Jump to content

I just browsed shaadi.com for the first time in years

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, BhForce said:

OK, this is very reasonable. Gurbani says don't be a fatso:

ਫਿਟੁ ਇਵੇਹਾ ਜੀਵਿਆ ਜਿਤੁ ਖਾਇ ਵਧਾਇਆ ਪੇਟੁ ॥

Cursed is that life, in which one eats to increase his belly.

This is reasonable, too. And it's traditional wisdom in our society, that's the reason the girl's side is said to be the "lower" side, because she's marrying up, supposedly. Because in our society, the point of marriage is to produce a family, and the man needs to be able to provision for his family.

And here we get to unreasonable. It's fine to want a man who earns a few tens of thousands more than you and have some money saved. It's unreasonable for every woman to think she can get a top doctor or millionaire.

I'm thinking that perhaps the answer is the crazy women will die alone, and their genes will die off. Meanwhile the reasonable women will reproduce.

Within the Rehitdhari Paanth maybe, but crazy selfish people breed like rabbits out of wedlock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2022 at 9:23 PM, californiasardar1 said:

Some observations:

- I recognize a very large number of women who had profiles on there 5-10 years ago (In many instances, their profiles appear to have the same photos ?). Even when I don't recognize a photo, other profile details show that they have been searching for years. For example, there will be a 40 year old women whose profile reads "Hi there! I am 35 years old and recently moved to X to start a new job." Also, most of the profiles are of women in their mid 30s or older.

How sad and shocking! I suppose their Knight in Shining Armor still hasn't shown up.

- Women in America have updated their income cutoffs. It used to typically be "$100,000 or above" and now most profiles are "125,000 or above" or "150,000 or above". In the UK, they seem to have increased the lower cutoff more modestly from 40k pounds to 50k pounds.

- As was the case back then, they are not shy about being EXTREMELY specific about what they require, even though they are looking for a partner from within a tiny population to begin with. For example, 35 year-old women looking for guys who are 35-37, 5'2" women looking for guys who are 5'10"-6'0", women looking for men in very limited geographic areas (where very few Punjabis live), or women looking for men who have very specific occupations.

Apne don't know how it's done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 10:43 AM, BhForce said:

If you look here: https://dqydj.com/income-by-sex/

you'll see that 85% of men earn less than $125000. 90% earn less than $150,000.

So right off the bat, these women are excluding 9 out of 10 men.

Out of that remaining 15% (or 10%), you have to exclude the already married, the ones who aren't 6 feet tall (average height in the US is 5'9"), aren't handsome, are too old or too young.

No wonder these women are single!


Yeah, the vast majority of men who are earning higher-end salaries are married and/or old

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 8:28 AM, Ranjeet01 said:

I spoke of the reasons are length before.

Women always marry up and across, they will only marry down if the guy has potential.

The advent of social media has given a lot of women an ego boost so makes them more unrealistic. 

Most women find most men unattractive.

In a country where obesity is a thing, getting in shape already puts you in the top 10 per cent.



Being in shape alone can't put you in the top 10%.

It can help maybe in the context of obtaining short-term flings, but not marriage. Looks are not enough, women also want financial stability (preferably a lot more than stability).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The muslims cannot really do much in Leicester so they picked an easy target in Birmingham.  And they use what they are good at which is the numbers game.  I wish there was a community that breeds at higher rates than the muslims so that when the muslims try to get their numbers that they get out-numbered by another community.  As to your post that you mentioned about us Sikhs being outnumbered by mobs from other communities is that although we are quite a docile race, we have a knack of being extremely well organised and disciplined when the time comes and this bodes well when tackling an unruly mob particularly when being outnumbered.  It's like some kind of dormant gene that gets activated. You saw how quickly our community galvanised during 2011 riots, how quickly during the Kisaan protests. Like MrrSingh said we are a walking contradiction. 
    • From what happened last week it looked like the Hindus started it and the muslims ended up on top with what happened in Birmingham.  You're right apne don't really bully minorities, we are racist though. I can't blame the Hindus to some extent when it comes to suls. Their leadership let them down big time allowing huge amounts of suls to stay behind after partition. We've been fortunate to have an almost sul free Punjab, we only know what suls are like due to living next to them in the west. Punjab has the lowest percentage of suls in all of India. Suls like to push the boat to see what they can get away with and when they go too far like they did in Myanmar recently, the majority community finally has enough and retaliate. If they were a community that kept their head down and worked hard no one would hate them but they just try to push their way of life on all of us. They have conflicts with every other religion. 
    • One major factor for the Hindus are doing what they are doing in the UK is the political backing. The Hindu political leadership in India is comprised of Gujjus and it is the Gujju diaspora that is spearheads in countries abroad.  Even if we had this level of political backing, we Sikhs don't do what these two other communities do.  We are wired differently. Even if we were an overwhelming majority, we don't pick on other communities.  But for some reason, these two other communities love to use their numbers.  But as a neutral observer, it is interesting to see Muslims in the UK on the back foot.  The Hindu lobby groups seem to have turned the tables on the Muslim lobby groups.  The police and local authorities seem to protect Muslims but they look quite helpless.  Muslim lobby groups seem to infiltrate systems from a lower level but the Hindu lobby groups seem to be excercise from a higher level. So it seems to be top-down vs bottom-up.      
    • The thing is that Hindus will only give it the large when in a significant majority and as soon as the numbers turn against them they pretty much give up. The only exception I've seen to this is the Tamil Hindus of Sri Lanka. They also have appalling unity, did the Punjabi, Tamil, Nepali Hindus come to help the Gujaratis? Nope. Yet you had Arabs and Somalians helping the Indian muslims and Pakistanis.  Sikhs historically have always been a minority in India and even greater Punjab so we are used to fighting when the numbers are against us. Just look at how we retaliated against the muslims of UP who heavily outnumber us when they tried to take our land. Even in Hyderabad Sikhs have fought against Muslims who make up a huge amount of the city.   
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use