AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
Luckyfoxxy
Inactive Cam Model
I think it's somewhat true but it's too oversimplified. It misses key elements such as romantization of marriage("you gotta marry out of love") which puts additional strain on family-planning, the divorce becoming trendy in 80s, the romantic comedies and idealization of what perfect relationship should be(and resultng amount of breakups because it's just not perfect enough) and the fact many men work also for prestige, to provide their families with social standing, better quality of life and stroke ego not just to get dat pussy, and that even with women being more promiscuous on average, there are still men who can't get laid - so there's some selection going on.
So there's still an incentive. To at the very least get fit - and they still require social skills to get a gf. It's not as easy as she presented it to be, basically.
There will always be men with bunch of kids from different marriages on benefits and those who can't commit. Thankfully, they are usually easy to spot and so they can be avoided.
In a way I think she's being unfair to both men and women in this video.
Last edited:
Has society become more lenient on having casual sex? Sure. If someone chooses to have multiple partners, that's their choice. But there comes a time when that gets boring and everyone at some point starts to look for a more long-term partner. It shouldn't be too hard to tell if a guy is only in a relationship for the sex or if he has ambitions for something much more lasting. We all take life at our own pace and sometimes the other person just isn't ready for that kind of thing.
Don't really agree with her either. Lol "guys get less productive" No. Ambition shouldn't be tied to getting pussy and then all of a sudden it's cool to be on welfare. I don't know any guy who thinks like that. I'm pursuing my own life's goals because I want to have a better life for myself and the future wifey. Not to just bag the future wifey and sit on the couch. Who does that?
How do you plan to keep a woman this way? Doesn't add up.
Don't really agree with her either. Lol "guys get less productive" No. Ambition shouldn't be tied to getting pussy and then all of a sudden it's cool to be on welfare. I don't know any guy who thinks like that. I'm pursuing my own life's goals because I want to have a better life for myself and the future wifey. Not to just bag the future wifey and sit on the couch. Who does that?
How do you plan to keep a woman this way? Doesn't add up.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
I disagree with a lot in this video, but just on the first point...
"For most of Western history, men had two options for access to sex...hire a prostitute, or get married."
I am not convinced. Something I have heard a lot over the course of my life, in various forms depending on the speakers motivation. My grandfather shared a lot of stories of his youth with me, and they paint a much different picture. But then, Grandpa isn't exactly recorded history.
Another thing that is often left out of these discussions is the age of marriage. Short piece here on it, don't know how accurate it is.
http://study.com/academy/lesson/average-age-of-marriage-throughout-history.html
"For most of Western history, men had two options for access to sex...hire a prostitute, or get married."
I am not convinced. Something I have heard a lot over the course of my life, in various forms depending on the speakers motivation. My grandfather shared a lot of stories of his youth with me, and they paint a much different picture. But then, Grandpa isn't exactly recorded history.
Another thing that is often left out of these discussions is the age of marriage. Short piece here on it, don't know how accurate it is.
http://study.com/academy/lesson/average-age-of-marriage-throughout-history.html
JickyJuly
Inactive Cam Model
- Apr 13, 2011
- 5,442
- 35,009
- 293
- Twitter Username
- @JickyJuly
- MFC Username
- JickyJuly
- Streamate Username
- Jicky
- ManyVids URL
- https://www.manyvids.com/Profile/461355/JickyJ/
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://www.clips4sale.com/store/99705/jicky
I disagree with EVERYTHING she said. I also find her really demeaning toward men and marriage. Her assertions are also mostly untrue imo. Everything she's saying is dependent on the idea that men only find value in women in the form of sex and childbearing. Any woman who believes that should probably leave men alone and also not try to speak for them. People are getting married later in life because they're not in a rush to get married and get laid without judgement. That means people have more time to find someone they are compatible with and more time to build before having children. Less people are getting married, but the divorce rate is the same now as in 1950... lower than the mid 1940s. The fact that less people are marrying could be attributed to a lot of societal shifts (economy, out of control wedding expectations/costs, less pressure to procreate)... I don't think male lack of ambition is a factor worth mentioning. If women want a driven man, they'll find one. Lower rates of marriage also doesn't necessarily mean that less people are in long term relationships.
Could someone break down for me what she meant in speaking about welfare/single mothers/child support? Those are all things that people could pay or need even if they were married and divorced. Also, a parent can't receive things like EBT unless they put the non-custodial parent on child support. I didn't really understand what she meant in saying that child support was a middle class thing. No matter how little you make, child support is allowed to take 1/4 of it. Since they're taking a percentage and not a flat rate, if you're broke, you're still broke and if you're not you're still not. Did I miss her point?
I feel like she's Russia's answer to Tomi Lahren. They could be pals or scratch each other's eyes out. I know which one I'd prefer.
Edit to add: Watched over. Sounds like the financial part is her suggesting that because single parents means two households, it automatically means less $ for each parent. But, that completely ignores the many blended families. My stepkids have 2 sets of people providing. That could be more money. Of course, in my case, it also means they have more siblings. But, it can mean more support financially or otherwise, for everyone. My stepdaughter's mom could call me needing something for her child that is not my stepkid and I would give. I don't doubt that if my daughters needed, she would do the same. I'm not saying all blended fams work this way or that there aren't other problems, but to ignore the reality of families after divorce seems weird. Again, someone explain to me if I missed her point and it is different than what I am going on at.
Could someone break down for me what she meant in speaking about welfare/single mothers/child support? Those are all things that people could pay or need even if they were married and divorced. Also, a parent can't receive things like EBT unless they put the non-custodial parent on child support. I didn't really understand what she meant in saying that child support was a middle class thing. No matter how little you make, child support is allowed to take 1/4 of it. Since they're taking a percentage and not a flat rate, if you're broke, you're still broke and if you're not you're still not. Did I miss her point?
I feel like she's Russia's answer to Tomi Lahren. They could be pals or scratch each other's eyes out. I know which one I'd prefer.
Edit to add: Watched over. Sounds like the financial part is her suggesting that because single parents means two households, it automatically means less $ for each parent. But, that completely ignores the many blended families. My stepkids have 2 sets of people providing. That could be more money. Of course, in my case, it also means they have more siblings. But, it can mean more support financially or otherwise, for everyone. My stepdaughter's mom could call me needing something for her child that is not my stepkid and I would give. I don't doubt that if my daughters needed, she would do the same. I'm not saying all blended fams work this way or that there aren't other problems, but to ignore the reality of families after divorce seems weird. Again, someone explain to me if I missed her point and it is different than what I am going on at.
Last edited:
I watched this when she first released it. And just kinda went... Um isn't anyone concerned about the population of the planet? This isn't the first trend of men not wanting to settle down and marry. It happened in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Honestly for us as a species survival, we don't want to over populate, because that will use up all our resources. So this trend doesn't bother me.
Like seriously no fucks if you don't want to settle down and get married. Idk, the libertarian in me isn't cool on telling people what to do with their dicks and cunts if they aren't physically or emotionally harming anyone.
The comment section is like a /r/theredpill circle jerk.
Like seriously no fucks if you don't want to settle down and get married. Idk, the libertarian in me isn't cool on telling people what to do with their dicks and cunts if they aren't physically or emotionally harming anyone.
The comment section is like a /r/theredpill circle jerk.
Thank god I didn't get my education from a video blog about a word that requires Googling. Given my experience, men mostly hurt men, and a marriage status does not evolve you as a species.
Like I only got married for legal reasons, even though my partner and I are 100% committed to each other and love each other more than anything. Insurance perks, tax perks, power of attorney, ect. We didn't even tell our family right away or have a party.
I do honestly believe getting married to have sex is retarded. The religious school I went to, after graduation, you saw a bunch of 18-year-olds marrying their highschool boyfriends., "so they can go the next step." Let me go see how they are doing after 10 years. "reactivates facebook." divorced. divorced. separated. and should totally get divorced, holy shit. Those are the only ones I still have as friends on there.
Ahhhh traditionalists.
I feel like these are the kids who never got over their parents divorce.
I do honestly believe getting married to have sex is retarded. The religious school I went to, after graduation, you saw a bunch of 18-year-olds marrying their highschool boyfriends., "so they can go the next step." Let me go see how they are doing after 10 years. "reactivates facebook." divorced. divorced. separated. and should totally get divorced, holy shit. Those are the only ones I still have as friends on there.
Ahhhh traditionalists.
I feel like these are the kids who never got over their parents divorce.
Last edited:
The best reason to be married for a man (I am assuming happily) is that you will live longer from doing so. Sexual competition is a losing strategy for men from a living perspective, we know this from the life expectancy studies, including those of eunuchs who on average have always outlived 'complete' men.
The first comment is way way off; cheating was just as common in the past as present. My family history for instance has a man who abandoned his wife, moved to another country, married someone else without divorcing, then brought his sons over. It isn't a rare thing at all.
Second comment, men have an easier time finding casual sex due to women having more sexual partners. Big assumption, casual sex requires a casual partner. No woman interested in casual sex will choose a partner who is not the same.
In the past items needed for casual sex such as condoms were illegal and difficult to find, there was no pill so the consequences for casual sex were pretty big. It most definitely didn't stop it.
The rest I enjoyed, was funny seeing the train of thought that followed. The productive man thing was way off.
You can't talk about the changing role of male productivity without a mention of post war feminism, modern men only generate and control half of the productivity required to raise children. In the past couples use to work together too, but the roles were more restricted. Modern men cannot control a partner in the same way, this is where this argument was based.
Casual sex will always be more visible in an open society. Those more serious about sex tend to be partnered/dating or alone for long periods of time.
The why bother attitude from men tends to come from the serious men, not those chasing casual sex, those with easy access to it. They wait around until women begin to become serious about a partner. This is occurring later and later so some inevitably give up on women. The shortage of men thing has always occurred, in modern times for women it has never been better.
Historically for men it has always been fine to live as a bachelor. It is only in recent years as more misandry has developed in our culture that straight men are expected to be 'found' by a partner when she wants one.
For those of us that couldn't quite get into promiscuity, thank god for cam girls, porn, and the occasional date. Now we are almost hurt free.
The first comment is way way off; cheating was just as common in the past as present. My family history for instance has a man who abandoned his wife, moved to another country, married someone else without divorcing, then brought his sons over. It isn't a rare thing at all.
Second comment, men have an easier time finding casual sex due to women having more sexual partners. Big assumption, casual sex requires a casual partner. No woman interested in casual sex will choose a partner who is not the same.
In the past items needed for casual sex such as condoms were illegal and difficult to find, there was no pill so the consequences for casual sex were pretty big. It most definitely didn't stop it.
The rest I enjoyed, was funny seeing the train of thought that followed. The productive man thing was way off.
You can't talk about the changing role of male productivity without a mention of post war feminism, modern men only generate and control half of the productivity required to raise children. In the past couples use to work together too, but the roles were more restricted. Modern men cannot control a partner in the same way, this is where this argument was based.
Casual sex will always be more visible in an open society. Those more serious about sex tend to be partnered/dating or alone for long periods of time.
The why bother attitude from men tends to come from the serious men, not those chasing casual sex, those with easy access to it. They wait around until women begin to become serious about a partner. This is occurring later and later so some inevitably give up on women. The shortage of men thing has always occurred, in modern times for women it has never been better.
Historically for men it has always been fine to live as a bachelor. It is only in recent years as more misandry has developed in our culture that straight men are expected to be 'found' by a partner when she wants one.
For those of us that couldn't quite get into promiscuity, thank god for cam girls, porn, and the occasional date. Now we are almost hurt free.
The amount of single parents in the dating world is a bit alarming. Like marriage isn't even about sticking around anymore. I think people used to "work" on their relationship because their options were limited.
Now you got all these dating sites and apps that you can literally see more options in the click of a mouse or swipe of a finger. And if things go south all of Facebook is telling people to go get another partner.
I used to be really romantic etc, but I'd rather just be pragmatic and save the idealistic shit for the movies.
Love doesn't pay the bills as they say.
Now you got all these dating sites and apps that you can literally see more options in the click of a mouse or swipe of a finger. And if things go south all of Facebook is telling people to go get another partner.
I used to be really romantic etc, but I'd rather just be pragmatic and save the idealistic shit for the movies.
Love doesn't pay the bills as they say.
- Feb 23, 2015
- 3,860
- 4,255
- 693
I do wonder about this part, the sticking around.
My grandparents all stayed married until death. One side the grandfather was a monster (enabled for decades by the grandmother), the other was the exact opposite (grandmother was an abusive holy terror). Never understood how the good partners put up with the bad ones for so long.
Caused a lot of damage behind the scenes. Was society better for marriages like that to stay intact? Honestly don't know.
It's just full of (the video, not the cool people here) vanilla preachings based on black and white social wisdom. Trust me, my brother is a Rabbi and I am used to filter these sermons
It may not pay the bills, but love does make paying the bills worth it (so fucking corny, what the fuck?) Were it not for my boyfriend whom I love dearly, I would have checked out a long time ago. I feel sorry that other people don't have that and are so down on love.
Elegant.
It describes the desire to chase the casual thing as beautifully as hiding from anything too serious. Anything long term will ultimately be discarded.
I just feel like once the initial infatuation is over, all of the romance kinda fades away. I've never been married or moved in/had someone move in with me. I sort of observe those around me and from the outside looking in, the marriages I see have a job feel to them. Compromise. Compassion and love, intimacy.
But no romance.
For instance, I got stuck in cali and ended up staying at a friend's place. He went off to go train and I was with his wife that week. She mentioned I did more around the house than her own husband. And I feel if he was still dating her and not married, maybe he would do more to impress her. Or maybe not I'm not sure. But it does feel that guys stop trying once the ring gets put on and it's more of a partnership than anything.
If that makes sense?
But no romance.
For instance, I got stuck in cali and ended up staying at a friend's place. He went off to go train and I was with his wife that week. She mentioned I did more around the house than her own husband. And I feel if he was still dating her and not married, maybe he would do more to impress her. Or maybe not I'm not sure. But it does feel that guys stop trying once the ring gets put on and it's more of a partnership than anything.
If that makes sense?
Last edited:
- Mar 1, 2017
- 84
- 112
- 113
- Twitter Username
- @opphs_
- Tumblr Username
- onlyprettypplhavesex
- MFC Username
- opphs
- ManyVids URL
- https://www.manyvids.com/Profile/814371/opphs_/
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Locked
- Question
-
- Locked
