I have seen this clip a few times before and it gets more and more infuriating because her mindset is very common for women under 40 years old. Sure, she is being interviewed in a big city where income skews upward, but she is no damned trophy wife.
When you add the “6’0” and physically fit requirement, she’ll never get her way. There are also some clips on the net where women are asked to judge a guy’s height and they have no idea how tall people actually are, so their desire for a guy who is 6’0” probably has less to do with physical attraction and more to do with just wanting what other bitches want just to have it. Also, she has less of a chance getting a White guy in the city than she would in the burbs.
The internet has a way of exaggerating a true fact until it becomes a Frankenstein monster - we all believe the lie like we're sniffing our own farts. Granted, women don't want to be with a bum any more than you want to be with an obese feminist who has a history of coal-burning. A healthy woman (incl. psychologically) is going to want an industrious guy who can provide; it isn't the majority of women who are going to laugh mockingly at the thought of a guy who makes $75k annually. A few years ago, my brother was just transitioning out of grad school, unsure about his prospects. His wife, who is objectively more attractive than this woman, said flatly that she'd work a drive-through job to earn extra money - anything that was necessary to do. Of course, she is anticipating that my brother is going to work to establish as good of an income as he can.
One other thing to think about: people know that the controversial opinions (utterances, answers, behaviors) are going to be what get the algo's attention. This format of bite-sized content and its increasing consumption inclines all content creators toward saying things that trigger people. So, for the most part, this shit is meant to trigger people. Even if we imagine this interview was real (the interviewee is a real stranger 'off the street'), she can tell what sort of vibe the situation calls for. She is being interviewed outside of a club. It's obvious the girl with the mic wants a 'hot take'. She is going to play into whatever she thinks the expectation is. It's like being a sports fan interviewed by a news crew at the game. Are you going to answer: "Well, I have a strong preference for team A to win, but I recognize the strengths and weaknesses of both of these great teams..." blah blah blah? No, you're gonna say, "Team B sucks and their fans are faggots."
It's one symptom of the gross information situation we have today. We're all in this cycle of the dog biting its own tail. We get mad at the frivolity and shallowness. But that's what gets the reaction. So, people make frivolous and shallow things. And then we get mad at it. As a group, we're dragging each other into this virtual, never-ending trigger loop, like we're all living in one big episode of Maury. You want the piece of shit guy to be the father. You know you do. You want the Springer guests to fight.
You want your content to be interesting, not dry. So we're all constantly punching ourselves in the dick and getting pissed about it, solving the problem by punching ourselves in the dick again. Oh, you got heated about that woman's degrading sexist comments? The solution for women? Be degrading. The solution for men? Watch more women saying degrading things. This whole thing is a problem predicated on attention, and it's the one thing almost everyone fails to reflect on. They think they're missing something if they aren't tuned in. Women will NEVER do what they aren't rewarded for doing. It falls on men to do what isn't rewarding, like pulling themselves away from the addiction of being offended by women doing bad things. Attention is currency today; we have to stop spending it the way we are, on 'fast food content'. If there is some implicit rule that 'fast food' can't be healthy food, the same goes here. 'Fast food content' can't be psychologically healthy content.
When it comes to judging measurements, volume and distance, women are clueless. The only thing that women are hardwired to be good at, are memory and pack mentality.
[ + ] Jinglebanger
[ - ] Jinglebanger 5 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 16:20:23 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 4 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 13:45:55 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 4 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 13:20:13 ago (+4/-0)*
One other thing to think about: people know that the controversial opinions (utterances, answers, behaviors) are going to be what get the algo's attention. This format of bite-sized content and its increasing consumption inclines all content creators toward saying things that trigger people. So, for the most part, this shit is meant to trigger people. Even if we imagine this interview was real (the interviewee is a real stranger 'off the street'), she can tell what sort of vibe the situation calls for. She is being interviewed outside of a club. It's obvious the girl with the mic wants a 'hot take'. She is going to play into whatever she thinks the expectation is. It's like being a sports fan interviewed by a news crew at the game. Are you going to answer: "Well, I have a strong preference for team A to win, but I recognize the strengths and weaknesses of both of these great teams..." blah blah blah? No, you're gonna say, "Team B sucks and their fans are faggots."
It's one symptom of the gross information situation we have today. We're all in this cycle of the dog biting its own tail. We get mad at the frivolity and shallowness. But that's what gets the reaction. So, people make frivolous and shallow things. And then we get mad at it. As a group, we're dragging each other into this virtual, never-ending trigger loop, like we're all living in one big episode of Maury. You want the piece of shit guy to be the father. You know you do. You want the Springer guests to fight.
You want your content to be interesting, not dry. So we're all constantly punching ourselves in the dick and getting pissed about it, solving the problem by punching ourselves in the dick again. Oh, you got heated about that woman's degrading sexist comments? The solution for women? Be degrading. The solution for men? Watch more women saying degrading things. This whole thing is a problem predicated on attention, and it's the one thing almost everyone fails to reflect on. They think they're missing something if they aren't tuned in. Women will NEVER do what they aren't rewarded for doing. It falls on men to do what isn't rewarding, like pulling themselves away from the addiction of being offended by women doing bad things. Attention is currency today; we have to stop spending it the way we are, on 'fast food content'. If there is some implicit rule that 'fast food' can't be healthy food, the same goes here. 'Fast food content' can't be psychologically healthy content.
[ + ] TheBigGuyFromQueens
[ - ] TheBigGuyFromQueens [op] 2 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 13:34:51 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Cantaloupe
[ - ] Cantaloupe 2 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 16:19:32 ago (+2/-0)
She has almost no redeeming qualities. People that are well situated have other options.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 13:35:37 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 2 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 14:12:24 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] ModernGuilt
[ - ] ModernGuilt 1 point 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 22:15:28 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Sunman_Omega
[ - ] Sunman_Omega 1 point 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 17:57:47 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 1 point 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 17:49:25 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] SilentByAssociation
[ - ] SilentByAssociation 1 point 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 20:45:54 ago (+1/-0)
0.9% =/= "less than one tenth of a percent."
[ + ] MasklessTheGreat
[ - ] MasklessTheGreat 0 points 2 weeksNov 29, 2024 19:25:40 ago (+0/-0)