80% of Japanese Women: Marrying Poor Men “Unthinkable”

hgdclll

if you say it with manly Tear
it will help you to be seen as
Manly Man .

LoL

Blows before the shoes

( blows ----> as in Blow up )

TOES BEFORE THOSE.

True, I am "a cold, cynical, sad person", but I think it was all just a misunderstanding. I don't use the word 'love' for the things you do. Love is a word, which is overused in my language, so it kind of feels shallow to use it. My parents never told each other, something of love, but they are still married and happy. And because of this situation around me, I do not think the word love is appropriate for the things you call by that very word.

"do you desire to be happy or are trying to find happiness?"
An interesting question. I don't know. Maybe I am, perhaps I am not. I'm a lonely person, yeah, but I choose to be one. It's not the people that have forsaken me, it's me who has forsaken the real people. I search for people who may suit me and found a few on the interwebz. Maybe my future is a bright one or perhaps I'm just making excuses.

"Writing doesn’t require money"

Than how do you write and on what? Paper requires mony, ink requires money,...

See, this is exactly what I mean (regarding mostly Chen's comment). Likening love to a sickness or effects of a drug?? Love shouldn't only be considered a "feeling", like a drug, like how you feel good after you fap only longer and not as good. Love should be considered a much more complicated thing, although not indescribable or magical. Trust, caring, understanding, companionship, attachment, etc. It's all good things a person should have, like the basic nutritional value you should get out of a healthy meal. Those should be considered important aspects of love. Love without those things is just infatuation or mistaken lust. Love is a two way thing, you need to give it in order to feel it coming back to you.

But your significant other shouldn't be the only one you love. Love between two partners IS the same as the love you should have between you and your family and friends and generally mankind, only deeper and with things like lust, deeper intimacy, and physical/mental/sexual attraction. I mean, people say they don't believe in love in a relationship, but haven't they ever felt love for their parents or siblings or other people, like friends? Oh, so love is ok there but when it comes to a significant other it doesn't? Maybe most people are just looking for fuckbuddies, or someone to gain things from, only willing to give in order to get something back in return.

You don't need money to survive. You need is basic necessities like a roof over your head, clothing, and food (I didn't say love, cuz love isn't something you need to live, it's something you need to live happy). A person can learn to make or gain these things without money, and without negatively effecting other people. Although I'll admit, that's harder to do without money in some places than others this day in age. And for example in America, correct me if I'm wrong, you can't even get medical treatment without paying (unlike in places like my country where anyone can walk in and the government pays for their treatment). Or you could just try to stay careful and healthy so that you wouldn't need to go to one. I mean, if you've got no money then you've got no TV or crap to sit in front of all day, so might as well use all that free time to stay healthy and fit.

Everyone listen to this man. He is one of the few people left on this planet with intelligence and their humanity.

More like atypically observant. Various drugs mimic the neurotransmitter game of love, and are only slightly more temporary. Trust, harmonizing interests, avid desire to settle down and such would probably be a safer bet if you're looking for longevity in that sort of thing.

Or just sit tight for human interface cybernetic 3D-ized anime babes, with on-the-fly configurable interests. They could actually find poorness a compelling feature in a man...

"Really? Our weekly savings went into the Powerball lottery again honey? I knew I made the right decision when I chose you!"

I actually follow no religion. I had one, but I don't believe in following a religion if I have to believe in everything it tells me to beleive in and doesn't allow for change, learning, and open mindedness. I believe in religion, but I don't follow one. I guess I make my own religion for myself, based on what I've learned and experienced.

You're continuing referral to love as a kind of temporary disease really makes me think you're confusing love and infatuation, or romanticism. It isn't shouldn't be something temporary or else it isn't love. Love IS all of the little things. You need to have a mix of those things in order to experience love. It's a mixture of feelings. You need to have trust, affection, forgiveness, understanding, attachment, etc. I don't know how anyone who sees that perspective can see it as wrong. Would you rather believe love is unexplainable magic that you may or may not stumble into some day, or something tangible that can be attained by the right means?

And I didn't mean that everyone loves their family or has to love their family, but it's unusual not to. But can you really say that not having a loving family member, hopefully since birth, is actually desirable? Do you like that you don't have a person

Really though, are you even happy? Or maybe a more reasonable question would be, do you desire to be happy or are trying to find happiness? Or have you just given up and are just living for the hell of it? Or for some other goal?

Only a cold, cynical, sad person would say they do not desire being loved. Even if you can live without it, you won't really be happy without it. Now really, I can't believe anyone who tells me they don't want happiness. Many people have lived on work, or things like art and creating, but happiness usually eludes those people. Like secluded, isolated writers, who can be brilliant and make something of their lives, but lack true happiness due to loneliness, even though ironically that loneliness can fuel their brilliant work. Still, I'm sure those people would wish they could have both love as well as achieve their goals at the end of their lives.

BTW, I didn't want to sound cliched, but I did once say things like you do, before I reached around 20. Even before that, I scoffed and laughed at the concept of love as something silly, cheesy, and a kind of nonsensical magic only for story books. I don't know how it feels for you, but for me it was a pretty depressing and jaded time. I was always angry at everyone for the slightest thing. That was after I stopped believing in god and the soul, which I still don't believe in... at least not in the same way. At least I can say I feel I understand the concepts better than I would have if I had blindly followed another person's views instead of finding my own. I used to look for a "god" in the bigger picture, the universe, the heavens, what ever is out there, the things that are bigger than "trivial" humans, but I never looked at the things that make up the picture. I almost forgot that I was human and that I live among other humans.

I don't mean to have anyone listen to me, or change because of what I say. I don't care. I'm just giving my views. I'm not trying to preach, I'm just saying what I honestly believe, and anyone can take or leave whatever they want from it. I'm not trying to convert anyone to anything. I'm just another human being who's learning to be and trying to be human. I'm happy to read your rebuts, Chen, or anyone's. I take healthy arguments as a way of helping each other out.

Oh, and needing money to make a living? Well, that's different. But it depends on what you want to do with your life, really. A person can learn to live a simple life without money. But depending on what they want to do, they may or may not need money. Creating art doesn't require money. Singing doesn't require money, if you've got talent. Writing doesn't require money, provided you learn how to read and write somehow first. I believe the current world's creation of economy, businesses, corporations, banks, etc. have made the world and life more complicated than it should be. The majority of the world's people has been made to follow an unnecessary template from their birth. But then, that's a whole other argument and this is far longer than it should be...

I think you are a religious person who can't understand the scientific point of view. Your argumentaion has flaws. Lots of it.

First: Love isn't what you want it to be. And I certainly do not love my familiy. It's my family. Persons I can trust. People who will hold to me in bad times. Love is just a temporary mental disease. The things you speak of aren't love, but sympathy, harmonizing interests and so on. Depending on your age: grow up or wake up. I for startes am not even in my twenties, but did realize already a big deal of the worlds working.

Second: One can't do shit without money. Maybe you can survive.. somewhat. But you can't make a living without it. (Besides: You only need clothes in cold areas.)

Staying healthy will be more complicate the older you get. Oh,.. in the far past people died around the age of 30, so you can make it at least that far.

Or maybe I just forgot the few good things in my life. I try not too hard to remember my past. Always hurts.

"If you want to be realistic, I’d suggest you know that nothing is black and white, there are no 100%s, and to look at things from multiple perspectives."

Well, yeah, that's what I do. Everything is grey. Good and bad are a matter of definition. Killing people helps humanity as a whole. Every emotion is a necessatiy for daily life, and so on..

"hadn’t had a single positive experiences in my entire life."
no kidding?

heh. i don't mean to generalize, but I don't think I've come across anyone who calls themselves a realist and doesn't almost always look at the downside to things, ironically. Having low expectations doesn't make you have a realistic point of view. If you want to be realistic, I'd suggest you know that nothing is black and white, there are no 100%s, and to look at things from multiple perspectives.

Thanks for the support, I suppose..
I'm a realist. I like dreaming too, but there I prefer 2D. Maybe it's just that I hadn't had a single positive experiences in my entire life. But oh well. Being realistic and obvervant are good traits I guess.

Chen - "Females want to look up, searching for older male, and male want to look down. searching for younger female.

that’s it. That’s our code. you can’t change it with your smart thought. Face it already."

I'm male and I'm searching for older females. Does that make me a mutant?

Well,.. this much responding for that old of an article kinda proves my point. Let's answer a few questions:

Male searching for older females? Nothing wrong with it. There are woman called domina's too. It's only natural for a few to do the exact opposit of what society as a whole does.

"If you’re right you won’t need to beat feminists back in their place"
Sadly that's not true, because mankind isn't any longer dictated by their codes. We control nature and so we control other things. If I'm right, our culture will downfall. Like, so many others in the past.

@Ukonkivi: If you think so, go on. I didn't try to convince anybody, hell, this is a comment section of a site I visit for fun. My assertions are based on things a men called 'Konrad Lorenz' found out, like half a century ago. But of course, I did exaggerate. After all, it's a fun thread. And, always remember rule 14 ;-)

But, yeah, equality isn't that great of a thing, even if it would work. Kills the young generation. Before their birth.

cut the number of your adjectives in half if you want your comment to be read =|
grammar (ie complete sentences) helps too

"Either way the way you talk is ridiculous and seems very convenient for men and inconvenient for women."

06:45:20 Anon, I guess you're responding to Chen?

"There are woman called domina’s too."
I would like more of these types.

A gender label for people is as unnecessary as a label like emo or punk or prep. They don't help with anything. They only create problems.

And a bunch of pathetic, downtalking assertions will not convince me of your inane tripe of being true. What silly, pathetic amount of biological determinism with no reason to back it up than your own feelings about the way things are and always will be.

Ask any half intelligent anthropologist, people are mostly made through culture. And if genetic engineering was needed to create equality, I would gladly accepting it. But it's not. And you're being silly.

You talk as if you know biology. How much time have you even spent debating the race and intelligence controversy? How much do you even know about genetic code, even haplogroups? Honestly I don't see science pointing in your direction.

Your first thought intrigues mea little, but the rest is plain wrong. Because equality between the genders leads to uncertainty. If people can't longer identify with a roll in daily life, like the father who earns the money and the mother who raises the children, societey will fall, as we can see it already happen in many regions. It's not like people are like white sheets as babies. We have some kind of code imprinted in our conscious, like every animal out there. It would be great, if a society like you describe it could exist, but I fear we first have to change humans and by that I don't mean by teaching, but I mean to manipulate the very code itself. Like creating a new kind of human throug genetic engineering. Sounds ridiculous, but have a greater chance of success, than your daydreaming. Your flaw is, that you didn't calculate the stupid humans. And let me tell you a secret: they have outnumbered us.

The thing with 'stupid' people, and I mean people who do not question their daily life, their habits, their code, so the thing with those people is, that they will live according to their pattern - no matter what. The pattern for male don't allow do see woman as something more than equal and the one for female don't allow them to see man as something less than equal. Females want to look up, searching for older male, and male want to look down. searching for younger female.

that's it. That's our code. you can't change it with your smart thought. Face it already.

That whole role in society thing is very Eastern, and you gotta realize that modern Western philosophy, and thus, most the American/European females readers out there are just going to think you're wrong. That part of the world is built on 'Anyone can do anything', and we don't care if it hurts the mold.

If you're right you won't need to beat feminists back in their place, the numbers will even out eventually on their own. If you're wrong but still want things your way, then you might.

Either way the way you talk is ridiculous and seems very convenient for men and inconvenient for women.

"Instead of being chivalrus to one gender, everyone should try to be chivalrus to other human beings in general."

Listen to this anon! He writes the truth!

You must not watch much TV. But then again, I don't like to watch anything but the news and classic cartoons and I still don't agree with you. It's all perspective. I don't agree that when you turn on the TV these days that the majority of females only fill those roles. At least, that's not how it is when I turn on the tv. Quite often, women are shown in charge, or ahead of the men around them. They're also frequently shown in a mixture of the things you mention, as well as action roles, intelligence roles, roles of business, etc etc. Far more variety than a decade or two ago, but even in the 70s and 80s I can think of some shows where female characters were original and/or in control. Even the amount of TV shows with a female lead is huge.

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the majority of women on TV are far cooler, smarter, confident, interesting, and etc in every way than any female I've met in real life. So, now I'd say they're pretty much equal with TV men.

Of course, I'm not including reality shows here. Ironically enough, those are where most of the female dumbasses on TV are. Both women AND men, really.

Also, yes, chivalry is dead. But I like the way it is here now... at least in Canada. Every time I go out to the store or somewhere there comes a moment where I either end up opening the door for someone or they hold it open for me, and I always get or give a thank you, and no one including me even thinks to look at who it is that they're helping out. It's like natural clockwork. Instead of being chivalrus to one gender, everyone should try to be chivalrus to other human beings in general.

stop being chivalrous.
you will be ending up dead
and stabbed in the back
by a Misandry Woman .

Chen, I do sacrifice those privileges. I haven't seen ladies first in these areas forever. I end up holding open doors for men more often than that, with nothing but a grunt in recognition. I do almost all the physical labor that men do. I know a lot of women who do. And then they go home and raise their families on their own...and those families turn out fine, a lot of the time better than two parent homes where the parents are constantly bickering.

Those female 'privileges' where the same kind predatory capitalists used on their workers 'drain all the life out of them while keeping them -just- happy enough and distracted.' so they didn't revolt and accepted the Boss's view of the world.

Turn on any TV station and watch. Girls are still just defined as girlfriends, mothers, daughters,sisters, or out and out sex objects, even on so called 'women's tv'. It's disgusting.

I do not think men and women are the same, but I sure as hell don't think either sex is inferior, The current climate still favors men in most parts of the world.