Women Talk, Men Do

talk

Towards the end of last week’s comment thread there were some very insightful questions about how Men and women communicate.

Jeremy:

Honestly, [Stingray], I’ve never met a woman who actually wanted…”deep meaningful conversations, often.” I think this is another lie that women tell themselves. What women seem to want, conversationally, is an authority figure. They want someone who can talk for hours about things they have no understanding of. They want to be intellectually dazzled more than participate in a “deep meaningful conversation.”

[…] To be honest, and this will sound like I’m being arrogant, most women I’ve spent any time conversing with are poorly-read, lacking creative thoughts, and have an abysmal understanding of politics and the world at large. Having said that, I still can’t stand it when women say nothing on a date.

Yohami:

”deep meaningful conversations” for a woman, means “emotional stuff about how I feel and what I want”, “reaffirmation and validation of my viewpoints” and of course “entertain me with stories that show me your character and make me feel good about myself for being with you”

So of course they want that often.

jf12:

Yohami, deep doesn’t mean just telling her how you feel about her feelings, it means also helping her to uncover her inner goodness in the way that she agonized for almost a few moments when she betrayed one friend at the expense of another. In other words, you hold your metaphorical conch of an echo chamber to her metaphorical ear and its solipsistic otoacoustic emissions, and she can hear what she wants to hear, deeply.

Stingray:

Woman are not good at and hate what men mean by a deep meaningful conversation. The argument and debate, presenting and then criticizing ideas, and the ad hominems (that so often you all can then get up from the table and it is ALL over). That is not our idea of deep conversation at all. Then the feelings are NOT good and most women hate it.

Deti:

And the last thing a woman wants in a “deep, meaningful conversation is for the guy to talk about things important to HIM or, even worse, about HIS feelings. HIS feelings, wants, needs, and desires are the LAST things she wants to talk about because that’s so….beta.

The best male friends I have share one or more common interests with me – a sport, a hobby, music, art, fishing, lifting, golf, etc. – and the best conversations I can remember with these friends occurred while we were engaged in some particular activity or event. Even just moving a friend into his new house; it’s about accomplishing something together and in that time relating about shit. When I lived in Florida some of the best conversations I had with my studio guys were during some project we had to collaborate on for a week or two.

Women, make time with the express purpose of talking between friends. Over coffee perhaps, but the act of communication is more important than the event or activity. Even a ‘stitch-and-bitch’ is simply an organized excuse to get together and relate. For women, communication is about context. They are rewarded by how that communication makes them feel. For Men communication is about content and they are rewarded by the interchange of information and ideas.

Women talk, Men do.

Josey Wales:

Women typically don’t give a shit about world affairs, history, etc. They just don’t seem interested in pondering, learning about, debating the big issues.

There has to be a bio/evo explanation for this, and my best guess is that women’s concerns/interests have always been more provincial, localized and trivial. Picture a bunch of women sitting around a campfire hen party cluck session in primitive societies… Sharing gossip as they threshed the grain or made clothes.

I’m inclined to agree this. It’s no secret that men and women’s brains are wired differently, but what’s interesting is the complementarity between between both sex’s brains. It’s a mistake to think that women’s neural predilections for emotion and intuitiveness is inherently a weakness or a liability, but it’s equally a mistake to think that men’s dispositions towards rationalism, problem solving and inventiveness.

Maps of neural circuitry showed that on average women’s brains were highly connected across the left and right hemispheres, in contrast to men’s brains, where the connections were typically stronger between the front and back regions.

Ragini Verma, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, said the greatest surprise was how much the findings supported old stereotypes, with men’s brains apparently wired more for perception and co-ordinated actions, and women’s for social skills and memory, making them better equipped for multitasking.

“If you look at functional studies, the left of the brain is more for logical thinking, the right of the brain is for more intuitive thinking. So if there’s a task that involves doing both of those things, it would seem that women are hardwired to do those better,” Verma said. “Women are better at intuitive thinking. Women are better at remembering things. When you talk, women are more emotionally involved – they will listen more.”

This pretty much confirms men and women’s communicative methods I outlined in The Medium is the Message:

We get frustrated because women communicate differently than we do. Women communicate covertly, men communicate overtly. Men convey information, women convey feeling. Men prioritize content, women prioritize context. One of the great obfuscations fostered by feminization in the last quarter-century is this expectation that women are every bit as rational and inclined to analytical problem solving as men. It’s result of an equalist mentality that misguides men into believing that women communicate no differently than men. That’s not to discount women as problem solvers in their own right, but it flies in the face how women set about a specifically feminine form of communication. Scientific study after study illustrating the natural capacity women have for exceptionally complex forms of communication (to the point of proving their neural pathways are wired differently) are proudly waved in by a feminized media as proof of women’s innate merits, yet as men, we’re expected to accept that she “means what she says, and she says what she means.” While more than a few women like to wear this as a badge of some kind of superiority, it doesn’t necessarily mean that what they communicate is more important, or how they communicate it is more efficient, just that they have a greater capacity to understand nuances of communication better than do men. One of the easiest illustrations of this generational gender switch is to observe the communication methods of the “strong” women the media portray in popular fiction today. How do we know she’s a strong woman? The first cue is she communicates in an overt, information centered, masculine manner.

From an evolutionary perspective, it’s likely that in our hunter-gatherer tribal roles had a hand in men and women’s communication differences. Men went to hunt together and practiced the coordinated actions for a cooperative goal. Bringing down a prey animal would have been a very information-crucial effort; in fact the earliest cave paintings were essentially records of a successful hunt and instructions on how to do it. Early men’s communication would necessarily have been content driven discourse or the tribe didn’t eat.

Similarly women’s communications would’ve been during gathering efforts and childcare. It would stand to reason that due to women’s more collectivist roles they would evolve to be more intuitive, and context oriented, rather than objective oriented. A common recognition in the manosphere is women’s predisposition toward collectivism and/or a more socialist bent to thinking about resource distribution. Whereas men tend to distribute rewards and resources primarily on merit, women have a tendency to spread resources collectively irrespective of merit. Again this predispositions is likely due to how women’s ‘hard-wiring’ evolved as part of the circumstances of their tribal roles.

Men Like Women

When a man attempts to communicate like a woman (context-primary), women associate him with the feminine (i.e. he talks like a woman). This subconsciously indicates to her that a guy is Beta and making concessions of his maleness to better identify with the feminine. When you read about angry women feeling duped by the Nice Guy, who was only ‘playing nice’ in order to earn her intimacies, that deception is rooted in a guy relating to women as a woman would.

As you’re probably guessing, with the rise of social feminization, post-sexual revolution, men have been socialized and acculturated to express themselves increasingly as a woman would. This is part of boys-men’s earliest feminine conditioning; a calculated effort by the Feminine Imperative to train men to communicate as women do. I call this men’s “sensitivity training”, but in essence it’s a social effort to force men to rewire their brains to better accommodate a feminine-primary society. “Get in touch with your feminine side”, is really a plea for men to contort their natural ways of communicating into a feminine aligned mode of communicating.

The results however are very much the same as the faux-nice guy effect I describe. There is a subtle disingenuousness that the feminine mind perceives when a man communicates as a woman would. Alpha Men wouldn’t care enough to accommodate women’s communication preferences.

Incongruent communication styles is a tough obstacle for blue pill men to overcome when transitioning to red pill Game-awareness. The sincerity they hope to convey to women about their intentions is incongruous with how women’s limbic understanding of male communication style works. Men are men, because they talk ‘like men’ and are concerned with what Men are concerned with. Granted, the socialization of men to be more feminine-oriented doesn’t do a man any favors in unlearning this, but overcoming the fear of asserting himself as a Man and communicating to a woman as a Man would is imperative.

As most of the male commenters above will attest, there comes a point (usually for older, mature men with the experience to know) where forcing himself to relate to a woman on her terms is simply exhausting. It becomes mentally taxing to maintain interest – at some point men will want to speak their own language, feminine-primacy be damned, but it’s when he does revert back to his native gender language that he becomes more attractive.

When a Man drops the pretense of catering to the feminine, this is when he sets himself apart as a truly masculine agent. He is unapologetically masculine, and that is the mark of an Alpha – to not bend over into the feminine to better identify himself with the feminine. There is strength(and tingles) in our differences from women. So if you’re a newly red pill Man, start making efforts to consciously identify where you’re aligning yourself, your beliefs, your personality with accommodating the feminine and start unapologetically shifting them to a masculine-primary purpose.

5 6 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Speak your mind

190 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jf12
jf12
8 years ago

Rollo said “Not because you’re necessarily a passive Beta, but that’s how women perceive men – as a girlfriend, when they communicate as her girlfriends would.” This is how it is.

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

Not really, Jeremy. The thought of being in a relationship with someone you don’t want to talk to doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. If you aren’t excited to share things with them, learn their perspective, hear their thoughts, you’re just together for the arrangement of the relationship, not the actual person. If people are happy with that kind of structure, fine, but others are not satisfied with that. They’ve already transcended the basic Maslovian needs or have even adapted to proceed without them.

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

@GeishaKate – you have just described the typical hookup-culture/fuck-buddy/harem arrangement that has been de-facto created within today’s sexual marketplace. When young people are content with being in an arrangement where they aren’t excited with sharing things, learning perspectives, etc. They’re just together for sex, no more, and can go find another “partner” for that as and when desired. The disconnect is when a woman then tries to act as though that arrangement were something more serious. Thus the “meaningful communication” problem that we are commenting about. There is no real interest in communicating with what happens to be a human-shaped… Read more »

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

“this is getting tremendously long” But it was worth reading.

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

BPS said “His Physiological needs for sex get met.” and “she finds his developed self to be absolutely awesome”, evidently because he doesn’t need sex from her.

Jeremy
8 years ago

@Kate Yes really, Kate. The thought of being in a relationship with someone you don’t want to go survival camping with often doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. If you aren’t refreshed to keep things stoic and harmonious, discuss the finer points of international finance and business, hear their well-structured thoughts on how best to fix government, you’re just together for the arrangement of the relationship, not the actual person. If people are happy with that fem-centric “must share feelings” kind of structure, fine, but others are not satisfied with that. They actually come here to transcend from… Read more »

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

jf12 – yep, pretty-much any girl will do for sex. The less-attached the better. At least, that’s the vibe I get from the PUA and MGTOW community as a whole. It resonates with something inside myself. More below. I don’t think that it has anything to do with any idea that the guy has no need of sex from her. I think it’s more a case of he’s got his shit together by prioritising himself. That translates to immense self-confidence, which is chick-crack. Sex sells to men. Confidence sells to women. This is why irrational self-confidence is espoused in the… Read more »

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

Asking a woman to stop caring about her priorities would be as absurd as asking a man to give up his. The point is to find a middle ground. Each person makes some concessions and the couple makes net gains.

The Burninator
The Burninator
8 years ago

@Kate You’ve already been answered, but you didn’t realize it. If you want me to “listen, but don’t fix” then you’re deliberately asking me to work against my hard wired nature as a man. That is, no matter how you try to disguise it with “be with me in a relationship” nothing but unbridled sadism. Why would I wish to be in a relationship with such a person? If you want a five minute vent to bitch about work, I might indulge that. But those 45 minute to 2 hour mental vomit episodes? No, no thanks, talk to your girlfriends… Read more »

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@BPS I can’t disagree but I must finesse. “That translates to immense self-confidence, which is chick-crack.” It depends. I’ve always been immensely self-confident in my abilities, in the same übernerdly way that Steve Urkel and Bill Gates had self-confidence. What women desire most from some men (e.g. attention and self-confidence), women find most repulsive from other men (“Who does who he think he is? Why is he creeping on me?”). “When I look into myself, I find the urge for the least attachment possible.” I find within myself the urge for the most attachment, but I no longer believe women… Read more »

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

Re: men complaining. When I was young the guy who got the most attention from girls was the good-looking complaining loner. He complained about the weather, he complained about the school food, he complained about his girlfriend’s perfume, he complained about not being sufficiently appreciated. He complained about a teacher making him stay after school to take a test thereby missing a mandatory work-out for the football team, and in a rage he turned over the teacher’s desk. The girls were ecstatic to have something to talk about for several days nonstop.

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

IME men complain almost as much as women. The key difference is that men almost never use the phrase “I feel..” and this is crucial. Men complaint’s are combination of critique, analysis, and search for a solution to that will end the complaint. Men complain from the need to find solutions. Women, however, seem to never have a complaint that doesn’t begin with “I feel…” That’s understandable because a woman cares most about what she is feeling right now. Expressing those feeling makes them more intense, and gives opportunities for other to validate her feelings, which allows the added bonus… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
8 years ago

@BPS – It’s the fact that women have broken the explicit bargain of creating lifelong families with men that is at the root of the current social crisis. What chiquita’s like Kate can never acknowledge is that women initiate the large majority of divorces where young children are involved. That women are raising 1/3 of our children without fathers ever being involved. That women kill babies in their wombs in the tens of millions per year in the U.S. alone. Women changed their minds about how they wanted to participate in those lifetime social constructs with men – not men.… Read more »

Softek
Softek
8 years ago

A girl was talking to me last night about her boyfriend complaining. She was getting pissed off at him because he was saying that he was really depressed, and her logic was — if you’re depressed, do something about it. Absolutely zero empathy/sympathy — less than zero. It was just pure disdain. She’s in an almost identical situation to him: is really depressed, isn’t doing much about it…but doesn’t see that. She showed me a part of the conversation where he confronted her and asked her what she thought made her so much better than him, what was she doing… Read more »

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

@jf12 – I used to have a strong urge for attachment also. That part of me is dead. Interesting your other thoughts, I will think about them for a while. @Glenn – yep, as I said though: that horse is long-since beaten to death. I am at the point where I no longer desire to explain it any more to women. When I read the SCUM manifesto was when I realised that women collectively are insane. The Unabomber got put away, the writers of the SCUM manifesto should have as well. Instead women go around giggling at Bobbitt jokes. Deeply… Read more »

Tiphereth
Tiphereth
8 years ago

@Rollo: I think the main disconnect is that men are now expected to relate like women. Thus, your reason and your capacity to solve any problem or complaint is irrelevant – the feminine is the dominant social frame now, so sit there and listen to her like her girlfriends would. I think there are a number of disconnects. I had read once a very intelligent blogger (probably into psychoanalisis), stating some tenets which I can identify with major manosphere themes: i) Women only value the “difficult” love, because of the emotional roller coaster provided by it, and the possibility of… Read more »

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Tiphereth re: “I think it’s more complex”. Read a good portion of the articles under Rollo’s category of The Feminine Imperative before going further. Everything should clear up, especially about the social effects of unleashed hypergamy. Knowing the FI, we can predict that women would tend to try to engage in AF during their youth (i.e. up until age 29) when they can still pull the great-looking guys relatively effortlessly, and then after hitting the Wall either try to clean up their act for BB or just drop out and become cat ladies because in their minds they’re still 23… Read more »

trackback

[…] Feminine and masculine communication. […]

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
8 years ago

@Softek:- But man, that conversation last night was an eye opener. I didn’t say anything, but in my head all I could think was, “Geez, you’re kind of a bitch.” Man you ain’t been there. Only time I get sick is with hit&run viruses (I lived in a major global tourist destination and airport hub, a plague factory) and would have to get to bed for a day or so. Maybe twice a year. With strict instructions not to bother me in any way unless the building was on fire. Just me, pitch darkness and this here bottle of Greek… Read more »

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Tam it’s not your sickness per se it’s your crowding of her territory. It’s the same reason so many retired men are berated by their wives: he’s supposed to be gone for 11 hours every day, leaving her queen of the castle. It’s simply the fact of his presence, his material existence, his having mass and occupying space. And eating her bonbons.

commenting101
commenting101
8 years ago

@JF12: No. It’s the sickness. Females are revolted at any sign of weakness in her man. Even female healthcare providers – AKA Doctors will treat a male with medical problems much worse than a female. My own wife gets noticably snippy when I have any kind of illness. The worse the illness the bitchier she gets.

This happens to every single man I have ever known. The minute that they get sick, the woman starts going batshit crazy.

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

@Tam @commenting – correct indeed. She is allowed to be weak and sick, he is not. Ever. I sometimes wonder if that is behind the old days of earlier mortality, men were not given the chance to heal up/get well properly. This is personally anecdotal: when I’m not hanging around women I get sick a lot less. The times that I get sick it is far milder. Less stress? Less picking up random shit from her? Who knows the reason. I do find it curious though. Speaking of nurses, the times that I’ve dated nurses I’ve been more prone to… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
8 years ago

@BPSoul :- if they were anything like NHS nurses, particularly agency casuals, my experience is that they simply have no concept of personal hygiene or indeed infection control. My main concern when stretchered into those people’s palaces (broken bits invariably, I must seem like a clumsy sod to whoever garners the stats; not so) is not that they reek of stale booze (spirits) or mellow Virginia, it’s keeping whatever I have in the way of carkeys, housekeys (v. risky) and phone about my person until I can hand them over to a friend. Book your personal effects in, my arse.… Read more »

Jeremy
8 years ago

@Kate Asking a woman to stop caring about her priorities would be as absurd as asking a man to give up his. The point is to find a middle ground. Each person makes some concessions and the couple makes net gains. “Let’s compromise.” —- Said by every dictator and evil man in history before they stabbed someone in the back. The problem with your unopposable stance in that comment is that it comes from a position of, “I need a man to listen to me but never solve any problems that I speak of, and when you as a man… Read more »

Tiphereth
Tiphereth
8 years ago

@jf12 Everything should clear up, especially about the social effects of unleashed hypergamy. That’s what I referred to “sexual power”: young girls, usually at their prime years of beauty, can fuck almost whatever “hot guy” they find along the way. Whereas young boys, at the prime years of the sexual development and emotional development, can only dream of fucking the hottest girls, because they cannot play a passive role in the process, and taking action requires learning and maturity, usually through taking risks and trial and error. I think most get busted, even traumatized along the process depending on how… Read more »

Black Poison Soul
8 years ago

@jeremy – compromise for a woman is taking advantage of deliberately-flawed logic. You mutually decide to partially agree to keep the peace and meet partway, followed by another compromise and you again mutually decide to agree and meet partway, then again ad-infinitum. Suddenly you find that you’ve “compromised” your way practically all the way into her frame and she’s the one calling the shots, in control. This is a process like: Some P = Q, therefore all P = Q in small, staged steps. Some men are rapists, therefore many men are rapists, therefore most men are rapists, therefore all… Read more »

Richard
Richard
8 years ago

The differences between men and women are evolutionary in origin. To this day, men still “hunt” and women still “herd”. Hunting requires a triangle, a hierarchy. Herding requires a circle, a consensus. A hierarchy arises from competition, a consensus arises from commonality.

Competition selects for high testosterone, commonality selects for low testosterone. Thus men are risk amenable and women are risk averse. Their contrasting attitudes to risk explain their contrasting styles.

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

Talking about problems and making general conversation are two separate subjects.

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Tiphereth re” young boys … can only dream of … the hottest girls”. It’s not only the young, and *certainly* not only the hottest! Most men are extremely deprived sexually by women, deliberately deprived by women. Almost all women *enjoy* knowing the vast majority of men are extremely deprived. Depending on how yoy count, the majority of single men of all ages, old as well as young, are involuntarily celibate. http://www.justfourguys.com/the-han-solo-seduction-leia-falls-in-love/#comment-14173 Keep in mind that in today’s culture the vast vast majority singles do not feel constrained socially to confine sex to relationships, so the only things keeping them from… Read more »

Jeremy
8 years ago

Right… two separate rules for different situations. How typical of a female, “When I say this rule applies, it now applies, when I say it doesn’t apply, it doesn’t apply.” Sorry Kate, your weaseling isn’t going to save your stance here. What you want to convey in response to Rollo’s post is not what you’re going to allow yourself to convey directly (non-covertly) on this thread. This means your contribution is going to be (in explicit terms) meaningless noise as I demonstrated. That doesn’t mean that myself or others are not going to learn something from what you post. There’s… Read more »

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

“two separate rules for different situations” Exactly.

draggin
draggin
8 years ago

I think this sums it up

Sao Feng
Sao Feng
8 years ago

In other news, ReturnOfKings bans commentators who fall prey to female attention whores.

Sao Feng
Sao Feng
8 years ago

pure gold:
“I’ve realized the problem is not just females commenting here, but the men who reply to their stupid comments”

http://www.returnofkings.com/30942/you-will-be-banned-if-you-reply-to-a-female-commenter

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

Truth, Rollo. I think that Roosh lost his temper after the low-quality rush of women commenters, he probably wants a higher quality of commentary than “Maureen” and co were providing. I guess that you can’t expect better after going triple-viral and getting a half-million screamingly incoherent death-threats and whining. (Slight exaggeration.)

Dammit I had something to add to the discussion here. Got sidetracked and lost it. Hopefully it comes back to me.

BlackPoisonSoul
8 years ago

Mmmmmmmm click traffic. Can’t comment on that one Rollo: you’d be more privy to that than us. The relevancy of various posts probably varies by the reader. At any rate, I *think* that I’ve recalled what I was going to try and share. It’s kind of mixed up and messy, very raw thoughts regarding communication styles: Men talk in order to do. Even if it’s just clarifying the thinking and bouncing ideas off others to help get a grip on things and make final decisions. Women talk in order to spin. As in, propaganda-like, to spin reality into a form… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Kate
“two separate rules for different situations” Exactly.

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Kate’s idea of “compromise” is that a man will do what she wants him to do when she wants him to do it.

By the way, Kate, there’s a nail in your forehead…in case you missed the two postings of the vid, it could be posted again, eh?

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Rollo I still believe in an open discourse, but I understand Roosh’s reasoning. Sometimes the only way for men to learn from women IS to reply to stupid comments. Women’s outrage and rationalizations often prove my points better than I can illustrate them. Different venues likely benefit from different rules. Some years back Zed was downright hostile to women who posted at Spearhead, and at the time I thought it was excessive. However, in time I came to see his point. Anonymous Age 71 (then Age 68) pointed out how his experience in the 1980’s with men in the divorce… Read more »

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

One of the first PUAs who took me under his wing observed a discussion by women and asked me: do you want to be right or do you want to be happy? It seems women pulling out dictionaries to argue over the meaning of words was not necessarily attractive! lol I answered, happy! This is kind of what these debates remind me of. I don’t make the rules; I’m explaining them. Its as futile for men to rail against them as it is for women to protest they need to stay in shape. You can fight with women all day… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Kate’s hamster:
This is kind of what these debates remind me of. I don’t make the rules; I’m explaining them.

Sure, sure, sure, and it’s not that you want to be able to think of yourself as right by proving all the men to be wrong, oh, no. Also it’s not that you want to give the men advice that boils down to “submit to the FI”, nah, nothing like that.

It’s not about the nail, either….

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

Being right makes me happy.

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

There’s no question that I’m right, and there is really nothing illogical or inflammatory in the opinions I have voiced. You just don’t like hearing them. Any more than women who learn the true nature of men initially like what they hear. Our style of communication is as logical to us as being attracted to younger women is to you. The point is to rise above your reaction and find what is useful to you for improving your interactions.

@Badpainter: lol Nice retort. There may come a time, though, when it is an actual choice.

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

Made that choice several times, both ways, better and happier to be right.

Go with what works I say. Of course the times when I don’t care at all it may look like I chose to be happy rather than right but it’s just indifference.

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Kate’s hamster: There’s no question that I’m right, Yes, yes, take the blue pill from Kate, it’s “right”. and there is really nothing illogical or inflammatory in the opinions I have voiced. You spout merely another version of “supplicate to the Female Imperative”, and then act astonished when some man rejects that? You just don’t like hearing them. You’re right, dearie, I do not come to this site to encounter the same gynocentric, blue-pill, “bow down before my female pedestal” garbage that is shoved at me 24/7 elsewhere. I don’t like women talking down to me from ignorance, either. Any… Read more »

Jim
Jim
8 years ago

I am not a regular around here, but still want to add my 2 cents. Even though I’ve lost interest in intimacy as a result of taking the red pill, as well as having conversations with women; I still have a significant propensity to attempt to take individual womens’ claims seriously. As if I’m giving them a “fair chance” or something. Though, that has almost always resulted in feeling vindicated for shunning them in general. Which is somewhat depressing, because I want to believe “not all women” really “are not like that”. That perhaps the current state of women is… Read more »

Kate
Kate
8 years ago

I’ve seen that study before. Amusing caveat: “Obviously the results are to be taken with extreme caution…” LOL The article is saying that you have to be acknowledged as right in order to be happy: that one affects the other. The dichotomy I was talking about was an either/or situation in which being right did not lead to happiness. I agree that agreeing just for the sake of agreeing ALL THE TIME is a bad strategy. But living in constant conflict isn’t healthy either. The timeless bit of wisdom is to pick your battles. Know a windmill when you see… Read more »

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

Jim’s comment raises an interesting question.

What exactly is intimacy? What does that look like in a Redpill context?

I used to think I knew what intimacy was, in bluepill way at least. And I have come the realization that intimacy is either not worth shit, or I simply don’t get it. What I do know is that those times were I was informed intimacy had been achieved were not correlated with my feeling comfortable, more secure or less anxious rather it was the opposite.

Softek
Softek
8 years ago

As far as what intimacy is, “Cupid’s Poisoned Arrow” by Marnia Robinson provides some insights into that. It’s an interesting read. In my opinion, intimacy is unchanged by the red pill. It’s the ideas and perceptions about it that are changed. There’s a lot of dichotomy: sex, attention, and affection are all thought of as needs, but at the same time, if you’re not getting any of those things, the only way to get them is to take on the mindset of having an abundance of them. And the guys who seem to have free access to all of those… Read more »

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

Softer, I get you about the tired brain. Your abundance vs. scarcity paradox is interesting, but leaves out one possibility. What if I don’t want it? I suppose then it doesn’t matter outside of attracting any number people who then feel the need to sell me on the idea that I should want it, but then they’re just selling the idea of intimacy not offering it. I guess I don’t get what women mean by intimacy. Surprising I know. Seems to be a shit test where she asks you to be vulnerable and express you weaker emotions and fears. When… Read more »

eon
eon
8 years ago

I can understand why men should never express weakness or fear to women. In spite of all of their bullshit bravado, they are not actually capable of dealing with it. This is somewhat analogous to why a mother should never unload real or imagined fears on her children. A follower can only function best when she can believe that her leader will make everything turn out okay. Telling her about significant problems that she cannot fix makes it psychologically much more difficult for her to accomplish what is actually within her capabilities, and creates one of the worst types of… Read more »

Jim
Jim
8 years ago

I am not even sure that “intimacy” exists from where I stand. Some of the following text might sound like I am rediscovering the wheel to some folks here, but for the sake of argument please bear with me. Although I am grateful for the wide availability of “red-pill”/evo-psych content such as this site, processing this information has caused an intense re-evaluation of my own desires. Currently, I am uncertain that, the women, specifically the youthful and “loving” ones whom I desire for their own selves, would ever “desire” me in a similar manner. I think I was implicitly aware… Read more »

Badpainter
Badpainter
8 years ago

Jim,

Thanks for that you’ve neatly summed my current thinking. What you say is depressing in a way, but at the same time it’s nice to be unburdened from the lies that go with chasing unicorns.

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

Great discussions about intimacy. As usual, Rollo has this issue covered, earlier and oftener and better than anyone else, regarding women’s inability to love men properly.

I have become convinced that from an evo-psych perspective, falling in love is necessary in order to get men to stick around for a couple extra years after sex. These infatuation-goggles make it possible for men to stay while avoiding killing the obnoxious mother of their own infants, if not toddlers …

And therefore, falling in love is AT BEST vestigial in women. You cannot convince me otherwise.

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Jim, it has been very well known for over two full generations that for increasing sexual desire in women there is a complete lack of usefulness in increasing intimacy. Back when, in the 1970s, they called it the intimacy paradox, but now it’s merely another in the many uncomfortable truths about women, including the absolute, inarguable, narcissism of women’s sexuality, along with women’s complete lack of sexual charity. Naturally for *abused* women, “treat them nicer and more intimately” is great therapeutic advice, since much of the earlier funding involved abused women, but for ALL other women “treat ’em mean to… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
8 years ago

@If12 – Great commentary and truly hard for a man to get his head around, yet it has to be true. My own experiences are all explained by women’s preference for submission and to be attracted to danger and their sexual narcissism rather than idiotic ideas about romantic love or intimacy or “trust”. As a man, I feel as though my whole life (until choking down the Red Pill over the past year) I’ve been told up is down and black is white when it comes to women. All the trained “nice guy” crap I swallowed has failed me utterly.… Read more »

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Glenn re: “Is it just me?” No, it’s most of us. I actually hate that the world is the way it is and that women are the way they are. My only conscience-comfort is that I am not to blame for it being this way; it wasn’t me that broke women.

Glenn
Glenn
8 years ago

@if12 I didn’t break women either. To me, the worst part of all this is the destruction of the family as the core organizing unit of society. Nobody is happier – not women nor men – and children are doing much worse without both bio parents in the house. Yay feminism!

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@Glenn, won’t it be weird when women get fixed? By which I mean a pill that will make women sexually appreciate nice men. I know it can be done, but women would resist it.

Jim
Jim
8 years ago

@jf12 I don’t think a pill would work for that purpose. I think a electromagnetic ray gun could be designed instead, I mean a microwave transmitter that when fired upon women would stimulate their sexual lusts and entice them dramatically. As long as such women first provide their partners with legal consent, I don’t think there would be any problems. In all seriousness though, I don’t seem to desire sex anymore. The knowledge that what I want doesn’t exist, or at best can’t be proven has dramatically reduced my sexual lust. Reminds me of a fascinating video of Stardusk on… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

Kate’s hamster: The article is saying that you have to be acknowledged as right in order to be happy: that one affects the other. No, it is not. Once again you dribble feminist cow shit all over the place. The article is saying that a supplicating man who acknowledges a woman as right all the time won’t be happy, and neither will she, because men and women are different, no matter what your hamster may be squeaking right about now. The dichotomy I was talking about was an either/or situation in which being right did not lead to happiness. The… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
8 years ago

I prefer the term ‘enlightened self-interest’ – I cannot help others until I can help myself.

“In case of sudden loss of cabin pressure, put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others”.

jf12
jf12
8 years ago

@AR re: “Living in constant conflict is what blue pill men do, all their lives.” Yes, not just with their own natures but with women. What blue pill women do, all their lives, is make beta males’ lives miserable through constant conflict and contradiction, a kind of motorized ball-and-chain always actively pulling opposite from where you need to go.

re: “But when a man learns the truth about women, and really becomes the leader of his house, then the constant conflict ceases.” Yes to an extent. She’s still a ball and chain, but more passively now.

40yearoldredflag
8 years ago

What a successful Alpha Male needs is a venue where you can pick up a hot, barely legal from a rich family, that has worn a chastity belt for her entire life.

Ben
Ben
8 years ago

Manson,,,, a rational response to the men leaving might be to ask, what made them leave? A man would give up duty to another through a powerful motive.

trackback

[…] Women Talk, Men Do […]

trackback

[…] I’ve illustrated before, women talk, men do. Women’s gatherings are arranged for the purpose of relating to one another and in this […]

Burgundy
7 years ago

Art mirrors your sentiment – women talk, men do – exactly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N13THFd2kDc

“Niggas wanna get it, Hoes wanna gossip.”

Truer words hath never been spoke

trackback

[…] and to impart this to him you need to have a mutual purpose. As I’ve written before, women talk, men do. Men get together socially with a purpose, an action, a hobby, a sport, a creative endeavor, etc. […]

trackback

[…] of women, those men are again berated for not interacting with other men in the ways that women do. Women talk, men do, but a feminine-primary social order only approves of one way for men to associate with one another […]

trackback

[…] But we cannot simply change our minds about needing a function. We evolved to be problem solvers, women talk, men do, but now we are expected to accept that men are […]

trackback

[…] byliby nadal strofowani za nie współżycie ze sobą w sposób, w jaki robią to kobiety. Kobieta mówi, mężczyzna robi, feminocentryczny porządek społeczny dopuszcza tylko jeden sposób, w jaki mężczyźni mogą […]

Bro
Bro
2 years ago

I reckon the need for “localized” communication in women is more of a herd mentality thing. It’s pretty important that women only create good rapport with anyone and everyone they meet so that any time something bad happens, they are the first to get helped out. Even more importantly, when it comes to bad times, women will find themselves in dire straits where what matters most is how what she says is perceived by those around her. Say some food has gone missing and she suddenly realises it is not her but there is a chance that she could get… Read more »

trackback

[…] Women talk, men Do. […]

190
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: