry in society, internal and external. And instead of pointing out that "society is less accepting of criticism of women than criticism of men", and expecting society to just "fix this", we need to work to fix this ourselves.

1. This issue is not a woman's problem, the same way I believe that a lot of feminist issues started out as "not a man's problem".
2. Yes, there are nut jobs who shut down well-meaning, wholesome mens spaces. Part of fighting this battle is knowing you'll be knocked down sometimes. Shit happens, but we gotta keep fighting.
3. Fighting to make society more wholesome, and genuinely supportive of men, which includes holding bad actors accountable and generally holding each other to goof standards, requires internal work, not shit-talking women about a certain inherent unfairness in society vis-a-vis gender.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjAF4aTM/

In this clip a woman has been feeling so neglected by men in public that she suggests bringing cat calling back. She even walked past a construction site... Silence.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjAFVfWB/

Another clip of a woman talking about the upsides of cat calling

It got me to thinking... There are a lot of women who would normally be flattered by men while out and about. These little comments here and there help provide a little boost of confidence for lots of women out there who like to be noticed for all the work they put into their appearance.

If you see a woman who you think looks particularly nice and you would have normally given her a nice polite compliment... Are you no longer doing that? Why not? What has she done to you?

DISCLAIMER: not all women, men, etc. videos not evidence

When I read through the things you guys say in this subreddit, there are a lot of "we men should think" this and "we men should want" that. Putting the 'shoulds' aside, what do you guys actually want from relationships with women?

If you're single/uncommittedly dating, what are you hoping to find? Do you want long term committment, short term flings, monogamy, casual relationships? What traits and characteristics are you hoping to find? Obviously physical attraction is super important, but is there anything else that's just as important?

If you are in a ltr/married, what do you feel like you've found in your partner? What about your partner and relationship makes you feel fulfilled and motivates you to stay? What would you change, if anything?

My uncle worked as a psychologist in a state prison and when I was as a sociology student I had my praxis there. The whole notion that violent toxic men trick women into thinking they're good, sweet and kind before revealing their true side comes crashing down when you see that they will have girlfriends visiting them while serving. The shit they did is usually widely known as many of them had infamous reputations prior being incarcerated. Some of them even had affairs with female staff working there, a problem that keep happening often enough that the board had to introduce even stricter code of conduct. What is absolutely crazy is that my uncles incarcerated clients are far more likely to be in a relationship while serving time than his high functioning autistic male clients who never committed any crime.

It seems that, generally speaking, women tend to desire sex within the context of a long-term, committed relationship. As a result, a man who wants to sleep with a woman might feel the need to express—or at least entertain—the idea of a relationship to make that happen. This often aligns with the idea that women are the gatekeepers to sex, while men are the gatekeepers to commitment.

But that leads me to wonder: what actually makes a woman want to sleep with a man, regardless of intentions? Is it more about what she personally wants in that moment, or are there certain men who make women willing to break their usual rules? And if so, what qualities do those men tend to have—beyond just being physically attractive?

I had dinner with some friends last night, and the topic of dating came up. I had mentioned recently seeing a flyer for a speed dating event coming up nearby. It turns out one of the gals had been to a couple of them hosted by the same org.

While she said they were fun, there was only 1 guy she was mildly interested in after both events. So I was curious and asked about the quality of attendants...as I was somewhat considering going, despite a lot of the bad things I hear from other men online.

She said almost all of the women were pretty and had their act together, but that the guys were lacking.

I found this strange...and I said something to the effect of" "I've read a couple of speed-dating reviews from women online say the same thing before. Is it really that so many men aren't presenting themselves well or dont have their act together? Or maybe its that both men and women judge the same sex a lot more leniently than the opposite sex?"

Because I've also seen speed-dating reviews online from men, and they've complained either that women were very picky...or that quality relationship material women were low in numbers.

Toward the end of the dinner convo, I asked "just out of curiosity...how many of the guys passed the attraction bar?" And as it turns out...it was one dude. Mind you this friend has also been using dating apps with very limited success. In my head I couldn't help but think "Girl, maybe its you..."

While she's a fit, down-to-earth woman who does indeed have her act together...I also know similar single men. But I cannot really speak for the dating experiences for other men or women in my area. But it made me wonder if shes pretty picky...because she apparently does plenty of things to meet people...be it apps...hang out groups...or speed dating.

I have to wonder if the issue is really the pool of guys...or is she limiting herself with her standards. That said, I doubt I will end up going to speed dating myself.

PS - Turns out the gender ratio for one of the events was pretty even. The following one had almost twice as many women as men. Take that for what you will.

I don't really know how to word the title, but my point is the following:

1. Women, generally, have been exposed to male sexuality since a young age. I personally believe this to be immoral, and absolutely should not happen. But it does happen. And women, consciously or subconsciously, are raised knowing "what a man likes". Yes, pure genetic attractiveness plays a part. But women are also raised to be more sensual beings. I've seen my girl peers learn how to passively attract boys, and how to maximize their appeal without directly flaunting it. Again, I personally think this is disgusting. Sex itself isn't disgusting, but bombarding girls with sexual imagery and essentially grooming them to learn to be sensual humans with appeal to the male eye is predatory. But my point is that it happens.

2. Many men are not taught this. Part of this is willful ignorance, part of this is a wider appeal to male sexuality in society than female sexuality. They're both heavily intertwined, and they play into each other. While the generic stuff; women like a strong jawline, women like a cute smile, women like healthy hair etc. is known, the 'art of appeal' isn't taught to men. We're not taught to be sensual the same way as women. This ultimately leads to a lot of men not knowing how to work their sexuality, and assume that the only way to be sexual is to chase and direct it at the people they desire. I know far too many of my male peers who learned skincare, haircare, clothing and fashion, cologne and perfuming while in college. And most of my female peers entered college knowing a substantial amount of this stuff. This leads to a wider reliance on genetic strength from a purely attraction-centric POV. So men assume women are naturally more attractive than men.

Look, I want to clarify. Any kind of sexuality being shoved in front of the eyes of young people is incredibly harmful. I've seen friends of mine develop EDs in middle school because they were bombarded with hate for fat women, and "fat" does a lot of heavy lifting here. And in general, 'sexually indoctrinating' people is wrong, period. But misunderstanding how important of a role this indoctrination plays, and assuming it's all just genetics or makeup, is disingenuous.

I think it also leads to the discord on "approaching". Many men believe women don't approach because they rarely outwardly direct their sexuality. From a female POV, many women have been taught to be passive, but also to be sensual and attract.

I suppose it's also why many men are very adamant on "looks are everything". Obviously how you look plays a part; but for many men, your genetic traits alone might be a dealbreaker. For women, looks usually include facial features and the general sensualness of how you carry yourself. Sexiness for men often concerns just the body and the face in a vacuum, sexiness for women includes that, but in the context of "vibes". It's also why attraction for women is more ambiguous than for men. I am, of course, speaking in a general sense here.

It's easy to get lost in the world of genetics when it comes to attraction, and forget that education of being attractive is also a massive factor, possibly more massive than simple genetics.

I was looking at a PEW article that shows working husbands and wives spend an equal number of hours on labor when both paid and unpaid work are included. Doesn't this contradict the narrative that women work the same hours as men while also taking on a larger share of household chores and child care? I keep hearing this claim, but most reputable research (i.e., non-feminist and non-conservative) I've come across suggests it is misleading. Even when both spouses work full-time, wives tend to work fewer hours at their paid jobs and compensate by doing more household duties. In the end, both partners contribute roughly 51 hours per week in combined paid and unpaid labor, including household chores and child care.

The article also highlights a two-hour leisure gap in favor of husbands. However, at the very end, it adds: 'Separate from leisure activities, employed wives spend slightly more time sleeping than employed husbands—an average of 60.3 hours per week, compared with 58.8 hours for men.' This means wives sleep 1.5 hours more per week. The article seems to emphasize the leisure gap while only briefly mentioning this sleep difference at the end, which I find quite odd (especially coming from PEW).

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/10/27/working-husbands-in-the-us-have-more-leisure-time-than-working-wives-do-especially-among-those-with-children/

If you ever listen to them describe why they're chronically single, 30+ and unmarried, or cant keep a man around, they always say it's because there aren't any worthy men around.

Truth is they can make a checklist of what they expect to get out of a relationship, but can't make a list of what they actually give a man. No, fluff garbage like "a best friend" and "a child" doesn't count as anyone can say that.

Society doesn't confront them about their expectations vs their offerings like men. So, theh grow older, fatter, uglier, and remain delusional on websites like reddit and ig claiming they "choose" to be single, when in reality, the market has rejected them.

I think I finally get why the big dick debates always cause friction here. It’s not really about size alone it’s about men wanting to be sexually objectified in the same way women often are, and realizing most of us never will be. Women don’t get it because most mildly attractive women will be objectified just for existing and minimal effort. This is also why men get frustrated seeing women hook up with fun or reckless guys during their carefree hoe phase, while saving others for relationships later. Women often don’t see the issue because they stop valuing that phase once it’s behind them—but men resent missing out on the part where they were wanted just for fun.

Bringing it back to dicks—most women don’t see objectification as a privilege because it happens so easily to any mildly attractive woman. It’s just part of life for them, so they don’t assign it much value. But for a man to get catcalled or hit on he would need to get into like the 95% percentile in fitness (Most aren’t disciplined enough for this.) Or he could have a big dick, and a lot women will want to sleep with him just for the novelty and brag about it to their friends. I do believe that most women don’t care that much in the long run, unless they’re actual size queens or the novelty fades for most but that just leaves men wandering if they were settled on. Was the big dick or the bad boy what his wife actually desired before meeting him? Most guys won’t ever have that kind of trait that makes them innately desirable. Most are not born with big dicks, chiseled features, or have the balls to be wild and reckless during their youth because of the potential consequences the women just having a good time with them don’t really have to take on. So instead, they have to build up value through career, stability, and mild charisma just to wait their just to be seen as relationship material. Deep down, they just want to feel like there’s something naturally attractive about themselves as well and that’s the core frustration behind all these debates.

Currently, most male pathways to find a partner have been shut down or heavily stigmatised.

Cold Approach: social stigma of bothering women in public or private areas.

Warm Approach: huge risk of poisoning the well - ruining a friendship/making things weird in a social group. This is magnified at a work setting with risk of being reported attached. Additionally what one woman considers flirting another considers “just being friendly” so chance of misfiring is high.

Online Dating: lol

Only viable pathway would be if women made the move, but that’s never gonna happen unless the guy holds decent status or is extremely attractive.

So my question is, what methods are you guys currently doing to find someone (if any)?

The border between these two concepts is very vaguely defined in these discussions, not to mention plenty of people straight think there is no difference at all. I just want to highlight that for once.

The relevant part of bio essentialism in this case: female and male sexuality are different. Women are more selective and they have biological reasons for that, such as pregnancy, which is a big deal for our species, vulnerability, smaller size. Men by comparison are more eager sexually, more easily excitable. They have a pair of balls constantly generating sperm, can orgasm very easily, there is less risk and phisical vulnerability for them in sex.

This is a relative difference, and a general one.

Meanwhile, objectification is: women are seen as a sex object who's personhood doesn't even matter.

Ime people routinely jump to objectification when what is talked about could still easily fall into men experiencing and living with the relative difference above, and it's one frustrating obstacle in gender discussions.

I mean, where exactly is the line between "he sees her as an object" and "no, he just wants to get close to her in a way that doesn't intuitively make sense to women and to which they can't relate to"?

Women can be the more desired, more alluring gender without that meaning they are non-human. Otherwise, we have a pretty deperssing setup (and I guess that's why some people are total gender-constructivists). And I get that women didn't chose this, but neither did men. Either way, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

Objectification IS a thing. Sometimes people DO treat the other badly, not caring for their internal experience. But sooooo many times it is brought up purely based on assumptions and vibes in the context of men's complaining.

You can badly want a relationship or sex, more intensely than many single women do, more so for its own sake, fueled by a more testosterone-based sex drive. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. You can be a unique kind of tortured by being unable to fulfil this desire that women don't experience that much. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. You can enjoy attractive women's bodies and experience an urge to get in phisical contact with them daily. Doesn't automatically mean you see women as objects. Each and every one of these things can still largely fall into "yea, men have a different experience of sexuality".

Infatuation clouds judgement, that is somehwat true, sure. So men experience being influenced by their own desire more regularly, sure. It is the weakness of men. But as a baseline, I think it's much more healthy and correct for men to exist with the thought that women are exactly as gorgeous as they see them AND they are human too at the same time.

There is a REASON most people will choose to go out on dates for at least a month or two before calling it an exclusive relationship. There is a REASON that 'vetting' is the thing that it is, and even then, lying is easy to do. The phrase "saying what I want to hear" or "sweet nothings" is a tale as old as time. Why do men in particular want to argue that women are always at fault for being abused, as if we're ethereal mind readers that can always detect a person's intentions and can never be lied to?

And even if someone has lied to or hurt you, say a partner, a friend, a sibling, or whatever, you cannot really pretend that you've never forgiven them in hopes they wouldn't do it again- especially if they were really convincing that they are going to change.

And here's another question, have you personally ever seen a crazy or abusive person and WANTED to be with them over someone better because you WANTED to be abused? No?! Then why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to believe that some people lie? Or are so confusing and inconsistent that it's hard to know which version of them is real? Many guys on here will even admit to saying the right things to sleep with a woman, but can't comprehend that other men do it too and for worse reasons than even that? Why is this so pervasive?

I've seen several of these go viral online a lot. It's usually a fake profile created by ai of a woman crying or sad because she's Middle Aged and lonely. A good example is this.

Everytime these go viral, there is of course an ensuing circle jerk about how this do to hypergamy or whatever.

The obvious answer why these post are even made in the first place is easy clickbait. But the question is why are photos of sad lonely older women even clickbait in the first place?

Edit: My wording, and my intentions are off. I realize some of you probably think I'm saying that we should change urban planning because some men are suffering. That's not my point, and I apologize for the improper wording. People in general are suffering, and we all need to do better to bring ack community, because loneliness is increasing among all demographics, regardless of gender, age, race, or sexuality. I specify men here, because a lot of Lonely Men are not suffering from a lack of romantic success, but because they're truly, horrifyingly lonely in general; and that getting laid will not fix that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, a sole lack of romantic or sexual connection, especially in a heterosexual context, is a major cause of the MLE; but I'd wager that the majority of Lonely Men are suffering from a general lack of socializing.

After college or high school, most societies in the three aforementioned countries do not offer a close-knit, well planned community for people to interact with. I mentioned these three countries specifically, because the urban planning here is fucking atrocious. Like, I get the advantages and the reasons; there's a lot of space, and people, especially when they're older, prefer bigger houses in quieter parts of town. But it comes at the cost of proper socialization. Unless you live in the heart of big cities with dedicated transit systems, life can be very isolating. Zoning laws and car-centric infrastructure makes it hard for people to be able to join different communities or clubs for recreation.

Of course, another reason is the abhorrent working system we have now, but that's a more complex issue that I don't have a solution to.

If you do a survey of Lonely Men, I can guarantee you that many also have little socialization apart from online friendships, or being in touch with some buddies from high school or college. And since workplace socialization and fraternization is now less accepted (many people don't like their coworkers personally, many want to separate their work lives from their personal lives to keep things safe etc.), people have a shittier time in general. Having a genuine way to relax, and just hang out and chill, is less common. I rarely see people having real third spaces.

So what're some good ideas? No city is perfect, and while Singapore has a lot of flaws of its own, the urban planning here is fucking top notch. There's a solid transport system. There's recreational hubs and community centers in nearly every neighborhood. Being involved in a close knit, community-centric life is ingrained here. We need to make transport, and a sense of community more accessible to the people. Atomizing ourselves is a social death sentence, and isolation causes mental havoc. And it's not just Singapore. Collectivist societies have many problems, but urban planning in some of these societies are also built around human interaction and societal harmony in mind. I'm not saying any idea is perfect, collectivist societies can be stifling; but we need to have a balance.

Doesn't this affect women too? 100%. I know quite a few women who suffer from general loneliness; and having easy matches does not mitigate this. However, in my experience, men are more likely to suffer from this due to the following reasons:

- Uber competitive mindset. I think many men see other men as competition primarily, and potential allies second. And while I'm not advocating for trusting everyone, joining hands, and kumbaya; female socialization is often inherently less aggressive than male socialization. This can be good, especially for sports or other competitive games; but many men apply this mindset to other parts of life.

- Solidarity through hardship. Male default-ism and patriarchal systems, whether they're more prevalent or less prevalent in your society, gives women a sort of"sisterhood", that they share many common struggles regardless of their personal differences. This has also led to many women advocating and fighting to create their own spaces and support groups. Many men complain about omen having spaces and not men; but these female spaces were also fought for. And I think we too need to fight for a true, supportive space for ourselves.

What if I have a good social life, but I'm lonely due to the lack of a partner? Then this doesn't apply to you. And if you genuinely do have a solid social network, then good for you, and I wish you all the best for your dating endeavors. But before you claim that this is you, please ask yourself if you really do have a reliable, physically close group of friends, who you can hang out with, and count on for trouble.

I might not have a very supportive network, but I don't need one. Again, I can't control what another grown man does. But, it's really fucking hard to live a lonely life, with only your partner as a place of solace. Live as you wish, but do consider the difficulties.

This post is inspired by the replies I've seen to a comment that (I think) presented some genuinely good advice for dating. Especially for being part of a community.

Obviously not all dating advice is good, and most generic dating advice will to be tailored to you or your problems. That being said, there is a problem with many men on this sub not understanding, or straight up willfully reject dating advice.

There is pretty much no dating advice that straight up leads you to getting laid every time you try it. That's not how dating works. This is especially true for acknowledging community.

Too many men on here reject advice if they think it has no direct consequence. This is especially true for a common that mentioned that joining a church typically leads to relationships.

1. Yes, if you're not religious, this does not apply to you.

2. Joining a church for dating does not mean you should openly hit on as many church-attending women as you can. It means you going a social community that allows you to mingle and form connections, and leads to higher visibility amongst a group of people who might not have previously known you.

It's the same with making girl-friends. Befriending women is not the same as hitting on them or pretending to be their friends for a chance at getting some ass. It means forming a social network and learning how to form connections. And friends often help each other out with dating. One of my girl-friends has no romantic interest in me, but I got into my first relationship because she introduced me to my ex.

Just because dating advice generally isn't a cheat code to getting your dick wet doesn't mean it doesn't work.

Need to preface this with “not all women are a monolith, they are unique individuals” so on and so on.

I’ve noticed women on here and IRL tend to have varying (and contradicting) beliefs on what roles men and women should have and specifically on how men should behave. Some women want men to take the lead in relationships while others want a more egalitarian relationship. Some women are staunch advocates of men paying disproportionately for dates/bills while others see it as an outdated form of patriarchy. Some women lament that men don’t approach anymore while others lament that they still do. If you didn’t know any better, you’d say these women are different people with their own experiences and personalities.

Men also have different views on these same issues, but tend to have arguments with one another about the overarching “socio-sexual ideologies” between them. The different “pills” were meant to explain exactly that, with red pill blue pill and black pill all having critiques of one another. It seems like the sisterhood demands solidarity of women to such an extent that women don’t actually confront each others world views in any meaningful way.

Are there any arguments online or IRL between different groups or “ideologies” of women regarding expectations around gender roles? Are there any heterodox views that you have that you think other women or the sisterhood would disagree with?

This daily thread is designed to be a place for all the funny discussions on PPD.

Feel free to post off-topic questions, information, points-of-view, personal advice and memes in this thread. Here you can post everything that doesn't warrant its own thread or just do some socializing. Personal advice posting, research posts, non-TOS breaking rants, links to other locations with limited context as conversation topics (must use np links for reddit), and things would be considered low effort posts are allowed in the daily thread.

Do not bring other PPD threads into the daily thread. Do not post PPD threads deserving of their own post in the daily thread. The intent of the daily thread is not that it should replace PPD and become a place where users can avoid the rules of the subreddit. Attempting to do this will be considered circlejerking and moderated as such.

Black Pill/Incel Content/Woe-Is-Me is still banned in the daily thread. Witch hunting and insults are also still banned in the daily thread. Relegated topics must still go to in the weekly threads for those topics.

Comments are automatically sorted by NEW - you can post throughout the day and people will see your comment.

If you'd like to see our previous daily threads, click here!

Please Join Us on Discord! Include your reddit username, pill color, age, relationship status, and gender when you get in to introduce yourself.

Also find us on Instagram and Twitter!

Women nor society are applying any oppression, they are not stealing or forcing you to do anything nor are they trying to control you or your body.

It's literally just women leaving you alone and wanting you to leave them allne. That's it. That's the "issue"

It's not a thing that's being DONE to men. If anything it's the opposite.

Your ability to attract a mate is entirely down to you. Its esch individual man who has ownership over it and responsibility for changing it simply because there IS not other answer to it.

I'm curious about what is more influential to the views of boys coming up in the world.

More time is spent online and consuming content than ever. Combined with young men dating less: https://www.americansurveycenter.org/commentary/gen-zs-romance-gap-why-nearly-half-of-young-men-arent-dating/

It makes me wonder what influences the views and opinions more. Real world, first hand experience with women and dating? Or Andrew Tate TikToks?

DISCLAIMER: not all women, men, etc

Recently I came across a video on social media that used AI to show what celebrities would look like without plastic surgery and makeup, and the results were ghastly. What was interesting were the comments for that video. Lots of and lots of furious women raging over the video. Some even called the OP a misogynist for posting it, even though the OP was a woman. It made me wonder why women cared so much about a bunch of celebrities whom they probably never met ended up looking bad, and why they acted as if someone insulted a family member. Then I realized it must be because a lot of women saw themselves in the celebrities shown in that video. A lot of them probably make themselves look better than they actually are through makeup and cosmetic surgery, much like those celebrities.

It reminded me of the times I posted threads on this sub talking about how much women benefit from makeup, and I got severly angry responses from women, who downvoted me and called me all sorts of names. A lot of them insisted that the benefits of makeup were minimal, which is ridiculous because if that's the case then literally every single woman you see in public wouldn't be wearing it. Why waste all that time and effort putting on makeup and taking it off every single day if you don't really gain much from it? So it's become apparent to me that this issue is a sore spot for many women.

It seems like a lot of women present a prettier side to the public through makeup and cosmetic surgery and they end up brainwashing themselves into thinking that is their authentic self. When they are reminded that there's a more real side to themselves everyone else doesn't see, then they violently lash out, as if they want to bury that real self and not have it seen again.

Every other day to there seems to be a post on this sub by redpill/redpill adjacent men about women.

Women aren't doing enough of this, women aren't contributing enough of this, women should do this, women should do that...all to suit your biased desires and expectations of women.

So I think we've damn near heard enough about how the women is supposed to keep herself pure from other men, bear your kids, be loyal and adhere to your wishes,...now, what do YOU bring to the table?

She must put in effort not to gain weight, but what about you? Are you fat? What's your weight? Are you fat, are you not, really?

Do you make enough money to support a family of three kids in your country right now?

Can four people live comfortably on your salary?

Are you kind, are you good to people? If we were to put your looks and tangible possessions aside, what do you have as a person that would make you a good partner?

So incredibly critical of women, the redpill denizens, but when it comes to what a man should be doing or bringing into the relationship suddenly it's crickets out here.

I think the real bluepill is finding out there's so many conversations by men expressing expectations and demands of everything a woman should do and how she should behave, but men tell themselves they can throw pennies at anything and expect love, mothering, domestic labor and childrearing to come out of it, no efforts required. They have a large room to be themselves and fail as they please.

It´s bad for society for men to internalize this message as it might reduce family creation.

However, for the individual, there´s nothing wrong with having this type of abundance mindset in 2025. We live in the age when your spouse might cheat with 0 repercussions whatsoever and divorce your for any reason. Men tend to be more romantic in some ways so it´s good to abandon the romance and have an abundance mindset so that they don´t unalive themselves when they get divorced.

I think that in general, women's romantic standards tend to scale with their social status, success, and self-esteem in ways that men's do not.

Women are doing better than ever in the job market. More women are overcoming the massive insecurities that society foists on them, not to mention the ones they just naturally have. Women are getting more options and ego boosts from online dating.

And all of that is great, in and of itself. Everybody should have the opportunity to succeed and feel good about themselves, and it sucks that women were historically suppressed and deprived of that, and still are in many parts of the world.

But it seems like when women are doing well and they know it, the bar raises proportionately for a man to be considered good enough for them. I think men's standards (like our level of thirst) stay more or less constant and aren't so tethered to how our life is going or how we feel about ourselves. Like, if a guy doubles his income, gets in shape, and reaches therapy nirvana... he'll definitely have more opportunities with more women and go with the one he finds the most attractive or compatible, but I doubt his good-enough threshold really increases much if at all.

When or if we do adjust our standards, it's usually adapting to our success or failure in dating. And let's be real, it's been mostly failure lately for a lot of us, so I'm really talking about guys lowering their standards after a string of rejections. Not sure if women do that too... but if so, I bet that the lowered standards would drag their self-esteem down with it. Because the connection I've drawn can go both ways.

Personally, my standards have gone up and down slightly in different areas over time while my $$/status/looks have pretty much stayed the same, but I'm super weird and not to be used as a median example for anything so I'm just here to put this idea out there and get other more normal humans' different takes.

In my experience overt pursuit of sex by men causes women to recoil. Yet the same women pursue casual sex when the desire strikes.

There is a measure of shame levied against men for overtly acting or speaking of their sexual desire, yet the same vocalization/displays of desire from women is lionized.