Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 266 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,801 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
(There are a few male trolls who dislike my views - but read my threads without fail - and seem to have a problem with me more than women on this forum. You know who you are, and I'm politely asking you guys to form coherent arguments against my OPs if you disagree with me. It should be easy if I'm as wrong as you believe I am. Thank you)


OK listen up ladies, I'm gonna tell you something that feminists are afraid to admit, and will deny.

Women have a lot of social power. The power comes from...

Sexual selection.

Female sexual selection habits influence male personality traits and behavior. It's a very powerful force for shaping society.

I'll explain...

The social norm (confirmed by online dating site statistics, which probably exists for genetic and cultural reasons) is that men initiate direct communication, and women assess the eligibility of the men trying who initiate direct communication.)

Why women get to choose.

...The instinctual goal for female animals [actually some female animals] is to find a mate with the genetic makeup necessary to be a good provider or a good father. Male animals, on the other hand, have a genetic goal of locating as many wives and mothers as possible.

These different goals lend a scientific authority to something every man who's ever entered a singles club immediately learns: Males compete for the attention of females.
- From Rules Of The Game by Neil Strauss.

In the book Decoding Love (the author is appallingly at citing references) the author claims that studies of contemporary hunter-gather societies shows that a human doesn't possess the physical capability of producing or gathering as much sustenance as they consume, until they are 15. Also (obviously) a woman has to physically carry the child for 9 months, and that affects her ability to protect and provide for herself.

Which gives further support to the hypothesis that women who were inclined to spend more time looking for the characteristics of a provider and protector, were the ones who survived and had their genes replicated.

The thriving PUA industry - and the dating advice threads that are found on every male dominated forum - are a testament to the phenomenon of males altering personality traits and behavior to become more attractive to women. Many men notice what personality traits and behaviors women respond to, and which one's they don't...

They witness that benign egalitarian men (ie. nice guys) are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.

They witness that benign 'nerdy' guys are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.

And they witness quasi-narcissistic and quasi-sociopathic men being frequently successful with women.

As a result many men actively pursue developing some of the traits and behaviors of a bad boy/jerk/asshole that women positively respond to eg., giving backhanded compliments, radical honesty, playing hot and cold, being quasi-narcissistic, etc.

The reason why men are willing to devote so much time, energy and money to change their personality traits is because they are overlooked by women, that is the motivating factor. If more women overlooked the quasi-narcissists and quasi-sociopaths then that would be a motivating factor for them to change their personality traits.

It seems feminists and women grossly underestimate the power of sexual frustration and loneliness (basically quais-ostracization) to motivate people to change personality traits. Because it's rare I hear women and feminists talk about the power of sexual selection to shape society.

(If you deny the lengths that men go to get pussy or a relationship by changing personality traits and behavior, I'd advise you to read The Game by Neil Strauss. Which is also very entertaining and insightful about the human condition, and the social dynamics of attraction BTW.)

If feminists and women want to see males with certain qualities become prominent in society, then perhaps they should advise other women to use the power of sexual selection to influence male behavior for the better.

Advise other women to;

Ask out that physically attractive socially awkward 'nerd'.

Go out on a date with that physically attractive 'nice guy' friend who you know is interested in you.

Go out on a date with that dude who's OK with expressing vulnerability, and doesn't play games.

Stop fucking and/or dating bad boys/jerks/assholes.


Because women have a lot more social power than they realize.




Please share any thoughts you have on this topic.




And please give for free to charity daily...

Help -End Hunger- and -End Poverty- with a free click!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
289 Posts
brief thoughts/opinions:

- there is a significant portion of women who select 'bad boys' over the alternates you proposed
BUT this is raw attraction (sexual and short term) demonstrated by teens and 20 something women

-when a heterosexual woman considers a long term partner, the bad boy traits are rejected in favor of qualities that would provide stability (in the emotional and financial sense)

-while bad boys would have the ability to have sex with more and varied women, these same women are not typically looking for a child to result from their fling, so the bad boy's genes don't get favored over Joe Normal come marriage time

I would argue the points made in those books are more about 'stages of life young people experience' rather than a comprehensive look at male/female interaction

{edit: I see what you did there with the hunger link. Trying to use guilt on us eh to strengthen your points? And don't think I'll be intimidated by the brick you tossed through my window with 'white night' scrawled across it in blood ;) }
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
650 Posts
One thing I find interesting is feminists claim women are disproportionately victims of abuse, yet also go crazy at the idea that women are attracted to assholes. Isn't that kind of contradictory ?

Are we just not supposed to say anything which could even remotely be seen as critical towards women ? Say anything that's negative such as "women are more prone to attention seeking" and it's "misogyny".

Gender roles are supposedly being opposed, yet the general narrative in this case is men need to "toughen up", "stop complaining" and that women are helpless victims who can't be held responsible for any of their problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I can personally attest to the online dating thing- way more guys approaching girls there, to the extent that it's almost overwhelming on the receiving end, actually. I agree that this general dynamic, and female choices (or perceived female choices) ultimately does have an impact on male behavior. I also quite agree with your advice that women should really avoid choosing/dating/whatevering assholes, both for their own sake as well as for the behavioral and cultural reinforcement. (Everyone should avoid dating assholes regardless of gender, honestly.)

A question for you, though- roughly what percentage or portion of women do you think tend to be making their dating choices this way? I'm not denying it happens- I definitely see friends and acquaintances (of both genders, really) put themselves through unhealthy relationships with terrible people time and time again. It can be really hard to break that unhealthy sort of dynamic- it seems cyclical and repetitive. However, I know that for me and for the overall majority of my female friends and family members, there is a pretty low tolerance for bullshit. In this, and in some of your other posts, it sounds like a much more widespread or endemic problem than I've experienced. I'm curious as to the discrepancy. I am prone to being friends with independent thinkers, and I come from a very, very, truly egalitarian family, which may have something to do with it, but I'm curious as to your experiences, and those of the other guys on this forum. Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,088 Posts
I personally think you and Mr. Strauss give them too much credit. It takes 2. Naturally men tend to lead the dance, so in the end it ultimately rests on our shoulders imo.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,394 Posts
Overall, I do agree with you in the fact that women generally get to choose their partners with more selectivity and that women will therefore have most of the social power over males (in general as there will always be exceptions).

Furthermore, a quick warning when reading my post: I will always mean in general, or the majority when discussing my thoughts.

Since your post is so long I will break down the parts I would like to comment on:

The social norm (confirmed by online dating site statistics, which probably exists for genetic and cultural reasons) is that men initiate direct communication, and women assess the eligibility of the men trying who initiate direct communication.)

Why women get to choose.

...The instinctual goal for female animals [actually some female animals] is to find a mate with the genetic makeup necessary to be a good provider or a good father. Male animals, on the other hand, have a genetic goal of locating as many wives and mothers as possible.

These different goals lend a scientific authority to something every man who's ever entered a singles club immediately learns: Males compete for the attention of females.
- From Rules Of The Game by Neil Strauss.

In the book Decoding Love (the author is appallingly at citing references) the author claims that studies of contemporary hunter-gather societies shows that a human doesn't possess the physical capability of producing or gathering as much sustenance as they consume, until they are 15. Also (obviously) a woman has to physically carry the child for 9 months, and that affects her ability to protect and provide for herself.

Which gives further support to the hypothesis that women who were inclined to spend more time looking for the characteristics of a provider and protector, were the ones who survived and had their genes replicated.
I actually disagree with you on why women get to choose. While back in the day it made a lot of sense, the biological reasons are outdated anymore and are actually more detrimental to men which should make men more choosy (at least where I am from, in the U.S.)

The only reason I think that women get to be more choosy is because of the increased levels of testosterone that leads men to desire sex more so than women. You might say that, that just means men need to mate with as many different partners as possible, but I believe that is wrong. There are too many differences in today's society for me to believe that it is biological for a man to mate with as many different partners as possible. I just believe that men desire sex more and that they therefore look for the opportunity to have sex whenever possible which leads to multiple partners but that having multiple partners is not the end.

My proof on the above paragraph is simply in my own observations. My older cousin is the only person whom I know of well that desires to mate with as many different people as possible and he is what most would consider to be the stereotypical jackass. Meanwhile I look on facebook at all of my different classmates and all kinds of different ment that I have gotten to know better from going off to college that are more than happy in a steady relationship. Then there are the people that mate with many different women but don't really seem to desire many sexual partners, in my opinion, they just seem to want just sex and that leads to having many different partners.

Next up is my proof about why it's more dangerous for a male to be less choosy in today's society. I believe that it is the male that carries the majority of the risk when it comes to sex in today's society. If a woman gets pregnant it is her choice and her choice alone to decide if she wants to go through with having the child. Sure, that's 9 months of having to carry that child around but that's 18 years of having to take care of that child financially for the father, who doesn't have much of a choice in the matter at all. I believe this is why men prefer to have a steady relationship (with plenty of sex) over having multiple partners anymore.

Biologically it may be that men desire to spread his seed as much as possible but we are not drawn to our base desires as much as other types of animals. Sure, the pull of our base desires are strong but we can influence these to a great degree, most notably through porn. Porn provides a safe way to release to as many different people as they desire. While it might not be as great as sex it still curbs the desire to spread a male's seed, I believe.

Next up, the reasons why I do not agree with why a woman gets to be more choosy:

If a woman has to be more choosy and choose a stable mate to take care of her during pregnancy then there wouldn't be any need for the stereotypical bad boys of the world, they would die out and would be very unsuccessful while the nice guys that just want a stable relationship would be INCREDIBLY successful, but this isn't the case.What's more is because of contraceptives they don't have to worry about pregnancy and can mate with the bad boy that excites them (even though they end up having unsafe sex and getting pregnant anyways) and this further demonstrates to me that the biological argument of why women have to be more choosy is incorrect (even though I do believe that women get to be more choosy) and goes on to say that it is not the case that a woman's biological drive is to find a stable mate to bear children with.

The thriving PUA industry - and the dating advice threads that are found on every male dominated forum - are a testament to the phenomenon of males altering personality traits and behavior to become more attractive to women. Many men notice what personality traits and behaviors women respond to, and which one's they don't...

They witness that benign egalitarian men (ie. nice guys) are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.

They witness that benign 'nerdy' guys are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.

And they witness quasi-narcissistic and quasi-sociopathic men being frequently successful with women.

As a result many men actively pursue developing some of the traits and behaviors of a bad boy/jerk/asshole that women positively respond to eg., giving backhanded compliments, radical honesty, playing hot and cold, being quasi-narcissistic, etc.
I agree. Most men want to satisfy their need to mate and therefore change themselves however possible to get what they want. What I believe happens though is that the power to control women begins to go to their heads. This power corruption coupled with all of the rejection they likely felt combine into a frenzy of disrepect towards women and the viewpoint that they deserve to be no more than tools to be used and cast aside.

The reason why men are willing to devote so much time, energy and money to change their personality traits is because they are overlooked by women, that is the motivating factor. If more women overlooked the quasi-narcissists and quasi-sociopaths then that would be a motivating factor for them to change their personality traits.
I agree, which I noted above and talked about why this makes the biological arguments about mating low ranking in the truth, in my mind.

It seems feminists and women grossly underestimate the power of sexual frustration and loneliness (basically quais-ostracization) to motivate people to change personality traits. Because it's rare I hear women and feminists talk about the power of sexual selection to shape society.

(If you deny the lengths that men go to get pussy or a relationship by changing personality traits and behavior, I'd advise you to read The Game by Neil Strauss. Which is also very entertaining and insightful about the human condition, and the social dynamics of attraction BTW.)

If feminists and women want to see males with certain qualities become prominent in society, then perhaps they should advise other women to use the power of sexual selection to influence male behavior for the better.
They can't and neither can anyone else in the world. In this world you cannot choose who you become attracted to. Women are attracted to those assholes because at first they exemplify strength, power and social status which I do believe influence women. They make women feel excited, which is something that greatly influences people of both genders, in my opinion. Who wouldn't be attracted to that?

What men need to do is to learn how to exemplify those same traits but not let the negative traits bring them down to a level of a dictator, in my opinion.

Let me explain the dictator comparison really quick though, a dictator has total control and begins to see himself as a god, they can do whatever they want. Power, I believe, amplifies a person's selfish desires and other negative traits and it takes willpower to suppress those desires and instead let it amplify unselfish desires. The reason that I believe that power has a bias towards selfish and negative character traits is simply due to a term I learned in my Ethics class I had about a year or so ago: Psychological Egoism. What Psychological Egoism basically states is that no being on this planet does anything that doesn't benefit themselves in some way (or they believe benefits them in some way). More on that in a thread I made that I will look up and place in the bottom of my post in an edit.

Advise other women to;

Ask out that physically attractive socially awkward 'nerd'.

Go out on a date with that physically attractive 'nice guy' friend who you know is interested in you.

Go out on a date with that dude who's OK with expressing vulnerability, and doesn't play games.

Stop fucking and/or dating bad boys/jerks/assholes.


Because women have a lot more social power than they realize.
That they do, but, they can't choose to be attracted to the people that do not make them feel attracted. If it weren't for the testosterone imbalance I believe men would behave the same more like women do in that they wouldn't go after a strictly physically attractive person. I've noticed that on average women do not equate physical attractiveness even in the same zipcode as males do and they tend to mate mostly based on other characteristics (but physical attractiveness does play a role, just not as significant as with men). Even when it comes to long term relationships, you will see mentally healthy men choosing women with other traits besides physical attractiveness as it doesn't play as big a part in their choices after being with that same person for a while. After a while, men will choose mates more closely related to how a woman will.

EDIT: wow, it's been longer than I thought since I had that class lol. Here's the Psychological Egoism link that anybody might be interested in:
http://personalitycafe.com/type-3-forum-achiever/85376-psychological-egoism.html
 

·
Social Pyromaniac
Joined
·
477 Posts
Okay, so you initially say that women only select males who are "good providers" based upon evolutionary derived instinct.

Then towards the end, you implore women to choose men who possess traits that run counter to a "good provider."

By suggesting them to choose different, you're implying that the type of men women choose is their own choice, rather than that of their instincts, thereby contradicting what you said earlier.

That doesn't strike me as a terribly good argument.



Also, any time this sort of thing is talked about, this time included, it all hinges upon a false dichotomy of male traits.

It basically goes something like "if intelligent and sensitive, therefore, not decisive with a strong presence."

In actuality, there are many men out there who manage to embody traits from both ends of this spectrum, meaning that the categorization of the supposed "bad boys" and "nice guys" is far from black and white, as is the choice between the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,365 Posts
While I agree with what you are trying to say overall there are a few points I would like to touch on.

OK listen up ladies, I'm gonna tell you something that feminists are afraid to admit, and will deny.
Women have a lot of social power. The power comes from...
Sexual selection.
Female sexual selection habits influence male personality traits and behavior. It's a very powerful force for shaping society.
I'll explain...
The social norm (confirmed by online dating site statistics, which probably exists for genetic and cultural reasons) is that men initiate direct communication, and women assess the eligibility of the men trying who initiate direct communication.)
Why women get to choose.

...The instinctual goal for female animals [actually some female animals] is to find a mate with the genetic makeup necessary to be a good provider or a good father. Male animals, on the other hand, have a genetic goal of locating as many wives and mothers as possible.

These different goals lend a scientific authority to something every man who's ever entered a singles club immediately learns: Males compete for the attention of females.
- From Rules Of The Game by Neil Strauss.

In the book Decoding Love (the author is appallingly at citing references) the author claims that studies of contemporary hunter-gather societies shows that a human doesn't possess the physical capability of producing or gathering as much sustenance as they consume, until they are 15. Also (obviously) a woman has to physically carry the child for 9 months, and that affects her ability to protect and provide for herself.

Which gives further support to the hypothesis that women who were inclined to spend more time looking for the characteristics of a provider and protector, were the ones who survived and had their genes replicated.
When you ask the question of sexual selection, you must also ask why it occurs. Now lets put aside genetics and focus on history for a second. Whichever text you pick up that describes the history of various cultures one thing can be considered common and that is the female gender usually had the shorter end of the stick. In the sense that men were the leaders, the choosers basically there was no real place for equal gender rights.

Now fast forward to the 21st century and you can see a somewhat balancing of the scales. Its still a growing process but it is developing. Now am I saying that women have every right to exercise their power? In some ways yes. In terms of reproduction they are the ones who have to make the bigger decisions and bear the bigger costs.They ideally should have the right to choose, But and this is quite a big but any form of absolute power corrupts.

A simple example of this is women knowing full well what they are capable of would use that power just to play games. Usually in this scenario the non "badboys" are the ones caught in the crossfire.

In terms of shaping male personality traits and behaviour I would argue that while this does indeed happen it happens to a small portion of the male population. The majority are actually made to be competitive and there is actually no need for behavioral change.


The thriving PUA industry - and the dating advice threads that are found on every male dominated forum - are a testament to the phenomenon of males altering personality traits and behavior to become more attractive to women. Many men notice what personality traits and behaviors women respond to, and which one's they don't...
They witness that benign egalitarian men (ie. nice guys) are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.
They witness that benign 'nerdy' guys are overlooked by women frequently, or are friendzoned.
And they witness quasi-narcissistic and quasi-sociopathic men being frequently successful with women.
As a result many men actively pursue developing some of the traits and behaviors of a bad boy/jerk/asshole that women positively respond to eg., giving backhanded compliments, radical honesty, playing hot and cold, being quasi-narcissistic, etc.

The reason why men are willing to devote so much time, energy and money to change their personality traits is because they are overlooked by women, that is the motivating factor. If more women overlooked the quasi-narcissists and quasi-sociopaths then that would be a motivating factor for them to change their personality traits.

It seems feminists and women grossly underestimate the power of sexual frustration and loneliness (basically quais-ostracization) to motivate people to change personality traits. Because it's rare I hear women and feminists talk about the power of sexual selection to shape society.

(If you deny the lengths that men go to get pussy or a relationship by changing personality traits and behavior, I'd advise you to read The Game by Neil Strauss. Which is also very entertaining and insightful about the human condition, and the social dynamics of attraction BTW.)

If feminists and women want to see males with certain qualities become prominent in society, then perhaps they should advise other women to use the power of sexual selection to influence male behavior for the better.

Advise other women to;

Ask out that physically attractive socially awkward 'nerd'.

Go out on a date with that physically attractive 'nice guy' friend who you know is interested in you.

Go out on a date with that dude who's OK with expressing vulnerability, and doesn't play games.

Stop fucking and/or dating bad boys/jerks/assholes.
Because women have a lot more social power than they realize.
Yes the PUA industry only thrives due to the existence of males who are different from the average. I honestly detest it because it is giving these men an all in scenario. Do these things that are different than what you want to be and you will get what you want. In actuality it does work, but is that truly what these men are seeking? once they get there then what, what is step 2?

I think its a fight fire with fire principle. Because men go about playing games and adapting there behaviour to gain the maximum advantage the women play games to counter this.

I'm quite sure, then again I would be speculating but I'm quite sure the female gender already knows that they have this power and have know for several decades if not centuries.

What you are describing does indeed happen I'm not going to deny that, but it must be said that it only effects a small subset of males.

Also it should be noted that the same thing happens to women as well. The "nice" girls or "nerdy" girls are more than likely to fall victim to the bad boy and/or "asshole" type of guys and treated as such as the same way as the "nice" and "nerdy" men.


What I would propose is a little different to what you have described.

Ultimately the men who are belittled by women and treated with indifference because they aren't of the typical norm all they really want is respect.
Well then where does one go to gain respect? certainly not from those who do not wish to give it. The type of women they would indeed be attracted to are not the ones who they need to court by changing there behaviour that is for sure. Unless of course they are looking for something casual yet do not know how to get it, thats where PUA comes in.

I would give the power over to men in this regard. The underlining problem here is that from a younger age the different men are expected to comply to the social norm. Because they don't they are viewed by some in a negative light and treated badly.

These men need to learn to stand up for themselves, and not be crushed by social expectations. I know its a hard thing to do but in the long run it would be well worth it. Why? because you are being yourself and have not contorted your personality to fit the majority, and when you do that you are inadvertently attracting the females that actually appreciate those characteristics.

To the women I would kindly ask you to stop fucking around with the guys who actually treat you with respect and dignity. Let them go if you have no interest in them stringing them along just because they provide for you what another man does not in one aspect doesn't give you the right to deceive in that manner.

To the lovely women who do appreciate these kind of men, where are you? cause seriously you are hard to find.
I guess some of you have been badly hurt by men and then take on an ideology that all men are the same. But this very forum is a contradiction to that fact.

Overall I would also like to state that not everything is so black and white, and one of the primary reasons for all this to happen is because men and women believe it to be so.

To put it simply the Asshole type confident guy does have a sensitive vulnerable side, and the nerdy vulnerable guy does have a more confident and assertive side as well. Depending on the person they would choose to cultivate and develop or ignore the other side. That is up to the person and whatever works or doesn't work for them.

Honestly I would say let those women fuck the badboys and jerks if that is what they want. They are making that decision and ultimately have to deal with the consequences of it. But the men who are not inherently like that don't stoop to the level of those men, you are only becoming that which you detest. I guess if multiple sexual escapades is your true desire then more power to you and I wish you well, but if that is not the case then don't bow down, stand up, fight back and never give up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
Okay, so you initially say that women only select males who are "good providers" based upon evolutionary derived instinct.

Then towards the end, you implore women to choose men who possess traits that run counter to a "good provider."

By suggesting them to choose different, you're implying that the type of men women choose is their own choice, rather than that of their instincts, thereby contradicting what you said earlier.

That doesn't strike me as a terribly good argument.
Actually, it's kind of brilliant given the track-record of these types of posts. I agree it contradicts the evolutionary premise, however from what I've seen the people who argue against the evolutionary points tend to argue that it's a conscious choice, not evolution, not psychology. Therefore, this argument forces them to either accept that evolution plays a part or accept that non-optimal choices are made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Animal

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,913 Posts
Geez dude with strange habits....

Women don't have social power, men are just not in control of their sexual impulses. You call it evolution, I call it no control over one's mind. The power was given to them because we are weak. Where there is weakness, there must be strength.

When I look back at it, I do have to say that I took some pleasure afterwards in rejecting these so called pretty gals who thought that I'd sleep with them just because they're so called hot. I'll be the fucking judge of that so I told them to bore somebody else to death. Of course you think I am trolling again xD but no. I'm just always in power regardless of anyone or anything, that's all there is to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
...The instinctual goal for female animals [actually some female animals] is to find a mate with the genetic makeup necessary to be a good provider or a good father. Male animals, on the other hand, have a genetic goal of locating as many wives and mothers as possible.
In the book Decoding Love (the author is appallingly at citing references) the author claims that studies of contemporary hunter-gather societies shows that a human doesn't possess the physical capability of producing or gathering as much sustenance as they consume, until they are 15.


Perhaps unrelated to the thread, I read 'Decoding Love' and I recommend it to you all. Unless you're an idealist and don't want to feel sick afterwards (as I did) and have your dreams crushed. I noticed and suspected these things before, but to have them laid out in front of you so plainly.

I understand importance of natural selection, but the sreaming consciousness that basically I'm just another option in the long line of a by nature promiscuous male who's holding himself on a leash because of his interests and restrictions of females and society or whatever, makes me sick. I would have to become soulless, brainless and completely heartless to enjoy this sort of sh*t.

Both children and suitors can f*ck themselves.


Also (obviously) a woman has to physically carry the child for 9 months, and that affects her ability to protect and provide for herself.

lol Tell me, because the book fails to explain the following. What about one-night stand's and men who simply dump the female during that time? Or cause her distress by cheating on her? That must be healthy both for her and the child. I don't see how's that in interest of well-being and survival of his progeny (his reproduction)
.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
One thing I find interesting is feminists claim women are disproportionately victims of abuse, yet also go crazy at the idea that women are attracted to assholes. Isn't that kind of contradictory ?
Leftovers from cavemen times. The big bad guy that beat everyone up to a pulp would be the strongest and dominant male. Thus, the women would screw him for kids.

Are we just not supposed to say anything which could even remotely be seen as critical towards women ? Say anything that's negative such as "women are more prone to attention seeking" and it's "misogyny".
That's called "PC gone mad" and I seriously wish that shit would just die.

Gender roles are supposedly being opposed, yet the general narrative in this case is men need to "toughen up", "stop complaining" and that women are helpless victims who can't be held responsible for any of their problems.
And this is just a load of bullshit spewed from someone's ass... or maybe some bimbo with no brain to speak of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,937 Posts
We aren't just animals, life wouldn't be as valuable if we were just another rung on the mammalian hierarchy. There are people who break against the mold we have for survival and make decisions for themselves, allowing them to be more driven by their psychology rather than their visceral pulls. I will admit, however, that those people are in a minority. With that in mind, I don't see much point in rehashing this topic over and over again. Have fun with as many people as you want when you can, and only seriously contemplate the people that deserve it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Ask out that physically attractive socially awkward 'nerd'.

Go out on a date with that physically attractive 'nice guy' friend who you know is interested in you.

Go out on a date with that dude who's OK with expressing vulnerability, and doesn't play games.

Stop fucking and/or dating bad boys/jerks/assholes.

Been doing this for the last 15 years so I'm doing my part and yes, I encourage other women to do the same.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,145 Posts
I'm sorry but I think both sexes have "power".

Both parties are absolutely able to exert their "influence" and so on ...

These threads are so. SILLY! :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,801 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
Okay, so you initially say that women only select males who are "good providers" based upon evolutionary derived instinct.

Then towards the end, you implore women to choose men who possess traits that run counter to a "good provider."

By suggesting them to choose different, you're implying that the type of men women choose is their own choice, rather than that of their instincts, thereby contradicting what you said earlier.
I'll explain;

Attraction (the internal experience) isn't a conscious choice, but acting on attraction can be a conscious choice.

Attraction can develop over time, so dating is a way to facilitate the emergence of attraction.

I see no reason why a 'nerds' or 'nice guy' are bad providers, but they don't have the same social proof of being a desirable mate that bad boys/assholes/jerks/players have. If women take the time to date them then they may discover the characteristics of being a good provider and good father.

Social proof is also used by women to determine a good mate (as social mammals in general we use social proof to help make decisions, often unconsciously). A man who is already preselected by women (like bad boys/jerks/assholes/players are by having a lot of female attention) is seen by women unconsciously as possessing desirable traits. So I'm also advising women to be aware of the inclination to use social proof to determine eligibility.

I probably should have added the part of about social proof to the OP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,801 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Actually, it's kind of brilliant given the track-record of these types of posts.
Ouch.

I thought you liked my threads?

*sniff
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,913 Posts
I'll explain;

Attraction (the internal experience) isn't a conscious choice, but acting on attraction can be a conscious choice.

Attraction can develop over time, so dating is a way to facilitate the emergence of attraction.

I see no reason why a 'nerds' or 'nice guy' are bad providers, but they don't have the same social proof of being a desirable mate that bad boys/assholes/jerks/players have. If women take the time to date them then they may discover the characteristics of being a good provider and good father.

Social proof is also used by women to determine a good mate (as social mammals in general we use social proof to help make decisions unconsciously). A man who is already preselected by women (like bad boys/jerks/assholes/players are by having a lot of female attention) is seen by women as unconsciously possessing desirable traits. So I'm also advising women to be aware of the inclination to use social proof to determine eligibility.

I probably should have added the part of about social proof to the OP.
Now I am no psychologist or anything and you can be a bit of a strange dude sometimes but I noticed IRL that you do have a point here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,801 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Now I am no psychologist or anything and you can be a bit of a strange dude sometimes but I noticed IRL that you do have a point here.
That wasn't from me, that was from a PUA called Mystery in this video...

 
1 - 20 of 266 Posts
Top