Don’t Tell Me What To Think


Don’t Tell Me What To Think

Content

Even the NAWALT disclaimer can’t prevent points of view seeming to tell me what I think, like “no matter what you think you think IRL, this is what you actually think here, because we’re men and this is our space and that’s all there is to it. Take it or leave it. Suck it up.” Sometimes the NAWALT disclaimer looks pretty thin to me. It looks like a crotch crutch to lean on when you want to make an unsubstantiated claim.

Take this :

“Whatever you share with a woman will be used against you at some other date. Not could be but will be.”

Yes. But, the Goldilocks adherents will insist, that’s why the man has to be *strong* as well as vulnerable. He has to be strong enough to survive his wife’s attacks on his revealed vulernabilities [sic]. See?

Apart from white space, what research or authority connects the first paragraph to the second?

So let’s swap horses, and I’ll tell you what you are thinking. You are connecting this: “Goldilocks communication is where you provide just the right amount of information to influence your listener”

… with this (emphasis mine): “In cognitive science and developmental psychology, the Goldilocks effect or principle refers to an infant’s preference to attend to events which are neither too simple nor too complex according to their current representation of the world.” *

(* Other comments on the same post equate women with children, in a negative way)

No matter what mind games go on, I come back to this:

“Even God can’t claim to know what it is to be a worm better than a worm does.”

AWALT or NAWALT, you don’t do my thinking for me.

Advertisements
Posted in AWALT, Molly, NAWALT
506 comments on “Don’t Tell Me What To Think
  1. Spawny Get says:

    Molly, we had the ‘no comments’ issue again. In fixing it, I appear to have shagged (technical term) the formatting, or maybe wordpress did it. If you want to fix that, give me or Tarn a kick and we’ll update. I’ll try and see what I can do in the meantime.

    Like

  2. molly says:

    See writers corner

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Tarnished says:

    👏👏👏👏👏👏👍👍👍👍👍👍

    Like

  4. jf12 says:

    Well, I didn’t include a NAWALT disclaimer.

    So you tell me, what DO you think is the value to the woman of the man’s strength to his revealing of his vulnerabilites? Eh? Hmm? What’s that you say?

    Like

  5. Yoda says:

    preference to attend to events which are neither too simple nor too complex according to their current representation of the world.

    Flow this would be.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Spawny Get says:

    Please keep the tone civil (saying it up front, not saying there is a problem). Not because of Molly being female, but because I want a friendly blog.

    I get pissed when I hear nutter fembots saying all men are rapists…this is a reflection of that annoyance.

    I do believe NAWALT, but I’m not going to debate numbers. Just assume the number you like and I think we can rub along.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    I tried to find something with Furbies but, I must be stuck on bears.
    I think that you’ll find this funny.

    You are wanted. Honest female viewpoints are valuable things to consider.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Yoda says:

    Complex the world is.
    Many things happen they do.
    Trends we do seek.
    Best we can do this is.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Liz says:

    Jf12: “Well, I didn’t include a NAWALT disclaimer.

    So you tell me, what DO you think is the value to the woman of the man’s strength to his revealing of his vulnerabilites? Eh? Hmm? What’s that you say?”

    The value to the woman of the man’s strength to his revealing…
    Could you reword this a bit? I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. What’s the value in anything? Why are we discussing things here, for starters? We all must derive some benefit in some way from discussing this stuff and getting to know one another. I’m closer to my husband for the trials and tribulations that have come our way. I refer to it as battle testing. I could expand on it, but I don’t think that’s what you’re getting at? (but I’m not sure…it’s vague…quite vague…).

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Spawny Get says:

    “Honest female viewpoints are valuable things to consider.”

    Indeed. Also, if you tell all women that they’re the enemy with no possibility of redemption…you’re rejecting women who may well be bringing up boys. I’m not saying chase those women, but I want a friendly tone anyway.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Tarnished says:

    I think the problem we see here is a reflection of people not quite believing NAWALT, even despite evidence to the contrary. Farm Boy does a great service by saying NAWALT (no sarcasm, I actually do think it’s good of him to include that at the end of his posts), but then anything that Liz or Molly say that perpetuates the “not all women” trope gets spoken over or is explained away as something completely different than what they meant. See recent conversation where Liz talked about how she doesn’t look down on her husband for sharing his emotional state, nor does she think he treats her as a child by squirreling away information that is “too difficult” for her to handle.

    This is the other issue with pedestalization, which I purposefully didn’t include because of my respect for the fact this truly is a manosphere space. Namely, that when women are put on a pedestal they are simultaneously seen as Special and Innocent and Protected…which is fine for children since they are uncoordinated, lack life experiences/knowledge, and are still growing in body and mind. But to put an adult woman up on such a pedestal is saying “I know better than you what you can handle, either physically or mentally.”

    That’s not cool. In fact, it’s the very opposite, and is quite demeaning. By telling someone “Hey, because you’re a female I know what your life is like and can tell exactly what goes through your head because I’m a man” you’re acting the same as feminists who say “Hey, because you’re a male I know what your life is like and can tell exactly what goes through your head because I’m a woman.” It’s nonsensical.

    It is literally impossible to know precisely what goes on in someone else’s brain, unless you are a mind reader…in which case, what the hell are you doing commenting on a random blog? I’d love to see this place become less of a “Here’s what you’re allowed to say/think” space and more of a “Here’s what (author) thinks due to his experiences. What differences and similarities or even possible explanations can we find together as people who are for men?”

    Liked by 4 people

  12. jf12 says:

    In the post “It Has Come To This”, FarmBoy bemoaned the lose-lose situation of a modern man in relating to a modern woman emotionally, because the supposed necessity of his calibrating for Princess Goldilocks means that *everything* he does relationship-wise is subject to criticism from her and thereby, inevitably, contempt by her. And there is absolutely nothing he can do about it; this lose-lose Sword of Damocles is one of his greatest vulnerabilities.

    By “battle tested”, men mean they have used it in battle and it works positively for them. They don’t mean “Well, it didn’t sneak up on me and shoot in the back as bad as I thought.”

    Liked by 1 person

  13. molly says:

    jf12 “Well, I didn’t include a NAWALT disclaimer.”
    That is true. My words “I’ll tell you what you are thinking” did make it like I’m aiming at you. My post is not only about your comment, though, it’s about most of the comments on the “It Has Come To This” post – on which the author didn’t even bother with the NAWALT disclaimer actually. However NAWALT was used by commenters there e.g. https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/it-has-come-to-this/comment-page-1/#comment-13237

    Like

  14. jf12 says:

    I can be, at times, the world’s worst offender in this (this: the gist of what this post is about). But for crying out loud! It’s not because I *de*personalize woman; it’s because my Theory Of Mind is so … so … Theory of Mind-y.

    Like

  15. jf12 says:

    For example, I have a bad habit of making up quotes (without necessarily attributing them) reflecting someone else’s views (“else’s”? shouldn’t the possessive be on the noun and not the adjective?) as a sort of straw man. But instead of being floppy and ragged like a real (real?) straw man, I intend my cartooned versions to be livelier and better-dressed than the original views.

    Like

  16. Spawny Get says:

    I don’t always say NAWALT, but to me it’s patently obvious that not every vajayjay owner is like that. I suspect that I’m not the only one operating under this understanding.

    From the male point of view, it does grind to always have to say it…nowotimsayin?

    Like

  17. Tarnished says:

    “From the male point of view, it does grind to always have to say it…nowotimsayin?”

    Absolutely! And because this is a manosphere blog, nobody should have to. The issue arises more when a female commenter who is either already NAWALT (like Molly or Liz) or is consciously trying to be NAWALT (like Bloom/RPG) is still told their own experiences mean nothing to the conversation at hand.

    I don’t even know where I’d fit into this…sometimes people here say that NAWALT applies to me, sometimes it doesn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Spawny Get says:

    Oh, it always applies to you.

    Like

  19. molly says:

    “From the male point of view, it does grind to always have to say it…nowotimsayin?”

    Yes. I’m asking (no one individual in particular – but all people here) please don’t tell a woman what she’s thinking, or what her attitude is. All else is okay, just not that. I have openly agreed with you men on just about every stinking thing about stinking feminism, just not that.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. jf12 says:

    re: “nowotimsayin?”

    You should’ve meant KnowhutImean?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_P._Worrell

    Like

  21. Spawny Get says:

    I stand corrected JF.

    Like

  22. Liz says:

    Jf12: “By “battle tested”, men mean they have used it in battle and it works positively for them. They don’t mean “Well, it didn’t sneak up on me and shoot in the back as bad as I thought.”

    Yes, battle testing would indicate a unit has endured a battle, survived, and became a more cohesive unit due to it.
    The latter thing you mentioned would be what is referred to as fragging/fratricide.

    Like

  23. jf12 says:

    @Liz, re: “The latter thing you mentioned would be what is referred to as fragging/fratricide.”

    Yes, exactly. As applied to couples, therefore, one thing “battle tested” should NOT mean is that they have learned how to battle “well” with each other.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Liz says:

    Agreed, JF12. The battle isn’t (or shouldn’t be) with each other.
    The metaphorical battle would be the difficulties life throws at them over time.
    Those are also the times when emotions tend to be greatly expressed, and in their “rawest” state.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. SFC Ton says:

    Yea all.women are like that. It only a matter of time when she will be just like that. At a ladies blog, a lomg time I am not like that girl proved to be just like that.

    Every chick I have ever read claim she is not like that, is just like that if she posts etc long enough

    Sorry darling, you still aren’t a special snow flake.

    Like

  26. Spawny Get says:

    Ton, so these rumours about you being in the diplomatic corps?

    Like

  27. molly says:

    SFC Ton, “It only a matter of time when she will be just like that”
    You’re telling me what I’ll think in the future? You don’t give me a choice. You tell me what to think.

    Like

  28. SFC Ton says:

    Yes sir they are 100% true

    I…. work with diplomats if you consider keeping them intact while they lie and do dumbshit working with them.

    Like

  29. jf12 says:

    re: “The metaphorical battle would be the difficulties life throws at them over time.”

    Amen to that, with the not-unvoiced mental reservation of replacing “would be” with “should be”.

    re: “Those are also the times when emotions tend to be greatly expressed, and in their “rawest” state.”

    I beg your leave to disagree. Real i.e. external problems tend to activate better behavior modes often (weasel word) accompanied by more careful emotion regulation. In my experience, women tend to express raw negative emotions greatly specifically to cause troubles and/or changes in relationships, as often if not more often when the man thought everything should be hunky dory. It is condescending in the extreme to call such behavior merely testing, any more than we would call a fragger to be “testing”.

    I could find psychological references which defend women’s *characteristic* tendency to express raw negative emotions during good times because “it must be good for relationships, because women do it.”

    Like

  30. SFC Ton says:

    Molly I am telling you if you are a woman, then you will be just like that at some point in time. No animosity in that statement. You are as nature, God etc made you.

    Like

  31. Spawny Get says:

    I don’t know what difference it makes, but I would like not to lose commenters over this. Can we not have a row over AWALT v NAWALT.

    I know things that Molly has done that mean that I have respect for her.

    I am perfectly willing to stipulate that Ton has never met a NAWALT, if that’s what it takes.

    Like

  32. jf12 says:

    @SFC Ton, re: “if you consider keeping them intact while they lie and do dumbshit working”.

    We thanks.

    Like

  33. molly says:

    SFC Ton, You are standing over me and saying “This is what you’ll think, darling.” You are dictating what I must think. Do you like people telling you what to think?

    Like

  34. jf12 says:

    re: “can we not have a row”

    Ok, so consider me backing away from the improvised minefields of AWALT. I’m more interested in *why* women do certain gendered things, rather than *which* women do, since having some reasons *why* makes me believe I can have a handle on those women *which* do.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Liz says:

    “I beg your leave to disagree. Real i.e. external problems tend to activate better behavior modes often (weasel word) accompanied by more careful emotion regulation. In my experience, women tend to express raw negative emotions greatly specifically to cause troubles and/or changes in relationships, as often if not more often when the man thought everything should be hunky dory. It is condescending in the extreme to call such behavior merely testing, any more than we would call a fragger to be “testing”.”

    I believe you, but that hasn’t been my experience. But then, I don’t get worked up over stip shit (not saying I’m “not like that” (God forbid)…it’s simply a true statement that I don’t get worked up over stupid shit. If life is good, I’m happy…like now, molto contenta, maybe some women need more problems and that’s why they bitch? Don’t know).

    Liked by 1 person

  36. molly says:

    SFC Ton, I know there’s no animosity. From what I know about you, you value individuality, and an individual’s right to think and speak freely. I’m an individual. I know what I am, and I am in charge of my future thoughts and attitudes. I thought you would respect that.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Spawny Get says:

    Thanks JF, I too am more interested in the myriad inconsistencies of humanity than percentages. I’ve heard many things in the manosphere about women that ring true in my experiences, but not with every female I ever dealt with. I’ve also dealt with some cunty blokes that betrayed my trust too.

    I still see no tactical or strategic benefit in rejecting potential allies, including some raising boys, that only want to be treated as politely as I would a male. In fact, the females here do put up with some blunt talking, I have respect for that because NAWALT.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. jf12 says:

    @Yoda, re: Flow.

    I could be wrong, but I’m not. Achieving Flow does not, and arguably should not, depend on some Goldilocks balance of yumminess or bite-sizedness of thoughts. There are indeed topics which seem more likely to elicit Flow (or in certain cases the rage to master) than other topics, but I assure you it’s in no way due to their “regular size” as opposed to their “super size”.

    Like

  39. Yoda says:

    Ton, so these rumours about you being in the diplomatic corps?

    Worked for Hillary’s inner circle he did.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. Spawny Get says:

    Yoda, laughed I did. That Hildabeast sure is some kind of unique, isn’t she? I expect the queue of guys waiting to piss on her political grave will be a long one.

    Like

  41. Liz says:

    ” I expect the queue of guys waiting to piss on her political grave will be a long one.”

    Can’t come soon enough.
    But that’s a family of teflon-coated poison-spitting hydras.

    Like

  42. Liz says:

    I suspect both Hillary’s ghost AND zombie could come back to haunt us.

    Like

  43. Spawny Get says:

    Over here we have Bliar slowly transforming into a lizard creature. We had a story in the news recently that a Labour candidate turning down a thousand quid from him…how toxic must be be for that?

    Like

  44. jf12 says:

    Did we ever get an answer as to the purpose of a man’s having strength for revealing vulnerabilities *other* than surviving attacks?

    Like

  45. Yoda says:

    Hillary in Andrea Dworkin’s body zombie attack.
    Bad this would be.

    Like

  46. Liz says:

    Wow! I had no idea he was that toxic…but he was in office for quite a while.

    If Hillary is elected, I can’t imagine. It’s just going to be so bad. 😦

    Like

  47. Yoda says:

    It takes a Global Village to finance Hillary it does.

    Liked by 1 person

  48. Liz says:

    “Did we ever get an answer as to the purpose of a man’s having strength for revealing vulnerabilities *other* than surviving attacks?”

    Yeah, Jf12, I asked you to clarify in my first post because i didn’t understand what you meant. You never clarified. I have no earthly idea what you mean when you say “the purpose of a man’s having strength for revealing vulnerabilities”.
    What’s the purpose of revealing anything in any social encounter?

    Like

  49. Liz says:

    Here, I’ll offer and example.
    Two twin dudes, with everything else equivalent. One is a musician/artist the other is an accountant. Which one do you think would appeal to women more and why?

    Like

  50. Spawny Get says:

    It’s kind of like Labour party here. Yeah, they’ll be absolute shit, but…is the shite factor that much worse than the party that says less shit things…but does nothing much different? I see Ton’s point; bring it on. Sooner shit gets broken, the sooner the good survivors can start rebuilding.

    Like

  51. Spawny Get says:

    I have female rellies who married accountants…*sigh*

    Like

  52. Liz says:

    Christ, how depressing Swithy.
    I know you’re right…I’d just like us to get out of the metaphorical chemical loo (military are absofuckinglutely screwed) before the real dysentery starts splattering.

    Like

  53. Spawny Get says:

    What’s up with Hildabeast’s Mini-me impression? The one with her daughter, recently, that godawful silver outfit.

    Like

  54. Liz says:

    Lol! I dont’ think there’s anything wrong with accountants, Swithy.

    But there are sexier careers…and the reason why they’re sexier is the question. 🙂

    Like

  55. Spawny Get says:

    I like that turn of phrase 😉 poetic yet earthy

    Like

  56. Spawny Get says:

    I think the rellies did the traditional deal. Financing for kids. I have no idea if there are regrets on either side.

    I think the musicians are generally regarded as sexier to ebul tingle seeking wimminz. It seems NAWALT.

    Like

  57. Spawny Get says:

    Poetic yet earth-closety, perhaps?

    Like

  58. molly says:

    “Did we ever get an answer as to the purpose of a man’s having strength for revealing vulnerabilities *other* than surviving attacks?”

    He’s a fool if he reveals vulnerabilities to a piece if childish mindless biological crap. If she’s not crap, she’ll know no-one is perfect. She’ll appreciate his honesty.

    Liked by 1 person

  59. Spawny Get says:

    The odds against that attitude might be lower than you think or hope.

    Like

  60. Tarnished says:

    “Did we ever get an answer as to the purpose of a man’s having strength for revealing vulnerabilities *other* than surviving attacks?”

    It’s so his spouse knows he’s not a robot.

    But seriously, everything Molly and Liz have said is true.

    Men (other than scfton) have emotions. They are a part of being human, and alive. To deny these parts of yourself is foolish, and can actually be harmful to your mind and body. Ergo, if you’re with someone who thinks you should be a constantly stoic unfeeling rock because they never learned to control (not suppress!) their own emotions…You’re with an extremely juvenile person. They are a douche, and immature to boot.

    Now, perhaps they have their own issues. After all, life sucks for a decent number of us at some point, and can be very horrible for an unlucky few. BUT! It is not your job to be the “missing piece” of someone’s psyche. You can help them, certainly, but the real work is up to them. Stop enabling people, and let them become self-actualized. They can’t be a complementary partner if they’re not even whole themselves.

    Conceal, Don’t Feel = Bad

    Liked by 2 people

  61. Spawny Get says:

    There’re elements in what you say Tarn, that are part of what the men are lamenting.

    Liked by 1 person

  62. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    There is another function to not genuflecting the NAWALT chant. It drives home to men the unlikelihood of meeting a unicorn in real life. As an example, it’s clear that there are people that win the lottery. But while it’s statistically possible that someone buying a ticket can win, it would be irresponsible to tell them that buying a ticket is sufficient for meeting their fiscal requirements in future. In similar fashion, while there are good women out there (I assume), telling men that all they need to do is look around for a girl that says she’s different and can keep up the act until he signs on the dotted line would be a disservice to them. Men should be assuming that their future wives will be exactly like most women are. If they hit the jackpot and marry a woman that’ll be supportive, then good luck to them. And if you’re one of those women, then good luck to you. But no man should assume going into marriage (or the regional equivalent) that his ticket is the winning number.

    If it makes you feel any better, Molly, I’m regularly assumed (both online and in real life) to be a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot. There is nothing but the knowledge that it’s mostly untrue (and my lack of giving a shit) that can keep me warm at nights. So men talking about other women say women suck, and warn other men that their special snowflake is like most women. Prove them wrong by your personal example, and you’ve done your part to make the world a better place. Telling men not to say that, or to tell them to jump through hoops while saying that is counterproductive to your cause.

    Now someone please get this Christopher Walken impersonator out of my head. It’s really aggravating, like an ice cream headache, only without the ice cream. Coffee flavored is my personal choice. It tastes like coffee smells, which is how coffee ought to taste, but doesn’t. It makes me sad, like God is laughing at us, rather than with us.

    Liked by 1 person

  63. Spawny Get says:

    There is another function to not genuflecting the NAWALT chant. It drives home to men the unlikelihood of meeting a unicorn in real life. As an example, it’s clear that there are people that win the lottery. But while it’s statistically possible that someone buying a ticket can win, it would be irresponsible to tell them that buying a ticket is sufficient for meeting their fiscal requirements in future. In similar fashion, while there are good women out there (I assume), telling men that all they need to do is look around for a girl that says she’s different and can keep up the act until he signs on the dotted line would be a disservice to them. Men should be assuming that their future wives will be exactly like most women are. If they hit the jackpot and marry a woman that’ll be supportive, then good luck to them. And if you’re one of those women, then good luck to you. But no man should assume going into marriage (or the regional equivalent) that his ticket is the winning number.

    Yeah, this is where I end up too. This is the attitude a man should have imho. All I’ve been trying to say is that there are women out there that are NAWALT and some of them are bringing up boys*. I think it’s worth taking a little effort not to throw the baby out with the bath water if it can be done while delivering the knowledge to the men and boys.

    *I’m not saying that this is the only reason for everyone, but maybe for some it’s necessary to point out.

    Liked by 1 person

  64. Spawny Get says:

    ” There is nothing but the knowledge that it’s mostly untrue (and my lack of giving a shit) that can keep me warm at nights.”

    This too for me. Besides you get treated better if you don’t smile like a loon. A quick smile and nod at the end usually means the other feels good about the exchange too. It’s different being a man…

    “”Prove them wrong by your personal example, and you’ve done your part to make the world a better place.”

    Very cool.

    “Telling men not to say that, or to tell them to jump through hoops while saying that is counterproductive to your cause.”

    That line is better not crossed, that is too far. I don’t think we got there, but the line is worth pointing out.

    Very cool comment CP.

    Like

  65. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Well, I’m a cool guy. It’so the cross I bear. 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  66. Spawny Get says:

    Might there be a post somewhere in there?

    Like

  67. Tarnished says:

    I could be wrong, and if I am then Molly should tell me so, but it seems this post didn’t come about because of anyone saying “the majority of women are like that”. Rather, the catalyst for it’s creation was the assertions that she was like that. I applauded her at the top of our comments for this very reason.

    It’s like the old trope of asking a man “When did you stop beating your wife?” He probably doesn’t beat his wife, nor has ever thought of doing such a thing. Yet by phrasing the question in this way, the asker implies that it happens anyway.

    Molly was tired of getting asked “So when did you first cheat on/begin to loathe/look at men other than your husband?”

    The generalizations aren’t the problem, because many who post here have personal anecodotes to back up their claims, as does much of the manosphere. The trouble lies in using said generalizations (that Molly has admitted to agreeing with anyway) to paint her with the same brush.

    Personally, there’s many flaws I’ll admit to: I often think our species as a whole is becoming too self indulgent to exist. I greatly dislike people who are crappy drivers. I can be very stubborn in my beliefs unless shown actual data that challenges it. My one vice is the fact I really enjoy food, so I have to work out every day to remain a size 6. Truly idiotic people make me want to leave this planet. However, I would never admit to being “like that” because I’m not, the same way a man who’s not a rapist wouldn’t admit to being one.

    Liked by 3 people

  68. Tarnished says:

    “A quick smile and nod at the end usually means the other feels good about the exchange too.”

    Truth.

    Liked by 1 person

  69. Spawny Get says:

    CP effectively summarised the male argument for not overdoing the NAWALT. Molly’s point that NAWALT was underdone was fair. I can certainly see that being told “shush woman, you are like that” might raise tempers and rightfully so. “All men are rapists” causes an eyebrow to wander north for me.

    Like

  70. Spawny Get says:

    Basically, I didn’t read CP’s comment as anything but a statement of the reasons why menospherites are sensitive to over-NAWALTing. Maybe I failed to read it proper cos it is late…

    Like

  71. molly says:

    CP, “Telling men not to say that, or to tell them to jump through hoops while saying that is counterproductive to your cause.”

    I never told them to say anything. I asked them, Please don’t tell me what I’m thinking. When I’ve said what I’m thinking, don’t insist that I’m thinking something else.

    Commenters here have said what they like about women and I agree with them. That’s not the point. From where I’m sitting, telling me what I’m thinking is the same as telling me what to think. I detest that for the reasons I detest SJWs telling us how to think and behave.

    Like

  72. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    The prospect of cloning and then turning into zombies Hillary and Andrea Dworkin is a premise toa movie that I will never see. Yikes!

    Molly,
    I think everybody here is sweet on you. Some more than others. You may have stumbled over a problem that is going to affect honest women for the balance of their lives- men are going to presume the worst to protect themselves. More yokes!

    “burrito: 🌯 🌯 🐻 🙄

    Like

  73. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    That’s “more yikes!”

    Like

  74. Spawny Get says:

    Instead of ‘you’ maybe read ‘one’, the generalised ‘you’.

    I’m not reading that comment (the one I liked) as being specifically about anyone. It’s advice to NAWALTs in general.

    But it’s 1am, maybe time for lights out.

    Like

  75. Liz says:

    Well, I don’t think most women want emotionless robot men. I don’t think that’s a rule in general, so I don’t think the ‘NAWALT’ even applies in that particular case. I gave the example before of the musician/artist versus accountant. There’s also the Latino versus Russian example. Or the INTJ versus ENFP. It doesn’t seem to me that women, by and large, generally prefer emotionless men.

    Liked by 2 people

  76. Spawny Get says:

    Liz, I agree, but I also think that men should be cautious about things. The SNAG advice is woefully bad advice most of the time. I doubt you married a SNAG, or a robot. Probably closer to robot than SNAG? But as I said, because he radiates super-confidence, he probably can share lots with you.

    Like

  77. molly says:

    Fuzzie, “men are going to presume the worst to protect themselves.”

    Yes they must presume the worst. If I have sons I will teach them presume the worst. My mother taught me feminism is bad. She still thinks it’s bad. She hasn’t changed her attitude. I won’t change my attitude towards feminism and men. I’m in charge of me.

    Spawny, “Instead of ‘you’ maybe read ‘one’, the generalised ‘you’.”

    Good advice. In my comments too, instead of ‘you’ read ‘one’. I intend no animosity.

    Liked by 1 person

  78. Spawny Get says:

    It’s hard to carry off dignity as a rainbow coloured, armless, bejewelled hornrim bespectacled furby…brava

    Like

  79. molly says:

    Spawny was your comment a ‘you’ or a ‘one’? 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  80. Spawny Get says:

    a generally true statement of fact (ie ‘one’), that is specifically true of you 😉

    Good night

    Like

  81. Farm Boy says:

    I think that this was asked before, but not answered. How do furbies type on the keyboard?

    Like

  82. molly says:

    It’s high time the patriarch sleeps. That’s an order. See I love you men. I do!

    Like

  83. molly says:

    I’m pretty handy with my toes, you know 😀

    Like

  84. molly says:

    Tarn is a man so I love Tarn too.
    Dunno about Liz. She has arms and I got arm-envy real bad…
    (Hahahaha! Just kidding Liz)
    lol

    Liked by 1 person

  85. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Farm Boy,
    I have seen voice converted to text on a smartphone. Perhaps, she has voice recognition software on her computer?
    She is a smart Furby.

    Like

  86. molly says:

    I’m doomed, I can never return a hug. Never! It’s foot massage instead, for me. That’s my lot. I’m a victim, eh.
    lol

    Like

  87. molly says:

    Tarn at 12:22 am, “I could be wrong, and if I am then Molly should tell me so”.

    You’re not wrong. You coined it, Tarn. As usual. A bright bunny unicorn you are. 🙂

    Like

  88. Poseidon says:

    “It’s so his spouse knows he’s not a robot.”

    Anybody else watch the Battle-star Galactica series? The Cylons were programed to share both thoughts and feelings. In fact all the Cylons were quite adept with the emotional sharing component of their programing. Can we therefore assert, “All Cylons Are Like That”? (ACALT) Will a Cylonsphere now arise?

    Like

  89. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    It’s all right if you can’t return a hug. We all bathe in your affections as you voice them.
    Then, there is massage for the ears. 🙂

    Like

  90. molly says:

    I missed some of the comments. I’ve been multitasking (no, women are not better at multitasking than men 😉 ).

    I missed jf12 at 10 March, 2015 at 8:28 pm. Good comment.

    Like

  91. molly says:

    Fuzzie I’d molest my own round fluffy ears if I had ’em. Fembots would accuse me of chronic lug fiddling.

    Like

  92. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Those fembots! Who knows what they’re thinking?
    As for bears and their ears, they are very possessive and protective. When they swim, they try to keep them from getting wet. It’s a high level of trust that would allow another close to the round things on the top of my head.

    Like

  93. molly says:

    Poseidon, my big cuzzie is a fan of Battle-star Galactica. I don’t know it much, so I’ll have to take your word re ACALT. As for the Cylonsphere, might it be called the Cylonoscopy instead? 😀

    Like

  94. Yoda says:

    Mollie cured of the Yoda virus seem it would.

    Like

  95. Yoda says:

    Pity that is.

    Like

  96. molly says:

    Fuzzie How do bears know their ears are round? If he saw his ears reflected in a pool, would he think Hey I’ve got round ears on top of my head?

    Like

  97. molly says:

    “Mollie cured of the Yoda virus seem it would.”

    Relapses sometimes recur

    Like

  98. Yoda says:

    Big ears have I do.
    Better to sense the world they are.

    Like

  99. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    I thought Yodaspeak was for Yoda posts.

    Molly,
    Here is a very small cub seeing himslf in a mirror. To know that it is himself demonstrates high intelligence, especially in one so young.

    Liked by 1 person

  100. Yoda says:

    I thought Yodaspeak was for Yoda posts.

    Another Yodapost want you do?

    Like

  101. molly says:

    Fuzzie video brings out my instincts to hug it does.
    Hugger I cannot be I can’t

    Like

  102. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    You can still be hugged and, while doing that, you can rub noses like an Eskimo.

    Yoda,
    Another Yodapost? That would be a good idea. How about one influenced by Mrs. Yoda?

    Like

  103. molly says:

    Maori noses rub
    Familiar with Hongi I am
    Also all Kiwis familiar with Whakapohane are

    Like

  104. molly says:

    Yoda a new post should do 🙂

    Like

  105. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    How could Maori come in contact with Eskimos? Someone had to get very lost.
    There is something else you could do that is not mentioned any more. It is the art of saying “Sweet Nothings”.
    So, do not dismay. You have great latitude in expressing your feelings.

    Like

  106. Yoda says:

    Hug with your legs one might

    Like

  107. Liz says:

    Swithy: “Liz, I agree, but I also think that men should be cautious about things. The SNAG advice is woefully bad advice most of the time. I doubt you married a SNAG, or a robot. Probably closer to robot than SNAG? But as I said, because he radiates super-confidence, he probably can share lots with you.”

    Of course my husband is not a SNAG. He’s a real dude, and he is genuine. Neither the SNAG nor the robot are ‘real’. He definitely is confident…so confident he can express emotional vulnerability.

    I’m actually much more like a robot than he is when it comes to the expression of emotion (exception during my pregnancies and the few months subsequent while my hormones were readjusting). He’s a very passionate guy…but he would never express emotion like a pregnant woman and lose his shit completely over small matters, or cry at the drop of a hat (if he did that, we’d get his hormones checked, as I’d suspect they were seriously out of whack…when men become super-weepy out of nowhere, for no real reason, that’s typically the reason).

    Like

  108. Liz says:

    I think Emma had a thread on this topic a while back and she, too, mentioned her father was very emotional (played guitar also)…yet he was also masculine. I dont’ think this is unusual and most of the ‘romantic’ countries operate this way.

    Like

  109. Liz says:

    (trip post, early, brain foggy, usual disclaimers and apology yadda yadda…) 🙂
    I also think it’s a very bad idea to purposely “shield emotions” from a practical perspective. First, it’s fake and that sort of act can never last and resentment at having to constantly perform a ‘show’ will grow. Second, suppression of emotions (I don’t mean talking about everyones feelz constantly and/or frequently…that isn’t expression of emotion, that’s actively bitching and/or catering toward bitching) will backfire.

    That’s like a pressure cooker ready to blow and obviously when that happens (not if, in life it happens because it’s life) there won’t be any coping mechanisms or real closeness to shield the blast….it will just seem like some out of the blue, freakish behavior to her, since it’s so uncharacteristic.

    -Just my fraction of a cent.

    Like

  110. Sumo says:

    Hug with your legs one might

    That sounds like my last date.

    Liked by 1 person

  111. Molly I feel that way at times, too. It can be difficult not to take it personally when commenters (not here, I am thinking of other blogs) go on and on as if all women are evil and are just sitting around plotting how to destroy men’s lives, or something. It can get old, for sure. I do my best to just let it roll off.

    Liked by 2 people

  112. Yoda says:

    resentment at having to constantly perform a ‘show’ will grow.

    Happens this does.
    Never good it is.

    Like

  113. Spawny Get says:

    “It can get old, for sure.”
    TBH there’s not a lot I can do about that, my focus IS primarily on men, I want to take whatever women compatible with that along.

    “I do my best to just let it roll off.
    And I appreciate the effort required to do that, because as I just said, I would like to bring red pill women along. I do not regard Tarn as a RPW.

    Liked by 1 person

  114. jf12 says:

    @Liz,
    if you seriously believe that shooting the guy in the back isn’t clarification, then what do you think would be clearer? I’m NOT asking for a woman’s take on the purpose of her man’s vulnerability, I’m asking for the her take on the purpose of his *strength*, or as you said “He definitely is confident…so confident he can express emotional vulnerability.”

    Why WOULD a man *need* confidence to express vulnerability to his supposedly loving woman, whose shooting him in his back is nearly minimized sometimes? Hmm?

    Like

  115. jf12 says:

    We coul start a pool. How many women comments about the “relationship function” of a woman “testing relationship strength by exploiting her partner’s vulnerabilities” until the deflection “Men do it too.”? I call 1 (one). It’s not because AWALT. It’s because of sexual conflict
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_conflict
    which is not the male choice.

    Like

  116. Yoda says:

    “testing relationship strength by exploiting her partner’s vulnerabilities”

    A shit test by any other name smells like crap it does.

    Like

  117. Yoda says:

    He definitely is confident

    Street thug also they are.
    Probably capable he also is.

    Like

  118. Liz says:

    JF12: “Why WOULD a man *need* confidence to express vulnerability to his supposedly loving woman, whose shooting him in his back is nearly minimized sometimes? Hmm?”

    Because they care what the other person thinks, that’s why. It actually doesn’t take any courage at all if you don’t give care and are apathetic. It isn’t easy for me, either, depending on the situation and he sure as shit has never shot me in the back.

    On the flip side of course, it’s far easier to share with a loved one you’ve been with for years than a new relationship person you’re trying to impress. Situational context applies.

    Like

  119. Liz says:

    Yes, Yoda, much like the schoolyard bully, street thugs might be confident too. So are a lot of really really good people who are actually successful in life.

    Like

  120. Liz says:

    Getting rich and fukkin’ fine hoes ain’t a plan… it is the result of a plan.

    Like

  121. Yoda says:

    I often think our species as a whole is becoming too self indulgent to exist

    A post about this write one could.

    Like

  122. Yoda says:

    So are a lot of really really good people who are actually successful in life.

    Fewer and fewer these people are.
    Incentives matter much.

    Like

  123. Liz says:

    “Fewer and fewer these people are.
    Incentives matter much.”

    True. Yet I’ve never met a thug I envied.

    Like

  124. jf12 says:

    His (self) confidence in this context is his not worrying about consequences, which can indeed be specifically because he *doesn’t* care about consequences. In other contexts it’s called outcome independence, as you (generic you) may know.

    Strength is NOT identical with caring. Sorry. Neither is handsomeness.

    Like

  125. jf12 says:

    @Spawny Get, re: rellies

    Do you have rellies who married musician slash artists?

    Like

  126. jf12 says:

    Like I implied at the beginning, we all know (All Humans Are Like That, I.E. Knowing This) that the ONLY reason a man has to be strong to reveal his vulnerabilities to his woman is because he knows beyond any doubt that she will attack him. period.

    Like

  127. molly says:

    Hi Bloom! Thanks. I don’t react to women-bashing, tho. Women deserve to be bashed. Women who speak out against feminism are a tiny minority. The rest are too “entitled” and smug with the bias in their favour. You’re not one of those smug women Bloom.

    I react to people telling me what I think. I don’t mind them saying women think crap. Too many women do think crap.

    This is what hate:

    Men telling me what I think after I’ve said what I think, like “O no you don’t woman, you’re a liar or too childish to know, so listen up while I tell you what you really think”. They dictate what I’m allowed to think. They want to control my thoughts like SJWs.

    Look at Tarn. “She” could not have made it clearer what she thinks about feminism. Yet some men insist she thinks against men, like she’s a liar. I ask those men: Why would she put all that time and effort into a lie? Men, look at my first post (https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2014/12/28/women-throw-the-smp-completely-out-of-whack/). Men, you think I’m lying?

    This is a ‘one’ not ‘you’ comment (per Spawny 11 March, 2015 at 1:04 am)

    Liked by 1 person

  128. jf12 says:

    re: “First, it’s fake and that sort of act can never last and resentment at having to constantly perform a ‘show’ will grow.”

    Yes to growing resentment, no to never lasting. The vast majority of men are trained by women and reinforced by women to strive to be more invulnerable until they die.

    re: “Second, suppression of emotions … will backfire.”

    Only if he has no other outlet. So, if he does have other outlets than you (generic you), one way he can communicate that fact to you that is obvious if for example he’s not bothering to try to be vulnerable with you.

    Like

  129. Spawny Get says:

    Men telling me what I think after I’ve said what I think, like “O no you don’t woman, you’re a liar or too childish to know, so listen up while I tell you what you really think”. They dictate what I’m allowed to think. They want to control my thoughts like SJWs.

    Well, you say that, but really? It’s the fact you have no arms that’s got your goat, I reckon.

    Like

  130. thedeti says:

    @ Molly:

    “CP, “Telling men not to say that, or to tell them to jump through hoops while saying that is counterproductive to your cause.”

    “I never told them to say anything. I asked them, Please don’t tell me what I’m thinking. When I’ve said what I’m thinking, don’t insist that I’m thinking something else.

    “Commenters here have said what they like about women and I agree with them. That’s not the point. From where I’m sitting, telling me what I’m thinking is the same as telling me what to think. I detest that for the reasons I detest SJWs telling us how to think and behave.”
    ______________________________

    Molly, I think the pushback you get on this issue is not so much men telling you what to think, or what you are thinking. What men are really saying here is not so much “Here is what you are thinking” so much as “I don’t believe you.”

    The pushback is because so often, when women come to male spaces like the manosphere to talk about intersexual relationships, what women SAY does not line up AT ALL with what is actually observed in the field that women DO. We can tell that what women say they are thinking, or what they believe, or how they feel, or even what they have done in the past, simply doesn’t line up in any way, shape, manner or form with any reality these men know or have known or have heard of from other men.

    A classic example is women talking about attraction and arousal, and what they find attractive, and what men do that is or is not arousing or attractive. The classic “I just want a nice guy who will treat me right” from a woman whose male repertoire is drawn from prisons, biker bars and fraternity houses. The “looks aren’t important” from a woman who passes over less good looking men to date the better looking men.

    This is why you’re getting pushback. This is why men are telling you that what you say you’re thinking/believing is not what you’re thinking/believing.

    Perhaps a better way to address it is, when a woman makes a claim of what she thinks/believes, is for a disagreeing man to say “I don’t believe you and here’s why”, stating the supporting evidence.

    Like

  131. thedeti says:

    Another set of examples is women saying that they spent their 20s carouseling it up, but they did it only because they were trying to find husbands.

    I don’t believe that. The “I just wanted to find a husband” is a post-facto rationalization to justify her having fun and having sex with sexy men from whom she didn’t want commitment. Every woman I’ve ever known who wanted to get married, got married on her timetable, pretty much when she wanted to. She set out to find a man willing to marry her, found one, and married him. I don’t believe for one second that for a woman, getting married or finding a man willing to marry her is difficult at all.

    Like

  132. jf12 says:

    @Molly, re: first post

    I can’t disagree with the main points, so I will characteristically strive to satisfy by answering the questions in the last paragraph.

    Q. Where does this leave the women who rate at 10 on the scale? Does she too over-rate herself, or does the wackiness stop at her?
    A. She over-rates herself by believing she is rarer than she is.

    Q. There are two sides to the coin after all. On one side is the over-rating of herself. On the other side is the under-rating of men. Does she underrate the men who rate at 10 so much that they are to her no more attractive than a 3?
    A. I actually believe the nonlinear out-of-whackness of women’s ratings of men is partly revealed by women overvaluing Top Men. As you alluded, the threshold of women’s sigmoidal rating curve is probably about a man’s being an 8. Men 7s are pushed down to like 4, but male 9s are elevated to 10s.

    Q. At her level, does a levelling-out occur, and qualities of character transcend the supposedly ubiquitous tingles. Can character itself become the source of the tingles? What effect will this have on the gene base of the tribe/group within which she selects?
    A. Yes, this levelling happens both high and low, as I said: sigmoidal. It is *because* the majority of men are “less than average” in attractiveness that nature made women so able to respond (so well! empirically) to other factors. Dominance, especially, i.e. capacity for brutality.

    Like

  133. jf12 says:

    @deti, re: “I don’t believe that.”

    The amazing thing is that I believe that the *women* believe that. “I was just trying to find one that fits.”

    Like

  134. jf12 says:

    The feewing about their carousel results from the same place as their feewing about their shoes. “Yeah, so I’ve got 27 pairs of others, but I was just wanting onepair that fits. Just one is all I ever really wanted. Whine.”

    Like

  135. jf12 says:

    It’s interesting if you think about it insertioanlly, mutatis mutandis, that “the shoe trying to find the foot that fits” is proverbially ascribed to women’s feet.

    Like

  136. Yoda says:

    . Can character itself become the source of the tingles?

    Strong with the force Deti is.
    Know all he does.
    Future post on character and attraction there will be.

    Like

  137. thedeti says:

    It is as if women expect men to simply accept what is said, without any examination of evidence or experience or supporting fact. It is as if I am expected to take on faith and accept at face value what a woman says about her thoughts or feelings, and I’m not to look at any evidence or facts.

    Men just don’t work that way. We hear what you say, and we then measure it against what we KNOW from facts, experience, evidence, and what other people tell us.

    Like

  138. jf12 says:

    re: SMP whack post

    Another aspect of women overvaluing themselves is the compression of women. Since women 4s think they match up with men 7s, the women 5s through 9s all compete directly for the exact same men, and almost all those men will not settle for just a 9 when he can have the 9 and the 7 and two 6s.

    Like

  139. thedeti says:

    It strikes me that a big reason for men washing up on the manosphere’s shores after getting fucked over by a woman, getting frivorced, getting ass raped in a divorce, and/or failing time and again with women, is precisely this problem:

    A man’s taking on faith and accepting at face value a woman’s representations and statements without examining any evidence or facts, without drawing from experience. A man’s failing to examine and question a woman’s statements when they don’t line up with her conduct. A man hearing a woman saying “this is what I think” and then saying, even to himself, “I don’t believe you and here’s why”.

    Like

  140. jf12 says:

    re: what to think

    The Goldilocks principle that everything has to be just right to experience Flow is severely misguided, arsing from the same dreary mundaneness of “Oh great. Another day wasted in trying to get the world to sing in perfect harmony. Is there no talent any where?”

    In real Flow, it’s all good. It’s all grist for the mill. Your hearing adjusts to the harmony that exists.

    Like

  141. jf12 says:

    arising …

    Like

  142. jf12 says:

    arggh. Besides finger error there is verbal error. Truly, I was thinking “Another day wasted in trying to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.”

    Like

  143. Yoda says:

    Women change their minds they do.
    Much power they have.
    Poor combination this is.

    Like

  144. Yoda says:

    “Change mind” often implies whims and rationaizations it does.
    A man builds a future on shifting sands not.

    Like

  145. jf12 says:

    @Tarnished, re: “It’s so his spouse knows he’s not a robot.”

    Ok, we’re getting somewhere but evidently it needs pushing. Why does she want him to not be a robot? More importantly, does she want him to show her where his buttons are so she can press them, or not?

    Like

  146. thedeti says:

    But, men are told and conditioned to believe women.

    Women routinely assert:

    “I have said it, therefore, it is true, and you should believe me.” “I say this is what I am thinking, therefore, it IS what I am thinking.” “This is how I say I feel, therefore, it is how I feel.”

    Men are constantly told: “Women don’t lie about things like sex, love, attraction, arousal, and interpersonal relationships. After all, women are more in tune with emotions and feelings. We are better at reading social microcues. We are better at “reading” people. Therefore, if we’re talking about intersexual relationships, we know what we’re talking about, we understand it better than men do, and YOU SHOULD BELIEVE US.”

    I think that’s a big part of the huge mess we’re in now. Believing that women always, always tell the truth about what they think and feel; and that women just “know more” about intersexual relationships than men do.

    I don’t believe you. That’s why.

    Liked by 1 person

  147. Yoda says:

    More importantly, does she want him to show her where his buttons are so she can press them, or not?

    Trusting of women you are not.
    Yet women bank on the trust of men they do.

    Like

  148. jf12 says:

    re: “If she’s not crap, she’ll know no-one is perfect. She’ll appreciate his honesty.”

    You say this confidently.

    Let me reword to see if I understand. Not putting thoughts in your head. Women appreciate a man being honest to her about his vulnerabilities because it communicates his degree of trust in her not being crap. She sees her lack of crapness reflected in his willingness to not *have* to be strong with her.

    Sad to say, this is the advice all women give all men, and it never works.

    Like

  149. Yoda says:

    The force between Deti and Yoda strong it is.
    Think same things at same time we do.

    Like

  150. molly says:

    I don’t think what I think, I don’t feel what I feel, because AWALT.

    Like

  151. jf12 says:

    Perhaps Dread can work well here: he reveals his vulnerability with a Big Red Danger Do Not Press Or Else button.

    Like

  152. thedeti says:

    Another thing that I hear Molly saying is “well, maybe women are like that, but I’M not like that.”

    A few thoughts there:

    1. Perhaps YOU are not like that, but enough women ARE like that to make it very possible that you, in fact, ARE like that, despite your protestations to the contrary.

    2. Perhaps you are not like that today. The odds are you will be like that tomorrow.

    3. Perhaps you are not like that at this point. But the possibility exists that you could become like that at any time you wish, on your whim and fancy, and there is not one damn thing any man can do about that.

    4. Perhaps you are not like that, in which case you need to be fully prepared to prove, with facts, evidence and conduct, that you in fact are not like that. The burden of proof is on you to establish that you are not like that. You will need to establish on demand that you are not like that, and you need to do it as many times as it takes for said man to come to the conclusions that you are not like that. You will need to do so with the kind, amount, and character of evidence required by the man/men to whom it is asserted that you are not like that.

    Liked by 1 person

  153. jf12 says:

    This one’s for all you vulnerable robots out there. You know who you are.
    http://reason.com/archives/2015/03/03/the-robotic-world-of-philip-k-dick

    Like

  154. jf12 says:

    re: “Perhaps you are not like that today.”

    Hee hee. One of women’s many buttons, as we know, is the “Stop telling me it’s all due to my hormones!” It’s one of those vulnerabilities that we have to pretend isn’t there.

    Like

  155. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    “I don’t think what I think, I don’t feel what I feel, because AWALT.”

    No. It is “I think what I think, I feel what I feel, and AWALT, but IANLT (I Am Not Like That).”

    Men’s response: “I don’t believe you. Prove it.”

    Like

  156. molly says:

    How can I convince people who declare me a liar (because (AWALT) ?

    Like

  157. jf12 says:

    Women think (should I say that some other way?) “Hmph. Men just want sammich-making sexbots. They don’t want to have to do the internal work to show Goldilocks-level vulnerability so women won’t feel like crap.” whereas any sexbot-inclined man will tell you instead that his motivation springs primarily from trust issues: the buzzword here is mutuality.
    http://reason.com/archives/2015/03/03/sex-love-and-robots/3
    Shorter version: men are much much much more likely to pay good money to treat a sexbot “like a real woman” than to treat a real woman like a sexbot.

    Nerdier version: Asimov’s First Law is vastly more important to technosexuals than the Second Law.

    Like

  158. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    “How can I convince people who declare me a liar (because AWALT)?

    ____________________________

    Perhaps you are not like that, in which case you need to be fully prepared to prove, with facts, evidence and conduct, that you in fact are not like that. The burden of proof is on you to establish that you are not like that. You will need to establish on demand that you are not like that, and you need to do it as many times as it takes for said man to come to the conclusions that you are not like that. You will need to do so with the kind, amount, and character of evidence required by the man/men to whom it is asserted that you are not like that.

    You will need to show it by facts, evidence and conduct, offered over time. And you will need to never, ever, ever, EVER, become Like That. Ever. Not ever.

    Like

  159. molly says:

    TheDeti 11 March, 2015 at 3:50 pm

    You sound like a SJW:

    “1. Perhaps YOU are not a rapist, but enough men ARE like that to make it very possible that you, in fact, ARE a rapist, despite your protestations to the contrary.

    2. Perhaps you are not like that today. The odds are you will be like that, a rapist, tomorrow.

    3. Perhaps you are not like that (a rapist) at this point. But the possibility exists that you could become like that at any time you wish, on your whim and fancy, and there is not one damn thing any woman can do about that.

    4. Perhaps you are not like that, in which case you need to be fully prepared to prove, with facts, evidence and conduct, that you in fact are not a rapist. The burden of proof is on you to establish that you are not like that. You will need to establish on demand that you are not like that, and you need to do it as many times as it takes for said woman to come to the conclusions that you are not like that. You will need to do so with the kind, amount, and character of evidence required by the woman/women to whom it is asserted that you are not like that, a rapist.”

    Like

  160. thedeti says:

    And when you do act Like That, immediately, RIGHT AWAY, repent, and apologize, and resolve not to be Like That again.

    Like

  161. jf12 says:

    re: convincing

    I think I can speak for the many experienced men here in saying: We’re familiar with each woman thinking she’s not as horrible to men as all the other women are, and, especially, with how horrible she knows she could be …

    We’re claiming to be standing on our experience of mountains of years and decades and generations of crap, and youre going to … what? Convince us not all mountains are as high as others? We know that!

    Like

  162. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    Your SJW perversion of my description to you is borne of pure irrational fear of violent rapists around every corner, under every bush, in every office. They are hysterical, unreasonable, irrational and frankly ridiculous.

    By stark contrast, what I said is not at all unreasonable and is borne of pure reason. Most men I know have known a woman who is Like That, whatever “That” is. Most men have been in marriages in which their wives have detonated or nearly detonated their marriages over ridiculous things. Most men have known a woman governed by her feelings who then allows those feelings to destroy everything they touch.

    How many women do you who have been raped? Have “most” women you know been raped? I mean really raped, as in knife or gun wielding man breaking into house or jumping from foliage. How many? Probably at most one or two out of hundreds.

    Your claim that I’m talking like an SJW is silly. You ought be above that. I don’t believe you. Prove it.

    Like

  163. jf12 says:

    @molly re: https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/dont-tell-me-what-to-think/comment-page-1/#comment-13541

    A very valid point. Thing is, when a woman engages a man she truly believes to be a rapist and invites him back to her place for him to show her he’s not such a rapist, this is common women rape-fantasy stuff.

    Like

  164. Yoda says:

    Difference between Deti and SJWs the reality of the world it is.

    Like

  165. jf12 says:

    I Do Believe

    the majority of men have bought into the SJW lie and thus, as betas, feel they must continually prove they aren’t raping.

    the majority of women have never bought into the truth that they are Lucy and they do pull the (American) football away from Charlie Brown.

    Like

  166. thedeti says:

    “Perhaps you are not like that, in which case you need to be fully prepared to prove, with facts, evidence and conduct, that you in fact are not a rapist. The burden of proof is on you to establish that you are not like that. You will need to establish on demand that you are not like that, and you need to do it as many times as it takes for said woman to come to the conclusions that you are not like that. You will need to do so with the kind, amount, and character of evidence required by the woman/women to whom it is asserted that you are not like that, a rapist.”

    Any woman who demands that a man prove he is not a rapist, that he do things to assuage her from irrational baseless fears, that he coddle her ridiculous cowering in corners and watch her rock back and forth sucking her thumb, that he insure her against a nearly nonexistent risk, is undeserving of any man’s time, money, attention and resources.

    Like

  167. thedeti says:

    Actually, the moment a woman acts Like That, he ought immediately jettison her from his life. No second chances, no “prove it”. Just “pack your shit and get out.”

    Like

  168. molly says:

    “Your SJW perversion of my description to you is borne of pure irrational fear of violent rapists around every corner, under every bush, in every office. They are hysterical, unreasonable, irrational and frankly ridiculous.”

    The SWJs’ claim that “All Men Are Like That” is ridiculous. Don’t ask me to justify something that I know is ridiculous. I believe AWALT is ridiculous as well.

    Like

  169. Spawny Get says:

    Molly,
    it took me decades to work it out, but here’s the lesson

    One cannot convince everybody that one is a good person, ever, especially on the internet. All one can do is behave as one thinks is right and live with the fact that not everybody thinks that one is showing one’s true inner values/self

    It sucks, and it sucks for everyone. The saddest examples of those who cannot understand this phenomenon are male feminists and manginas. They are simply blind to the reality that no action that they can ever take will ever cause them to be seen to be as good as a winmmin by the fembot bleedership.

    The men here are right to say that the safest attitude for all men is not to trust that a woman is NAWALT. Some men do believe that NAWALT (to some degree or other). Some men want wife’n’kidz enough that they believe the risk is worth it. best of luck to the.m, hope it works out, some do

    A lot of the guys here have had their lives gutted by the actions of women they have trusted. They have the right to their opinions about trust, they earned them.

    All ‘you’ and those like you can do is live life according to good values and not worry that you will never be able to get every man to trust you.

    Similarly, I have to live with fembots spouting the same tired lies about pay-gap, patriarchy, war on women etc.

    It’s not a perfect world. Learn to roll your eyes and move on, or you will just stress yourself out in a war that you absolutely cannot ever win.

    Like

  170. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    You do understand men’s use of generalizations, don’t you? You do understand why men use generalizations about women, right? Makes it easier to weed through the “bad stuff”. And a man needs to know and understand the general principles, the things that are generally true about women, before he can deal with a woman individually. You understand all that, right? And you do understand that women, ALL women, have inborn, hardwired features, right? Things like hypergamy, feelings over facts, attraction to confidence/dominance/masculine looks? I mean, you get that, right?

    Like

  171. jf12 says:

    re: “The SWJs’ claim that “All Men Are Like That” is ridiculous. Don’t ask me to justify something that I know is ridiculous. I believe AWALT is ridiculous as well.”

    Ok, but “ridiculous as well” is a false equivalency quantitatively. It’s a form of apex fallacy. The men-who-hurt-women are small single digit minority percentage, but the women-who-are-crap are huge double digit majority percntage.

    Like

  172. thedeti says:

    For example: All men want to fuck good looking women, as many as possible, as often as possible, with as little investment as possible. ALL MEN ARE LIKE THAT . I am like that. Spawny is like that. jf12 is like that. Yoda is like that. Christian men are like that. A Protestant pastor is like that. A celibate Catholic hetero-oriented priest is like that. WE ARE ALL LIKE THAT.

    There are certain things that are true of women. All women want to get the best one man she can get. If any time she feels she is not with “the best she can get” or it appears she can do better, she will try to, or be sorely, severely tempted to. ALL OF YOU ARE LIKE THAT. ALL OF YOU. without exception.

    Can you at least accept that?

    Like

  173. jf12 says:

    The lives of SJW males makes it clear that women don’t actually want men who think all women’s crap is magically delicious. But evidently a woman wants a man who thinks her crap is magically different from all other womens’ crap.

    Like

  174. thedeti says:

    “But evidently a woman wants a man who thinks her crap is magically different from all other womens’ crap.”

    Maybe. I would hope she can settle for “he is willing to put up with my crap because I bring value to him and his life. Because of that, I will do my level best to deal with my own crap instead of shoveling it onto him and making him deal with it. When I do shovel my crap onto him, I will accept his refusal of it I will accept his correcting me and calling me out on it, I will stop doing it, and I will try not to do it again.”

    Because that is pretty much how it works in the real world.

    Like

  175. jf12 says:

    re: “Most men have known a woman governed by her feelings who then allows those feelings to destroy everything they touch.”

    Ooh, the inverse Midas touch. All the gold they touch turns to crap.

    Actually, think a lot of women ARE aware they are this way, and they want a man to be strong enough to rescue her from her own clutches. But they can’t admit it, obviously.

    Like

  176. jf12 says:

    re: “I will accept his correcting me”

    LOL. I do think this is almost as common as the rape fantasy: the fantasy that “Some day, the One will come by whom I will like to be corrected because he will be just so awesome an’ all.”

    Like

  177. jf12 says:

    “But I pull the (American) football away better than the other girls, don’t I? Tell me it’s because I have such beautiful eyes.”

    Like

  178. molly says:

    With respect, I’m not trying to convince anyone I’m a good person. I’m sticking to my point that no-one can tell me what I think.

    TheDeti:
    No man can take away my knowledge of myself. No woman can satisfy you NAWALT.

    The same goes for all women who comment on this blog. We are liars until we prove our truthfulness – a huge ask. So as liars we comment on this blog. As lies, our comments are worse than useless, they are harmful.

    Faced with AWALT-until-proven-innocent, women should leave this site. We should pack up our lies and leave. Is this what you want?

    Like

  179. jf12 says:

    re: “Is this what you want?”

    We wanna kick the football. We don’t want to expect it will be pulled away.

    Like

  180. molly says:

    No man can take away my knowledge of myself. I know I fit NAWALT. I don’t have to prove my knowledge of myself to anybody.

    I can only prove my truthfulness by never telling a lie. When I’m on my death bed some man will insist, “But how do I know you won’t tell a lie tomorrow?”

    My mother fits NAWALT. She home-educated me most of my primary schooling, and taught me feminism is bad, group-think is bad, all bigotry is bad. Like her sisters she married in her teens and stays married. She did not change. Her sisters didn’t change. Nor their mother. Nor their grandmother. None of them changed. I follow their example. No man can tell me I won’t.

    I know myself. My life, me, Molly, proves AWALT is wrong. I can never prove that to you, yet I know it to be true. No man can take that knowledge away from me here, or anywhere.

    Like

  181. thedeti says:

    Molly: Can you accept men’s need for generalization? If so, you’ll understand where men are coming from.

    Like

  182. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    You are arguing from your personal conduct. Everyone else is arguing from female nature. You have a natural state of being. You can imperfectly overcome and master that nature. Most women do not. A few can. Even fewer actually do.

    Like

  183. jf12 says:

    re: “Like her sisters she married in her teens and stays married.”

    That was a fine example for you. So do you think it is a good strategy to advise men to avoid women except one of the rare women who follow that sort of fine example in their lives? I’m asking what you think, seriously. Or would men be far better served by instead advising women to try to make those rare women much less rare, which is what all we men think?

    Like

  184. missattempts says:

    Does the man called “Cill” post here anymore? I wanted to ask him why he’s
    so bothered by women when he has his music and food to put in his belly.
    He can SING the prases of women, but he doesn’t have to live with women.
    What’s better then that?
    Tarn, don’t but too much stock in your FWB. Listen to “The Way Of Love” by
    Cher.

    Like

  185. Liz says:

    Jf12: “Yes to growing resentment, no to never lasting. The vast majority of men are trained by women and reinforced by women to strive to be more invulnerable until they die.”

    Ah, so the key is to repress emotions and live in growing and lasting resentment until the end of things. Well, I only have one life, and as far as I know so does everyone else. Think I’d pass on that if that were the only option.
    I know it isn’t, because it isn’t the way we live but…good luck with that.

    Like

  186. jf12 says:

    re: AWALT iave Known And Loved (AWALTiHKAL)

    The androsphere is (almost definitionally) much more full of men telling other men, not women, how to think and behave, and specifically advising the majority (80%) of men to try to be less beta. Readers of prior comments know that I consistently define alphas and betas the same as all other primates: alphas get (enthusiastic!) servicing by females (bananas grooming, sex) and don’t have to service females in return, but betas have to service females (sammiches, backscratches, sex only when she wants it) and don’t get servicing, enthusiastic or not, by females in return..

    Tell me what you think quantitatively is the utility of AWALT vs AMALT in your neck of the woods. How much more likely is it where you live, e.g. in your house, to hear a woman say “You didn’t make my sammich quite as yummy as you could have, moron. You didn’t scratch my back quite as Goldilocksily as you could have, moron.” as compared to hearing a woman say “I hope I made your sammich as yummy as you wanted, dear. I hope my backscratches are sufficiently pleasing to you, my lord.” Is it as high as 80/20? More like 99/1, like in these parts?

    Like

  187. Spawny Get says:

    “Does the man called “Cill” post here anymore?”
    I hope so, I looked into it legally and it appears that he’s allowed to be busy elsewhere from time to time.

    Like

  188. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Guys,
    You do realize that you’re asking Molly to prove a negative? That’s the burden of the innocent. To add to that, Molly isn’t even twnty yet. She hasn’t been fully tested by life.
    As for her character, I’ll take her big cousin Cill’s word on it.
    Another point, she has compassion. She has asked me to post at 4pm her time so she knows that I am all right.

    Molly,
    I don’t think that you’ll make any progress here in defending yourself. Where you will make progress is in sticking around, demonstrating longeviety.
    Pleas, stick around. It’s nice to have a sweet girl in the mix to to maintain a little faith in NAWALT.

    Liked by 2 people

  189. Yoda says:

    Ok, but “ridiculous as well” is a false equivalency quantitatively. It’s a form of apex fallacy. The men-who-hurt-women are small single digit minority percentage, but the women-who-are-crap are huge double digit majority percntage.

    Same trick used with moral equivalence arguments this would be.

    https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2015/03/06/life-is-a-giant-marshmallow-test/#comment-12988

    Like

  190. Yoda says:

    The world complex it is.
    Generalizations useful they can be.
    But exceptions to the generalizations one must know.

    Like

  191. jf12 says:

    re: exceptions

    Accounting for Anomalies is what would keep the Architect up at night, if there ever were any nights and if he did ever sleep besides.

    But in general the cataloguing of exceptions turns out to prove the rule: there are few enough exceptional objects.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_finite_simple_groups

    Like

  192. thedeti says:

    “I know myself. My life, me, Molly, proves AWALT is wrong. I can never prove that to you, yet I know it to be true. No man can take that knowledge away from me here, or anywhere.”

    Fair enough. But a successful relationship with a masculine, dominant, confident man will require that you establish that HE knows this about you, not just that YOU know it about you. You will be called on to prove yourself to him. And you best be able and willing to do so.

    Or, perhaps a successful relationship with a confident, dominant, masculine man is not important to you. If that’s the case, then this is irrelevant. Get a relationship with a weak, timid, effeminate man, run it into the ground until you cannot stand him anymore, then end it. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Again: I don’t see this as anyone telling you what to think or how you can think. I see this as responding to the claims you’re making with “I don’t believe you. Prove it.”

    Like

  193. Spawny Get says:

    Of course no court would see merit in allowing a woman to claim a few million from her ex-hubby who made every penny YEARS after the divorce…right?

    Oh yes indeedy, a new post is up. One that is guaranteed to raise your ire

    Like

  194. molly says:

    The Deti, you haven’t answered my question 11 March, 2015 at 5:01 pm:

    No man can take away my knowledge of myself. No woman can satisfy you NAWALT.

    The same goes for all women who comment on this blog. We are liars until we prove our truthfulness – a huge ask. So as liars we comment on this blog. As lies, our comments are worse than useless, they are harmful.

    Faced with AWALT-until-proven-innocent, women should leave this site. We should pack up our lies and leave. Is this what you want?

    If you think I’m a liar unless and until I prove I’m not, this discussion is over. I don’t expect you to have a serious discussion with someone you think is a liar.

    Like

  195. molly says:

    TheDeti,
    Faced with AWALT-until-proven-innocent, women should leave this site. We should pack up our lies and leave. Is this what you want?

    Like

  196. jf12 says:

    re: “the key is to repress emotions and live in growing and lasting resentment until the end of things”

    No. I think the key to getting Charlie Brown to actually kick the ball is for him to actually experience Lucy not pulling it away.

    Like

  197. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    Reread my comment at March 11, 4:49 pm. Contains everything you need to know.

    And – My opinion isn’t really relevant. You need to prove yourself to your future husband, not to me. Best you determine how to do that, rather than dialogue with me.

    Like

  198. molly says:

    TheDeti,
    I don’t need advice re proving myself to a man. Men want me for a wife already. They see what you don’t, as you’re not here. They see what I outlined 11 March, 2015 at 5:43 pm
    (https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/dont-tell-me-what-to-think/comment-page-1/#comment-13562)
    … and I’m already proven to them.

    You haven’t answered my question “We should pack up our lies and leave. Is this what you want?”

    Nobody can force you to answer it directly and honestly. If you don’t, you know what I’m going to think: You hang onto AWALT. I know I’m not one. Discussion is fruitless.

    Like

  199. Yoda says:

    Talking past each other people are.
    Unfortunate this is.

    Liked by 1 person

  200. jf12 says:

    And Now for Something Completely Similar.
    Can we say Most All Women Are Like That, or is Most not sufficiently qualifying All therein?
    “Most women would be turned off if a man was too up front about it, but the man still has a responsibility to be completely honest about his expectations, too.”
    http://thoughtcatalog.com/chocolate-vent/2015/03/when-should-a-man-tell-a-woman-hes-expecting-sex/

    A barely discernable reshaping of meaning later, “A RealMan™ has a responsibility to JustBeHimself™ so we can tell if we are turned on or not without thinking he might be misleading us about how turned on we should be.”

    Like

  201. jf12 says:

    “I do want men to be honest, really, but not SO g-d- honest, and not so g-d- often. Yes, go ahead and ASK me, but ask me when you think I’ll say yes, wouldja, so I won’t feel so crappy about turning you down so much.”

    Like

  202. thedeti says:

    Molly:

    If you’re already “proven” to other men, and they want to marry you, then why are you here? Why is it so important for you to convince other men — men you will never even so much as give a second look to, much less marry — of your worthiness and specialness? Get thee to an altar posthaste so one of those men can wife you up.

    And yes — when it comes to core female nature such as hypergamy and emotionality and other hardwired matters, yes, AWALT.

    Like

  203. jf12 says:

    re: whatsoever to think.
    “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”

    I confess to dwelling on the negative too much, and yet rarely is the question asked. Is our chidlren lerning? Specifically, are girls taught enough that they aren’t naturally true & honest & etc the way that boys are taught that they are made out of boogers and farts?

    Like

  204. jf12 says:

    re: what to think

    Not yanking your chain, just being honest. From now on, what you should think whenever you hear about Goldilocks is ‘the unfortunate tendency of some humans, especially girls, to think they’re entitled to someone else arranging things so that they are “just right””.

    Like

  205. molly says:

    “Why is it so important for you to convince other men — men you will never even so much as give a second look to, much less marry — of your worthiness and specialness?”

    You’re shifting the goalposts again. My comment 11 March, 2015 at 5:43 pm explained my knowledge of myself. Not convincing other men of my worthiness and specialness!

    If you can’t give me a straight answer to this question, I’m out:

    No man can take away my knowledge of myself. No woman can satisfy you NAWALT.

    The same goes for all women who comment on this blog. We are liars until we prove our truthfulness – a huge ask. So as liars we comment on this blog. As lies, our comments are worse than useless, they are harmful.

    Faced with AWALT-until-proven-innocent, women should leave this site. We should pack up our lies and leave. Is this what you want?

    Like

  206. Tarnished says:

    “Tarn, don’t put too much stock in your FwB.”

    Sorry, Missattempts/Lon, but I’m unsure of why I shouldn’t…and that’s presuming I do, since this stock could mean anything. More clarification is needed before I could say whether I “put stock” in him or not.

    The song you suggested above is in regards to a woman who isn’t loved back by the object of her affections…This doesn’t describe my situation at all. My lover has been such for nearly 9 years at this point. We treat each other as people first and foremost, and gender roles are very rarely adhered to.

    From our previous conversations it sounds like this is an issue for you. Often you’d say that if he *truly* cared for me, he’d sing my praises…pedestalize me…be chivalrous towards me…and just generally treat me like a princess. As before, I’ll remind you that I do not think of myself as a woman and have no need or desire to be treated as one. I do not want or need him to do the overly romanticized things you describe.

    Much as I know they are very sweet and certainly are actions that some women may very well love, they aren’t something that should be in my life, regardless of my FwB’s presence.

    Like

  207. Spawny Get says:

    I vote you stay, for whatever that’s worth.

    Liked by 3 people

  208. Tarnished says:

    Molly,

    Spawny said this further up, but it’s worth repeating:

    There’s no way to “prove” oneself online. The guys here will never know anyone else here in real life. I know I am how I say…my friend with benefits knows…my friends know…my family knows…my customers and random people I interact with know. That’s what truly matters, the people who benefit from knowing you in the real world.

    Just something to consider.

    Liked by 2 people

  209. Spawny Get says:

    See, I’d like to know where better to get the inside info like this, if we treat every woman (or Tarn) as an enemy
    https://tarnishedsophia.wordpress.com/2014/02/18/on-being-an-unintentional-spy/

    This is confirmation from the unicorn’s mouth of everything you ever suspected.

    Like

  210. jf12 says:

    re: unintentional spy

    Using my personal experiences let me first disagree with “I can honestly say that when women are “alone” aka without any men in earshot, they act entirely different, or at least talk about things that I’d personally consider to be very private matters.” But then I too have chalked up women’s lack of reticence with me about things going into them and/or coming out of them to be due to them treating me like a girl. For a long while I was fooled into believing this was a good thing.

    Like

  211. Poseidon says:

    When I was a kid growing up in Brooklyn my dad would sometimes take me to Yankee games. The excitement of the games would stimulate my appetite. Fortunately in that venue there were folks who walked around the stands selling stuff like cotton candy, roasted nuts, kosher hot dogs. With this venue, on a stimulative thread such as this, there is no kosher hot dog vendor. Perhaps someday the technology will advance such that bloggers will be able to offer food items. Tarn’s unicorn icon is looking quite yummy. Anybody ever sampled barbequed unicorn?

    Like

  212. Spawny Get says:

    JF, the things one learns years after they’d have been most useful…

    Like

  213. jf12 says:

    @Spawny Get, re: the things one learns.

    Oh yes. In a way, though, I’m kind of glad I was too dense to realize how universally failing a sexual strategy that my being nice was, and how universally victorious my being dominant would have been. I’d have been absolutely insufferably narcissistic, I mean even more than usual.

    In my personal experience and observation of others, right at puberty universally girls went insane and started treating nice boys poorly, at best treating them like ugly girls who intrude on their boyfriends’ time “Hey, you, I want him to take me to a party so you better not ask him to play Call Of Duty with you tonight!” And universally girls denied doing so, claiming that the reason they turn down nice boys so often is because the nice boys never ask … and then universally the girls get mad for pointing out that’s crazy talk.

    Like

  214. molly says:

    I’m out. I’ll leave my gmail for Cill to use if he wants it. I won’t have any further use for it.

    I thoroughly enjoyed my time here and learned a lot. Please look out for Fuzzie.

    Cill hasn’t been following this BTW, except read a couple of the earlier comments. I’ve asked him not to look at it. He’ll be back here midday NZ time.

    Go well.

    Like

  215. Spawny Get says:

    Have a nice afternoon and sleep on it. It is your decision to make and, I hope, unmake.

    Like

  216. jf12 says:

    It’s easy to understand why women wouldn’t like to hear a lot of stories from men whom women didn’t like. “Here we go again, just like all the other unwanted men. (All Unwanted Men Are Like That) How about instead of you telling me about all the AWALT that you’ve encountered, you can tell me about those times when women DID like you. Make something up if you have to; it’ll make me feel better. Better yet, where are all the men whom women DO treat well? Where are their stories hiding? There can’t be that few. I know I’ve treated a lot of nice men, I mean some, I mean there must have been some …”

    Like

  217. Cill says:

    Jesus jf12 would you shut up.

    Liked by 1 person

  218. Spawny Get says:

    I know more than I can say. I know Molly has been going seriously out of her way to not be like that.

    Like

  219. SFC Ton says:

    This has gotten to the tldr read point so skip whatever I write that has been said before

    If the man o sphere moderates itself to be woman friendly it becomes not merely worthless and of no use but purple pill and destructive

    But all women are like that to some level. Once a day, once a year, once a lifetime. Just like all men are like that at some level and and at various times. But because all women are like th a doesn’t make them bad or evil etc just makes them women.

    I think a good woman knows she is like that/ can be like that and take steps to ensure she doesn’t act out. Good Men do the same. A woman who thinks she could never do xyz/ thinks she is above that/ better then that won’t guard herself from those actions and is more likely to do xyz.

    I would say the making this about one individual makes that individual exactly like that (sop….whatever the hell that fancy word for being sel absorbed is) and perhaps has a good deal of attention seeking/ validation drive.

    Like

  220. Cill says:

    Now I’m seriously wondering why I should hang around here myself.

    Like

  221. Spawny Get says:

    When I was nineteen, if someone kept telling me what I thought…I’d probably be pissed too. The following decades taught me to be more relaxed about what other people thought.

    Liked by 3 people

  222. Tarnished says:

    Cill,

    Because you have valuable information from your life experiences that people will actually listen to. I’ve seen how many views your posts usually get…men want to know what you know.

    Also, because some of us care about you.

    Liked by 2 people

  223. Tarnished says:

    “The following decades taught me to be more relaxed about what other people thought.”

    Hence why I’ve simultaneously cut down on my time in the manosphere at large, and my go-to response has gone from “I’ll try to prove I am what I say I am” to “cool story, bro”. It used to matter to me that people in the manosphere knew I was Y instead of Z…but after so many years it’s become clear that nothing can ever be evidence enough. Cill and Spawny, we have had very honest conversations and I trust both of you like I do my real life friends. Others will never be at that level. It is how it is.

    I for one am not leaving, but nor will I be particularly keen on trying to make sure others here know I’m NLT. I know who and what I am, that’s good enough.

    Liked by 2 people

  224. Yoda says:

    Cooling off period a good thing it might be.
    Time a friend it can be.

    Liked by 2 people

  225. Yoda says:

    “The following decades taught me to be more relaxed about what other people thought.”

    Worthy of Yoda’s wisdom this would be.

    Like

  226. Spawny Get says:

    Being realistic, Tarn, that’s the best any of us can do.

    Like

  227. Yoda says:

    the things one learns years after they’d have been most useful…

    More “Yoda worthy wisdom” this is.

    Like

  228. Spawny Get says:

    High praise that is, Yoda

    Like

  229. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    Please don’t go. I may be being selfish here but, I have enough to be sad about.
    Where else can you go and be greeted with
    🌯 🌯 🌯 🐻 🙄 ?

    Who else will make burritos for me?

    Like

  230. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    I’m reminded of My Cousin Vinny:

    “But you want us to throw out the whole concept of jurisprudence because you find yourself in the unique position of having a client who says he didn’t do it.”

    Note that the client in this case really didn’t do it. Which is why I said to the Unicorns earlier, “Good luck to you,” and meant it. But those Unicorns need to realize that the only difference between them and all the other NAWALTs is follow though. Every gold digger and SIW looking to get hitched is saying exactly what you’re saying, and doing exactly what you’re doing. There’s no brand on their forehead, nor on yours. And there are a hell of a lot more of them than you, to the point that men (myself included) have no real life experience in dealing with Unicorns. We’ve only had the pleasure of dealing with NAWALTs that turned out to be like that after all.

    For what it’s worth, I’d like to see Cill and Molly hang around, too.

    Liked by 2 people

  231. Tarnished says:

    “Every gold digger and SIW looking to get hitched is saying exactly what you’re saying, and doing exactly what you’re doing.”

    Well, some of us aren’t looking for hitching or cohabitation of any kind. 😉 But yes, you have a valid point. Most women want to get married and will do whatever it takes to make themselves seem “worth it”. It’s precisely this reason I wholeheartedly support MGTOW. Marriage is not male-friendly here, and shouldn’t be something most men consider a good deal. There’s no horse in this race for me.

    Like

  232. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Damnit!!! I like Molly!

    The only crying bears to be found that were suitable were cubs salling for Mama Bear.

    Like

  233. Cill says:

    I just talked to Molly. She won’t be back here. She didn’t leave for reasons some of you are already starting to expound. She left for the exact reasons she said she would. Look at her post, look at her comments. She kept to the point throughout. I’ve known her all her life. You’d not get a finer person, male or female, than Molly. She’s gone. Let this be the end of it. Please, no more post-mortems.

    Liked by 1 person

  234. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    And good luck to you, Tarn.

    Liked by 1 person

  235. Spawny Get says:

    I like that film very much.

    The thing is, I thought we were having red pill discussions. I liked the friendly tone. I thought that the women were being pretty good at not taking pretty much anything personally. I didn’t see men having to make much effort to rub along. I liked the atmosphere and its not like there aren’t plenty of alternative sites to slag every single woman off if that’s really how you feel.

    CP just made another comment that I strongly agree with. And he did it without all but guaranteeing pissing off any woman with any sense of pride. Is it that hard to do?

    Liked by 2 people

  236. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Yes, it’s hard to do, Spawny. I just make it look easy.

    Liked by 2 people

  237. Tarnished says:

    CP,
    Right back at you.

    Cill,
    Whatever you want, my friend.

    Spawny,
    Sometimes it is, or at least it appears to be. I tend to think it’s a defense mechanism of sorts for men…but that can be discussed elsewhere. I’d like to abide by Cill’s request if it’s all the same to you. Unfortunately I agree with Yoda that there was too much of the “talking past each other” going on. More’s the pity. 😰

    Liked by 2 people

  238. theasdgamer says:

    I kept quiet because the women are too emotional about this topic; it’s just not something that reason can be used to persuade them. They pretty much proved the opposite of Molly’s post.

    [SG – male or female, everyone one gets to be pissed off. I’m pissed off now because of an unnecessary row on my blog, and then you stir it up worse. Wtf for? Am i, due to my penis privilege allowed to be passed off, or am i too emotional? Cut it out.]

    In the manosphere, NAWALT is a starting, unspoken assumption which the fembots all accuse the manospherians of failing to state. Manospherian posts have examined this trend. So, Molly speaks like all the fembots and sounds like them on this topic.

    That is my one contribution to this thread, other than to add my agreement to what Ton and jf12 have said.

    [SG – nope, not letting you pour petrol on this] I note that Liz and Tarn don’t do that. Props to them.

    Liked by 1 person

  239. Spawny Get says:

    Gamer,at some point everybody gets pissed off when repeatedly told what they think, when they don’t think ‘that’.

    I don’t find it very helpful of you to make comments like that last one.

    The other two have ten more years of experience of being shit talked about.

    Please ask me to remove the shit talking.

    [SG – don’t worry, I did it. Stop shitting on my blog. I liked the tone just as it was. I’ve cooled things down for you in the past BTW. It’s not about sex.]

    Like

  240. Farm Boy says:

    Women can be great people. My Mom and sister are great examples. One of my goals is to try to convince more women to be like them.

    Liked by 2 people

  241. Farm Boy says:

    And to show them how.

    Liked by 2 people

  242. blurkel says:

    Hi all

    I’ve been busy with vehicle repairs and not able to stay with the flow. Due to the lack of a necessary tool, I have a short break, and will now chime in despite being VERY late to this party.

    I was once told about a man who had done something so wonderful that God decided to reward him directly. “Tell me what to give you,” said the divine.

    “I’d like a bridge from California to Hawaii so I don’t have to fly there.” said the rewardee.

    “That’s a mighty big order, my son! Is there something else I can give you as your reward?”

    “Well, your mightiness, I’d sure like to understand who women think.”

    The deity was struck dumb for a moment. Recovering, he replied “Would you like that bridge to be two lanes or four?”

    I’ll be under the shade tree all week. Try the veal, and remember to tip your servers.

    PS: my email server is being moved, so any notifications of your comments might bounce back as undeliverable. This is a temporary condition and will be resoved by early next week.

    Liked by 1 person

  243. thedeti says:

    Well hell, spawny. I feel badly. I truly do. I was trying to illustrate a point or two. Now we have hard feelings.

    [SG – I don’t believe that we disagree about much of substance. While out and about I take particular note of your comments. There’s no hard feelings here. I did comment later vVv see below]

    Like

  244. I wish I had been here earlier, cill if you think it will help please pass this along… At age 43 I can see AWALT, or have the *potential* to be. Including me. It is a choice, just as a man can choose commitment and monogamy even if every once in awhile a gal catches his eye and he wonders, “what if…” I know it may seem Deti is picking on you and jf12 is being vexing for sure, but I have “known” these two for well over a year and I would say they are trying to make a point in general, not attack you personally. Deti made me have a melt down early on when he used a similar technique to show me my biggest player blind spot, declarations of “try wuv” these guys all saw it go down, complete with me chucking virtual dishes at pretty much everyone but fuzzie! Deti did me a favor that day, my reaction to his words revealed something to myself that helped me grow and give up a “pretty little lie” that had been being used against me by people who didnt luv me, they just used the words to manipulate. It’s hard to explain and it’s all there on j4g somewhere but who knows which post. Please don’t take it so personal, maybe seeing AWALT (or could be w/o self control and knowing better) is something that will help you in your quest to nblt. If that makes sense? I am glad you don’t want to be a woman like that, good girl! You are way ahead to know this now at such a young age. Hugs and hope to see you back around. That or I will have to come to new Zealand, to make sure you are NLT myself! 🙂 peace. (I’d have to stop in and have a word with the ppp while I was there as well! Poor dears are totally lost!)

    Liked by 1 person

  245. My last post was for cill to pass along to Molly. I hope with a few days to think on it she will see it wasn’t about her personally. Deti if I am wrong there, correct me, but I don’t think you meant Molly specifically. Yes?

    Like

  246. molly says:

    Fuzzie are you there? 🐻

    Liked by 1 person

  247. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    It’s 11pm local, so it’s 4pm your time. I am a sad bear and much sadder than I thought I would be.

    Like

  248. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    I must have been composing my last comment as you posted yours.
    I am here.

    Liked by 1 person

  249. molly says:

    Fuzzie 🐻 I won’t be visiting any more. You know how to email me tho.

    I’d like you to keep in touch by email Fuzzie, tho you don’t have to.

    Here’s my last treat on this blog:

    🍩 🍕 🍗 🍟 🍞 🍢 🍜 🍛 🍝 🍥 🍨 🍫 🍮 🍬

    🌯 🌯 🌯 🌯 🌯 🌯
    🐻 🙄

    UR a nice person Fuzzie Bear. ❤

    Like

  250. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    I don’t know if I have your address but, Cill could give it to me. I feel awful about all this. *sniff*
    Here’s mine for you
    🌯 🌯 🌯 🐻 🙄

    Like

  251. molly says:

    Fuzzie I’d like to know each day ur okay, by email same time as before.

    Like

  252. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Molly,
    I just sent you an email as atest to a gmail address. Are you likely to get it?

    Like

  253. molly says:

    Yes loud and clear Fuzzie! You’ve got one from me by now. Check it out! 🙂
    email rules 😀

    Like

  254. Sumo says:

    Molls, if you chance to read this, just remember what The Mighty Sumo says about other people’s opinions – “who gives a flying fuck?”

    All that means is that I care about things that I think are important. Other folks are welcome to their own views, but it don’t mean shit to me unless I decide that it does.

    Liked by 2 people

  255. Cill says:

    Sumo, some people not worth a flying fuck never going to get it. Worst shit don’t sink.

    Weather warning here: worse than Cyclone Bola of 1988, bearing right down on my pad. Pray for me, bro.

    Liked by 1 person

  256. Liz says:

    Oh no! Hope everything turned out okay and your home is still standing, Cill. 😦
    I’ll miss you and your positive energy, Molly. Your rainbow-furby ways lighten up the room. But I understand.
    Take care.

    Liked by 2 people

  257. Spawny Get says:

    Looks like I failed to hit the commit on my final comment last night. Okay, from scratch then

    I want a man-centric blog. I want to get the red-pill message out to Men, Boys and (and I do think they exist, though not in high numbers) the Women with enough grit to hear what’s said. If you don’t share my belief that such women can become red-pill then…fine. At the end of the day everyone gets to believe what they want, especially here because on the internet there is no ultimate coercion anyway. I would point out that some of the women here are raising kids or will raise kids. The more such women understand the male point of view (even if they don’t totally sign up) the better for the kids.

    I don’t think that it takes much effort to put the points across in a reasonable, if pointed, tone. CP has done it a few times over the last few days, Farm Boy manages it in post after post. Cill, having lost two beloved Uncles quite recently does it too. They aren’t alone here.

    And NO, this place is not going to become whatever you call what that mhra site has become. Any concern trolls coming for ‘improvements’ beyond what the tone was a couple of weeks ago can go piss up a rope.

    And Deti? I’m not interested in grudges or continued hard feelings. None of this is particularly aimed your way, or anyone else’s way. I’m busy and haven’t been policing the comments in detail. All I saw was enough to know why Molly was steamed, because I would have been if people kept telling me what I thought. At my current age I see taking that bait as an attempt to troll me and I refuse it, stonewall it. When I was nineteen? probably would have been pissed too. Pretty sure that Molly did better handling it (less swearing for a start) than I would have done. I didn’t see Molly as asking for more than being treated as a young man of the same age – and that I do believe is perfectly reasonable (In fact, I insist that it is).

    I’ve seen feminine men, including straight ones. Is it so hard to imagine that there are masculine women. or at least women that do have the old style masculine values? American churches, or so I’ve heard, used to be full of them. Maybe that’s a post for someone with a religious bent to do something Dalrock-esque? I don’t believe, but I do see many good folk getting good things from Christianity and that’s good enough for me. I’m not signing up, but I don’t believe I’m your enemy. We have enough enemies in common to be addressing.

    I hope you stick around, Molly. But I won’t promise anything more than the tone a few weeks ago. I don’t believe that you need ‘better’ than that.

    Liked by 1 person

  258. theasdgamer says:

    [SG – male or female, everyone one gets to be pissed off.]

    Not the issue. The issue is whether women get deferential treatment or are expected to discuss issues rationally no matter whether they are pissed or not.

    I’m pissed off now because of an unnecessary row on my blog

    And you continue to discuss things rationally….kind of my point, isn’t it? Unnecessary? I think not. Anyway, it looked like Molly was gone, so I figured that she wouldn’t see my comments. Didn’t figure that I was pouring petrol on.

    Narcissism is also an issue. I have tendencies that way that I battle and I have a daughter who’s a narcissist. She burns bridges constantly. Women have more of a problem with narcissism, generally. The point has been made in the manosphere that women like to make their point, then close the discussion. (I’m not going to say NAWALT because you feminine lot should understand that as assumed.) Narcissists end the discussion and burn bridges.

    I question whether we can truly have Red Pill discussions as long as women get deferential treatment. Perhaps you see that as showing common politeness, but I think that politeness inhibits truth-telling when it involves women and Red Pill discussions. RedPillGirl seconds my view on that, I think. I don’t seek to unnecessarily pour petrol on a discussion, but I see heat as part of the process of truth-telling.

    Like

  259. Tarnished says:

    Asdgamer,

    One can disagree in a civil manner. Men do it all the time, and women some of the time. That’s all that is/was being asked for.

    It’s alright to say to each other “Hey, my experiences are different in regards to relationships, but I understand where you’re coming from. Let’s agree to disagree and continue on the conversation with generalities instead of personal anecodotes.”
    It would be very easy to do this, and wouldn’t invalidate anything.

    Liked by 2 people

  260. theasdgamer says:

    @ liz

    like now, molto contenta, maybe some women need more problems and that’s why they bitch?

    I think that strikeout>some most women are addicted to drama. See my blog post about relationships.

    Like

  261. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    I haven’t seen anything here that I think is uncivil. If someone told me that they knew what I was thinking I would simply laugh. My way of thinking is quite difficult to predict, being highly creative though capable of analysis as well.

    Like

  262. Spawny Get says:

    [SG – male or female, everyone one gets to be pissed off.]

    Not the issue. The issue is whether women get deferential treatment or are expected to discuss issues rationally no matter whether they are pissed or not.

    I’m pissed off now because of an unnecessary row on my blog

    And you continue to discuss things rationally….kind of my point, isn’t it? Unnecessary? I think not. Anyway, it looked like Molly was gone, so I figured that she wouldn’t see my comments. Didn’t figure that I was pouring petrol on.

    You see it as fundamentally about sex, I believe that it was far more about age. But I know more about her actions IRL that I’m not sharing, so we’re just going to have to disagree on that. I thought that she had the right to be pissed at people telling her what she was really like…so I posted her material. The point being made could just as well be made by a guy being told what he thought all the time, despite having made reasoned statements about what he thought.

    Narcissism is also an issue. I have tendencies that way that I battle and I have a daughter who’s a narcissist. She burns bridges constantly. Women have more of a problem with narcissism, generally.

    I think that’s a fair comment. Some might call it solipsism, but whatever you call it, I think your point is fair.

    The point has been made in the manosphere that women like to make their point, then close the discussion. (I’m not going to say NAWALT because you feminine lot should understand that as assumed.) Narcissists end the discussion and burn bridges.

    She made what I felt was a reasonable point, got some unfair blowback (not all the comments by any means) and realised that continuing argument was pointless because too much of the commentary was just talking past each other. She made a rather mature decision at that point to walk away. Showed maturity in that IMHO.

    I question whether we can truly have Red Pill discussions as long as women get deferential treatment. Perhaps you see that as showing common politeness, but I think that politeness inhibits truth-telling when it involves women and Red Pill discussions. RedPillGirl seconds my view on that, I think. I don’t seek to unnecessarily pour petrol on a discussion, but I see heat as part of the process of truth-telling.

    I don’t think I’m looking for deferential treatment. I don’t think that she has. None of the women here have appealed to me for protection, or tone policing. That’s why I’m okay with sticking up for them when the treatment is unfair. Not, however, at the price of muting the discussion. At least that’s my aim.

    I want a friendly tone, I want a campfire discussion, not a spit-and-sawdust drinking pit chest poking type one. It’s not like there aren’t sites like that, is it?

    “but I think that politeness inhibits truth-telling when it involves women and Red Pill discussions.”
    I didn’t see that issue around here in the past, just saying. Again; I don;t go chasing after female commenters, but I just do not see any value in chasing off those that can handle a reasonable masculine tone. For example, I highly rate Karen Straughn, I’m damn sure she’s NLT. She’s an ally. She helps spread the word to men and women. What’s not to like?

    Like

  263. Spawny Get says:

    Gamer,
    “I haven’t seen anything here that I think is uncivil.”

    Would you claim to be specially, or even averagely, capable of detecting tone?

    Having two left feet, I don’t advise you on dancing…catch my drift?

    Like

  264. Tarnished says:

    I don’t usually laugh, but I do have many eye-rolling moments. It’s important to remember that not everyone has learned to shrug off such assertions/accusations though. Not saying to baby them, because that’s not required…but perhaps be a bit more detailed in one’s responses? I don’t think the truth needs to be spoonfed or watered down, just recognized as different for some people. There’s the Truth of an overarching cultural situation, then there’s the smaller truths that we all have due to our separate lives.

    Make sense?

    Liked by 1 person

  265. Spawny Get says:

    Gamer,
    feel free to post links to your blog. I’m not getting enough time on my blog at the moment. I’m also watching politics over here. If you have something relevant, or just new…link to it here, it’s fine.

    Like

  266. Tarnished says:

    ASDgamer,

    Sounds exhausting.

    Like

  267. theasdgamer says:

    @ Spawny

    Would you claim to be specially, or even averagely, capable of detecting tone?

    Having two left feet, I don’t advise you on dancing…catch my drift?

    Is conversational tone-deafness necessarily an attribute of autists? Not necessarily, I think. Autism is primarily a developmental problem and many VHF (very high functioning) autists develop workarounds. Better at it as they mature, obviously.

    This may help some readers. http://www.autism-help.org/communication-autism-introduction.htm

    The article discusses some problems with non-autists eisegeting meaning into convo where none was intended.

    See, Spawny, “autistic” doesn’t mean “clueless” or “unable to discern implied meanings”.

    I’m also watching politics over here.

    Like S. Holmes, you have your compelling fancy. Take care it doesn’t have you. 😉

    Like

  268. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    ASDgamer,

    Sounds exhausting.

    Kind of like weeding a garden. Nip it in the bud and it’s not bad.

    Like

  269. Spawny Get says:

    “Like S. Holmes, you have your compelling fancy. Take care it doesn’t have you.”

    Oh, I’m not optimistic about the outcome, but all sides are going to be getting a spanking. There’s joy to be had in that.

    I’m interested to see if the political class (that knows it’s fucking hated) can actually address why they’re hated, or whether the torches, pitchforks, piano wire and lampposts come into play. Metaphorically speaking, clearly.

    That Killary is a leading contender for president…and Biden is a runner(!!!) tells me you have very similar issues. No idea who you have to fight them from the ‘right (INO)’. You have immgration too, you have crime (including rapes) committed by illegals that your press has no appetite for covering.

    Speaking of worthless PC journalism –
    TIMES JOURNALIST ‘UNCOMFORTABLE’ EXPOSING ROTHERHAM RAPE GANGS

    The Times journalist who broke the Rotherham rape gangs story has described it as “a hugely uncomfortable story to put on a front page of a national newspaper.”

    Speaking after being named News Reporter of the Year at Britain’s Press Awards, Andrew Norfolk added: “and you all know why it was uncomfortable.. But it was true.”

    He received a standing ovation for what many present described as an “emotional speech”, however his apologetic tone may raise eyebrows.

    Norfolk spent four years working on the story, with his findings that Muslim men were grooming white British girls eventually being vindicated last year with the publication of the Jay Report.

    However, the fact the acts were committed mainly by Muslims has caused unease for Britain’s liberal establishment which is wedded to the ideology of multiculturalism.

    In 2011, Guardian columnist Libby Brooks accused the Times of “racialising” the crimes, and described claims of Muslim men grooming white British girls as “dubious”. Former Rotherham MP Denis MacShane also admitted that as a “Guardian reader and liberal leftie” he had avoided burrowing too deeply into the issue while representing the area in parliament.

    “I think there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat if I may put it like that,” he said.

    “Norfolk spent four years working on the story”…FOUR FUCKING YEARS, FOUR FUCKING YEARS. How many might have been saved if this cunt wasn’t more worried about upsetting the PC agenda than the lives of kids?

    Liked by 2 people

  270. Tarnished says:

    Perhaps.
    But it’s also the reason I’d be a MGTOW if I were testicularly endowed. 😉

    Like

  271. jf12 says:

    re: shutting up about

    Ok. If I am allowed one more chance to read minds, however, the general idea that it is is wrong for men to say they know what women *should* think about these issues is an undeliberate misdirection from women feeling intruded upon by men’s descriptions accurately reflecting how women *do* think about these issues, as determined by men’s eventual understanding of their observations of women’s behavioral tendencies. It’s understandable that women (in general) don’t want men inside their heads.

    One major result of that understanding is the idea that deti keeps pushing, that men can know that what women generally tend to say about such issues, e.g. “I just want some one guy who will treat me well”, does not reflect their actual thinking. If we want to call it something other than lying, maybe self-deception isntead of deception, that’s fine.

    Like

  272. Cill says:

    I was one of the 3 people around when this blog was created. This blog is as much my doing as anyone else’s except Spawny and Tarn. It was Spawny, the creator of the site, then Tarn and me, who set the tone of this blog.

    The manosphere does not own this site. The red pill does not own this site. In particular, AWALT does not fit with the attitude of this site. It took a teenage girl to take up the gauntlet for us on that one. I’ve read it through, and am struck by her sincerity and clear-headedness. I don’t think there was any “talking past each other” – not on her part, at least. I think she saw the issue all too clearly, which was the reason she finally drew the line. Her last words on the subject were to ask me, “Please don’t look at my post in case a couple of them drop by to gloat.” She knew it would piss me off.

    No self-appointed Red Pill Crusader has a god-given right to throw himself around like a fucking wrecking ball in this site. Any man who thinks a red pill badge is an excuse to get up to any level of disrespect, is a troll. [Cill edit: I should point out that my words “gloat” and “wrecking ball” refer to a comment by theasdgamer that Spawny has deleted. See Spawny at 12:43 am here] We should not be cowed by that Red Pill Badge.

    I’m not pissed off at thedeti, who conducted himself with reasonable courtesy throughout. I hope he sticks around.

    I’m expecting a new undertone of AWALT to continue here. I can’t say I’m going to like it, but I’ll do my best.

    I believe I’m speaking for Spawny and Tarn too, when I say the departure of Molly is not something to celebrate. And speaking just for myself, this blog is a lesser place without her. You have to admit, she was brave.
    [SG – Yes you are speaking for me]

    Liked by 2 people

  273. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    Perhaps.
    But it’s also the reason I’d be a MGTOW if I were testicularly endowed. 😉

    Maybe we will have the technology someday so that women could grow testes….

    I actually get energy from drama play. It’s a thing with naturals–we like some drama. We like the emotional engagement.

    I also like physical engagement with women such as dancing provides (Sex, too, of course). Not so much physical engagement with men for sport, such as wrestling. There’s a reason that the ancient Greeks loved wrestling and were homos.

    Like

  274. Spawny Get says:

    I believe there’s a difference between:
    a) ‘people in general tend to think blah blah blah’
    and
    b) ‘YOU (specific person) are completely wrong in what you say you think, you think blah blah blah’

    Leading to this quote from the top of this page

    “no matter what you think you think IRL, this is what you actually think here, because we’re men and this is our space and that’s all there is to it. Take it or leave it. Suck it up.”

    Would you not be pissed if someone did that to you?

    I mean, I’d just think that the person saying it was an utter twat if they did it to me, but I don’t have a problem with someone talking back and being pissed.

    I just don’t see what we gain from that, I can see what we might lose.

    Somewhere on this blog recently CP gave a very clear comment describing why red pill guys are sensitive to over-NAWALTing. It can allow men to avoid taking the red-pill. I gave the comment big ups. As far as I can see, he gave a clear rendering of the red-pill truth as to why over-NAWALTING can be a problem unencumbered by tone policing.

    What red-pill truth do you think needs to be rendered with a direct personal insult? Not that I care what you call a fembot, they’re the enemy of men. But, not every woman is a psychotic man hating emo-bitch. That just doesn’t feel like a radical statement to me…nobody is saying marry ’em, nobody is saying co-habit with them to the point of de-facto marriage…

    Liked by 2 people

  275. theasdgamer says:

    @ jf12

    Yeah, we know that women don’t want us men to believe the truth about them. They also don’t want to believe the truth about themselves. I see this all the time with women at bars, with Mrs. Gamer, etc. This is all old news and has been discussed to death on other blogs, as you well know. Continuing to discuss this isn’t likely to persuade women, but perhaps it will educate men new to the manosphers.

    Major props to Bloom for being able to see herself truly.

    Like

  276. Tarnished says:

    I was about to say the things that Spawny and Cill just did, but as my mind meld was successful… 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  277. theasdgamer says:

    Spawny, if a man is trying to persuade women about the Red Pill, I think that he will have to do things differently than he would men. One message can’t fit all. I think Bloom’s idea about a separate blog to discuss the Red Pill with women makes more sense than a blog that tries to be all things to men and women. I don’t think that interaction is all that helpful. Otoh, a scripted conversation can be very helpful at persuading.

    Like

  278. Liz says:

    When I was a moderator for a debate site (I hope I haven’t brought this up too many times, I definitely don’t want to come across like ‘once, in band camp…’), the site was set up before the advent of blogs, and twitter and facebook and all that flash in the pan one-liner business of drive-by posting obnoxious vitriol. It was designed for discussion, and the discussion wasn’t just encouraged, it was required (about 75 percent of what I’ve posted in the sphere would be considered too OT/unconstructive, and of course sexist, I’d have been banned long ago for what I post here).

    Although it wasn’t as fun as throwing brick-a-bats, it was informative. And being on the receiving end of the ‘reported messages’ (members had a little button to call in for posts that were considered rude, and so forth) the number one thing that enraged participants of all stripes…men, women, teens, conservatives, liberals, and so forth….absolute number one thing that rubbed them ALL wrong was condescension. Liberals would report even liberals they agreed with, if they were over-the-top condescending for no constructive reason to a forum member.

    This was my observation over the course of about a decade, not just a few months…again, the was one thing that hackles just about everyone. It isn’t constructive and I see no point in it other than to rub people wrong and create drama (Hm? Ooooh you like your drama don’t you, just like a child….yes?)<—nice, isnt' it?

    Liked by 1 person

  279. jf12 says:

    re: “Otoh, a scripted conversation can be very helpful at persuading.”

    I think that’s what deti has been working towards. “So, first, can’t we just agree that x? You kind of have to admit that x is true, obviously. Next, if x then naturally y also. Etc.”

    Like

  280. theasdgamer says:

    I do think that women can have a role in the manosphere by confirming what manospherians say about what women generally do and what they say in private convos amongst themselves. I don’t see women as being helpful in providing feedback about what women think. See my previous comment. If women are in the manosphere, they are likely either fembots or Red Pill aware. In one case, hostile and deceptive, while in the other, friendly but would be preaching to the choir. What new do they have to offer? Are their analyses accurate? In my experience, often not.

    Like

  281. Tarnished says:

    “They also don’t want to believe the truth about themselves.”

    Hypothetical here:
    What if the general Truth really isn’t that individual’s truth?

    Let’s use a non-abrasive topic, like ice cream.

    I enjoy most flavors, but don’t like chocolate at all. I state this openly as it is true. Then someone comes along who…for whatever reason…doesn’t believe me. They say I’m being ridiculous, how can I think chocolate ice cream isn’t the best, I must be delusional/wrong/crazy. Maybe I don’t like it now, but surely in another 5…10…15 years I’ll end up loving chocolate ice cream. In fact, this person states, I probably *do* enjoy it immensely, I’m just not wanting to admit it because X, Y, Z.

    But they know better than myself what I like and prefer, since it’s obvious that all blondes they know…and all blondes their friends know…really like chocolate ice cream.

    People like this hypothetical are typically known to the rest of the world as Arrogant Jackasses.

    Liked by 1 person

  282. Spawny Get says:

    There’s a difference between AWALT and NAWALT where ‘n’ is 1 in 10, 1 in 1,000, 1 in 1,000,000, 1 in 1,000,000,000 – whatever value of ‘n’ you want – I don’t care, my estimate varies with mood and subject anyway.

    If you think that all women are exactly the same then…I don’t know what to say to you. Things are even more fucked in your world than in mine and that’s going some.

    “Continuing to discuss this isn’t likely to persuade women, but perhaps it will educate men new to the manosphers.”
    I hope so, because that is really what I want to do. And that, IMHO, is better done with conversation, banter and without telling every woman who puts up with the tone, YOU ARE LIKE THAT IN EVERY WAY.

    Major props to Bloom indeed. And Liz and Molly. Who might have issues, but maybe not the same issues as Bloom. Bloom is certainly putting in the time in introspection. I respect anyone who can do that.

    Liked by 2 people

  283. theasdgamer says:

    @ liz

    if they were over-the-top condescending for no constructive reason

    Interesting. Can you provide some examples of 1) over the top and unacceptable and 2) not quite over the top and acceptable and 3) what would be an example of a constructive reason for being condescending?

    Like

  284. Spawny Get says:

    “Spawny, if a man is trying to persuade women about the Red Pill, I think that he will have to do things differently than he would men. One message can’t fit all.”

    I agree. My priority is da menz, but I think there’s a minority of women that can tag along profitably for all. I see no need to kick them in the teeth for no benefit.

    Liked by 1 person

  285. thedeti says:

    “But those Unicorns need to realize that the only difference between them and all the other NAWALTs is follow though. Every gold digger and SIW looking to get hitched is saying exactly what you’re saying, and doing exactly what you’re doing. There’s no brand on their forehead, nor on yours. And there are a hell of a lot more of them than you, to the point that men (myself included) have no real life experience in dealing with Unicorns. We’ve only had the pleasure of dealing with NAWALTs that turned out to be like that after all.”

    Cautiously Pessimistic has the hands-down thread winner here.

    [SG – I absolutely agree with you and him. He has form in this regard]

    Liked by 2 people

  286. Cill says:

    Telling a woman you know her thoughts better than she does is the ultimate condescension.

    [SG – Well, woman or man, but yeah, I’m struggling to top it]

    Liked by 1 person

  287. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    Objectionability is essential to the issue. Objectionability is why the truth is avoided. Your example is unhelpful.

    Example: I realized that I had a problem with narcissism when I realized that I tended to burn bridges. The idea that I was narcissistic was objectionable. I didn’t want to believe the truth about myself.

    Women don’t like the idea that they can have one-night stands with men or that they can be as sexually hungry as a man for some random stranger. They all say, “But I’m not like those sluts.” Even when they do that stuff over and over and over. If you were friends with more women who are at bars you would hear this stuff. But you’re not around them much. Amirite?

    Or like women who say that they don’t like jerks. Like Mrs. Gamer. Except she likes me most when I’m at my jerkiest. (Or when she perceives me incorrectly to be at my jerkiest.)

    Like

  288. Liz says:

    I’m not going to point to specifics, theasdgamer. I’m not a mod here, nor do I want to be.

    “3) what would be an example of a constructive reason for being condescending?”

    I can’t think of any constructive reason for being condescending. The only time I’d say it’s warranted is if one is addressing an obvious troll…not someone interested in having an actual discussion.

    Liked by 2 people

  289. Cill says:

    CP’s “thread”:

    I must have made the same point hundreds of time by now. Molly would agree with it wholeheartedly too. But much as I agree with it, it doesn’t answer the point of her post:

    “no matter what you think you think IRL, this is what you actually think here, because we’re men and this is our space and that’s all there is to it.”

    CP’s comment is a great Blog Thread, but not the top thread on this post. The top thread, I think, was Molly’s, and if it was good enough for her to stick to it throughout, it’s good enough for me too.

    Liked by 1 person

  290. Liz says:

    Swithy: “I hope so, because that is really what I want to do. And that, IMHO, is better done with conversation, banter and without telling every woman who puts up with the tone, YOU ARE LIKE THAT IN EVERY WAY.”

    And props to you Swithy, for providing a place that has made that possible.
    I’ve enjoyed my time here. 🙂
    Another thing I learned in band camp…er, as a mod, it’s hard work, and there’s no way to please everyone. Human communication is too subjective.

    Liked by 2 people

  291. Spawny Get says:

    As I’ve said before, I’ve read Deti’s stuff for years. There’s no drama between us. I haven’t read every comment by anybody here, so I’m not going to pick names of goodies or baddies.

    Like

  292. Spawny Get says:

    Cill, yeah, I was using that comment to show that pointed things can be said without being obnoxious about it. Never said it was on topic…

    Liked by 2 people

  293. Tarnished says:

    Asdgamer,

    That is correct. I’ve never been to a bar yet.
    I also don’t like jerks, though many have asked me out.

    Like

  294. theasdgamer says:

    I’ve never been to a bar yet.

    The impact from seeing these things for yourself is vastly different than merely hearing about it.

    I also don’t like jerks, though many have asked me out.

    Sounds like something Mrs. Gamer might say. Except that she does like jerks and can’t admit it to herself.

    Like

  295. Spawny Get says:

    “it’s hard work”

    it wasn’t, not for a decent period.

    I’m distinctly not interested in enforcing an agenda beyond look after the men, spread the red-pill. Not interested in scheduling posts. Don’t read posts before they’re posted (this one was a special case in that regard, but I didn’t change a word, didn’t suggest any changes either).

    Seeing as his name came up, Deti was invited as a writer (pretty sure that I did, if I’m wrong I can right that wrong right now) without any restrictions on topic. Scheduling amounts to trying not to have multiple posts on one day. To be honest, if we can keep the tone of posts impersonal, I’d like more posts like Deti’s material in the past (elsewhere) rather than mine. No insult to me intended.

    In addition to the more serious stuff by others, Cill’s posts on the PPPs were great, a real eye opener. His post on his Uncles (wounds are still raw) were highly praised in emails I received. Really touched the hearts of people, not all of whom commented here…but they read the material..

    Right now, I’m not feeling the burn. And I’m busy. And distracted. Can’t we all just get along?

    Liked by 2 people

  296. Liz says:

    You know what our family motto is?
    “there’s no such thing as fun for the whole family” [SG – fixed as per comment below]
    (yes, really…and it’s true, anyone who comes from a large(ish) family will tell you)

    I’m quite fond of everyone here. (even when I’m persnickety) 😉
    I do hope that Molly comes back. Really, when one is 19 a day is like a week…so maybe after a little while she’ll feel like returning.

    We could refer to ourselves as Swithites here and have a new motto:
    ‘There’s no such thing as agreement for all Swithites!’
    And, you know, if sufficiently inebriated…this will sound like a fantastic idea I’m sure.
    😛

    Okay, going to the cafe. Hope you all have a great day. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  297. Cill says:

    Spawny “There’s a difference between AWALT and NAWALT where ‘n’ is 1 in 10, 1 in 1,000, 1 in 1,000,000, 1 in 1,000,000,000 – whatever value of ‘n’ you want”

    Good point.

    jf12 came up with the “Most All Women Are Like That” suggestion (a pretty good suggestion, actually, but not on her point)

    FWIW Molly had a written a note to herself to answer the MWALT suggestion, but never got around to publishing it (it’s fairly obvious she wanted to hold onto one discussion – that with thedeti – instead). This is her note:

    “Most All Women Are Like That (MAWALT)
    My parents taught me the great majority of WALT. The difference between MAWALT and AWALT is not just quantitative tho, it’s qualitative as well. I am AWALT unless I can prove I’m not. So… MAWALT is irrelevant until I give that proof. Impasse.

    Again this is a ‘one’ not ‘you’ comment (per Spawny 11 March, 2015 at 1:04 am)”

    Liked by 1 person

  298. Spawny Get says:

    “Telling a woman you know her thoughts better than she does is the ultimate condescension.”

    Well, woman or man, but yeah, I’m struggling to top it

    Liked by 2 people

  299. Liz says:

    Gah messed up above.
    Family motto: there’s no such thing as fun for the whole family
    There

    Liked by 1 person

  300. jf12 says:

    re: what to feel

    Given that a stated agenda is “look after the men”, I think the men who say “women are like …” are indeed trying to depersonalize things for the good of themselves, as well as also trying NOT to make it personal about some woman or other. But maybe we could discuss my personal feelings.

    For me, THE redpill realization felt, like an icewater douche, shockingly uncomfortable even though I had intellectually anticipated it and heard/read about it from many others. That realization is that everything I had been led to believe by society about men-women relations was told to me specifically to advantage women at the expense of men. This is one version of the Feminine Imperative, obviously.

    Thus the redpill focus has to be on deadvantaging women and de-expensing men. Ton gave a great definition of a purple-pill focus: moderating the redpill to make women more comfortable with it, necessarily by making it more advantageous to women at the expense of men. But then necessarily purplepilling means that women won’t *feel* correctly about it, since it ought to be shockingly-repulsively-fetal-position-moaning uncomfortable, maybe especially to women.

    Liked by 1 person

  301. Tarnished says:

    “Sounds like something Mrs. Gamer might say. Except that she does like jerks and can’t admit it to herself.”

    How nice for Mrs. Gamer. Perhaps she should indulge in a little self reflection to determine the why’s and how’s between what she says and what her actions truly portray.

    Liked by 1 person

  302. theasdgamer says:

    Objectionability. Very uncomfortable.

    Like

  303. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    Have you ever been told by another woman or man that a man to whom you were sexually attracted was a jerk?

    Like

  304. Liz says:

    JF12: “Thus the redpill focus has to be on deadvantaging women and de-expensing men. Ton gave a great definition of a purple-pill focus: moderating the redpill to make women more comfortable with it, necessarily by making it more advantageous to women at the expense of men. But then necessarily purplepilling means that women won’t *feel* correctly about it, since it ought to be shockingly-repulsively-fetal-position-moaning uncomfortable, maybe especially to women.”

    Not every red pill male poster has this problem (making women uncomfortable/angry).
    Are those types withholding information or perhaps….presenting it differently, in a way that isn’t as personally insulting (wild stab here)?

    Liked by 1 person

  305. Spawny Get says:

    “presenting it differently, in a way that isn’t as personally insulting (wild stab here)?”
    LOLing over here

    TBH each has the right to be pissed with the current situation in society. We also, each have our own back stories. I’m not saying men shouldn’t be pissed. Men are dead over this shit after all.

    As a separate issue, I’m looking to spread the word as effectively (and enjoyably) as I can.

    Liked by 1 person

  306. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    Not every red pill male poster has this problem (making women uncomfortable/angry).
    Are those types withholding information or perhaps….presenting it differently, in a way that isn’t as personally insulting (wild stab here)?

    If we use Bloom as an example of an effective way to present Red Pill info, deti made her extremely uncomfortable.

    Quoting Bloom above, Deti made me have a melt down early on when he used a similar technique to show me my biggest player blind spot, declarations of “try wuv” these guys all saw it go down, complete with me chucking virtual dishes at pretty much everyone but fuzzie! Deti did me a favor that day, my reaction to his words revealed something to myself that helped me grow and give up a “pretty little lie” that had been being used against me by people who didnt luv me,

    Please show an effective way to present the Red Pill that doesn’t involve discomfort. Maybe it can be found wherever unicorns dwell. 😄

    Like

  307. Tarnished says:

    I suppose it must be.

    Like

  308. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    I just realized that jf12, perhaps presciently, already made the point about the Red Pill involving discomfort.

    Like

  309. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    Just occurred to me that you’ve been accused of being a unicorn in the past, so maybe you can find the redpill-dispensing-discomfort-relieving-gizmo in your neighborhood. Is it the same gizmo that works with us men to fix our thinking tools? For the ladies it might require in-home loving service from B.O.B. (battery-operated boyfriend).

    Like

  310. jf12 says:

    @tasdg, re: “perhaps”

    “Perhaps”? Why you little … I’ll show you “perhaps”! I’ll have you know I wurked hard on that comment, *knowing* how teh peoplez would take it. And *caring*.

    I admit to having been changed for the worse by these things over the past couple of years, because it caused me to become less careful and less caring about comfort levels. I’m not sure I retain even a shadow of real interest in any particular woman’s OR man’s personal Goldilocks-level of shades of purple, except for amusement purposes

    Like

  311. theasdgamer says:

    @ jf12

    Ah, a real bonding moment. I feelz da wuv. Puppies! Burrito, burrito, burrito!

    Like

  312. Liz says:

    theasdgamer:
    “If we use Bloom as an example of an effective way to present Red Pill info, deti made her extremely uncomfortable.”

    I’m more speaking to the context of this particular thread…since it seems pertinent. Of course most women are going to be uncomfortable and these forums aren’t for most of them. I don’t see any reason to purposely alienate the ones who are interested and come here in good faith, however.

    Per Unicorn… I’d never refer to myself that way. I see a lot of myself in the red pill descriptions of women, to a certain degree. I don’t “think like a man” either…though I do admire men very much relay my life observations and experiences as honestly as I can (without revealing too much in the interest of anonymity). 🙂

    I’ve always had an interest in debate (clearly) and the blogs/forums I frequent have always been male-centric, and almost all-male participation, even before I stumbled upon the sphere. Actually, there are more women within the sphere than most of the forums I’ve frequented outside the sphere.

    Liked by 1 person

  313. Spawny Get says:

    “Of course most women are going to be uncomfortable and these forums aren’t for most of them. I don’t see any reason to purposely alienate the ones who are interested and come here in good faith, however.”

    yep

    Liked by 1 person

  314. SFC Ton says:

    Don’t rightly see how anyone is telling anyone how they think. It’s telling them how they will behave. The two aren’t the same.

    Liked by 1 person

  315. jf12 says:

    A comment on the relative merits of three points of view. I think this comment may be experienced by some readers as unnecessarily antagonistic, and if so please tell me how to say it as effectively some other way.

    A red pill pov is that alpha to the max will always be more advantageous for the man. Despite, or maybe because of, its uncomfortable starkness, the truth in this statement is universal.

    A purple pill pov is that mixing in some beta will help the man in relating with women. The comforting weaselly vagueness of this (undeniable) truth is always intended to *falsely* imply that “some beta will be more advantageous for the man, when he is in a relationship”.

    A blue pill pov is that what’s best for women is what’s best for men, in the long run anyway. Subject to many further caveats this could become definitely (but deniably) true, but again the intention is always false.

    Can one even make the statement of the red pill pov more comfortable for women without it ceasing to be the red pill pov at all?

    Like

  316. Tarnished says:

    “Have you ever been told by another woman or man that a man to whom you were sexually attracted was a jerk?”

    No.
    However, I’ve been told that I should put up with a specific man’s jerkiness because “he’s so hawt”.

    Ugh…please. Character first, then looks.

    Liked by 1 person

  317. Spawny Get says:

    “I think this comment may be experienced by some readers as unnecessarily antagonistic”

    *shrug* not to me. Anyone?

    Like

  318. Spawny Get says:

    Ton, what if she doesn’t act like that?

    What difference does it make as far as you are concerned when you go from (taken to extremes)
    “the vast majority of women will do this”
    to
    “all women specifically including you, Missy will do this”?

    I mean what is gained by ‘you’ in making that step? what’s the benefit? because to me there’s a potential cost (a lost potential ally).

    I’m not doing it as a calculated thing, but does this suit as an analogy;
    “It’s a hearts and minds mission where nobody is asking you not to shoot baddies on the spot, nobody is changing the ROEs in any negative way. just saying don’t burn down the non-aligned, or even friendly oriented villes for no reason”

    That’s how I see it, though my life force is dwindling at this point.

    Liked by 3 people

  319. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    don’t see any reason to purposely alienate the ones who are interested and come here in good faith, however.

    Epistemic crisis. Sometimes leads to a paradigm shift. Other times to alienation.

    Liz: Think like a man

    jf12: …hard on…

    Isawwutudidthereandnotgonnabiteheh Can’t have a thinking equipment malfunction without the equipment. No, I’m not sharing.

    Like

  320. Tarnished says:

    Spawny,

    While I’m also awaiting a response to the question you just posed, methinks Molly already had the answer a long time previous somewhere above:

    Namely, that to some in the manosphere, a woman could be in her last 24 hours of life never having been “that way”, but until she dies they will still proclaim it a distinct possibility.

    Liked by 2 people

  321. theasdgamer says:

    Don’t cornfuze looks with hawtness. Playfulness is way more important as a hawtness trait than looks.

    Like

  322. Tarnished says:

    Cornfuze? Your autocorrect hates you…

    And *I’m* not confusing anything. You asked if anyone had ever said that a man I was attracted to was a jerk.
    The answer was no. I further clarified that other women had insisted that looks/hotness should trump his jerkiness, which is a steaming load of the grossest order.

    What was confusing?

    Liked by 1 person

  323. jf12 says:

    Is there any woman here who thinks she isn’t advantaged by the Feminine Imperative because she’s different in that way? Serious question, won’t jump down your throat.

    Like

  324. Liz says:

    “Is there any woman here who thinks she isn’t advantaged by the Feminine Imperative because she’s different in that way? Serious question, won’t jump down your throat.”

    When you say advantaged, are you refering to the “manosphere” forums in general, or life in general?

    Like

  325. jf12 says:

    Is there any woman here who acknowledges realizing most women falsely claim to be quite different from most women most especially in their personal taste in men and how they personally relate to their, er, tasted men? And, moreover, that they are different most especially in devaluing the jerkiest of alpha traits compared to other women?

    Like

  326. Tarnished says:

    Is this what we’re still defining the FI as, from Farm Boy’s post?:

    “Being weak individually also lends itself to the idea of banding together into groups for safety.  This is the core of the feminine imperative.  Women naturally band together when working on obtaining resources in the large (e.g. welfare, other subsidies).”

    If so, I think your question is worded oddly, jf12. Are you asking if there’s a woman here who isn’t advantaged by being part of civilization? 😕

    Like

  327. jf12 says:

    re: advantaged

    Life among men.

    Like

  328. Tarnished says:

    Our species, like other primates and most mammals, is a social one. People typically fare better in small groups than attempting to survive alone. The sexes need the participation of each other to continue the species. This should all be fairly common knowledge.

    Liked by 4 people

  329. Spawny Get says:

    Pretty sure we’re all clear that when it comes to getting the law on our side, the women win just about every time. Is that what we’re looking for here?

    Liked by 3 people

  330. Tarnished says:

    Ok, here we go!
    Yes, I will absolutely, unequivocally state right now that women get a huge pussy pass in the vast majority of our combined societies.
    It’s wrong.
    It’s stupid.
    It’s unnecessary.
    It’s sexist.

    But it’s also real.

    Like

  331. Tarnished says:

    Holy quesadillas, Batman!
    Regular, everyday, laymans grammar and syntax is your friend!

    Like

  332. Cill says:

    Presenting the Red Pill to women must involve discomfort?

    I hope this aspect of the discussion is not intended to be on-topic.

    As she says up there somewhere^^^ Molly was home educated. Her parents have been anti-feminists since long before I was born in the mid eighties. They educated Molly to understand feminism is “bad”, and why it’s bad.

    It should have been obvious to all who were around at the time that almost from the time she arrived on this blog she made her dislike of feminism very apparent. She has gone further, and expressed her disgust for women for what they’ve done to men and boys.

    I can see examples here on this post:
    “I react to people telling me what I think. I don’t mind them saying women think crap. Too many women do think crap.”

    “Fuzzie, ‘men are going to presume the worst to protect themselves.’

    Yes they must presume the worst. If I have sons I will teach them presume the worst.”

    Molly knew what Red Pill is long before she arrived on this blog. She was actually educated not only in anti-feminism, but the weaknesses of women as well, from an early age. How many here can claim the same? Trust me, when it comes to the faults, foibles, dishonesty, and sheer idiocy of women, Molly got taught the whole shebang – from both her parents. I know this directly.

    While Molly was here, no part of this post involved her attempting or resisting the swallowing of the Red Pill. That notion arose after she left, like an attempt to re-write history. And it seems that a lot of people are fooled by it. Red Pill Crusading can be quite mind-numbing to all, with the result that the direction of a post is forced towards the crusader’s mindset. That’s what I don’t like about AWALT as well.

    Like

  333. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    I miss Molly!

    Liz,
    Having said that, upthread you said that you see more female participn manosphere threads thatn others. That is very interesting. Maybe it’s part curiosity and part whatever.

    Like

  334. jf12 says:

    re: defining the FI

    It’s definitely distinct from cooperation and civilization. Shortly, I would say the FI is: Women Must Be Advantaged!!! I think Rollo’s great insight is the unity of the social aspects and the biological “eggs are expensive, etc.”

    It may not be your cup of tea, but one of the achievement medals I awarded myself was deriving the FI from the fact of sexual conflict (more specifically, the fact of female *deselection* of males, not necessarily in the “chase-away” model as usually discussed, but certainly in females avoiding the vast majority of the reproducing they could be doing).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_conflict

    The general idea is that the female role is to make the sexual strategy of males harder. /O
    In terms of selection, which I think is not the right terms (righter being deselection, as I said), her selection of him comes either at the expense of his having to be better than other males, for example, or at the expense of his having to overcome the handcap of not being better. Either way, the fact that she selects advantages her at his expense. Therefore, the FI. Q.E.D.

    In light of the rimshotted statement, almost one could say that the male role is to make sexual reproduction easier for females and therefore easier for both sexes, and I think I speak for all biological entities in the entire world (!) in saying “Boy, I wish.” (it’s a wet frog-peeping Spring here). Unfortunately, the male is instead relegated to overcoming female resistance, thereby making the sexual strategy of females harder, and thereby making females make it even harder for males. Therefore, the FI. Q.E.D.

    Like

  335. Liz says:

    Agreed, and too easy, Tarn and Swithy.

    There must be some trick….

    Liked by 1 person

  336. Liz says:

    Fuzzie: “Having said that, upthread you said that you see more female participn manosphere threads thatn others. That is very interesting. Maybe it’s part curiosity and part whatever.”

    I think women like to discuss relationship and gender issues a lot more than other subjects that I gravitate towards (mostly politics and military issues).

    Like

  337. Spawny Get says:

    Liz, I just checked, according to Admiral Akbar…It’s a trap

    Liked by 1 person

  338. theasdgamer says:

    Cill, I also educated my daughters in anti-feminism, such as I realized it. The Red Pill is painful for whoever swallows it. I agree about crusading being unhelpful.

    Liked by 1 person

  339. Cill says:

    Thanks asd.

    Like

  340. Spawny Get says:

    JF, that should be a post, I reckon. Or made into one.

    Like

  341. Liz says:

    Anecdote time!
    My husband was on the plane, and a flight attendant asked if anyone had gum. One pilot turned to her and said, ‘no’. My husband wasn’t thinking about what she said, and was rummaging through his backpack looking for something…when he looked up she was watching him, so he said, “What?”
    She responded: “Oh, I thought you were rummaging through your bag trying to find gum in order to please me.”
    And he said, “No. That’s not how it works.”
    He wasn’t intentionally flirting, nor was he being ‘a jerk’ (unless being a jerk is the opposite of searching frantically to please), nor was he being an emotionless robot. But…yes, she was impressed and it showed for the rest of the flight.

    Liked by 1 person

  342. jf12 says:

    Is there really always a way for a man to be kinder and gentler in communicating certain ideas to a woman, “presenting it differently, in a way that isn’t as personally insulting”, especially when the main content of that idea hinges on his belief that it almost certainly does apply to her? Is the only kindler gentler thing simply not to say it?

    I could be wrong, but I’m not, in saying that I think that the Exemptionalism in this (very interesting) discussion about Which Women Are Not Like That lends itself to using a hypothetical class of Most Women as whipping girls for no other real reason than to exempt oneself from feeling the sting.

    And if I’m committing Exemptionalism on myself, please let me know.

    Like

  343. jf12 says:

    @Liz, re: jerkiness

    I love anecdotes from women about how other women’s perception of various levels of jerkiness from men works on those women. No, I’m not being snarky. I actually consider myself trying to be understanding.

    It’s very scary for a man, specifically not exempting myself, to realize that there is no limit to the effectiveness of jerkiness for his self-advancement among women. It is continually *painful*, pitifully empathetically, having once seen it this way, to always reread a woman’s statement in a redpill light: “Don’t be a jerk because jerks won’t succeed with me” as her simply not *wanting* jerks to be as successful as jerks really are. Because *I* also don’t want jerkiness to be as successful as it is.

    Like

  344. jf12 says:

    Shorter: There is no way to unsee “Don’t be a jerk” as merely yet another shit test.

    Is there really some purple eyewash somewhere that would help unsee it? Would you even recommend that purple eyewash to any man (besides me!)?

    Like

  345. Spawny Get says:

    “Is there really always a way for a man to be kinder and gentler in communicating certain ideas to a woman”

    I was talking about not being personal when being personal wasn’t going to be helpful. Are we clear that you’re reframing the issue? Just seeking clarity.

    Imagine you’re in a spit and sawdust pub opposite this angry looking, pissed, slapheaded bruiser with his two pit bulls sniffing at your bollocks, salivating. Would you feel the need to be personal about him while explaining just how many bald blokes with dogs are gay?

    Like

  346. jf12 says:

    re: “you’re reframing the issue”

    I apologize for giving that impression. My intention was to make it clearer that sometimes there really any exemptions possible, and specifically in this very issue in which we’re discussing mentally entrapping modes of thought to which we’re *all* susceptible, it is *most* unhelpful to indulge any belief in exemption.

    Like

  347. Tarnished says:

    Oy vey…

    I really couldn’t give less of a fuck about “most women” or “all women” or “97.324% with a deviation depending on whether it’s raining in London women”.

    The women here are pro-male in some form. They agree that men have a significant amount of crap to wade through and deal with on a daily basis in the West. They understand that our society is generally set up to give more advantages to the female than the male. A few even want to do something about it. Molly, in her young wisdom, was pointing out how weird and frustrating it is to agree with/offer condolences for the personal anecodotes and experiences so many men talk about here…but then have those same men say “Only my experiences, thoughts, and anecodotes matter here. Yours only matter if they fully support mine.”

    This^^ is bullshit.
    That’s all she was saying. Why the hell is this so difficult? 😕

    Liked by 2 people

  348. Tarnished says:

    Did anyone stop to think that perhaps there’s more potential NAWALTs on blogs like this precisely *because* these women actually care about men and boys? The demographic could just be naturally skewed due to this…
    Just sayin’.

    Liked by 3 people

  349. Cill says:

    Tarn coined it. I wish she was here to read it for herself Tarn.

    Liked by 1 person

  350. Tarnished says:

    No worries, Cill.
    I know that you’ll show it to her if it will help.

    Liked by 1 person

  351. Spawny Get says:

    “it is *most* unhelpful to indulge any belief in exemption.”
    That’s not the world that I’ve ever seen about me. If it was I’d grab all my cash and head for the islands.

    Like

  352. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Tarn,
    Thanks for what you said at 11:16pm. It’s hopeful.

    I have noticed something. Male commenters who are married are more likely to be frustrated with women. They are dealing with ongoing issues at home.

    Like

  353. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Yes and no, Fuzzy. Prior to marriage, I had the luxury of being Blue Pill. Once I was married, duty demanded I become Red Pill. Or to sound less noble, I wasn’t desperate enough to be Red Pill until I was married. Once enough time and study had taken place, my wife’s behavior became much more predictable, if not desired. With better predictive models, I’m better able to deal with and anticipate problems. It’s frustrating, but not as frustrating as being Blue Pill, where I’m constantly being sandbagged.

    Liked by 1 person

  354. Liz says:

    jf12: “My intention was to make it clearer that sometimes there really any exemptions possible, and specifically in this very issue in which we’re discussing mentally entrapping modes of thought to which we’re *all* susceptible, it is *most* unhelpful to indulge any belief in exemption.”

    That does make it “clearer”. Indeed. Can we have the key to unlock whatever code you’re speaking in? I can make out what you’re saying about 30 percent of the time.

    Liked by 2 people

  355. SFC Ton says:

    Spawny all women will*do that*. There is no exceptions, just how often they will *do that*. Then fill in what that is.

    All women will use a man’s words against him. Every last one of them. Will she do it once in a lifetime? Once an hour? Who knows but she will do it

    All women will break faith with their man. She might fuck another dude or she might gossip about him but she will break faith with some man.

    They don’t do these things because they are evil or bad but because they are women. Expecting women not to do these things is like asking my dogs not to chase small furry things. This is not a feminist vs non feminists issue. It’s an issue of the basic nature of women. Non feminist women have this basic programming the same as feminist women.

    Thinking any significant number of women will oppose feminism is nonsense. Any potential lady alley gained by soft pedalling will never stack up to the number of men gained by honest and direct words. In the usa the GOP thinks like you Spwany, regarding the votes of non Whites and women and yet they never get many non Whites or women to vote for them and no where near enough of those votes to offset the number of White men they drive off by soft pedaling.

    Like

  356. For what is worth, even though Deti’s comments pushed me into a virtual dish chucking meltdown, I never felt he was being unfair to me, quite the opposite – he was turning on a light so I would stop stumbling around in the dark. I appreciated the light, even if it was harsh on my eyes, because the stumbling was doing me no good.

    Not that I probably get it any better today, how men think or the red pill, but I try. Bonus points for trying??? I think I may be forever clueless, between us… Shhh…

    I hope mollie will be back, and if she is I hope ya’ll will be nice. She’s a sweet girl.

    Liked by 1 person

  357. Can I call a time out??? Agree to disagree and such? 🙂 pretty please?

    Liked by 1 person

  358. Spawny Get says:

    Might as well Bloom because I’m getting to the point of just saying I’m not interested in running a blog where where people unnecessarily insult each other when all it boils down to is AWALT v NAWALT (wherever already said you can pick your own ‘n’).

    And once that’s said, I’m not sure where we go next.

    I’m not looking for votes. I’m trying to have a poolside party with friendly people while the moron masses throw themselves off cliff tops. Maybe save some of the human lemmings who seem hesitant to jump. A few of those lemmings appear to be female.

    Not sure what more to say.

    Liked by 1 person

  359. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Redpillgirlnotes,
    I would be fine with anything you propose.

    Liked by 2 people

  360. Cill says:

    Bloom I don’t know you in person of course, but I do know Molly. I think you and she might be very different women. Molly has been red pill all her life, almost, and I don’t think that’s entirely due to her anti-feminist education. I think you are probably feminine, whereas Molly is male in quite a few ways.

    Although she’s at the extreme end of “feminine” in appearance and mannerisms, she’s really quite masculine underneath it all. I’ve never known a woman to be so much into risk-taking, physical and mental. When she and I sit down for a serious chat, it’s like I’m talking to another man. Her mind is male in the way it processes thoughts. She is 100% female and woman by gender and sex, but she describes herself as a tomboy. She’s one helluva clever, with a stellar IQ. Men frequently underestimate her intelligence, and who can blame them? A stellar IQ is very unusual among women.

    I think you and she would react in very different ways to “harsh” comments.

    Liked by 2 people

  361. Spawny Get says:

    Now you mention it, in all that went on…You’re right, she did hold it all together and act rationally. Not sure that makes her masculine inclined though. Don’t see Liz just rolling into a ball either. At the time I was more impressed at the maturity of a nineteen year old.

    Anyway, good night

    Liked by 2 people

  362. @ cill she sounds delightful. I am a tomboy in many ways myself. I hope she gets it better than I do because I am pretty much totally missing it despite my best intent. I really do think women speak French and men speak German. It’s a wonder it works at all! But somehow we cannot seem to leave each other alone so…. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  363. Cill says:

    Great Scott, Spawny, you haven’t slept yet? I thought you must be having a very early morning. Sleep time, mate.

    Liked by 1 person

  364. Spawny Get says:

    Have been sleeping, will be sleeping…just looked in, the curse of the tablet device

    Liked by 1 person

  365. Cill says:

    Another thing, Molly doesn’t walk out on an argument in a petulant huff like a woman. She withdraws when all has been said and it’s getting repetitive and tedious, as a man would. Or she has clearly prevailed in the argument, and the opposition has nothing left to counter her with apart from silence or diversion. She’ll withdraw and find something better to do with her time. I know her. Look at the way she withdrew above, the actual “I’m out”. It was clinical, matter of fact.

    If you do a “Find” on Molly and find all her comments from the top down, you’ll see what I mean. Mind like a steel trap.

    Bloom, I’ll work on Molly. As I say, it will be like dealing on another man. We’ll see 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  366. Cill says:

    And yet she’s 100% feminine. I don’t know, maybe it’s her super brightness that gives her an unusual mind for a woman. Super brightness could be called a male characteristic I guess (Liz there? Woops, duck head)

    Liked by 2 people

  367. Tarnished says:

    Scfton,
    In that case, we’re not talking about NAWALT/AWALT or NAMALT/AMALT. We’re talking about human nature. Everybody *will* do things in their lifetime they aren’t proud of, that’s just how it is. It’s recognizing that you did it, and never doing it again that makes one an adult.

    Bloom,
    I’m all for agreeing to disagree, so long as we have a plan for going forward.

    Spawny,
    Get thee back to bed, man.

    Cill,
    There’s a reason I like Molly so much. She is very similar to myself, though I tend to walk away (both online and in real life) quicker than she does. I’ve no time for beating round the bush with pretty words…I’ll be diplomatic and try to empathize with a different viewpoint, but at the end of the day if we don’t agree then…
    Being female she will have to deal with people underestimating her intelligence, mostly men though sometimes women as well. Especially if she dresses or acts feminine otherwise. I’m glad she has someone like yourself in her life to back her up if need be.

    Re: Walking Out
    It was over 4 years ago now, so the blog name is lost to the fog, but I once read a Tradcon woman’s post regarding how she’d *want* to leave the room to cool off during a fight with her husband, but he’d (gently!) grab her by both arms and make her sit down/wouldn’t let her leave the room until the matter was resolved. All the commenters said the husband was doing a very good job of teaching her to “not run from marriage problems”. I didn’t comment, but thought that if anyone *ever* tried to physically stop me from leaving a situation I’d either go into a rage and hurt them or I’d agree with whatever they said to get them off my back and *then* leave and never come back. Molly didn’t storm away in a huff…she saw that the conversation was going nowhere and removed herself from it. I applaud her maturity.

    Liked by 2 people

  368. SFC Ton says:

    Agreed Tarn we are talking about human nature. We are all human and fallible (expect for me. I’m the missing link…. man-ape thing or so my darlings call me)

    I have no doubt Molly is as Cill describes, but like all of us, human and fallible. We are more prone to those failings when we think we aren’t like that. Which is one of those ancient and universal philosophical teachings that span the globe

    Liked by 1 person

  369. Liz says:

    I’ve picked up my metaphorical football (or, I guess lipstick case/mascara wand, as it were…) more times than I can count through the years after particularly heated/unproductive and/or generally frustrating discussions. Sometimes it’s at the request of my husband, who is okay with my internet discussion habit as long as it has no adverse effect on our actual life…but when it gets to me, he’s had enough.

    At such times, I’ll take a break for a bit, and then come back if it’s a site a value.

    Liked by 2 people

  370. Cill says:

    Even God does not know what it is to be a worm better than a worm does
    … Unless the worm thinks it is perfect.

    Molly is not perfect, and she knows it.

    I, however, am perfect.

    (no I’m not, otherwise I could not have concocted the first 2 lines of this comment)

    No-one is perfect, not even Padawan.

    Like

  371. alana says:

    Tarn “I also don’t like jerks, though many have asked me out.” Lol same here.

    “Have you ever been told by another woman or man that a man to whom you were sexually attracted was a jerk?”

    Asdgamer: “@ Tarn, Have you ever been told by another woman or man that a man to whom you were sexually attracted was a jerk?”

    Like Tarn, my answer is definitely no. I’ve really racked my brains trying to think of one instance of being attracted to jerkiness, but there is not one. However I think extreme manliness/masculinity can be very attractive on some guys.

    ———-

    Molly is a sweetheart, and i hope she’ll be back because her insights are appreciated.

    Liked by 2 people

  372. Cill says:

    But Spawny has perfection of visage. Blessed are they who have seen it. The rest of us, including me, will have to die wondering – like never having seen the Taj Mahal.

    As for the man himself – how fortunate is he who sees one of the world’s great wonders every time he shaves.

    Liked by 2 people

  373. Cill says:

    Sumo is a perfect badass

    Liked by 1 person

  374. Spawny Get says:

    Cill, “will have to die wondering” vague clues are closer than you think. But I’m better looking. It should be “Spawny ‘better than movie star good looks’ Get”

    Liked by 1 person

  375. thedeti says:

    I see i’ve been brought up more than once on this topic since I left.

    1. Spawny, I’d be happy to write something. It would be much along the same lines as things I have written elsewhere. Though I’ll say you have fine authors here in Molly, Cill, Farmboy and yourself.

    2. It isn’t my intent to cause discomfort, though I am sure that does happen. Rather I want only to speak what I perceive to be the truth as I understand it, have seen it and have experienced it. To the extent others have benefitted from it, so much the better. To the extent others have been hurt or discomfited, I regret it, but sometimes pain or discomfort are necessary agents of growth.

    Liked by 1 person

  376. Spawny Get says:

    “As for the man himself – how fortunate is he who sees one of the world’s great wonders every time he shaves.”

    I avoid this veritable trap of Narcissus by shaving in the shower, without a mirror.

    Liked by 2 people

  377. Cill says:

    Spawny (“Better than MSGL”) Get

    Liked by 1 person

  378. Tarnished says:

    Sumo is the monster under Chuck Norris’s bed.

    Scfton,
    Alright. I can agree with that as a basic premise. Yet what of the range of human nature? To say that All Men will do X eventually and All Women will do Y eventually seems to fly in the face of free will, which most people seem to have. How does one consolidate these contradictions?

    In hearing about this “dish-chucking” conversation between Bloom and thedeti, I’d like to read it. Was it done via private emails (in which case it isn’t available for viewing) or on one of Bloom’s posts? It just sounds really insightful into what a Red Pill conversion could be like.

    Liked by 1 person

  379. Cill says:

    Spawny (better than Doctor Watson) Get?

    Like

  380. thedeti says:

    tarn:

    Bloom’s famed tantrums were at Just Four Guys in early to mid 2014. She would get so pissed at me (and everyone else) there.

    Like

  381. Spawny Get says:

    Deti, pick any topic that you like, please. Discomfort, for men and women taking the red-pill is par for the course, all I don’t want is people making it directly personal.

    This isn’t a request, Just seeing if anyone is interested in…

    But one thing I’m somewhat interested in is, can Christianity escape from unholy churchianity in the States? I’m not a believer but I think Christianity has a long history of being a major positive force in building (western) society. Clearly not without drawbacks as well, but a clear nett positive, I think.

    In the UK the CofE is riddled with lefites and imho is seen as completely irrelevant to the real world. It’s delusional marxism in a frock that is openly political nowadays.

    As a lay observer, churchianity is a church obsessed with marketing itself for money (women). The UK failed in the opposite direction, I think.

    Like

  382. Tarnished says:

    Thanks thedeti. I’ll have to scrounge around and check those out. I will also state that I agree with Spawny re: talk about the RP, but don’t make it personal. Generalizations exist for a reason.

    Spawny,
    No. It would take a huge amount of time, effort, and sincere motivation not backed up by money/profit/fame to turn the Christian faith away from its path of Churchianity. The US is too full of Christians who would rather listen to a minister tell them his religious opinions than actually open their own holy book and read it themselves. It’s sad that in my neck of the woods I know more Biblical stories than the average Christian. 🙄

    NACALT goes without saying.

    Like

  383. SFC Ton says:

    What gives anyone the impression I believe in free will?

    Let’s assume I do (and the Easter Bunny etc); most of the time the monkey/lizard brain is driving the bus and actions are not the results of deliberate thought. This is more true for women then men, more true when people are in high stress situations, being emotional etc etc. Then out comes whatever bit of nastiness you thought you would never do. In wine comes truth sort of thing

    Liked by 2 people

  384. Spawny Get says:

    “man-ape thing or so my darlings call me”

    and yet you quote (translated) latin “In wine comes truth (sort of thing)”

    Your man-ape facade is cracking Ton.

    Liked by 2 people

  385. jf12 says:

    @Liz, re: keys to unlocking clarity

    The key word in my ‘splainin was “exempt”, clearly. The key idea was the folly of considering oneself exempt, clearly.

    The key to demonstrating the strength of my grasp of these keys, if one overlooks the too-frequent typos (including contextually clearly (!) missing words such as “sometimes there really AREN’T any exemptions”, the often overblown analogies, and the (I claim) quite rare thickest- as-a-brickest insensibilities, is that I bent the keys back on themselves, clearly.

    The folly of considering oneself exempt from “the folly of considering oneself exempt”.

    Like

  386. Liz says:

    JF12: “@Liz, re: jerkiness

    I love anecdotes from women about how other women’s perception of various levels of jerkiness from men works on those women. No, I’m not being snarky. I actually consider myself trying to be understanding.”

    I had to read this several times to understand what exactly you’re talking about and it finally dawned on me (I think), so I’ll respond. By “various levels of jerkiness” you’re refering to my husband as the acting “jerk” in this equation. It would seem there’s no subtlety or nuance permitted in your world view…just like emotions, it’s all excluded middle land. Either the person is a supplicating pussy with no self respect (which he would have been if he had tenehutted trying to rummage through his bag for the princess), or he’s an ipso facto a jerk.

    This explains a lot about your (implied) insistence that it’s simply impossible to convey red pill information to women in a way that isn’t directly personally antagonistic and insulting. Interesting how that logic seems to break down when applied…if women respond well to “jerkery” they should be eating this style of communication up right now, right here, right?

    Here’s another anecdote (:thumbsup:).
    A different flight attendant brought him a large bag filled with smaller bags of peanuts. The bag broke open and they all spilled on the ground. He was about to help pick them up but before he made a move she said, “Oh, look at that, what a mess. Now, you’ll have to get on your knees and clean that up.”
    The supplicant would say: “Oh, okay…” and proceed to clean it up.
    The jerk would say: “You clean it, (perhaps adding a pejorative)”
    He said, “I was going to help you until you said that.” and then he walked away.

    Liked by 2 people

  387. Liz says:

    Should add to the above…the bag broke when she was holding it, not him.

    Liked by 1 person

  388. Tarnished says:

    Scfton,
    My apologies. I know you’re a Christian, and so far every Christian I have known as more than an acquaintance has believed in the concept of free will. I was wrong to presume you also did.

    For what it’s worth, I believe in free will and strive to make deliberate, conscious decisions in all that I do. Admittedly, there have been times I reacted automatically and without thinking (jumping in front of my younger brother when an unknown neighborhood dog came running at us,for example). But those times are few and far between. This could very well be due to the lack of life-or-death instances in my environment though.

    Like

  389. thedeti says:

    “can Christianity escape from unholy churchianity in the States?”

    On a broad, en masse basis, no. True Christianity still exists but only in small pockets here and there. Women as a political force are too powerful and their more feminist factions have completely overtaken nearly all denominations, even the most fundamental protestant ones.

    It’s un-PC to say it, but Christianity as properly practiced has no female priests/pastors, and women are always supervised by men. And women don’t teach men or boys, ever. All instruction of males is done by other males.

    Liked by 1 person

  390. jf12 says:

    @Tarnished, re: “Everybody *will* do things in their lifetime they aren’t proud of, that’s just how it is. It’s recognizing that you did it, and never doing it again that makes one an adult.”

    Ok, but. In the context of this post, “I’m not like that because I would never do that”, I think it’s recognizing that you *will* do it that makes one an adult. One (That Other One Over There, Not You Personally) would HAVE to personally recognize the tendency to do unproud things in one’s own self in order to motivate exerting oneself to avoid doing those things.

    It is precisely the attitude “I’m Not Like That” that makes one susceptible to being like that.

    Liked by 1 person

  391. Tarnished says:

    Seriously, man, I’m having a bit of fun with you above but…What the heck are you trying to say?! It’s like the frickin Voynich manuscript whenever you comment. :/

    Like

  392. Tarnished says:

    Ha! Alright, now we’re getting somewhere, jf12!

    Like

  393. Tarnished says:

    “Ok, but. In the context of this post, “I’m not like that because I would never do that”, I think it’s recognizing that you *will* do it that makes one an adult. One (That Other One Over There, Not You Personally) would HAVE to personally recognize the tendency to do unproud things in one’s own self in order to motivate exerting oneself to avoid doing those things.”

    Yes, absolutely!
    But this is not a “female thing” with all the AWALT, Unicorns, NAWALT crap. This is a human thing called “Growing Up and Taking Responsibility”. Everyone either learns or doesn’t learn this, it’s not a case of men automatically learning it and women never learning it.

    Like

  394. alana says:

    Btw, I wonder if I’m one of very few women who don’t find Johnny Depp super-gorgeous.

    Like

  395. jf12 says:

    re: “women respond well to “jerkery””

    Yep, and jerkery is what women respond well to, unfortunately. Thus like all things relating to the sexes, all women suffer from the folly of considering themselves exempt from the womenish tendency to hide what pushes women’s button! In this case, every woman’s *perceptions* of “What Jerkery Means To Me” should be buried under a mountain of grains of salt.

    Like

  396. Spawny Get says:

    As unacustomed as many here might be to hear it from an atheist, but regarding
    “It’s un-PC to say it, but Christianity as properly practiced has no female priests/pastors, and women are always supervised by men. And women don’t teach men or boys, ever. All instruction of males is done by other males.”

    I think society is going to have to re-adopt some parts of that if it is to survive. maybe not the ‘ever’ or ‘all’ part, but perhaps…”women don’t teach men or boys, very often. most instruction of males is done by other males.”

    Most of co-ed seems aimed at tearing down masculinity. Apart from the blatant woman favouring parts, obviously.

    I’m guessing that around half my teachers growing up were male. I was lucky. Scientific studies in the UK showed that female teachers aren’t objective in their marking. Some of my younger male relatives scraped the limits of preferred behaviour, I think.

    Liked by 2 people

  397. jf12 says:

    @Tarnished, re: getting me

    I was sending you good vibes between 2:12 pm and 2:13 pm. Glad to be of help.

    Liked by 1 person

  398. alana says:

    The previous comment wasn’t completely random, I said it after seeing the pic of Johnny Depp as Captain Sparrow posted above. :p I never understood why he’s talked about as the pinnacle of male good looks or smthg.

    Liked by 2 people

  399. alana says:

    “he’s talked about as the pinnacle of male good looks”. Correction: excluding Spawny. 🙂

    [SG – thank you for doing the decent thing by correcting the obvious error]

    Liked by 3 people

  400. Tarnished says:

    “It’s un-PC to say it…”

    Not un-PC. It’s the truth. Nobody has to be a part of a religion with these distinctions if they don’t want to be. Heck, it’s part of the reason I’m not one anymore.

    Like

  401. Tarnished says:

    “I’m guessing that around half my teachers growing up were male.”

    Same here. My area has a plethora of male teachers and daycare workers.

    Like

  402. theasdgamer says:

    @ jf12

    A day without your humor is a day without….fill in the blank, you slay me. Your playfulness (major alpha trait) seeps into me. I’m a mimic wrt playfulness. Playful people make me playful. But enough about you….

    The key to demonstrating the strength of my grasp of these keys, if one overlooks the too-frequent typos (including contextually clearly (!) missing words such as “sometimes there really AREN’T any exemptions”,

    At the risk of bragging…oh, hell, WGAF…I read this as you intended. But perhaps you need to strengthen your grasp on your keyboard….

    the often overblown analogies

    Noooooo! We here in the peanut gallery luv the analogies! Blow more analogies over our way more offend!

    the (I claim) quite rare thickest- as-a-brickest insensibilities

    I dissemble that remark. And I double-dog dare ya, ya bastage!

    I bent the keys back on themselves, clearly.

    I protract my previous suggestion about your keyboard. Sincerest regrets. And your little doge, too!

    The folly of considering oneself exempt from “the folly of considering oneself exempt”.

    Except when I’m exempt, I’m exceptional! (Sometimes exceptionally foolish, in an exempt-ish way, if you can accept it and grant me an acceptable, exceptional exemption.)

    Like

  403. Liz says:

    “Yep, and jerkery is what women respond well to, unfortunately.”

    Yep, everyone is responding to it very well here, obviously.

    [SG – this cracked me up, well played. I’d have been proud to have unleashed that one]

    Liked by 3 people

  404. Tarnished says:

    “Most of co-ed seems aimed at tearing down masculinity.”

    Correct. It’s not so much “co-ed” as “give female students what they want and force male students to like it/put up with it”. Bad for everyone, honestly.

    Liked by 1 person

  405. Spawny Get says:

    “It is precisely the attitude “I’m Not Like That” that makes one susceptible to being like that.”

    Fair point, but at times it seems that there’s an unnecessary amount of prodding in the chest accompanying it.

    There’s a trope of sorts in the UK of the pub bore who accompanies every sentence he proclaims with a prod in the chest of his unwilling audience using his pipe stem. Sooner or later in that situation every right thinking person is tempted to relocate said pipe to warmer, darker, browner climes.

    Liked by 3 people

  406. Tarnished says:

    Asdgamer, you’re melting my brain.

    Like

  407. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    Responses:

    1. She’s attractive. “I’ll only pick the peanuts up if I can use my mouth and pass them to you, mouth-to-mouth.”

    2. She’s unattractive. “After you.”

    Like

  408. Tarnished says:

    Liz,
    I really like your story above. It demonstrated very well the difference between being A Jerk vs A Man Standing Up For Himself.

    Liked by 2 people

  409. theasdgamer says:

    @ Spawny

    There’s a trope of sorts in the UK of the pub bore who accompanies every sentence he proclaims with a prod in the chest of his unwilling audience using his pipe stem. Sooner or later in that situation every right thinking person is tempted to relocate said pipe to warmer, darker, browner climes.

    Could you please provide a map?

    Like

  410. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn

    Asdgamer, you’re melting my brain

    It’s my inner jerkiness, luv.

    Liked by 1 person

  411. Spawny Get says:

    Gamer, sadly I did look for images (of the pub bore prodding), but alas! none were found.

    Is there an American parallel?

    Liked by 1 person

  412. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    if women respond well to “jerkery” they should be eating this style of communication up right now, right here, right?

    I reference you to my reply to Tarnation.

    Liked by 1 person

  413. Tarnished says:

    A map of where this occurs:

    Liked by 1 person

  414. theasdgamer says:

    @ Spawny

    Is there an American parallel?

    Sans prop.

    Like

  415. Tarnished says:

    “Tarnation”?!
    I love it! 😀

    Asdgamer,
    Well it wasn’t melting in a good way. It was really more of a “Crap, someone spilled a combination of melted gold, lava, and 5-alarm chilli over my noggin” sort of way.

    So, yeah, I guess it *was* due to your inner jerkiness… 😛

    Like

  416. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    “Is there an American parallel?”

    Europeans.

    Come on, you feed us a line like that, what did you expect?

    Liked by 2 people

  417. jf12 says:

    @Tarnished, re: “it’s not a case of men automatically learning it and women never learning it.”

    I agree. But men and women also suffer from distinctive weaknesses, as well as strengths. For example it is a internal strength of men that they do actually know precisely what turns them on, although their honesty about it is NOT a strength since it can be exploited by someone else e.g. a golddigger.

    And it is also a strength of men that they can rate a woman precisely (to decimal points) on the Hot Babe scale *because* of men’s low threshold of attraction! Everyone above the threshold is attractive enough to accept and there is a bunch of them, thereby enabling finer gradations (a statistical consequence of sampling theorems, if you want to go there). Two men could discuss ther relative merits of a Hot Babe for a long while, eventually agreeing to very slightly disagree. “Ok, Joe, you’re right, she’s probably more like an 8.8 than an 8.9 like I said at first.” “Well, Bill, I concede too, having studied the matter more fully now, you’re right she’s probably more like an 8.7 than an 8.6 like I said at first.”

    The corresponding strength of women is that they know what turns them off “You (jf12, i.e.), for example, you moron.” I note in passing that this strength is NOT the “But Johnny Depp really IS average!” and “Brad Pitt really IS average.” phenomenon, which instead reflects women’s weakness in perceiving, realizing, and acknowledging what turns them on. (the mental version of hidden ovulation)

    Two women could discuss “let me count the ways” that their own husbands are unattractive for hours each day every day. Women are, maybe, even better at finely rating the unattractiveness of Unhot Fools than men are at rating attractiveness.

    Like

  418. Spawny Get says:

    Even more apt. Relationship advice from the pub bore

    featuring the concept of ‘female orgasm expectancy’

    Liked by 2 people

  419. Tarnished says:

    “Two women could discuss “let me count the ways” that their own husbands are unattractive for hours each day every day.”

    Then why are they with them??? 😕

    Re: Attractiveness
    Does anyone else here think that scent is more important than sight? (Pheromones over base looks, I suppose?)

    Like

  420. jf12 says:

    re: “American parallel”

    There is the proverb “If you point a finger at someone then there are three pointing back at you.” but one wonders where to put the thumb.

    Like

  421. Spawny Get says:

    Is this a recent, familiar feeling experience?

    Liked by 1 person

  422. theasdgamer says:

    Let us now examinate the effeck of the playing of jf12 and yours untruly. Classic push-pull. We started out jerk-ish and transitioned into playfulness. Ladies, did we seem more interesting after our little show than before? Did you see lots of behavioral range and range of emotion and types of engagement? Be honest. Look at your comment count and willingness to engage us despite our previous jerkiness. Do you see us as more fun? I think that we made the case that you all like jerks. The jerks just have to be not-boring.

    Like

  423. Liz says:

    Tarnation! That was a really clever one, theasdgamer. 🙂

    Now I’m feeling competitive…can’t believe I never thought of that. 😛
    We need a photo caption contest!!

    Like

  424. Tarnished says:

    I thought it looked like a cart full of banana cream pies plow into a car full of clowns. 😀 😛

    Liked by 1 person

  425. Spawny Get says:

    “Then why are they with them??? :?”

    Because they’re married to the horrors and just legging it is frowned upon, especially if they are kids…

    Like

  426. Liz says:

    “Re: Attractiveness
    Does anyone else here think that scent is more important than sight? (Pheromones over base looks, I suppose?)”

    Scent is very important…I think whether it’s more or less important than sight would depend (for example, really bad breath would be a deal breaker regardless of appearance…).

    Like

  427. Tarnished says:

    Spawny,

    Well then, MGTOW for the win. Nobody should have to be with anyone who perceives more of their faults than good points.

    Liked by 1 person

  428. Poseidon says:

    Spawny:

    Here’s a couple of websites I recently discovered regarding the pathology of churchianity:

    http://eric-carpenter.blogspot.de/2015/02/25-reasons-professional-pastors-should.html

    http://www.thedones.com/

    Like

  429. Liz says:

    “Be honest. Look at your comment count and willingness to engage us despite our previous jerkiness.”

    The more confrontational the topic, the more disagreement, the higher the post count tends to be on a topic. Nothing kills discussion like total agreement. Has nothing to do with the “jerk factor”. To illustrate, try googling something controversial and see the number of hits, as compared to ‘animal husbandry’, or something equally uncontroversial and mundane.

    “Do you see us as more fun? I think that we made the case that you all like jerks. The jerks just have to be not-boring.”

    Yes, jerky playful/funny is better than jerky and unfunny. It’s always better to be interesting.

    Liked by 1 person

  430. jf12 says:

    @tasdg, re: shhh!

    Like

  431. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    The more confrontational the topic, the more disagreement, the higher the post count tends to be on a topic. Nothing kills discussion like total agreement. Has nothing to do with the “jerk factor”.

    Even with disagreement, isn’t there still engagement? Isn’t that an aspect of jerkiness that is attractive? Masculine naughtiness is still…masculine.

    Yes, jerky playful/funny is better than jerky and unfunny. It’s always better to be interesting.

    So, clowny-not-engaging-funny is less interesting than engaging-funny (playful)? Because maybe clownishness is too try-hard and engaging is more masculine?

    Like

  432. Spawny Get says:

    Cheers Poseidon
    http://eric-carpenter.blogspot.de/2015/02/reason-3-professional-pastors-turn.html
    seems where the US and UK parted ways (TBH I might well be entirely out of touch with CofE as it exists today, but I think I’m right about the public image)
    6 more to go, huh?

    The second link looks to be worth a look by the Dalrockians. http://www.thedones.com/
    Maybe they already have, I may just have missed its mention. I tend to read the posts but not all of the comments.

    Liked by 1 person

  433. Tarnished says:

    “So, clowny-not-engaging-funny is less interesting than engaging-funny (playful)? Because maybe clownishness is too try-hard and engaging is more masculine?”

    Nah.
    It’s because nobody goes to a circus to see an egotistical clown with his back to the audience.

    Like

  434. Spawny Get says:

    ‘Tarnation’ could catch on, you know?

    Liked by 1 person

  435. theasdgamer says:

    @ Tarn It!

    It’s because nobody goes to a circus to see an egotistical clown with his back to the audience

    Let us suppose that attractive jerks are engaging. If they are engaging, they won’t have their backs to the audience. Egotistical? Sure. Engaging? Sure. Boring? Not.

    Like

  436. Yoda says:

    Two women could discuss “let me count the ways” that their own husbands are unattractive for hours each day every day

    Too much time in their hands they do have.
    Doing something useful they should be.

    Liked by 2 people

  437. Liz says:

    Tarn it! He does it again… 🙂

    “Even with disagreement, isn’t there still engagement?”
    Yes, definitely. And that’s part of what makes it interesting.
    Otherwise, it would go about like the Monty Python sketch above.

    ” Isn’t that an aspect of jerkiness that is attractive? Masculine naughtiness is still…masculine.”

    This is what I’ve been trying to get across…”attractiveness” is generated in the context of the rapport…the ‘banter’ portion, not the jerkery (if that is an actual word…sounds a bit like porn).

    I DO think there’s a lot about “engaging-style” humor that is fun.
    And it’s more attractive than “clownish humor”, IMO, because it is an intellectual process (whereas just sheer clownishness/jackassery isn’t).

    This can apply to both sexes, actually. Think of a woman behaving as a slapstick clown versus a subtle humorous rapport. I think most people would find the second more attractive than the first (exception perhaps those who prefer the humor of ‘White Chicks’ to ‘Godsford Park’…some people find fart ignition very very funny, but I think they’re outliers). The most attractive/engaging would probably be some sort of underlying naughty-factor, tastefully applied.

    So, I’ll agree that in order to make an “attractive impression” the guy has to throw the humor out in a masculine (non-slapstick-clown) way…but I disagree that’s ipso facto jerkery. I’ll also agree that at the end of the day, the fact is, some women DO like jerks. So it’s contextual…there was a scene in Breakfast Club with Claire and Judd Nelson that demonstrated this aptly. That jerk act worked spectacularly on her, and there are a lot of women like that.

    A good sense of humor – the ability to tell a joke, rather than simply laugh at one, the ability to engage in a bit of repartee – is linked to intelligence, and that’s why I find it attractive. And I think that’s probably why most people do.

    Liked by 2 people

  438. Tarnished says:

    Asdgamer,

    True, but they’re still acting jerky. Their ability to be engaging and/or playful just makes them slightly more tolerable than a jerk who is in-your-face horrible. I’m still not attracted to them.

    Note: If a jerk is being playfully jerky to someone who doesn’t want to be a part of their “show” it is a gigantic turn off. I saw many stereotypically good looking jocks in high school put down the unpopular nerds in “playful” ways. Such actions are nauseating and highly unattractive.

    Liked by 1 person

  439. jf12 says:

    re: “It’s because nobody goes to a circus to see an egotistical clown with his back to the audience.”

    Remember when priests faced away from the congregation so they could see him doing it for them, i.e. in persona vulgi.

    Like

  440. Liz says:

    “A good sense of humor – the ability to tell a joke, rather than simply laugh at one, the ability to engage in a bit of repartee – is linked to intelligence, and that’s why I find it attractive. And I think that’s probably why most people do.”

    I should add, too, it’s the type of intelligence that applies well in social situations. Test scores that “prove” intelligence don’t really figure into practical application in social situations. In a nutshell, people in general respond well to humor. Mark Twain was brilliant, but he’s most loved for his witt/humor.

    Liked by 1 person

  441. jf12 says:

    re: map

    An expression that I don’t like is “He couldn’t find his [rear end] with both hands and a map.” My concern is always: What is the other hand for?

    Like

  442. jf12 says:

    @theasdgamer, re: rhetorical

    What oh what is an ordinary guy to do when he needs his fix of narcisstic supply but can’t afford bonding again?

    Like

  443. jf12 says:

    Yeah, well, you … you shouldn’t think … you can’t tell me you’re so sure that I can’t be sure that I’m exempt because … because … hey, you’re not exempt either, buddy!

    Like

  444. Tarnished says:

    “What oh what is an ordinary guy to do when he needs his fix of narcisstic supply but can’t afford bonding again?”

    No worries. I’ll introduce him to my father. He’s got enough narcissism for anyone.

    Liked by 1 person

  445. Tarnished says:

    “What is the other hand for?”

    Finding his cock.

    …or chicken. I’m not sexist against barnyard avians.

    Liked by 2 people

  446. Liz says:

    I like the oviparous when they aren’t vociferous.

    Like

  447. jf12 says:

    re: choking the chicken

    In my too-vast experience, when wringing a chicken’s neck the head often comes totally off. It’s not the best metaphor, imho.

    Relevant portion starts at 1:34

    Like

  448. Liz says:

    I am a true hypocrite, I’ll admit.

    Because I’ll eat chicken but I can’t watch that video.
    (eek Jf12…is that true? The head comes off?)

    Liked by 1 person

  449. Liz says:

    I always prefered the euphemism “roughing up the suspect” to “choking the chicken” anyway. 😛

    Like

  450. theasdgamer says:

    @ Liz

    Re: euphemisms…”let’s play UPS Driver…you come out to my truck and handle my package”

    Like

  451. Spawny Get says:

    regarding the head coming off…beware good ideas

    Liked by 1 person

  452. Spawny Get says:

    The perils of an arranged marriage

    Like

  453. Spawny Get says:

    Problems sexing babies and the downside of poor quality help

    Happy Friday Evening to All

    Liked by 1 person

  454. thedeti says:

    spawny:

    No posts of Blackadder unless you also post Rik Mayall as Lord Flashheart.

    Like

  455. I like the point about being more susceptible to being bad, if you insist that you can never be bad. Was it Satanists who said “exercise, not exorcise, your demons”? 😉

    Like

  456. jf12 says:

    re: the unreasonable effectiveness of badness in the natural world

    If there weren’t some degree of internal aversion to being bad, the external rewards make it seem likely that we’d all be villainous.

    Like

  457. Spawny Get says:

    “we’d all be villainous.”

    According to a large number of Hollywood films, being English I am teh Villain. In Die Hard you even had an English guy playing the German baddie.

    Like

  458. jf12 says:

    re: Us vs Them

    We’re US, so y’all must be Them.

    Liked by 1 person

  459. FuzzieWuzzie says:

    Spawny Get,
    Earlier, you wanted to know about churchianity. While my attitude may be down, I’ll concede, but take this with a grain of salt as second hand information. Most everywhere you’ll go, you’ll find male to female attendance at a one to two ratio.
    In the US, both Mother’s and Father’s Day fall on Sundays. When Mother’s Day rolls around, there’s nothing but praise from the pulpit. On Father’s Day, expect a strong verbal beat down. If that weren’t enough, our Dagwood Bumstead goes home, turns on the TV, and gets it again from the President on all the major networks.
    Rollo has taken to calling them Christo-feminists. I think that they’re vain enough to think that they have suborned God.
    I am not much for church. After what I said, I wonder how God feels about it?

    Like

  460. Spawny Get says:

    Fair enough. That wasn’t a complaint BTW.

    We even got to do Darth Vader

    (despite what the voice over says…Dave Prowse is forking English)

    I remember this stuff (that’s Darth)

    Which was a welcome improvement on

    Liked by 1 person

  461. Yoda says:

    But C3PO is English and a good guy he would be.
    But the biggie Obi-Wan he would be.

    But American accent I do have.
    Though syntax not so American it is.

    Liked by 1 person

  462. Yoda says:

    Chewbacca English Wookie he is.

    Liked by 1 person

  463. Spawny Get says:

    Fuzzie,
    even as an atheist, I liked the following words from the film Stigmata

    Here are the lines from the movie Stigmata:

    “The Kingdom of God is inside you and all around you,
    Not in a mansion of wood and stone.
    Split a piece of wood and God is there,
    Lift a stone and you will find God.”

    I have no idea of the value of this analysis (I’m not trolling anyone)

    It’s not about the church according to this.

    Don’t expect any conversion from me (I just do not believe in the existence of any god), but I do like what I (casually) know of the values expressed by the character being quoted. Not such a great fan of the organised church.

    Like

  464. Tarnished says:

    Fuzzie,

    I haven’t been to a church in many years, but I do sometimes attend a coven in my area for the more significant Sabbaths/equinoxes. Oddly enough, there tends to be a 1:1 ratio of men to women, as well as a 4:1 ratio of adults to kids. My Christian friends who actually make an effort to attend church uphold what you speak of though.

    Like

  465. Tarnished says:

    “The Kingdom of God is inside you and all around you,
    Not in a mansion of wood and stone.
    Split a piece of wood and God is there,
    Lift a stone and you will find God.”

    Precisely. If the Gods are actually paying attention to us (which I doubt most of the time), then it’s hardly likely They’d constraint Themselves to a particular building. Although…this specific quote is a bit more pantheistic than most Christians are willing to admit. 😉

    Like

  466. Tarnished says:

    Spawny,

    How do you react to religious types who claim you have no moral compass/sense of ethics due to your atheism? Or does that not happen across the pond?

    Liked by 1 person

  467. jf12 says:

    re: panentheism, not strictly pantheism per se

    Just per sayin.

    Liked by 1 person

  468. Spawny Get says:

    Doesn’t happen here TBH. Even if it did, what do you want me to do? Lie about believing? I do not.

    It’s kind of like the original sin of being a vayjayjay carrier…all you can do is live as ‘good’ a life as possible 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  469. Tarnished says:

    This is true, jf12. This viewpoint could be a part of panentheism, pantheism, polydeism, pandeism, or panendeism…and possibly others that I’m unaware of.

    Like

  470. Tarnished says:

    Spawny,

    Original sin?
    Pshaw. I refuse to be held accountable for someone else’s wrongdoings. 😛

    Liked by 2 people

  471. jf12 says:

    re: Whuddaya mean created? Funny, I don’t feel created.

    btw, we left that England place because it was BOGUS, dude.

    Liked by 1 person

  472. Spawny Get says:

    Didn’t you guys leave to get away from dangerous modern ideas like buttons?
    Or did we kick you out for spoiling the party?

    Then you fought for independence over vicious British taxation of 3%!

    (p.s. not saying that I know what side I’d have been on 😉 I’m no enthusiastic monarchist, though it might be better that President Bliar, or Prez o’Blimey, or (worst of the lot) Prez Killary )

    Liked by 1 person

  473. Tarnished says:

    My relatives didn’t come over to the US from Germany and Ireland until the 1920’s and 1890’s respectively…
    Probably why I don’t mind buttons or bright colors or singing. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  474. Spawny Get says:

    Regarding the Puritans, try this show (total 1 hour in 6 parts) which covers the Restoration. For the entire week they drink NO water (they do the diet of the time), they drink 3.5% abv beer (small beer), beer, wine etc because the water wasn’t safe at the time. They get thoroughly puddled.

    End of part 3 / start of art 4 they try caudle (sp) smells like ‘mulled sick’ it seems.
    at 4:50 Sue tries a wormwood bath as a cure for flatulence (at 6:00 she recounts her dreams caused by wormwood poisoning)

    Part 3 check out the ‘visage’ at 5:30…fembots will explode. A mask worn by the woman travelling, held in place by a button between the teeth.

    I HIGHLY recommend the various Supersizers programmes. The Romans’ episode is also cool. Quackus

    Like

  475. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Frankly, I’m deeply offended by Spawny’s athleticism, swaning around with his team spirit and halftime oranges. If we had fewer athletes around, the world wouldn’t be the mess…

    What?

    Oh.

    Never mind.

    Liked by 2 people

  476. jf12 says:

    re: Sue being put in a hole with a pastry lid on top

    I think I left my dream interpreter hat on my other head, but I’ll try. Sue is feeling like she’s being much too sweet, but nonetheless being kept in a box by someone who ought to better apreciate her creamy filling and flaky crust.

    Like

  477. theasdgamer says:

    @ jf12

    btw, we left that England place….
    …for Holland…then to the place of the Yanks. (apologies to Ton)

    Like

  478. jf12 says:

    re: little is much

    You’re entitled to a wrong opinion provided you admit it’s wrong. Women often mislead women about what men find attractive. Jones and Kramer say their measurements indicate that the fact that woman is attempting to be more attractive is more important to increasing her attractiveness than any supposed actual effectiveness of her technique in implementing her attempt.
    “This result was unchanged after statistically controlling for the perceived amount of cosmetics that each model used. Although cosmetics increase attractiveness, the effect is small, and the benefits of cosmetics may be inflated in everyday thinking.”
    Jones A, Kramer R. 2015. Facial cosmetics have little effect on attractiveness judgments compared with identity. Perception, 44(1), 79-86.
    http://www.perceptionweb.com/perception/misc/p7904/p7904-f1.pdf

    Earlier they showed that “There are a variety of miscalibrations where attractiveness is concerned–often, what one sex thinks the opposite sex finds attractive is incorrect. Here, we … find that models’ self-applied cosmetics are far in excess of individual preferences. These findings suggest that attractiveness perceptions with cosmetics are a form of pluralistic ignorance, whereby women tailor their cosmetics use to an inaccurate perception of others’ preferences.”
    Jones A, Kramer R, Ward R. 2014. Miscalibrations in judgements of attractiveness with cosmetics. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(10), 2060-2068.

    What are some ways in which women mislead men about what women find attractive in men?

    Like

  479. Liz says:

    “re: little is much”

    JF12, could you help me out and tell me where you’re pulling this (the “little is much”) from? The thread is long and I’ve lost track.

    Liked by 1 person

  480. jf12 says:

    I’m hanging this gem from the post title, telling someone what to think. One should think that little is much even if one is of the opinion that it’s not.

    Like

  481. jf12 says:

    One way in which men mislead other men about what women find attractive in men is when men tell other men that they really have to bulk up big. But that’s the only example I can easily think of. Also, I can’t think of any common examples of (hetero) men misleading women about what men find attractive.

    Liked by 1 person

  482. Tarnished says:

    “What are some ways in which women mislead men about what women find attractive in men?”

    Not sure. I don’t hang out with women or am privy to their musings anymore to a significant amount. If someone asks me what I find attractive, I’ll answer honestly…but can’t/won’t speak for other people.

    Like

  483. jf12 says:

    I’ve often thought that when women try to adjust their appearance to be more attractive, their intended audience usually comprises virtual housewives watching faraway on tv. Definitely not their family members at close quarters, nor the guys they bump into at work or church or wherever. But, how does one look into a mirror and instead of seeing what one sees, one sees how one imagines how one will be viewed on tv?

    Like

  484. Liz says:

    “Also, I can’t think of any common examples of (hetero) men misleading women about what men find attractive.”

    I can’t either. What men want and/or are attracted to is pretty standard. I think women’s attraction triggers are more complicated (and also change, depending on ovulation cycle/if she’s on hormones, ect). I don’t think supplication ever works as an attraction trigger…for example, there aren’t a lot of scenarios I can think of where getting on one’s hands and knees to pick up after a woman who demands it would be seen as attractive.

    Liked by 2 people

  485. Liz says:

    Thinking of the Judd Nelson/Claire scene in Breakfast club, I think that’s the type of girl “jerkiness” works on. She’s at the top of the pecking order in popularity, everyone constantly tells her she is great and she thinks a lot of herself…so the contrast, when he “brings her down” intrigues her. By contrast, I was a bookish shy thing and not popular at all. If someone had tried that on me I would have hid in the corner and been sad, wondering why he told me I had a ‘fat girls’ name’.

    Liked by 1 person

  486. Tarnished says:

    “But, how does one look into a mirror and instead of seeing what one sees, one sees how one imagines how one will be viewed on tv?”

    No clue. When I get ready in the morning, I basically just make sure I’m clean, good smelling, and presentable and/or professional looking. That’s it.

    If I’m going somewhere “fancy” with my love, I’ll dress more in a way that I know is pleasing to him. This means presenting as more feminine than I’m really ever comfortable with, but it’s not often and it makes him happy, so…

    Letting other, non-important strangers “dictate” how one looks (outside of basic hygiene) is pretty foolish and indicative of a level of social supplication typically found in teenagers.

    Liked by 1 person

  487. jf12 says:

    re: “there aren’t a lot of scenarios I can think of where getting on one’s hands and knees to pick up after a woman who demands it would be seen as attractive.”

    Julia knelt downcast near Ellen’s feet, but raised one of her wet eyes inquisitively. “Ma’am, please don’t …” Ellen kicked at her, braying imperiously “You impudent slut! I told you no peeking! Now get busy.”

    Like

  488. Tarnished says:

    “By contrast, I was a bookish shy thing and not popular at all.If someone had tried that on me I would have hid in the corner and been sad, wondering why he told me I had a ‘fat girls’ name’.”

    Same here. Knowing what I know now about various aspects of Game, it’s evident that in late high school and college that guys had tried some of this on me. But instead of knocking me off a nonexistent pedestal, it just dug a hole and pushed me in.
    Did you have similar experiences Liz?

    Liked by 2 people

  489. Liz says:

    Lol! I mean a DUDE getting on his hands and knees jf12. 😛

    Liked by 1 person

  490. Tarnished says:

    Jf12,

    What is that from?

    Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: