On What Hetero Women REALLY Want

 I think some women don't even want "a man" because they really want the man or the relationship itself, they just be wanting an accessory because they're so used to seeing other women--celebrities, high-profile politicians, wealthy elites & so on--with a man on their arm at black tie events, walking the red carpet or smiling for the paps.  The image is burnt into their shallow little brains;  they believe that's what they're SUPPOSED to want due to social conditioning.  They believe their "look" isn't complete without one... almost like a Hermès bag or high-priced pair of Louboutins. 

If you think I'm trying to be clever/cute or make some kind of coy pop culture analogy, think again.  That's exactly how superficial and vapid a lot of hetero women are these days; how desperate for acceptance into the imaginary Good Wives' Club they are, nothing deeper lying beneath the surface except maybe the crushing debt they've run up on their mealticke--excuse me, HUSBAND'S credit cards.  Their biggest fears in life, surprisingly, don't revolve around illness or poverty and destitution as long as they're not in charge of the hard scary math stuff, but "dying alone", aka without their pudgy unfaithful balding windba-- HANDBAGS by their side. 

These insufferable broads fear being single and "alone" not because they dislike solitude but because they fear being SEEN alone in public without their dumb hairy security blankets.  (Sorry, guys.  That one wasn't even clever, it was just rude).  The thought of going it alone "out on the town" without their most sentient accessory petrifies them, not because they crave the passion of sex with men, nor the intimacy & connection of 2-way conversations w/ them or sharing in their oh-so-enthralling manly hobbies--heavens no.  How many women do you know who like, really ENJOY restoring classic hotrod cars, woodworking, welding, hunting big game or, I dunno, fucking taxidermy? 

Plenty of women will claim to enjoy these pastimes in order to stand out from the pack or gain favor with the menfolk, but somehow the golf courses, wood and metalworking shops, skateparks, taxidermists & shooting ranges of this vast nation are always Sausage Fests IRL.  And as for women's hobbies (knitting, antiquing, pole dancing classes or wine & painting nights, for instance), men are even more reluctant-bordering-on-violently-unwilling to participate or feign any type of interest. Where does that leave hetero couples, then?  Actively repelled by each other's favorite hobbies and interests.  Not exactly an ideal place to be if you plan on sharing a living space with another person for the rest of your natural life.  In order to live harmoniously, you'd need to share similar interests and pastimes at a bare minimum, one would think. 

The sad fact that so many straight men in relationships cheat and verbally abuse their female partners is perhaps the biggest downside of all to entering these committed monogamous relationships, yet straight women persist, blaming the "homewrecking tramp" who has no allegiance or vows to her like clockwork when it all comes tumbling down.  In fact most women never even get to the point of really weighing the pros & cons of cohabiting, such as "Do we have the same major life goals?  Are our daily housekeeping & personality styles compatible?"  (Type A vs. Type B, perfectionistic neat freak vs. cluttered and laid back)  because they're too busy worrying whether he'll knock another woman up, stroll out on his family or turn into a toxic abuser at some point.  

Women also don't consider all the roles they'll be expected to pick up seamlessly without missing a beat like their hetero partner's mother likely did for his father or step-father:  unpaid therapist, sex doll, arm candy, mother figure to both him and their kids, maid, chef, chauffeur, travel planner, holiday gift buyer/party planner, secretary/bookkeeper...  all this ON TOP OF working a full- or part-time job outside the home to contribute to the income.  There was a time of course when a man's income could easily support a whole family sans a college degree--that's rare these days.  So marriage is far more beneficial for men at this point, who are now turning the tables and impregnating women to "trap" them like we were accused of doing back when men held the financial power.  Abortion laws are sealing the deal. 

Nothing about this is glamorous, ladies.  You're not fooling anybody.  So I ask you:  What IS the point of the nuclear family setup?  Of cohabiting, combining resources or, god forbid, making the fateful decision to enter a legally binding contract (marriage) that's known to end in divorce at least 50% of the time? 



1 Man + 1 Woman For Life = 1 Big Fail

A horror movie, not a how-to guide.   😒

Clearly this arrangement is not working.  Not for the couples, not for the kids and not for society.  Why not just enjoy the endorphin train while it lasts and then skip to the co-parenting part that we all KNOW is gonna be more peaceful and harmonious than forcing everyone to live under one roof?  I'm serious--really think about it. 

We treat people as if they're not "real adults" unless/until they enter marriage, buy a home they may not want and certainly can't afford with one lump sum down payment and bring innocent kids into the world amidst this chaos.  They usually have years, decades or a lifetime of student loans, medical bills or other debts to pay off by this point, so they're already starting out behind the eightball, unlike the Baby Boomer generation and those before them who got by with a free diploma & didn't have to worry about silly things like "credit scores". 

I have a theory that men actually prefer the company of other men and ditto women... not necessarily sexually or romantically (although some might if they gave it a shot).  I mean in terms of shared interests, senses of humor, topics of conversation, general ability to get along & work out their differences.  The whole Men = Mars, Women = Venus thing is unfortunately true in the general sense.  And instead of forcing square pegs in octagonal holes by creating these unnatural hetero nuclear families, we should fucking go with the flow.  Stop pressuring people to "grow up" and "settle down," whatever the fuck that means.  There is no one right way to live, love or raise a family (see:  the divorce rate, domestic abuse rates, child abuse/neglect rates, addiction/overdose rates, etc).  If something's not working, you try something else.  But not us.  Stupid Americans fear change so much we'd rather cling to the sinking Titanic than risk jumping on the lifeboat because at least we're familiar with life on the freezing, waterlogged, sinking ship.  

There is nothing wrong with living alone, continuing to live with your biological family that raised you, doing the "Friends" thing and living next door to your boo, living Golden-Girls style with your besties or any other living arrangement that makes you happy.  The same is true for relationships:  single, casual dating, online dating, marriage/kids, marriage/no kids, monogamous, polyamorous, hookups... it's all good as long as you're fulfilled.  Putting pressure on yourself to "settle down" (marry, move in together & have kids) by a certain age is the problem.  Wouldn't it make more sense to just NOT?  To either forego the first 2 divorces by waiting until you're in your 40s or 50s and truly ready to "settle down," or not ever marrying at all? 

And even if you do marry, who says you have to live in one shared space for the rest of eternity?  Why do people in hetero couples believe they have to give up their autonomy, personal space, privacy, independence & individuality when they enter a relationship?  Clearly because we're still living according to 1950s standards that didn't even serve the people back then.  It's entirely possible to be in a loving, monogamous and committed relationship with one person while not living up under each other like sardines in the same house or rushing to the courthouse to make it legal.  Wasting thousands of $$$ on ridiculous weddings only puts more pressure on couples to stay together when they should've separated years ago.  



The More Things Change...

Too many of y'all act this way by choice

Yet for hetero couples, the forecast is showing more playacting & escapism on the horizon with a strong chance of shamelessly imitating celebrities like Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Russell Brand (barf), the Kardashians, Joe Rogan, Johnny Depp (again, vom), Andrew Tate (🤮) , the Royal Family of the UK and, I dunno, Nicki Minaj?  Whoever's "it" in the media at the moment, taking home the most Oscars/Tonys/Grammys/Billboard Awards or "dunking on" the opposing political party hardest.  Never mind their actual talent, character as a human being or anything of substance.  What matters is that they "tell it like it is" and appear in all the magazines and hashtags and ads for expensive couture clothing. 

In this setting, straight men serve as a prop in hetero women's delusional fantasy world where they're as famous as Ariana Grande or Marilyn Monroe, being made to hold their coat or taking their pic while they spend 20 minutes trying to get the perfect angle and lighting so they can change out their Insta PFP but without making it look too staged (you know exactly what I fucking mean - everyone hates those faux-candid shots these thirsty hoes be posting).  The rest of the "date" will be spent dreaming up super original hashtags & captions like "#datenite" or  "MamaBear 'n Hubby out on the Big Town!!1!!11"  🤢 Bottom line:  It's all about optics, not substance.  Because there is none in the vast majority of hetero relationships.

I said what I fuckin' said.

Read that again because I said "most" and "vast majority".  Not "all".  But the fact remains:  you all know exactly what I'm talking about and that I'm not lying.  If you take issue with it, fucking DO something to change it rather than projecting your misery onto me, a 0% hetero women who refuses to participate in the game of kicking my fellow female down the stairs with passive-aggressive digs and other forms of sabotage the second I feel the least bit threatened by her.  I couldn't give less of a shit if you're younger, thinner, cuter, more fertile or richer than me, or if you're soooo in love with your current partner.  In fact, I'll cheer you on as long as you're halfway respectful and decent to me.  The only way to win this game is to forfeit it and devote your attention to something worth your time:  Living a life that feels better to you than it looks to others.  

TL;DR - If women knew what was good for them individually and as a class, they would shun these archaic social impositions and do exactly what they wanted with their lives.  Date, fall in love, have casual sex, have children, coparent... whatever.  Just think long and hard about the legally binding parts like marriage or co-signing on a mortgage.  But more importantly, focus on your hobbies/interests, career, creativity, education, traveling, health, leisure and other things you want to do with your life.  Because it is YOUR life.  With egg-freezing and sperm banks, the biological clock is no longer the loud pressing issue it once was, at least not for those who can afford to put their dreams of a family on ice. 

If your partner doesn't make your life easier and more fun, what's the point of having one?  Have the courage to curate the life you want, not the one you're pressured into.  That was the point of feminism to begin with, and now that we actually have the means to be free of our biological imperatives to "settle down" if we want kids AND no longer benefit financially from marriage like we once did, it's high time we start behaving accordingly.