why do so many guys complain about women having high standards?

ThisIsMe123 said:

How do you know they have no jobs?

Anyways, I'm the kind of guy that's pretty flexible to what I look for in the looks of women, and when I would reach to them, I'd be kind of shocked that I "wasn't their type". I had one woman thought I was too skinny, when I know I weigh quite average (I do have meat on my bones, lol). SO I didn't know what she was talkinga bout, unless she's looking for some hulking dude.

And she wasn't much to look at herself.

Click to expand...

There are single mothers on dating apps trying to shame men to help with their kids, lol. Most of them fat and old and incredibly entitled.

I'm supposed to have endless sympathy for a woman wanting a tall man so she can wear high heels.. yet I'm somehow a monster for not wanting to raise another man's offspring. Lol.

dzheremi said:

I'm not the OP, so apologies for butting in, but I do have to ask: You may not like it, but what's wrong with recognizing that this is reality?

Click to expand...

This is what happens when you compartmentalize your life and fail to apply the word to your circumstances.
Including your relationships. Only God can change hearts. If you've read enough Christian books on the subject the topic comes up frequently. In every instance, when one party went to Him about the other the mirror was facing them. They changed and the situation improved. It wasn't about fixing the other or making them see things their way. He dealt with their garbage instead.

We're living in NeverNever Land. No longer acknowledging the truth but the fantasy we've put in its place. That's our reality. But the bible says the truth makes a man free. Therein lies the problem and the remedy. You can't use a soulish approach (thoughts and feelings) and expect a holy outcome. He hastens to His word. A close reading of The Spiritual Man by Watchman Nee would reveal the stumbling blocks and resolution.

dzheremi said:

I don't believe in numerically rating people, but because that's the world that we live in, I think it is appropriate to point out that if you are a 5 and you are holding out for a 10, you're either going to be continually disappointed and alone, or you're going to have to try to adjust the way that you judge the quality of potential partners so as to put other things ahead of their numerical rating.

Click to expand...

That's a good example of spiritual ignorance. The Holy One won't deliver it because of the partiality which He speaks against in James. If you're waiting on a 10 and the years are passing by that's why. There's no wind behind your sails. You'll have to bring to pass on your own.

dzheremi said:

As distasteful as it is to just come out and say it, all of us -- from the most beautiful model to the homeliest bridge troll -- only have so many attributes we can put forward when trying to show potential partners our best selves.

Click to expand...

Our unwillingness to know the tenets we profess extends our suffering. Out of all the women mentioned in the bible only a handful are considered beautiful and the same holds true for men. Attractiveness wasn't the norm. It's an important concept that shouldn't be overlooked. But more importantly, who were their partners? They were men of God and committed to Him. Not lukewarm or backslidden. And the majority were prominent.

In like fashion, that's why you see the same in our culture. The devil copies His blueprint and exploits it.

dzheremi said:

What I wouldn't do in response to this situation is react by saying something like "So you think that because I don't meet some standard I don't deserve to date you anyway? Well that's ridiculous." That's an entitled attitude, and entitlement can make even the most physically beautiful person downright ugly.

Click to expand...

If you sow to the flesh you reap the same and you're judged by its standards. If I desired a spouse and saw little to no movement in that area and didn't have a word from the Holy Spirit on the subject I wouldn't look outwards. I'd look at myself for the problem.

God will answer a righteous and sincere prayer. Do I meet the qualifications? Is my prayer legitimate or transgress His word? Have I cast my care or am I double-minded? Do I understand the biblical ideal of a good wife/husband and are my actions attuned to that result or has worldliness crept in? Do I know my kingdom mission and what I require for its fulfillment or is success my lone motivation?

There's an old adage about taking care of His business while waiting for your blessing that holds true. Pursuing the things of God aligns us to His will which inevitably alters our vision and perspective. When we get on His frequency doors open, obstacles are removed and prayers are answered. We're swimming with the current not against it.

The wisdom of this world is foolishness. It isn't difficult to spot someone who consciously aligns with the Lord. You'll see it in their discourse and convictions. Maturity brings change and we evolve from the lesser to the greater man. When you've walked with God long enough you understand the value of favor and prayer. When hardships come you want someone who has His ear laboring on your behalf. You want a right now word of encouragement and support. A true help meet.

That's the danger of making lifelong decisions when you're immature. You don't recognize your ignorance. The more we grow in faith the clearer things become. We avoid the potholes in our path and cease to make choices that support our undoing. We're wiser now.

Studying the men and women of God is a good starting point. What does He bless? What qualities do they share? What standard were they held to? What's the biblical equivalent of what you're seeking and aspire to become?

God provides the tools and resources we require to complete the work He assigned. His expectations are in line with our equipping (Parable of Talents) and the spouse follows suit. A helper fit for him. Not the person you wish you were or idolize. But the real you.

~bella

timewerx said:

Fair enough, let's talk about evolution then!

Women going for older men devolves our genetic quality. While most people would assume genetic expression is permanent across all ages. Unfortunately, it's not. The quality goes down with age and it gets even worse with unhealthy lifestyle. Changes, deterioration of genetic expression / quality can be passed down to your offspring and thus, heritable!

So women are going for mentally ill men (who are sick in the head with excessive greed) with deteriorating genetic quality as well as having reduced chances of survival during extinction level cataclysms due to their choice of taller/bigger/heavier guys.

Click to expand...

I do not believe things are quite that simple, there is a cost/benefit analysis. Men's genetic material might diminish somewhat during older age (I don't believe as much as I think you're implying), but on the flipside men who are more financially successful on average tend to have higher IQs.

Good or bad, I do believe many men are hardwired to have a drive for success in order to attract quality mates. This constant shaming men receive for having preferences I believe has a role in the boy crisis we see today. This isn't universal, but I think many men think if they work hard and accomplish a lot in life, they'll still wind up ending up with someone like Amy Schumer. When in reality, men would be more motivated if they could see themselves winding up with a pretty early 20s something woman. That's not to say some young men do not still have such motivations to work hard to get a quality mate, but I do think this constant feminist messaging men receive is really screwing many up psychologically.

I'm sorry, I don't think a shorter man is going to have much of a better chance if we have some extinction level cataclysm compared to a taller man. A lot of the larger dinosaurs died out and the smaller ones (modern birds) survived... but the daily calorie requirements between these two animals is much different than the ones between humans of various sizes.

I've seen men talking to each other... and trying to convince one another that "hey.. Lizzo.. maybe she is attractive"? I've seen the same with men talking about women in their 60s and 70s. This is profoundly unnatural. It's sad.. feminists play on the good nature of men. A lot of men don't want to view themselves as sexist.. and buy into this baloney that what is and what isn't attractive (only for women, women's preferences are biological and it's sexist to question them) is a social construct. That if men don't fight this social construct, they are somehow complicit and bad people. When you've convinced yourself that these women are somehow just attractive deep down.. you kill a lot of the motivation's men have that energizes them to do things in the world.

It's not even just this stuff.. speaking to many men in my generation... they're so clueless about how women and men operate. Or at least how they operate in a healthy manner.

The quality of genetic material--in respect to childbearing--is dependent on the condition of the parents at the time of conception. Research fertility diets. Most reputable sources address both. Though the largest gains (i.e. most information) is found in TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine).

Heng Ou has several resources that explain the tenets for western audiences. Awakening Fertility is a must read if you desire children. It takes a year to reset things. The sooner you begin the better your contribution to the child's health.

Nourishing Traditions is an alternative for those desiring improvement without regard to pregnancy. Though it's applicable too.

~bella

MehGuy said:

I do not believe things are quite that simple, there is a cost/benefit analysis. Men's genetic material might diminish somewhat during older age (I don't believe as much as I think you're implying), but on the flipside men who are more financially successful on average tend to have higher IQs.

Good or bad, I do believe many men are hardwired to have a drive for success in order to attract quality mates. This constant shaming men receive for having preferences I believe has a role in the boy crisis we see today. This isn't universal, but I think many men think if they work hard and accomplish a lot in life, they'll still wind up ending up with someone like Amy Schumer. When in reality, men would be more motivated if they could see themselves winding up with a pretty early 20s something woman. That's not to say some young men do not still have such motivations to work hard to get a quality mate, but I do think this constant feminist messaging men receive is really screwing many up psychologically.

I'm sorry, I don't think a shorter man is going to have much of a better chance if we have some extinction level cataclysm compared to a taller man. A lot of the larger dinosaurs died out and the smaller ones (modern birds) survived... but the daily calorie requirements between these two animals is much different than the ones between humans of various sizes.

Click to expand...

Read up on "epigenetics" and "DNA Methylation". Heritable DNA methylation mutation for example is 100,000x more likely to occur than DNA mutation.

These things are strongly dictated by environment, lifestyle, diet, health, and age. The human genome is deteriorating and latest trends, could further accelerate its deterioration. Definitely not good for humanity for everyone to be bearing children at an older age.

Modern men are no longer selecting quality mates in terms of genetics either. Think frequent and expensive make overs, clothing, jewelry, and cosmetic surgery. Since only financially successful women could afford such lifestyle, it is safe to say that men's preference of mates is now more strongly influenced by money as well.

Excessive greed, makes us do things that will cost us dearly later on. As I've said a few times already, we've turned into cancer. Because this is how cancer behaves. Only concerned about short term gains. Totally oblivious to consequences in the long term.

Our society is dysfunctional that it has gotten to the point of intolerability in the last fifteen years. I wish I was born ~30 years earlier in America. There are a lot of old people saying they are glad they are old and ready to go, they already had a life in relatively peaceful and prosperous times. Makes me furious. And it's at the point where most humans couldn't do anything about it short of massive revolution or near-extinction event.

They have already made good long ago to weaponise the media and education to ensure that future generations do not change and anyone that opposes will be sent to the grave or camp. The good side has lost and even lost badly.

VCR-2000 said:

The good side has lost and even lost badly.

Click to expand...

It seemed so so many times in human history.

timewerx said:

Read up on "epigenetics" and "DNA Methylation". Heritable DNA methylation mutation for example is 100,000x more likely to occur than DNA mutation.

These things are strongly dictated by environment, lifestyle, diet, health, and age. The human genome is deteriorating and latest trends, could further accelerate its deterioration. Definitely not good for humanity for everyone to be bearing children at an older age.

Modern men are no longer selecting quality mates in terms of genetics either. Think frequent and expensive make overs, clothing, jewelry, and cosmetic surgery. Since only financially successful women could afford such lifestyle, it is safe to say that men's preference of mates is now more strongly influenced by money as well.

Excessive greed, makes us do things that will cost us dearly later on. As I've said a few times already, we've turned into cancer. Because this is how cancer behaves. Only concerned about short term gains. Totally oblivious to consequences in the long term.

Click to expand...

You really hate the wealthy, huh?

Miles said:

Epigenetics can have positive or negative outcomes. People can enjoy a healthy lifestyle, live in a good environment, and bear children later in life.

Unless you're talking about IVF, mothers have always had children at an older age. Consider how common big families were in the days before the birth control pill. Some may have started sooner, but women stopped giving birth when their fertility ended.

Children of older fathers have, on average, longer telomeres and higher IQs than children of younger parents. Longer telomeres are linked to longer life expectancy, and a higher IQ confers other survival benefits.

Are there genetic risks? Yes, but those risks are small. The vast majority of children born to older parents are normal. For instance, a 100% increase of risk for something that occurs in 2% of the population is still only a 4% risk.

The main disadvantage if everyone had children at an older age is that there would be fewer people. It's harder to have a big family if you wait until fertility is waning.

Click to expand...

This study journal about offspring quality from older fathers shows most of the outcome is bad. The relative risk for many of the disorders well exceeds x2.0 risk factor with some as high as x7.8 . There's even a proposal for counselling session for older prospective fathers that have crossed a certain age threshold. Why would they propose counselling for older prospective fathers if there's nothing to worry about?

Even if the increased risk is still small, the effect will be cumulative on succeeding generations because many of these disorders are heritable. And due to the strong influence/pressure of society on women to have children with old men, bad genes will spread even more.

Wondering why our world today has gone totally nuts and seemed like it's run by sociopaths and the mentally ill?

timewerx said:

Wondering why our world today has gone totally nuts and seemed like it's run by sociopaths and the mentally ill?

Click to expand...

I would blame this on people getting further and further away from Christ. I wouldn't blame this on old men having children.

peaceful-forest said:

I would blame this on people getting further and further away from Christ. I wouldn't blame this on old men having children.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that is the ultimate cause, including having messed up standards when looking for someone to marry.

"The love of money is the root of all evil". The love of money is also hatred of God, so there we go!

Miles said:

Genes are our DNA and our DNA is with us throughout our lifetime. Having children later in life doesn't necessarily indicate bad DNA.

Click to expand...

Gene expression is also affected by "epigenetics" and the changes are more dramatic than random DNA mutations. This is a potentially large issue as these can affect infant development and have an effect on human evolution overall because epigenetic changes are heritable.

You mentioned "good" environment and lifestyle as a driving factor can have a positive outcome. However, what is "good" isn't necessarily good in absolute terms.

Good environment doesn't just mean low stress, fun, psychologically / spiritually positive environment, etc.

Were you also exposed to toxins? Do you regularly take pharmaceutical products (like maintenance meds) including food supplements? Do you eat processed foods, junk foods? Do you often eat outside? Are you overweight? Did you become overweight or diabetic as you got older?

These things will drive epigenetic changes and because many of these are man-made causes, the effect will generally be bad.

The risk is there we can all agree with. It may be small now but the cumulative effects over time will have a large impact after multiple generations. Not our problem?

I can understand taking that risk if it is "true love" but what if money has strong influence? We all know the problem of money, it makes people short-sighted and only care about short-term benefits and ignore its effect on the long term towards succeeding generations. Are we seeing the same problem here?

timewerx said:

I agree with you that is the ultimate cause, including having messed up standards when looking for someone to marry.

"The love of money is the root of all evil". The love of money is also hatred of God, so there we go!

Click to expand...

Yes. The love of money is. And I don't really like that women are sometimes obsessed with the amount of money a man has, but

People complaining about the lack of something (in this case a human opposite-sex companionship relationship that also includes sexual activity) wouldn't be a thing or talked about if God ordained literally every man to be paired with every woman, or if he stopped the Devil from being allowed to tempt people to pervert it. Or even if he authored everyone to be polyamorous and caused it to work in such a manner that jealousy and other issues didn't come from it.

Miles said:

Money only goes so far. It's one thing for a woman to want her man to be gainfully employed and able to care for a family. That's sensible. However, it's quite another for her to be a gold digger or obsessed with worldly things. Not all men are looking for that in a relationship. Personally, I've never liked gold-diggers. Even when I was younger, what some call "true love" has remained what I look for. Not that I'm totally idealistic. I consider myself to be pragmatic and sensible, but I care more about making unique contributions in this lifetime. It's good to save and have stability, as that allows me to focus on more self-actualizing pursuits, but excess is superfluous to me. Not something to waste time on when there is so much to read, learn, design, build, write, ponder, and give thanks for. If God didn't bless me with these potentialities, perhaps I'd be content with only focusing on money, but as far as I'm concerned there's more to life.

I'm only in my 40s, so I can't say for sure how I'll be when I'm old, but the older men in my family tend to be reasonably healthy. Not perfect, but pretty good for the most part. No obesity, diabetes, substance abuse, etc. as far as I'm aware. The age of their fathers, and the ages when they fathered their own children, didn't seem to make any difference. Then again, I can only speak for my extended family. The experiences of others may differ.

That being said, if toxins were as cumulative and heritable as you suggest, then those risks would accumulate regardless of how many years pass between generations. As long as somebody exists in an evironment with toxins, they will presumably be acumulating. If you view having a child earlier as a kind of toxin "reset", that would contradict your assertion of how heritable the effects of those toxins supposedly is. Not to mention how vulnerable children are to toxic environments.

Epigenetics can be positive or negative, but most heritable characteristics are passed along through DNA. The SNPs that comprise DNA are what researchers study in terms of "good genes" vs. "bad genes". And even that isn't so simple. For instance, the influence of many proposed candidate genes were called into question with advances in GWAS (genome-wide association studies) research. The unique interactions of SNPs can vary from individual to individual depending on what combination they have. It's nice to think that any potential children that I might have could also benefit from epigenetic factors that have been passed along through my family and my own life experiences. However, I am aware that there's more to it than that.

Speaking of mutations, problematic mutations don't usually survive. Leading to infertility, miscarriage, etc. The ones that do survive and reproduce are generally healthy and, depending on your views on evolution, may be a net positive within the greater context of humanity. If there's a change, a potentially beneficial mutation, that change has to start somewhere.

Regarding risks, the risks are small and even the article you cited decouples paternal age from some of them. There are many reasons why a man might father a child later in life. Therefore, it isn't accurate to pin all risks on the fathers age when other factors remain unaccounted for. Correlation isn't causation.

Click to expand...

Yeah, nobody wants a gold digger but knowing women, they are very good actors! For someone very rich and not hiding the fact, they'd probably be assuming every woman who's interested with them to be a gold digger. So it's only a matter of choosing the "best" gold digger of them all!

Toxins accumulating at the same rate across generations regardless of what age you conceived the child, simply through passage of time TRUE.

However, it's really worse off for those who conceived at an older age.

Let's say you conceived a child in your mid twenties in perfect health. And then you conceived another child in your mid forties in worse health dealing with hypertension, and maybe some minor kidney and liver problems, and taking up meds to manage blood pressure, cholesterol, etc exposing you to plenty of toxins from meds, toxins generated by your body due to worse health, and potentially unhealthy lifestyle. On the other hand, your first child in their early twenties in perfect health also conceived a child.

It's pretty obvious which child is going to be in better shape or better chances of having perfect health, your 2nd child or your grand child. Accumulation of toxins across generations isn't exactly linear, it will be affected by conceiving age on average.

Here's another journal about the problems of older fathers conceiving.

KJ91 said:

its common sense that woman want a good looking, tall , strong guy who has money. why would woman settle for average/unattractive short men who dont have money when they can get much better? stop trying to change women and tell them who they should date and be together with. you cant change biology. women work the way they do because thats how God made them. some guys act like they are owned something.

Click to expand...

No issue with women wanting good looking, tall, strong guys that have money. But that goes both ways. Women should not complain when guys have standards as well such as wanting to be with women who are fit,physically attractive (in the man's opinion) and feminine. Don't try to tell men who they should date and be with.

​

Miles said:

Older siblings tend to be more successful and intelligent, on average, but younger siblings tend to be healthier and live longer. Bear in mind that the average person is a statistical creation rather than an actual human being. Often, the younger siblings are more successful, the older sibling lives longer, etc.

It is not, nor has never been, simply a matter of older fathers having more toxins because they've been around longer. Different environments contain different toxins, different levels of toxins, different enrichment opportunities etc. People can experience wildly different upbringings and care over the years.

Feminists are angry that men have a longer fertility window than women. I have to wonder if this is perhaps the motivation for studies like the one you shared. Both of which superficially make the situation sound worse than it is, Demographic data and family history remain more reliable predictors than those 2 studies. Both of which even admit that it's hard to define advanced paternal age and hard to decouple from other factors.

You can get a much better idea of how a child will turn out by looking at the families of both parents than by looking at statistics. Statistics which, by the way, can be sorted in all sorts of ways in accordance with one's biases. The problem is that the studies you cite fail to take into account who exactly those older fathers are, what kind of backgrounds they have, why they've become older fathers, etc. And at the end of the day, none of it negates the fact that the risk remains quite small. If a man or a woman is young enough to have children, the odds are good that those children will be healthy.

Click to expand...

I think you're simply biased because you and your close relatives enjoy great health even at an advanced age.

However, I'd imagine your case is a minority compared to every other older adults around the world.

Besides, our bodies don't just accumulate more toxins over time from the environment. Our bodies also generate toxins and this gets worse as we age.

Just because you live in a pollution-free part of the country, eating foods you grew yourself without using chemicals doesn't mean these problems doesn't apply to you because it really doesn't stop our bodies from generating toxins that can also damage DNA. It's part of the reason why we physically age. And when older adults and seniors have more wrinkles, weaker bones, hairs graying, etc, that is pretty obvious sign that their DNA is not as undamaged as it used to be.

Also vast the majority of people in the planet will be living in a polluted environment or at least grew up in such environment. Only few people in the world (by percent) enjoys the privilege of living in low pollution environment, eating high quality nutrition.

The practice of conceiving later is also likely to be detrimental in the evolution of a species or an ethnic group.

This is probably why these study journals sound deadly serious about the matter because it probably is. They're not just concerned about our kids and grand kids but also the fate of humanity in the long term, say hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years from now.

Sadly, it is not in human nature to care about the future this is why we are facing so many problems like climate change, overpopulation.

Anyway, I'm not trying to discourage older people trying to find True Love and even conceive children. At least make sure it's True Love and make an appointment with genetics specialist (w/e it's called) before trying!

KJ91 said:

its common sense that woman want a good looking, tall , strong guy who has money. why would woman settle for average/unattractive short men who dont have money when they can get much better? stop trying to change women and tell them who they should date and be together with. you cant change biology. women work the way they do because thats how God made them. some guys act like they are owned something.

Click to expand...

First of all, lumping all women into a box like this is incredibly counterproductive. You can't pigeonhole millions of human beings from all over the world in such simplistic terms.

It is not "common sense" that women want a "good looking, tall, strong guy who has money". It may be a common stereotype, and is certainly perpetuated by the media. That doesn't make it true for actual, individual women.

There is also a wide range between "handsome, tall, and rich" and "short, broke, and ugly". It doesn't have to be one extreme or the other.

I'd be interested in a man who looks good to me - not caring at all if he's traditionally handsome in anyone else's eyes. He doesn't need to be towering over me in height. How are we defining "strong" here? Do I expect him to be able to bench press me with one arm? Of course not, lol. But would it be nice if he could open stuck jar lids, or fight off a mugger? Sure. As for money, I don't care much about that, so long as he's a hard worker who takes care of his own responsibilities and doesn't leech off other people.

Generalizations and stereotypes are often quite foolish and damaging to our point of view. They stop us from seeing individual human beings.

Having standards is ok. Everyone should have them. I would think very low of anyone who has no standards, especially in something so important as a partner.

Whether having "high" standards is good depends on the individual, I think. It really depends of whether you are a high status person or not. I don't think, for example, a single mom in her mid-30s living paycheck to paycheck has any right to complain go on the familiar cry of "where are all the good men?" and the lack of partners that her "high" standards - these men usually can and do pick better partners.

Standards are fine. Just be sure you are the first person to live up to them, before demanding them of someone else..