The meek shall inherit the earth

[godelian]

So, to you, if one person has 99 billion dollars, then they are not very wealthy.
Again, absolutely every thing is relative, to the observer.

Well, $99 billions is close to the absolute maximum:

As of March 1, 2024, the richest person in the world is Bernard Arnault, the CEO of French luxury goods group LVMH; he's worth nearly $230 billion.

There are not that many people in between these two figures.

And, what 'principle' are you talking about and referring to here, exactly?

I am not going to hand over half my net worth to someone who just provided me with some sex. Seriously, sex is not worth that much. That is why I only give an informal and verbal niqah contract governed by Islamic law. I certainly provide during the deal but not after. That also removes the incentive of trying to leave a marriage with cash and prizes.

If a woman gives away half of her 'multi billion of dollars' to her husband that divorced her, then what exactly is the 'matter of principle' here, exactly?

Hypergamy. Women generally do not marry down. So, this scenario of a woman losing half her net worth in a divorce is rather unlikely. You confuse possibility with probability. Why discuss improbable situations?

The meek, by the way, do inherit the earth, and this cannot be refuted.

The offspring of meek women do inherit most of the assets, because meek women from financially humble families produce most of the children, even the children of wealthy men. The demographic of so-called strong, independent women who don't need a man, remains increasingly childless, in spite of all the useless egg freezing going on.

[Age]

So, to you, if one person has 99 billion dollars, then they are not very wealthy.
Again, absolutely every thing is relative, to the observer.

Well, $99 billions is close to the absolute maximum:

So, to you if one has 99 billion dollars, then they are close to the 'absolute maximum' of being 'wealthy', but not yet being 'very wealthy'.

As of March 1, 2024, the richest person in the world is Bernard Arnault, the CEO of French luxury goods group LVMH; he's worth nearly $230 billion.

There are not that many people in between these two figures.

What does that matter?

To you human beings with 99 billion dollars are not 'very wealthy'.

And, what 'principle' are you talking about and referring to here, exactly?

I am not going to hand over half my net worth to someone who just provided me with some sex. Seriously, sex is not worth that much. That is why I only give an informal and verbal niqah contract governed by Islamic law. I certainly provide during the deal but not after. That also removes the incentive of trying to leave a marriage with cash and prizes.

Okay. Some things are more important to some people than other things are.

If a woman gives away half of her 'multi billion of dollars' to her husband that divorced her, then what exactly is the 'matter of principle' here, exactly?

Hypergamy. Women generally do not marry down.

What is so-called 'down' to some is not actually 'down' at all to others.

So, this scenario of a woman losing half her net worth in a divorce is rather unlikely.

Okay. But saying that it is 'rather unlikely' implies that it might not ever happen. Yet, it has already happened.

You confuse possibility with probability.

But I never thought about 'possibility' nor 'probability' here, let alone talked about them. So, how could I be confusing the two, and why did you even begin to presume that I was even thinking about the two here?

Why discuss improbable situations?

I was not.

Is it an absolute impossibility forever more for a man to marry a woman for money?

The meek, by the way, do inherit the earth, and this cannot be refuted.

The offspring of meek women do inherit most of the assets, because meek women from financially humble families produce most of the children, even the children of wealthy men.

you could not be missing more of what I am actually saying and meaning here.

The demographic of so-called strong, independent women who don't need a man, remains increasingly childless, in spite of all the useless egg freezing going on.

Okay, if this is what you believe is true, then this must be true, to you, right?

[godelian]

What is so-called 'down' to some is not actually 'down' at all to others.

Women do not like "marrying down". In the following article, a female author explains this law of nature:

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/evewoma ... marry-down

Why you should never marry down

It goes without saying, that in a union where the woman is way above the man in matters of financial stability and intelligence, age, social status and academicals, things seldom flow as they should. The naturality of such a relationship doesn’t happen.

One of the things we don’t want to accept is that when a woman marries or dates down, it’s a whole lot of work to justify that the union is actually working well.

Often, she has to shrink and coil herself to fit in the box. It is suffocating, emotionally draining and socially depriving, much as we all need to adjust ourselves to accommodate our significant others.

I wouldn't marry a woman who has better finances than myself because such situation is widely deemed unsustainable. There are so many candidates who have less financial clout. So, why ask for problems?

[Age]

What is so-called 'down' to some is not actually 'down' at all to others.

Women do not like "marrying down". In the following article, a female author explains this law of nature:

So, to "godelian" anyway, absolutely every woman in the whole world, forever in the past and forever in the future did not and will not like to so-call 'marry down'.

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/evewoma ... marry-down

Why you should never marry down

It goes without saying, that in a union where the woman is way above the man in matters of financial stability and intelligence, age, social status and academicals, things seldom flow as they should. The naturality of such a relationship doesn’t happen.

One of the things we don’t want to accept is that when a woman marries or dates down, it’s a whole lot of work to justify that the union is actually working well.

Often, she has to shrink and coil herself to fit in the box. It is suffocating, emotionally draining and socially depriving, much as we all need to adjust ourselves to accommodate our significant others.

I wouldn't marry a woman who has better finances than myself because such situation is widely deemed unsustainable. There are so many candidates who have less financial clout. So, why ask for problems?
[/quote]

Yet you are whinging and whining here about women so-called 'marrying up'.

Are you sure that 'money' is something that really helps you live Life properly and Correctly.

[godelian]

Yet you are whinging and whining here about women so-called 'marrying up'.

???
I think that it is perfectly fine that women prefer to marry up. Again, I see it as a law of nature. However, they'll never get hold of half my net worth by doing that. I reject the idea of communal property. Furthermore, when the marriage ends, I stop providing and all payments also end.

[Age]

Yet you are whinging and whining here about women so-called 'marrying up'.

???
I think that it is perfectly fine that women prefer to marry up. Again, I see it as a law of nature. However, they'll never get hold of half my net worth by doing that.

Yes, because you are just way too smart hey "godelian', especially with your far less digits than twelve digits 'wealth' right?

I reject the idea of communal property. Furthermore, when the marriage ends, I stop providing and all payments also end.

Okay. So, are you saying how 'good' you are, or otherwise?

[godelian]

Yes, because you are just way too smart hey "godelian', especially with your far less digits than twelve digits 'wealth' right?

Being "smart" or "wealthy" are relative concepts.

I obviously feel stupid and poor now that I finally find myself confronted with the mighty expanse of your vastly superior intellect and the immense deposits and holdings of the free-flowing funds in your bank account.

[Age]

Yes, because you are just way too smart hey "godelian', especially with your far less digits than twelve digits 'wealth' right?

Being "smart" or "wealthy" are relative concepts.

Is there a concept that is not relative?

I obviously feel stupid and poor now that I finally find myself confronted with the mighty expanse of your vastly superior intellect and the immense deposits and holdings of the free-flowing funds in your bank account.

Okay, but this, still, has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Fact that the meek always end up inheriting the earth.

[godelian]

Okay, but this, still, has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Fact that the meek always end up inheriting the earth.

Yes, the offspring of meek women but not of meek men, will inherit the earth. Being meek is a trait that increases the multitude of a woman's offspring. Not so for a man.

[Age]

Okay, but this, still, has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Fact that the meek always end up inheriting the earth.

Yes, the offspring of meek women but not of meek men, will inherit the earth. Being meek is a trait that increases the multitude of a woman's offspring. Not so for a man.

Obviously, this one has absolutely no idea nor clue what I mean.

[godelian]

Okay, but this, still, has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Fact that the meek always end up inheriting the earth.

Yes, the offspring of meek women but not of meek men, will inherit the earth. Being meek is a trait that increases the multitude of a woman's offspring. Not so for a man.

Obviously, this one has absolutely no idea nor clue what I mean.

That sounds like a you problem.

Being meek, i.e. submissive, is a wonderful trait in a woman. Not so much in a man. Men are supposed to be dominant. As a man, you won't leave your mark on the world, if you are a pushover. As a pretty woman, you will be able to attract a high-value man and produce offspring if you are submissive.

[Age]

Yes, the offspring of meek women but not of meek men, will inherit the earth. Being meek is a trait that increases the multitude of a woman's offspring. Not so for a man.

Obviously, this one has absolutely no idea nor clue what I mean.

That sounds like a you problem.

Being meek, i.e. submissive, is a wonderful trait in a woman.

If this is what you want to choose to believe is true, then, by all means, please keep believing this.

But, what the 'meek' word is referring to, exactly, you, obviously, still have a lot more to learn and understand here.

Not so much in a man. Men are supposed to be dominant. As a man, you won't leave your mark on the world, if you are a pushover. As a pretty woman, you will be able to attract a high-value man and produce offspring if you are submissive.

And, you obviously have a very rigid and very narrow view of things here.

But, again, please keep expressing and sharing these views of yours here.

[godelian]

And, you obviously have a very rigid and very narrow view of things here.

But, again, please keep expressing and sharing these views of yours here.

Well, boss babes don't reproduce. They tend to be single and childless.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... in-america

And the unhappiest profile?:

Female
42 years old
Unmarried (and no children)
Household income under $100,000
In a professional position (doctor, lawyer, etc.)

The woke university departments are still fully packed. They still produce this profile by the truckload.

With their looks, they can often attract a man, but they seem to be unable to keep one, not even to save themselves from drowning. Too much masculine energy.

I should probably invest in pharmaceutical companies that produce antidepressants and antianxiety medication.

[Age]

And, you obviously have a very rigid and very narrow view of things here.

But, again, please keep expressing and sharing these views of yours here.

Well, boss babes don't reproduce. They tend to be single and childless.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... in-america

And the unhappiest profile?:

Female
42 years old
Unmarried (and no children)
Household income under $100,000
In a professional position (doctor, lawyer, etc.)

The woke university departments are still fully packed. They still produce this profile by the truckload.

With their looks, they can often attract a man, but they seem to be unable to keep one, not even to save themselves from drowning. Too much masculine energy.

I should probably invest in pharmaceutical companies that produce antidepressants and antianxiety medication.

But, the meek will still always inherit the earth.