The people who hate you want doubt, despair, hopelessness.
Deny them it.
They play dumb. Men moreso.
The people who hate you want doubt, despair, hopelessness.
Deny them it.
They play dumb. Men moreso.
Dropping the porn is the biggest hurdle men face. It’s deliberately addictive.
“I now practice mindful sexuality with every girl I meet: cute cashiers, beautiful bartenders, foxy friends. (Gorgeous women are everywhere!) But instead of punching more holes in my heart, I come away from each interaction knowing that I’m a better husband, father, and man. I choose to increase my respect and awe for women in every instance; I refuse to degrade them with my thoughts.”
“I suppose I meant love as in respecting someone as a full person, but thinking about it, you obviously don’t need love for that, since you can respect (and should respect) the people you hate. You can despise someone and still treat them like another human being.
Respect is not something which should only be given to those you love, nor should loving someone make lacking that respect somehow acceptable.
I probably should have worded my response better. What I meant was that respect is the very baseline of human decency, and without that, it’s totally beyond belief to try and pair two characters up and imagine that there could ever be mutual healthy love there.
When you love a person you love that person for who they are, not for who you want them to be, or who you think you can make them. You do not control them. You cannot force them to do anything against their will. You respect their independence and autonomy.”
They just suppress it.
It reminds me of little kids.
Looking is not touching.
Touching strangers is wrong.
It isn’t friendly.
It’s like copping a free feel or trying to ingratiate yourself psychologically.
Oxytocin to create a bond isn’t released from stranger interactions. Cortisol, the stress hormone, is.
Entitlement: Why do you get to impose your expectation on other people, your legal equals?
If it’s friendly, they’d do it to other men. It tends to be men doing it to women because 1. it’s obviously sexual and most of them are straight, unfortunately, meaning men rarely have this problem and 2. they believe there’s a low risk of being punched in the face. True. But there is a higher risk of being kicked in the balls. Grabbing or pinning is an attack common to martial arts and obstructing someone from moving freely (penning) is legal cause for self-defense. The intention is not important, legally.
When other men do it, you’d assume you’re being attacked. ‘Kino’ is assault.
Proxemics aside, cultural differences are no excuse, respect the people you’re talking to as people, like you.
As in, neither party has the right to randomly paw at the other.
Booze is not an excuse. Crashing a car is still bad, whether you’re drunk or not. Again, your intention should be translated into appropriate actions. A judge would ask why you created that situation and expected it to end well, ignorance of the laws is no excuse.
You don’t get to foist any kind of intimacy on people, it doesn’t matter how well you know them, they retain rights. This is called escalating in PUA circles, forcing intimacy. That kind of force is illegal, yo. The word ‘force’ gives it away, kay?
These people presume you’re ‘game’ to be humiliated, demeaned or used in the hopes you have no personal boundaries. It’s to do with sociological frames, they assume control hoping you won’t question the assumption. Personal boundaries are a human right, legally and socially. If someone doesn’t respect your boundaries, they don’t respect you. The law also applies in clubs or hell, even a brothel. They’d literally treat a prostitute with more respect. They judged you to be less worthy of respect than a hooker. They wonder at their ‘fail rate’.
RUDE PEOPLE DO NOT DESERVE POLITENESS IN RETURN.
This rewards them. This encourages them. Say they’re being rude. Use the word rude. Be rude yourself, they deserve it. You don’t have to impress them, befriend, correct or be nice to them. They set the tone, not you.
Do not fall into the trap of treating them like they’re your responsibility, they aren’t your naughty child and they enjoy this attention as an opener to befriend you. It isn’t your fault their mama raised them wrong. You can’t fix them, they’re adults, they’re already dead inside. There’s no hope. Don’t stand around trying to correct someone on etiquette (and respect) who doesn’t believe in evil or their own capacity for wrongdoing. Don’t try to ‘save’ them, you aren’t Jesus, dear. Walk away as soon as possible, tell an authority figure in case they start on others (they will, because you’re so special), after pointing out somehow they were 1. rude and it was 2. wrong of them to behave like this. They need telling, but only because the message will sink in with punishment.
There are plenty of discussions about ‘female entitlement’ from such men, notice the clause. Derailing, seriously? Doesn’t change the fact, does it? Changing the subject doesn’t change the agency of men, does it?
Tu quoque isn’t a license to assault. ‘It’s bad for you too!’ hypothetically or really, doesn’t make it morally acceptable, does it? Two wrongs do not make a right, do they? It isn’t the agent, and it’s behaviour. A man or a woman can be an alcoholic, doesn’t make alcoholism better or worse. They are defined by their bad choices.
People are rude. Men can ‘confuse’ the difference between assertive (Can I buy you a drink? Hello, you seem nice.) with aggressive (if you have to grab, it’s because you know she doesn’t want to grab you).
Just get the bouncer or a really gay guy to grab them in exactly the same way and see if he thinks it’s fine. No women to blame there. It’s the Western version of Eve Teasing and it demeans us all, as a society. We shouldn’t have to explain why people in the West have the human right to go out without being molested. Would they also pass a child in a park and grab them that way, if it’s so ‘friendly’ and the word they refuse to use, ‘innocent’?
Just point out their behaviour. They get really flustered at being challenged and having to explain themselves.
Even a parent wouldn’t randomly walk up and grab their child, so they’re presuming a level of control and dominance above the people who made you. Not attractive. They grab you because they cannot grab your attention. It’s sad, really. Don’t pity the predator though. They will go on to do it to others.
Why do you think you get to touch me? You don’t own me. I own me. People aren’t pets, don’t pet me.
Do you often go around groping strangers? [yes they do]
You do know going round feeling people up is illegal? It’s also a fetish called frottage.
Grab me again and I’ll defend myself. [this really triggers them into umbrage]
If this is how you treat strangers, maybe you rape your friends. [only use if obnoxious]
Even when we shake hands, they are offered. This allows the physical bid to be rejected. This is polite among men.
Swerving and giving them a disgusted expression will often convey better than words, as a first line of defence. You note the easy application of defence? Because restricting a person’s use of their own body is an attack.
Second line “what’s wrong with you?” accurately puts the attention on their responsibility for their own actions.
Liking someone’s outfit, or them being a celebrity, or thinking they’re pretty, is not an excuse to touch them. Ask if you can touch the fabric of an outfit and they’ll usually offer a sex-neutral area, like an arm or shoulder. That’s fine.
You don’t go up and touch their handbag or their car, do you? Why accord their body less respect?
In short, don’t treat regular people, male or female, with less respect than you’d show a stripper, who is protected by bouncers.
Chasing people around a place makes you a sexual predator too. We’ve all seen the poor women hiding in the bathroom so the creep will leave. Don’t complain you keep being called a creep, if you keep acting like one.
This is unusually well-informed, it’s like a comprehensive list of most issues I’ve heard that turned out to be red flags and dealbreakers for women. We see a lot of dealbreakers for men (standards for women) but rarely the reverse. I know there’ll be some butthurt guys sour we’ve noticed but you’re meant to be about self-improvement and that includes relationship errors.
Men always say ‘We don’t know what we’re doing wrong, just tell us!’
Except when we try to tell you, you don’t listen. And then we’re the nag, apparently. They don’t correct the issue by changing their behaviour (if they had the empathy to do that, there wouldn’t be an issue), they want to make excuses as if that fixes things and it’ll stop being a problem. We aren’t your mother. If you don’t fix the issue, and worse, make excuses for treating a relationship like dirt, it won’t be swept under the rug. We can and do leave, often on what appears to the dense male as ‘no notice’.
You get to control a dog, not a person (they are still a human even if you’re married, one of the few divorce reasons even for Catholics is abuse of spousal power for good reason, nobody has carte blanche when coupled, the entire point is considering and compromising with another, an act, not empty words). If the terms of exchange are disagreeable, it isn’t the injured party’s fault for going. It’s the selfish person who expected their desires came above another’s needs or set ridiculous (petty, irrational) double standards based on a trashy temperament (antisocial, narcissistic, borderlines etc). Any man who ponders marriage should make sure he doesn’t commit resentment-inducing errors that might deservingly end in divorce court (btw, this list also applies to women, because this is how you should treat a human, especially one you love). This is a list of disrespectful behaviours you shouldn’t even tolerate from an acquaintance or friend. It’s inhumane, degrading treatment, the calling card of fuckboys, and their daytime form, douchebags.
You can’t put a bandaid on a crack in the foundations. The whole building will come down. Excuses are for schoolboys, women raise problems so the man will be masculine about it and act, it’s a challenge to his masculinity and you’d better not fail e.g. “the spice rack isn’t hung yet…”.
If you think this would turn into a row, congratulations, you’re a man. All he needs to do is say “I’ll do the thing on (day)” and then actually keep his promise. Shocking, I know. Women are such complicated creatures.
If you think it’s actually about the spice rack instead of being about the man performing in his masculine role (or not), congratulations, you’re a thick man who gets into a lot of arguments with women and doesn’t know why. I guess women are ‘crazy bitches’ because anger is never justified from a woman you promised shit to.
In this case, an experienced wife would treat the man according to his emotional age and give him a taste of his own medicine by usurping his role if he won’t fill it, by crossing his line of sight with his tools when he has time to do it, making like you’re going to do it yourself, and letting him ‘show you’. This isn’t manipulative because sometimes, as the DIY death rate shows, men are the dumber sex. Men do the exact same thing when you act like you can’t operate the washing machine but a 2-ton car is a Man’s Job TM. Yes, we’re canny to that too.
Translation, of such a simple sentence about a spice rack: “You said you’d do this 4 months ago, this is the fifth time I’ve mentioned it and if I do it myself you’ll whine and pout for another month, so just hang the bloody spice rack, please. I don’t enjoy telling you to perform your role in this house, you signed up for this. I’m doing all my work and contributing and so well, in fact, that you don’t even know what it is.” When a woman brings something up and she’s irritated, it’s because she shouldn’t have to bring it up.
A woman doesn’t like to remind her man that he is a man. She doesn’t enjoy making demands of him because as an adult he should already know. If they married (non-married, there are no real commitments but it’s vague) then he signed up for a series of duties and responsibilities, and so did she. I saw a great post about how Wife is a job, not a title.
Well, it goes both ways. You married each other, the man did not marry a maid/cook/whore/mother/whatever and she has to settle with a lazy fat lump on a sofa making demands like she’s his mother. Settling doesn’t mean that. Settling is a good thing where you agree to perform gender roles for a life together, that you equally enjoy.
Husband is a job, not a title.
Men with happy marriages are not overbearing, cruel or come up with stupid hoops for the woman to jump through. They listen as they would to a sister and respect her as if her mother.
I’ve seen the manosphere point to comedy and whine that the woman is a shrew and the man lazy. These two behaviours are connected, but they refuse to admit this because they’re allergic to industry or equal standards and this is the reason they’ll die alone. There was a study of the hours a housewife works, keeping the house alone and caring for children alone and it would be deemed illegal if she were paid. The man gets off hours a day, the woman hardly any. Yet they say “why are you stressed?” Honestly, ask every housewife you know to tally the hours she works a week and on which tasks and prepare to be shocked. We don’t complain proportionate to the labour, we get on with it.
Women used to have support networks and/or maids to have the same working hours as men. Our time is very cruel to women, expecting us to Do It All. The economy too, demanding dual incomes, mean women work longer hours with all the fun side effects, like aging faster on the face and cortisol weight gain. It is impossible to ask these things of one person, and as I like to say with the obvious example, raising small children – if it’s such fun, I challenge the men complaining how ‘women have it easy’ by either doing a swap (a la I Love Lucy) or volunteering around small children for a week, say, in a nursery. See how long you last (and those kids can’t interrupt you sleeping off the exhaustion, you aren’t legally responsible for them really and they can’t break your house). No? Don’t want to work with kids? Then quit complaining that it’s easy when you are blissfully ignorant of the requirements, it’s like a champagne socialist talking to factory workers. All talk, no man.
Men have been mis-sold a fairytale from 50s advertising that they can be Kings over their wife. Those advertisers were all men so no prizes for why they had no idea what women were doing at home. Actually, Kings have about the same authority as their Queens and treat them with respect. In many cases, the Queen has more power and the man is in fact Prince Regent, inferior. If you cannot afford nannies and servants, don’t have aspirations above your station (where lifestyle and ‘free’ time are concerned). Money causes most rows i.e. the man isn’t making enough and being The Man but if the woman tries to help he gets prissy. We cannot win and this is unfair on the woman’s side (yes I know the economy is bad too). However, it must be made clear, marrying a woman isn’t buying a slave at market to mistreat. It’s agreeing that you’ll be The Man, forever. To her. Whatever happens, sickness, poverty, aging. Whether you feel like it (lazy) or not. It’s a partnership and one side can’t steer a ship. Don’t like it? Go your own way. This is the way relations between the sexes have always been. The American Dream is literally impossible without equal participation. This isn’t feminist, it’s a team effort. There are no individuals in a marriage.. This dates back to cavemen. Everyone’s work is important to support the tribe. The man is not automatically higher although he leads (and the greater burden for screwing up is on him as last word). They’re both running things, ignore the Idiot Box’s lies, this isn’t a competition (but statistically based on working hours, men would lose) and any man calling a woman out on this will soon experience The Strike. This is entirely passive and hence, feminine. She’s just showing you the consequences of a life without her help, as she was defamed. Where she does the thing you accuse her of (doing nothing, laziness) to show you her value in the house. This starts a row because the man refuses to admit he was wrong before. Pride has wrecked many a marriage, it isn’t as if anyone else is going to hear him and again, he isn’t an individual, he is a husband talking to his wife. Imagine one coworker refusing to admit his colleague did any work, it’s ridiculous. Male eyes tend to gloss over while women are working, the fools can say it doesn’t “really count”, bringing the Strike on themselves and this is why some women draw attention to their efforts, hoping for acknowledgement from the man they love e.g. I did this, I’m doing that, I’m going to do that next, I do everything around this house, nobody appreciates me, look at this thing I am holding or pointing at as I ask you a rhetorical question about it. Sound familiar? She wants your approval, idiot! She wants affirmation from the only man who matters in the world to her, it’s a gesture of love!
It’s like a dog giving you the puppy begging eyes, but even more obvious to a third party.
Then it’s “why is she angry? I did nothing.” Yes, that’s the literal problem. A man who fails to engage with his wife (import of communication) won’t have a happy marriage. Women need words. Words you mean (honesty). Reputation in the house (reliability, a classically male trait) for keeping promises is as important as business rep.
You don’t get to sit around doing nothing being waited on, especially when you’re a prole. That happens on TV with the big houses for ‘working class’ characters and it’s also the reason the ‘man of the house’ is the object of the comedy, because he isn’t the ‘man of the house’ at all, the woman is having to pick up the slack for her failure of a man. You must contribute to the running and keeping of a house even though it is the woman’s domain and she has the last word there (hence bringing up your failure there just like a performance review, is also her job). Women enjoy lengthy discussions assigning specific responsibilities and making these things clear but men fear them. Sloth. You should’ve agreed this stuff before.
If you’re a man and keep letting the opposite sex slip through your fingers, see if you feel a bit offended at this list’s items (and most of it applies to dating, the lowest difficult setting of a relationship with the opposite sex).
Essentially, you should treat a future spouse with the most respect of anyone in your life, including your best friend and family. You’ll be spending thousands of hours with them a year. One sign a marriage is over is that the husband is nicer to the waitress he’ll see for an hour. Women need affection to show affection and it’s the man’s duty to lead.
It’s funny how the trashy men don’t know they’re trash and are often loudly bemoaning the ‘trashiness’ of random women (usually in the USA, as if American woman aren’t the global exception) with utter obliviousness to how repellent this is. As if we don’t notice how you speak about other women.
If you are offended, if the shoe fits and you treat people like this, any people, feel free to strap on that thing and strut, girl. I’m the messenger.
Relationships are a choice. They take effort and communication. Do you want to learn these things now or in post-divorce counselling?
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Don’t stand around acting like it isn’t work, bitching.
Best ones imo, expanded;
Paranoid when you spend time with male friends, but when he has female friends, it’s fine, don’t be so paranoid.
Used you like a therapist (emotional pin cushion).
Thought he was smarter than you (regardless of evidence to the contrary, which was obviously a fluke).
Tried to pretend Yes All Men are like him when he behaves badly, blame-shifting.
Coffee snob (signalling prick).
Mansplaining – on topics he is ignorant on, especially if you know better. They double down for ego and wonder why the woman dumps/nexts them and this keep happening, “why don’t women like smart guys” – they aren’t smart, they can’t keep a woman. Meth addicts of 50 IQ points can keep a girlfriend. Smart isn’t like House where being an arrogant prick is funny or attractive.
Thinks intelligence or wit are solely the preserve of males, gets patronizing on their demonstration by a woman (slightly intimidated and insecure about it for no reason to feel ego-threatened, wtf) and wonders why only boring stupid bimbos are suddenly all he can attract.
Characterizes rationalizations as rational, logical, or being argumentative not as passive-aggressive and unhealthy but “playing Devil’s Advocate”. Devil’s Advocate is balanced, no emotion behind it or personal investment, it’s never cruel or mean-spirited to hurt the other person, that’s bullying.
Tried to control your appearance but the street was one-way, crazy bitch. His terrible hygiene is ‘au naturelle’ and his awful style ‘unique’ as if those are good things. Often talks a big game about self-improvement because dumb.
Undeniable human trash from an objective perspective (can’t commit to anything in his entire life, absurdly commitmentphobic of the word commitmentphobic). Generally a failure at everything he tries.
Yes, quite right. Only the most insecure of boys would fear being too nice to a good woman. Good men enjoy being romantic as a demonstration of masculinity. It’s quaint to appreciate people for their traits and character rather than capitalist cogs that might give you something or service a desire.
I remember, I believe it was in the latter part of 11th grade, a kind of ritual had developed for me; the wonderful excitement of watching my favorite girl enter into the classroom again. I was always happy to see her again, I felt reassured that now I was going to be with her (in the same room as her) for the next hour, and I was always very curious to see what kind of mood she would be in today. I had started to think to myself that maybe I should pursue her, to show her more directly and obviously that I “liked her,” to “let her know” and “make it clear” that I liked her. The idea of being more forward with her was quite intimidating, it was not how I was used to acting and I didn’t really know how she would respond. So I started to…
View original post 1,848 more words
K-types (selfless with societal investment) set the standard.
I love to watch the self-proclaimed redpills get their knickers in a twist over findings they don’t like after tittering over feminists doing the same. It’s petty but it’s funny in a meta way.
The majority of men grow out of the stereotypical opinion that teenage boys have about notches and being a ‘player’. They value being respected more highly (at odds with that r-type narcissistic instinct).
Contrary to stereotypes about sexual performance and masculinity, men interviewed in a large international study reported that being seen as honorable, self-reliant and respected was more important to their idea of masculinity than being seen as attractive, sexually active or successful with women.
Patriarchs don’t respect the manwhores that might corrupt their daughters or cuck their sons. Most men are patriarchs compared to PUAs. The media portrayal of their lifestyle and social approval on reality TV makes them assume it crosses over to real life, when it doesn’t. Most people don’t approve of sluts, even other sluts. Let alone respect them.
inb4 ‘beta’ – those are the qualities of kings, real kings
The study published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine included interviews with more than 27,000 randomly selected men from eight countries (Germany, U.S., U.K., Spain, Brazil, Mexico, Italy and France), with about 16 percent of the men reporting erectile problems.
Spot the porn addicts.
Regardless of age or nationality, the men more frequently ranked good health, harmonious family life and good relationships with their wife or partner as more important to their quality of life than material, self-fulfilling or purely sexual concerns.
aka Most men are mature. They aren’t selfish. That’s wise. Happiness studies support that opinion.
Who knew the real men aren’t online bitching? Who knew?
There’s more to life, kids.
This is from wikipedia but it so succinctly explains the problem you must forgive me.
During World War II, anthropologist Margaret Mead was working in Britain for the British Ministry of Information and later for the U.S.Office of War Information, delivering speeches and writing articles to help the American soldiers better understand the British civilians, and vice versa. She observed in the flirtations between the American soldiers and British women a pattern of misunderstandings regarding who is supposed to take which initiative. She wrote of the Americans, “The boy learns to make advances and rely upon the girl to repulse them whenever they are inappropriate to the state of feeling between the pair”, as contrasted to the British, where “the girl is reared to depend upon a slight barrier of chilliness… which the boys learn to respect, and for the rest to rely upon the men to approach or advance, as warranted by the situation.” This resulted, for example, in British women interpreting an American soldier’s gregariousness as something more intimate or serious than he had intended.
Spoiler: It’s a proxy for class.
…Such an intuitive emotional response to wages operates with a background economic theory, which we may never describe to ourselves directly but which could in fact be stated as follows: a person’s wages are determined by the scale of their social contribution….
Stefan is knocking it outta the park recently. Highest quality redpill stuff.
Who turned him onto us? Anyone know?
TLDW: Social engineers are child abusers.
In one word, it comes down to Legacy. The legacy is the future.
You either have one, or you don’t. You eat the cake, or you keep the cake.
But it doesn’t last forever. Never kick the pup because the pup grows up.
We are reaching that tipping point. I saw a comment, I think it was on Vox Day’s blog, pointing out that by recreating the conditions of Weimar Germany in every system, it’s predictable what would happen next. But neolibs don’t listen to history, they’re on the Right Side… *snicker*
He’s right that the quality of men dropped before the quality of women. I feel the manosphere forgets there is another half to the equation. Post-WW, the few surviving men lived it up. Then the Sexual Revolution just happened on by shortly thereafter because women felt left out and wanted some of the attention. Men lost their motivation because sex is practically all they want from women and…. yup, that’s pretty much it. This causes the economy to tank eventually and we’ve been building up bubbles ever since (look at the time you went off the Gold Standard to cover for it, LOOK) because men buy most of the shit needed for a family from a position of surplus and women, while easier to sell to, must buy on credit.
The manosphere mocks women for saying “Where have all the good men gone“? Answer: They’re Peter Pans at home playing video games and watching porn, the Lost Boys, which hardly reflects well on men as they think it does, while all the time most of their discussions feature “Where have all the good women gone“? without a trace of self-awareness. Answer: Pump and dumps, pretty much. Not Asia. Not S. America. You chucked them, or some other guy did, and now they’re psychologically ruined by it.
Maternal instinct isn’t a myth. It’s much like paternal drive in men. Some have it, some have it strongly and some do not have it at all. Women are dumb enough to freely admit where they lie there, oblivious to how it affects their long-term value: are you pro-choice? They can only answer for themselves and only the women who state the rape/cancer exception are permissible.
Gold Standard in America: 1971. I’m sure that’s a maaaa-ssive coincidence.
UK: 1934. WW1 made us broke. However, we had similar problems:
The crisis was seen as a national humiliation.