Coily

For the sake of this discussion I'll break it into, White knight/Simp, the Gent, and the happenstance man. Working from last to first, the happenstance man typically will see a woman in a situation of need and help; he has no motives, nor even contemplates there could be any ramification than being genuinely helpful. They will help just about anyone in need. The Gent usually will go out of his way to help a woman as he has an internal code of honor. Now he won't go to extraordinary lengths once the situation has resolved, but he will have a paternal nature to how he thinks about a situation. The Simp Knight will do anything thing he can to keep his presence around a woman known. He will see a female wanting something, and just give it to her to try and win favor. Basically they are a sex pest, who don't get sex, but think by buzzing around a woman's orbit he will eventually win the prize of her. There are a lot of women on social media who will seek the Simp Knight, mostly to exploit their wallet. These "men" are more than willing to throw money.

I think you're responding to someone else.

This on the surface would seem like solicitation to your BF. Jealous or not, a lot of guys would jump to that conclusion when it's done through social media. No matter how innocent it comes off that way. Your BF over reacted by blocking you on social media. But he's not entirely wrong for viewing this negatively. This to me says how overly reliant people are on for social media for validation.

It's one of those moments you are interested, she's occupied elsewhere. Just be polite and let things go as they had been. If she comes around later great, if not, you have someone to say hi to.

You need to start thinking strategically, while beating this guy to a pulp would be cathartic what will that get you in the long game? Your cheating wife getting full custody of YOUR kids, and this guy getting to sue you or other legal problems. What I recommend is backing off of vengeance and going for revenge. What should that look like, using her cheating to seek full or primary shared custody of your children. Law-fare is your ultimate tool here, use it to maximum effect. It is far better right not to lay hands on this jerk. You could even seek legal remedy against this guy for the costs of your divorce, it may not have good standing, but it will draw him into legal troubles. Also with the evidence you need to collect have your lawyer get into contact with this man's wife, don't do this yourself. But let him answer to his likely angry wife and suffer those consequences. Ruin his life legally, and without raising a fist.

I think it's part of the whole OLD dating conundrum, basically trying to weed out someone as quickly as possible. Having been on the receiving end a few times of that sort of probing question, I just kind of concluded that someone is looking for a flaw to move on, rather than get invested.

While I disagree that those two quote of mine are in parallel, I do agree that it’s a discussion worth having in terms of dating. I also disagree with feminism being the baseline between all female-male interactions should be measured. Then again I also draw a very distinct line between feminism and suffrage. The Suffrage movement really is difficult to compare with the Radical Feminist movements of the 70s/80s and beyond. It’s also a lot more complex than it is usually reported in the history books, then again the world from 1900 to 1920 is where I spent a lot of my historical research. Kind of blew my mind that some of the most ardent detractors of suffrage were women. I would also venture to say that some men (not all) going along with other radical feminist movements since then were of a malicious compliance; you know the trope of the predatory male feminist up to no good. I would be curious as to what nations you are comparing the US to. To put such a blanket statement out I think is deceptive in the details of where things differ. You mention abortion, which have legislation variances across the globe. It’s a hot button topic for many, but this isn’t a “gotcha” moment for our discussion. I reject your framing of ‘radicalism” being in regard to life and death circumstances. You want to paint giving a dam about women as only viewed through a feminist lens; I think this is grossly unfair and specious way to go about this discussion. If one thinks men only care about women as a provider of offspring, I don’t think you understand most men. With this last paragraph’s argument, you poisoned the well. I think this is a horrifically bad faith position to take. Just as not all men are anti feminist, not all women are feminist; your position is so sadly narrow, that a woman who is a anti-feminist would be under worse scrutiny than any man.

Bolt and YogaCat, “Strong and independent woman who doesn't need a man" more of a meme on the internet at this point, to describe women who hate men. I would say our age differences probably play a role in our perceptions of that phrase. Radical Feminists like Andrea Dowrkin, Clementine Ford, or Bell Hooks; who made a huge splash in the public sphere with their man hating rhetoric in the 90s through 2010s. The radicals who had this weird Eugenic mentality to get rid of men that didn’t conform to their kooky beliefs. Being self-contained and content is one thing, many people are like that. It’s a few women, like a few men; who have disdain for the opposite sex that I’m calling out. I don’t think you hate men from all of your posts through the years. I don’t think you’d go WGTOW, which would mirror MGTOW; a movement which I view as treating women as sex objects due to personal damage.

If I remember my textile history, the key is looking for "selvedge" when it comes to jeans, better weaving process.

I would be really curious, if there were a comparison of dating attitudes from the 1920s to the 2020s. See where things really went off the rails with dating attitudes, and where things improved. Sadly that will be impossible, sure there are those little articles that pop up on dating advice from back in the day that ranges from quaint, to sexist, to still remarkably valid.

There is a strange social pressure for everyone to be kind of cookie cutter, quirky and independent seem to get labeled as depressed or in need of therapy. If you aren't out on the town doing stereotypical X or Y for your age group you must be broken. I find all of it very strange to be honest. As to WGTOW, it's existed for quite a while, the "strong and independent woman who doesn't need a man" parts of radical feminism. Which I think MGTOW is a reaction to, basically they are both reflections of the worst elements of each other. Then again I would not label feminism a hate group nor 'da manosphere", hateful elements in both but not the ideas as a whole.

Man oh man, I'm sorry to read this. You need to talk to a lawyer now. Document everything can, especially when there's a question about paternity. It doesn't matter one wit what the relationship was before discovering her cheating. There is NO justification or excuses cheating, none. It will also be difficult, but don't leave your home. She can leave, like she left you and your children; but you need to move into a guest room. This is for your kids, and their future, not this woman. There is a path forward for you and your kids as a family. You just have to come to terms with this new reality. I wish you the best,

Sounds like this in-law was wanting to be dramatic for some reason. I would hold off on any contact with her for a long while. Mostly due to the yelling in the alley and refusing to give you the phone number of the cousins. Your household is safe, sound, and content. All is well.

Sorry, can't agree. I dated a woman who was basically emotionless when we were in public, it was just how she was. In private she was very affectionate and attentive. What we deem good or bad isn't what the OP is asking.

Just be polite and move on. You don't have to engage in conversation, or anything else.