One of the primary ideas I’ve offered since starting this blog is that of the socially insaturating influence of the feminine imperative. I’ve even dedicated a particular category for it on my sidebar. It’s a recurring theme for my outlook on gender relations because I believe it’s the environment we subconsciously accept as the default. Women of course have little reason to question the primacy of their own imperative when it serves them, and men are less willing to analyze the social fabric they exist in if it intuitively means they might be rejected for intimacy, sex and social affirmation. Unplugging from the feminine Matrix takes an act of will.
I euphemise this environment at times when I refer to the details and social conventions of the imperative as “girl-world“, and often I think that readers may interpret the rise of fem-centrism as something unique to the late 20th century up to the present. And while it’s certain that 3rd wave feminism was the catalyst for the present day “girl-world” society we find ourselves in, I don’t think that it adequately accounts for the prime, directive motive that the feminine imperative demands, and has demanded since before our present feminization.
That prime motivation is control.
Risk vs. Security
It’s easy to simply pass off this feminine need for control as a grab for power, and to an extent that may be true, but this would be interpreting that need from a male perspective. Men tend to want power; power over others, and their own lives, to affirm status, esteem, affluence, etc. From a female perspective, there may be a minority of women who crave male power, but the vast majority seek control in terms of satisfying an innate need for their security. For women, security comes in many different varieties, financial, emotional, self-worth, etc., but their need for control is rooted in minimizing the risk and uncertainty associated with achieving that security.
Through a combination of testosterone and evolved neural wiring, Men thrive and grow in risk taking endeavors – we have a propensity for behaviors that are rewarded in risk. We will go to great lengths in order to take risks. Women’s primary impulse is to avoid risk; being the primary vehicles through which the next generation will pass and be nurtured it’s logical that women’s neural software and biochemistry be evolved for risk aversion. In seeking security, women developed their own set of uniquely evolved propensities for security. Ergo, they became the sex with the better developed capacity for communication, after a need for determining the most secure decisions available to them.
With the catalyst of the sexual revolution, the power dynamic shifted to the feminine imperative in a way it never had before in society. Once freed from the old societal norms, women were encouraged by the feminine (and their new found male sympathizers) to pursue their independence as they saw fit, but what generations of women did with this new freedom was more vigorously pursue what hundreds of thousands of years of evolved psychology had designed in them – to consolidate their own security.
Every law men see as blatantly misandrist from marriage to divorce, alimony to child custody, employment to sexual harassment and more, are primarily rooted in women’s inborn need for security. Virtually every feminine social convention is designed for women to consolidate on a long term security for themselves. Security is their reason for control. If they can control for the options, control the risk management, control the preconditions of their decisions-to-be, they can more definitively consolidate on their security need. Girl-world, our modern, fem-centric society molded by the feminine imperative, was founded on making a better environment for women to exercise this control in order to better facilitate their security motive.
Every browbeaten husband who’s abdicated his frame to appease his wife does so because she doesn’t trust him with controlling for her security. Encouraged for generations to be the self-sufficient, independent woman, and combined with generation of masculine ridicule, she predetermines for herself that men cannot be trusted to provide for her security. In order to meet this need she must take the reigns as a precondition for any marriage or pairing in spite of her wanting a man to do so.
Men are shamed for not being the men women expect them to be because they seem incapable of providing for their security. In girl-world this is the preconceived norm, men wont do it so we have to.
However the confounding element in this push for feminine control is Men’s influence and cooperation with their imperative. I took a lot of heat for declaring that Men define what is sexy for women. In girl-world this is an affront; women need to control men’s desires in order to make them compliant to their overall security need. Hypergamy can’t function efficiently if men are allowed to define women’s value in the sexual market place. That need for control is aggravated by men’s biologically hard-wired predisposition to prefer women THEY find sexy. Solution? Rewrite the societal rules for what men are allowed to find sexy. Thus we have a fem-centric societal push to encourage men to care about “what’s on the inside” and define their physical attraction cues as “superficial” and “shallow”. It’s the height of the feminine imperative’s arrogance and solipsism to think that it can rewrite the environmental cues for men evolved over centuries.
Feminine entitlement is a topic of much rancor in the manosphere, but one element I think is lacking in that discourse is the role that the feminine security need plays in it. Feminine entitlement is an extension of this need for control – men should owe women the security that their provisioning affords them, and they’re mad about it. In a recent post on In Mala Fide, Ferdinand details the lastest entitlement push for this feminine control – the new ‘dating’ site,
The basic premise is an overt illustration of exactly the one-sided need for security control women feel entitled to have with men. The premise?
You give the site your name, phone number and email. After getting a code from a robocall, you fill out ten questions — your age, your state, your sex etc. — and upload your photo. Then you select whether you want one match or three (the former costs $8, the latter $15), pay via PayPal, and that’s it. The site’s owners will personally match you to someone based on the info you’ve provided and you’ll get a seven-minute long phone call from them the following Monday.
The kicker is that no woman is expected to tender a picture of herself for the man’s benefit. His interest is dependent entirely on the controlling factor of the ‘matchmaker’ and her determination of his acceptability. And what was the motivation for starting this service?
THE WOMEN ARE IRATE. The women are talking about men, young men, the men they’d like to date and marry, and are they ever pissed. Here’s what they’re saying:
“All they want is sex. They don’t care about relationships.”
“They’re so lazy.”
“All they do is play video games.”
“They aren’t men. They’re boys.”
The women are a little bewildered. They’re good girls. They followed the script: did well in high school, got into college, worked hard there, got out, got jobs, started looking around for someone special to share life with, and …
“I met a guy the other night. Good-looking, smart. Twenty-eight years old. He still lives at home. With his mom.” Young men are now nearly twice as likely as young women to live with their parents; 59 percent of guys ages 18 to 24 and 19 percent of 25-to-34-year-olds live at home. Based on those Census Bureau stats, 64,000 young Philly men have returned to or never left the nest—and they all have mothers, ex-girlfriends, grandmothers, dads and other friends and relations worrying about their plight.
Essentially the site’s founder, E. Jean Carroll, has taken the Kate Bolick / Kay Hymowitz ‘Man-Up’ model of dating in the new masculine paradigm to the next level – simultaneously monetizing women’s insecurities about male ‘Kidults’, reinforcing feminine security entitlement and absolving women of the decisions they made that put them into this new dating paradigm. Bottom line, Carroll is selling hypothetical dates with “real” men with the means to provide the security that women are owed them. And once again the theme repeats itself; men can’t be trusted to provide for your security ladies, so Carroll will do it for you
And yet there is something to be said about the kidification of males, especially in the West. The last 10 years of my life have been dedicated to robbing males from W2 jobs and throwing them into self employment. Time and time again I am confronted by weak risk-adverse males who can’t seem to adapt to the confident behavior required of business owners. It’s no wonder that most of these weak males also have terrible sex lives, or worse: the sex dungeon. If they have a woman, it’s typically one who is far more confident and financially strong than he.… Read more »
Unfortunately we live in a spectator society now, especially in North America. Do we go out and socialize and talk to the opposite sex? Nah. Just flip on Jersey Shore and live vicariously through them as they do those things. Do we go exploring nature and learn to camp, fish, build a fire, and survive? Nah. Let’s just watch other people do that on Survivor. Do we travel the world? Nah, let’s watch other people do that on Amazing Race. Do we exercise and keep thin and healthy? Nah, let’s order pizza while we watch other people do that on… Read more »
I gave up my smart phone in November and it was the final anchor that bound me to fake relationships completely.
I just gave up SMS as well, in February, and now I require phone calls.
I’m amazed at the response that my voice has in situations where I was otherwise flaked on. You can’t properly text or email dominance, but the voice has amazing powers.
Yes, hypergamy is strong. In time, open polygyny will develop.
Polygyny exists on some level already (think poor black criminal types with 6 kids from 4 women). I’m a supporter of polygyny actually, and tell my regulars that I can see myself having many kids with a few solid, feminine motherly women. The reason why polygyny isn’t happening is because the State takes responsibility for single mothers in excess. It’s part of the masculinization of women in the West and upsets the balance that naturally comes without that safety net in place. Over time, as governments grow evermore impoverished, I firmly believe an unregulated style of polygyny will emerge. Not… Read more »
Hypergamy leads to Polygamy… Indeed.
– I thought it was crazy that Ferdinand posted on the same subject and was going to link to it. – I don’t know of anyone who’s so blatantly said “woman are competing for men, this is a problem because it used to be the other way around”. – Besides that this was the other eye opener: “The women are a little bewildered. They’re good girls. They followed the script: did well in high school, got into college, worked hard there, got out, got jobs, started looking around for someone special to share life with..” How many times have we… Read more »
This is an interesting spin on the feminine imperative.
I’ve usually thought of it in terms of framing relationship as requiring commitment/resources, and of women banding together to keep control over rogue males (read males who refuse to commit or who share resources outside of a main pairbond) through social ostracism.
This puts it at one meta-level removed. The underlying drive of the feminine imperative is not commitment, it’s control over resources, and security. And in the real world we might see that as communist and socialist leanings in females.
I believe it has been discussed in more intimate detail elsewhere regarding the differences between North Vietnamese societies and those of the south: in one, men control the purse strings, in the other it’s reversed. I may be wrong about the country, but what I read years ago was that the female controlled financial areas were more likely to lose wars because of the betaness of males. In the US, I recently read that women control something like 75% of spending (no citation, I’m on my iPad at an airport). Even big screen TVs are primarily purchased by women, and… Read more »
“Then again, if a woman I’m with asks for fancy dinners or trips…” Which, strangely enough, seems to happen more with older, fatter women than young cute ones. This is one of the perils of being around age 40. If you date anyone close to your own age group, you get some seriously demanding women, not the fun, flirty younger women who can make it a great night going to only the Slurpee machine. Why is it that the lesser the market value of the woman, the higher demands she seems to make? And then they actually wonder why “you… Read more »
Control as a means for security, yes. I usually call that “resources”. Security fits better.
[…] Rollo Tomassi- “The Burden Of Control“ […]
[…] victory!Links to Tawkify posts:Bronan the Barbarian!Fly, Fresh and YoungChad Daring/Chef in JeansRollo TomassiMichael BycAmateur StrategistThe GeographerIan IronwoodScatmasterRobert StumpTagged as: Betabeat, E. […]
Girls need something controlling their lives. They seek a dominating influence to engage their neuroticism and give meaning to their emotions. In its absence, or when it wanes, they will want for another. This is why unattached girls fill their lives with endless activity and schedules to keep busy. For single girls, going to Starbucks with their friends is important. Every man is familiar with the 1-2 year mark where your girlfriend starts trying to drag you to more of her things. In the man’s mind, this is a good thing. She’s developing her own life, she has her own… Read more »
This is a good thought. Write more about it. How does one regain that control or frame?
[…] Rollo Tomassi […]
Wait’ll they see the “real men” they find on that stupid site. More anger….
Yeah, they’ll probably find them even less appealing than the betas they reject by the dozen…
A couple years ago I researched some online dating sites to see what they were about, and “the dating sites that are based on personality” were b.s. (not only because you could say I want X and the site computer system search results would not say X eventhough I said X was the result I wanted as it would incorrectly result in H personality, but the main reason it was b.s. is because it was even trying to base on “personalities and the soulmate myth” to begin with and often would not show any pictures of the women eventhough males… Read more »
And if you are wrong about it all being because a woman needs to control her level of security? What then?
Why is it just now women are in the lime light? The pill gave women the freedom to have casual sex. The freedom for them to do what comes naturally. Men are not the only ones who are naturally promiscuous.
[…] Rollo Tomassi […]
Why should woman want to date or be in a relationship with a controlling person who doesn’t take responsiblity for themselves? Would you date yourself is the only question people need to ask themselves to figure out if the “problem” is them or the other sex. You should get what you give. Risk has both an upside and a downside. The house usually wins.
In some countries today it is expected that the man needs to hit his woman under some circumstances. There is not only no social stigma against it, but the girls sisters and mother will agree with the mans punishment. I’m not talking about Iran or Afcrapistan, but SE Asia countries, such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, etc. I have rarely hit a woman. It has rarely been necessary. But sometimes you have two choices – hit her, or break up. So yes, hitting her in such an instance really does mean you care. It is a travesty the way this… Read more »
Woops – posted on the wrong thread. Meant to post on inmalafide http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2012/02/27/the-necessity-of-domestic-violence/
But I suppose there is some small relevance here – men need to counterbalance women’s control issues when women use women’s freaked out women’s ways.
lol she actually gets irritated when he starts to apologize for smacking her.
[…] Rollo Tomassi […]
This kind of one sided babying of women through protection used to make me laugh. How could any woman that needed such treatment ever think she could be seen as ‘equal’ to the system that is protecting her and was put in place by men? Now this kind of thing just pisses me off. The idea that an old, washed up woman can decide that men aren’t ‘worth these women’ is insulting. I wonder if it was a difference in where I’m at in life, if it was the red pill, if it was a matter of degree of transgression,… Read more »
[…] the Barbarian! Fly, Fresh and Young Chad Daring/Chef in Jeans Rollo Tomassi Michael Byc Amateur Strategist The Geographer Ian Ironwood Scatmaster Robert Stump J. DeVoy Omega […]
well, how about building a dating web site based on the principles of pre-qualifying the women instead? do you guys think something like this will fly, commercially speaking? i have the means of production and marketing. ideas of letting only manosphere men in is swirling in head right now. just for kicks.
[…] The Rational Male […]
[…] Rollo Tomassi […]
If women have any power at all it is only because men collectively gave it to them Historically women were not educated, could not work and had no control over reproduction. Now we are educated, work and use birth control. Feminism was created by the men who provided the education,work and birth control to women along with social acceptance of these behaviors. If there are problems between the sexes everyone is guilty. If men were not inclined to spray their sperm wherever and in whomever than women would have to change. One egg versus billions of sperm competing for one… Read more »
[…] comfortable place in any relationship would never been experienced. I do understand her need to feel secure in all respects but everything she did throughout her life and her decisions actually hurt her […]
[…] http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/07/the-burden-of-control/ […]
[…] http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/07/the-burden-of-control/ […]
That’s damn good.
[…] (enlace al original en ingles) […]
wh0cd417931 propranolol resource