OPINION Men seem to make life for women worse’: single US women share the woes of dating in 2025

[Freeman]

I'm not being disingenuous at all

Maybe you missed it but this is what I was agreeing with

Many of the responses were surprisingly similar. The most frequently listed qualities women said they were looking for in a partner were kindness and emotional intelligence, mental and physical health, shared values, ambition and being “hardworking”, financial stability, masculinity and maturity, and a willingness to commit to an equal, monogamous relationship as well as, in many cases, having a family.

And

One of the phrases respondents used the most was that they were looking for a partner capable of “adding to” or “enhancing” their life – as in, someone who was entirely self-sufficient and capable of adding romance, children or a unique intellectual connection to their lives. A large number of women complained about past suitors who had been “lacking effort” or “unable to keep up”.

And this is just from the first few paragraphs.

Yes, niggas need to do better. I come on this very board everyday and read some of the most sexist shit I encounter in a week so it's not like I'm making shit up

And by niggas, if it doesn't apply, let it fly. But I'll be more specific and say men in general need to be better. That's not to provide cover for women who aren't up to par but I am going to charge men with being better in areas where they lack

So it took you 5 pages to state what we all already know? That men and women lack in certain areas.

Like im trying to get to what the larger point is and why its not in your thread title or op yet.

Is it just that men need to do better at dating?

 

[konceptjones]

View attachment 1590638

 

[MorganFreemanKing]

The article itself isn't even a real call to action, it's just a roundtable of women expressing frustration. It's all anecdotal evidence about the men that they meet while dating (this part is important).

It reads more like a message to women just acknowledging that theyre not alone in their experiences.

They talk about the kind of men they want to meet and involve themselves with. The men who want to date these women should take heed to their concerns.

While I don't think the article is outright suggesting this, one could read it and think the men they're looking for don't exist. It doesn't acknowledge a possibility that 1, the men they're looking for aren't looking for them, or 2, the men they're looking for aren't interested in dating at all, which MULTIPLE articles point out (again, lack of originality).

So if you're pursuing women like this, then yeah, be up on your shit. If not, leave them alone and let them stay befuddled.

 

[Freeman]

The article itself isn't even a real call to action, it's just a roundtable of women expressing frustration. It's all anecdotal evidence about the men that they meet while dating (this part is important).

It reads more like a message to women just acknowledging that theyre not alone in their experiences.

They talk about the kind of men they want to meet and involve themselves with. The men who want to date these women should take heed to their concerns.

While I don't think the article is outright suggesting this, one could read it and think the men they're looking for don't exist. It doesn't acknowledge a possibility that 1, the men they're looking for aren't looking for them, or 2, the men they're looking for aren't interested in dating at all, which MULTIPLE articles point out (again, lack of originality).

So if you're pursuing women like this, then yeah, be up on your shit. If not, leave them alone and let them stay befuddled.

It would go a longer way simply being titled as such. None of us have a problem with what the article is we have a problem with what it isn't.

 

[SeaSnake]

Im the last person to be on some gender wars shit but the article would have better been suited being titled "women are having trouble finding suitors in their respective dating pools" or some shit like that.

First thing 3 of yall did was come in here acting sassy for no reason. @SeaSnake probably never bothered reading it, Craig Robinson told us we were wrong before any of us said a word and you @AP4.0 missed that the article didn't actually allude to its claim.

Nobody is acting sassy. I’m sorry I concluded what side yall were gonna be on and how it was going to be viewed before reading y’all’s comments. This is agender war topic like the last 1200 gender war topics.

 

[SeaSnake]

So it took you 5 pages to state what we all already know? That men and women lack in certain areas.

Like im trying to get to what the larger point is and why its not in your thread title or op yet.

Is it just that men need to do better at dating?

If you already know why you here?

 

[Freeman]

Nobody is acting sassy. I’m sorry I concluded what side yall were gonna be on and how it was going to be viewed before reading y’all’s comments. This is agender war topic like the last 1200 gender war topics.

You couldn’t even read my post correctly. Tighten up.

 

[SeaSnake]

You couldn’t even read my post correctly. Tighten up.

I read it correctly jackass. You wanted the title to be different completely missing the point of the article in the first place. Gotta open your mind at some point.

 

[Freeman]

If you already know why you here?

Im in here cause yall seem to have agreed with the premise of the article and thread title without acknowledging/understanding what was in the title had nothing to do with what was in the article.

The thread and article are titled "men seem to make life for women worse" im waiting for yall or the journalist to explain how. Is that crazy?

 

[Freeman]

I read it correctly jackass. You wanted the title to be different completely missing the point of the article in the first place. Gotta open your mind at some point.

So what did this post mean?

But when is say it I’m pandering

What are you saying thats the same? That you can't find men that don't have the qualities you'd like? That men don't try hard enough when dating you? What? Yall can do this shit all day with @Knock_Twice all day not me.

 

[SeaSnake]

Im in here cause yall seem to have agreed with the premise of the article and thread title without acknowledging/understanding what was in the title had nothing to do with what was in the article.

The thread and article are titled "men seem to make life for women worse" im waiting for yall or the journalist to explain how. Is that crazy?

Again taking the title too literal. It’s obviously about dating not ruining the quality of life for all women. One of the main points in the article was how the red pill Trump shit impacts dating. It’s not hard to understand why the women in the article would not like that frame of thought.

Just cuz koncept summed it up for you does not mean he covered everything brother.

 

[SeaSnake]

Is my understanding wrong?

 

[Freeman]

Again taking the title too literal. It’s obviously about dating not ruining the quality of life for all women. One of the main points in the article was how the red pill Trump shit impacts dating. It’s not hard to understand why the women in the article would not like that frame of thought.

Just cuz koncept summed it up for you does not mean he covered everything brother.

Is my understanding wrong?

YESSSSSS. What are you even talking about?

 

[deadeye]

Related video:


Introducing.............Jeff St James.


He's a licensed therapist who many consider to be the next Kevin Samuels.


Enjoy

 

[SeaSnake]

YESSSSSS. What are you even talking about?

“I wish I could have met my person before the stupid gender wars, social media and red pill rhetoric that has ruined people’s view of dating and marriage,” she said.

That is directly what I’m talking about which is from the article.

Since you have all the time today fully explain what I missed in the article that’s leading to my misunderstanding.

 

[Freeman]

“I wish I could have met my person before the stupid gender wars, social media and red pill rhetoric that has ruined people’s view of dating and marriage,” she said.

That is directly what I’m talking about which is from the article.

Since you have all the time today fully explain what I missed in the article that’s leading to my misunderstanding.

That has nothing to do with Trump and wasn't a main point or sentiment of the article. Literally just a sentence.

 

[SeaSnake]

That has nothing to do with Trump and wasn't a main point or sentiment of the article. Literally just a sentence.

I’m talking about the trump incel red pill stuff that has impacted dating. We have all seen the shit. I’m not reaching.

 

[Freeman]

I’m talking about the trump incel red pill stuff that has impacted dating. We have all seen the shit. I’m not reaching.

Trump started the incel red pill movement?

 

[SeaSnake]

Trump started the incel red pill movement?

No but the way he carries women’s rights helped lead right to it. That red pill incel stuff is about getting back at women Trump Mo is restricting women and taking away rights.

When Obama was president we didn’t hear about 50 million relationship podcasts. Also these right wing folks do date. I can even bring up how people reacted to the MeToo movement. So if adult women are saying things like politics and views make it hard to date are we supposed to write it off?

If this article was saying “women make life harder for men” and men listed their valid reasons I don’t think it would’ve gone more than 2 pages.

 

[Freeman]

No but the way he carries women’s rights helped lead right to it. That red pill incel stuff is about getting back at women Trump Mo is restricting women and taking away rights.

When Obama was president we didn’t hear about 50 million relationship podcasts. Also these right wing folks do date. I can even bring up how people reacted to the MeToo movement. So if adult women are saying things like politics and views make it hard to date are we supposed to write it off?

If this article was saying “women make life harder for men” and men listed their valid reasons I don’t think it would’ve gone more than 2 pages.

Trump has nothing to do with nothing and the article didn't say that so I could careless about the what if. It's irrelevant.

If the article and subsequent thread title @AP4.0 chose had anything to do with what was said in the article I wouldn't have an issue with anything written. My issue is that a pretty bold claim the article and thread title made hasn't actually been discussed. I don't think im being unreasonable to expect that. That should be the minimum.