“I Love you” and the razor’s edge

[guru1000]

@guru1000 I think I follow what you are saying. Recognize the true intent behind the words "she desires me in an extreme manner" and that will empower you to reply in kind.

I fully support what you are saying. In fact, I think that it's the best explanation of this situation that I've ever heard. I urge you to start a thread on this topic as I feel you (and a few others) are best equipped to give real world guidance on the topic.

That said, from what I am understanding, the members find themselves in situations where the female is imposing extreme feelings on them, sometimes even telling them "I love you", and the timing is just not there for the member to reply in kind BUT they recognize that this is a delicate, Make It or break It moment, and need to understand how to reply, affirming but not committing, so as not to break the moment.

Any phrases, responses, guidance, etc you can offer there?

Again, I urge you to start a thread as this response will get buried and it's an important dynamic to cover.

Graz

I don’t believe it’s quite complicated as to introduce a new ideology/way of thinking or thread.

The problem only exists because most interpret/focus on words rather than intent. The issue arises as words themselves are limited in scope and further “corrupted” by social understanding or misuse which ascribe disparate interpretations to a word. Convolute this with our own proclivities/biases and thus our own interpretation of the word. A seemly word salad but great truth in the above.

Goes back to the discussion of truth and lies. What truly distinguishes truth from lie if the intent belies the words? For example, when she says, “I love you,” in most cases, she doesn’t love me in the sense to put my needs before her own, but rather she desires me in an extreme way. So why doesn’t she just say that, Is she lying? Well she’s describing her feelings in the best way she knows how to given her understanding of these words. So when an individual speaks to me, I try to understand the greater motivations and intent rather than the words themselves.

As to how to reply: Any answer that does not compromise her willingness to desire you in such a way serves both you and her ... even if you need to reciprocate, “I love you too.” Though, her “love” means she desires you greatly and your “love” means you want her to feel safe in her feelings to desire you greatly and have no intent to wrong her.

 

[Spaz]

Borders on terror.

LMAO. That's hilarious !

 

[sazc]

And here comes the high level manipulation.

Just a couple of days ago you and AJ were both condemning Guru when he went against the feminine imperative.

Today he's a hero and I'm being condemned because I debunked the feminine imperative on love.

I'm proud to be in both your shiet list of @ssholes.

I actually gravitate wholly toward the way @Amante Silvestre handles his women.

When it comes to @guru1000, yep, there are points of disagreement between us, but it's, again, easy to see where he has blended all points of information into his dating life, and can council well.

@HankHill is a fairly new poster, but also seems to have a solid sense of his frame, and has integrated ideology successfully.

There are other posters as well.

IMO, you, in the other hand, never post about blending the information on this site with real world application, continue to devolve every discussion into some "which gender is better" argument, and you, as opposed to the other posters I mentioned, always lack finesse and maturity when you post

 

[Spaz]

I would like to know what the core argument is on this thread. That one sex's "feeling" of love is more intense? I can't tell what people are arguing about anymore.

They're irked when we claimed that women's ability to love is limited to just survival unless she is taught to love in a deeper sense of the word.

In essence, Feminine love = survival of her and her offspring's.

 

[samspade]

They're irked when we claimed that women's ability to love is limited to just survival unless she is taught to love in a deeper sense of the word.

In essence, Feminine love = survival of her and her offspring's.

Okay. So what is your view of masculine love?

 

[sazc]

I don’t believe it’s quite complicated as to introduce a new ideology/way of thinking or thread.

The problem only exists because most interpret/focus on words rather than intent. The issue arises as words themselves are limited in scope and further “corrupted” by social understanding or misuse which ascribe disparate interpretations to a word. Convolute this with our own proclivities/biases and thus our own interpretation of the word. A seemly word salad but great truth in the above.

Goes back to the discussion of truth and lies. What truly distinguishes truth from lie if the intent belies the words? For example, when she says, “I love you,” in most cases, she doesn’t love me in the sense to put my needs before her own, but rather she desires me in an extreme way. So why doesn’t she just say that, Is she lying? Well she’s describing her feelings in the best way she knows how to given her understanding of these words. So when an individual speaks to me, I try to understand the greater motivations and intent rather than the words themselves.

As to how to reply: Any answer that does not compromise her willingness to desire you in such a way serves both you and her ... even if you need to reciprocate, “I love you too.” Though, her “love” means she desires you greatly and your “love” means you want her to feel safe in her feelings to desire you greatly and have no intent to wrong her.

I just think this post will get lost in the shuffle if a be thread isn't created.

I also think men here can wholly benefit from your examples of critical analysis and ideology integration into real life application .

@Spaz @guru1000 and I may disagree on certain points, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate a man who has entered a higher level of understanding that integrates information intelligently

 

[Spaz]

I actually gravitate wholly toward the way @Amante Silvestre handles his women.

When it comes to @guru1000, yep, there are points of disagreement between us, but it's, again, easy to see where he has blended all points of information into his dating life, and can council well.

@HankHill is a fairly new poster, but also seems to have a solid sense of his frame, and has integrated ideology successfully.

There are other posters as well.

IMO, you, in the other hand, never post about blending the information on this site with real world application, continue to devolve every discussion into some "which gender is better" argument, and you, as opposed to the other posters I mentioned, always lack finesse and maturity when you post

So it's ur wish that I blend the information on this site to better suit my game, correct?

 

[sazc]

So it's ur wish that I blend the information on this site to better suit my game, correct?

I don't care what you do

I will say, from my perspective, from what you post, you are on the train to to incel-ville. Fear not, you have friends, from this site, on that train with you.

Can't say im correct, because who really knows. That's just how it appears

 

[Spaz]

I don't care what you do

I will say, from my perspective, from what you post, you are on the train to to incel-ville. Fear not, you have friends, from this site, on that train with you.

Can't say im correct, because who really knows. That's just how it appears

Incel-ville simply because I debunked the feminine imperative?

Now you know why I don't need to actively invite nor seduce women to bed them...

I'm on a whole different level of game, young attractive professional women actively invite me out on a weekly basis, it's you not taking note of the various field reports I posted

 

[lamath]

Action not word

If you guys dont care stop replying to each other

lolllll

 

[BeExcellent]

As to another woman whose contribution was monumental...Madame Marie Curie whose invention of mobile X Ray units in World War I (funded and staffed by herself and other women who volunteered their cars & time) and resulted in saving the lives of some 1 million men.

Look it up.

 

[Ranger]

As to another woman whose contribution was monumental...Madame Marie Curie whose invention of mobile X Ray units in World War I (funded and staffed by herself and other women who volunteered their cars & time) and resulted in saving the lives of some 1 million men.

Look it up.

Actually that was Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen. He was using what’s devised as a cathode ray tube. Which later was INstrumental in TVs. The picture tube was a cathode ray tube.

 

[lamath]

As to another woman whose contribution was monumental...Madame Marie Curie whose invention of mobile X Ray units in World War I (funded and staffed by herself and other women who volunteered their cars & time) and resulted in saving the lives of some 1 million men.

Look it up.

Women did accomplish some great things, but overall not as much as men.

You guys think is mostly a social programming things or more biological?


I think that man needs to prove themself alot more than women, if they want to be able to get a reproductive advantage or support their family.
Probably a **** load more reason for it.

 

[BeExcellent]

Marie Curie invented the mobile X-ray unit.

Before her invention of the mobile X Ray unit only big city hospitals had the technology.

The refusal to acknowledge her irrefutable and well known enormous contribution to World War I in that lifesaving technology tells you everything you need to know about Ranger. He seeks to discredit women of any ilk in the face of fact, just as he makes ridiculous sweeping generalizations and proposes to know how all women think.

It merely showcases his lack of understanding and intelligence, and reveals a shallow and entirely presumptive nature.

I'm sure that has no relation whatsoever to his success (or lack thereof) in relationships.

But I digress.

She also discovered polonium and won 2 Nobel prizes for her work in radioisotopes, medical science & radiography.

She was the first woman ever awarded the Nobel prize. You can read about all this at the Smithsonian's website among other places.

Her mobile X Ray units were her invention. I never said she discovered X rays. She applied the discovery in a way that saved a million men in the war.

But if Ranger's ego can't stomach that FACT?

Says a great deal about Ranger.

 

[Ranger]

Not in the least affected BeEx. Statistically you are battling a loosing battle with this.
A portable car made by the Japanese in the 70’s doesn’t take away from Henry Ford. Who didn’t actually create the internal combustion engine but made it more affordable for people to buy vehicles by using an assembly line.
But you win. I give up and am moving on from this.

 

[samspade]

Marie Curie invented the mobile X-ray unit.

Before her invention of the mobile X Ray unit only big city hospitals had the technology.

The refusal to acknowledge her irrefutable and well known enormous contribution to World War I in that lifesaving technology tells you everything you need to know about Ranger. He seeks to discredit women of any ilk in the face of fact, just as he makes ridiculous sweeping generalizations and proposes to know how all women think.

It merely showcases his lack of understanding and intelligence, and reveals a shallow and entirely presumptive nature.

I'm sure that has no relation whatsoever to his success (or lack thereof) in relationships.

But I digress.

She also discovered polonium and won 2 Nobel prizes for her work in radioisotopes, medical science & radiography.

She was the first woman ever awarded the Nobel prize. You can read about all this at the Smithsonian's website among other places.

Her mobile X Ray units were her invention. I never said she discovered X rays. She applied the discovery in a way that saved a million men in the war.

But if Ranger's ego can't stomach that FACT?

Says a great deal about Ranger.

Some women have done some amazing things, but access to a woman's eggs is the mother of invention. I'm not being glib. It's what has motivated men to create, discover, wage war, make peace, build, destroy, you name it. Women have done their share but not without the foundations men have laid for them and the ample free time innovation has provided. Women bear and nurture children which is as noble, if not more so, then launching a rocket to the moon...man launches the rocket to get to her eggs. Reduce everything to the bare essentials and I think you'll see my point - and that's not to say women don't or can't have creative contributions. (Besides offspring, lol.)

 

[sazc]

Though I will admit that I have never said "I love you" first to a woman, it was never really an issue of frame control or seen as a detriment to my manliness or anything of that nature. In turn, the moments in which a woman had said these words to me were never a surprise. It was never a moment in which she had professed feelings I was entirely unaware of, to which I had to suddenly handle it on the fly in a panic as if a live grenade was tossed at me.

In every case through my experience, these feelings and emotions were well communicated between us through actions and other comments made leading up to it (such as her saying there is something different about me, she thinks she's falling for me, etc.) long before the actual words were spoken.

Her previous efforts and actions professed "love" while my efforts and actions were responses in kind. My reaction enticed her to proceed to the eventual point in which she felt compelled to explicitly say it. When the words were finally spoken, it was a mere technicality; a moment in which it became explicitly recognized and confirmed, even though it was already well known and understood implicitly for some time.

The bottom line is, this kind of development between two people should not be a surprise or a power struggle, but instead a mutually progressive experience that both partners ALLOW; that both people willingly pursue and nurture over an extended period of time.

If you don't want to hear the words, don't play a role in allowing it to progress to that point.

You guys really need to start a thread. Many members lack the understanding and insight that you can provide as to the cause and effect relationship of this type of situation, and how to handle it.

Maturity, finesse, integration of ideology into the real world successfully.

 

[AJ84]

And here comes the high level manipulation.

Just a couple of days ago you and AJ were both condemning Guru when he went against the feminine imperative.

Today he's a hero and I'm being condemned because I debunked the feminine imperative on love.

I'm proud to be in both your shiet list of @ssholes.

I didn’t condemn Guru, I just agree or don’t agree with him and express that. He also pointed something out to me in that other tread that I had not considered and I thanked him for that. If we weren’t going back and forth I may not have thought about what he pointed out so to me, that wasn’t a bad thing.

Today on this thread I agree with his definition of love. Tomorrow he may post something that I don’t agree with or vise versa. Big deal, there is no law that says he is a jack** if he doesn’t agree with me and I’m not a b**ch if I don’t agree with him.

This is where you get stuck, when someone doesn’t agree with you, you go out of your way to fight them in that, to the point of making it personal, and inevitably spouting off random crap not based in fact, and then providing unsolicited proof that you get laid, which is funny to me because for someone who preaches seeing women as an accessory that amuses you, you sure do go out of your way to prove how they validate you. But I’m digressing here.

If someone posts something that makes sense or resonates with me I sometimes ‘like’ it and may comment on it, regardless of who posted it or whether or not we debated stuff in the past.

And I don’t think you’re an ahole at all. I just don’t agree with 90% of your views. The other 10% I think is golden though.

There’s no one here who I think are actual aholes.

 

[AJ84]

Faraday, Tesla and and a couple of others I can’t remember created the foundation. The world and technology actually went in a different direction.

This intrigued me so I looked up female inventors. Many of them did work along side males in their inventions and some didn’t even get credit for their work but that’s a sign of the times, not a reflection of their work.
But I found one Ranger lol! I have some downtime today clearly lol. Windsheild wiper blades were invented by Mary Anderson, who got a patent for them but wasn’t successful in getting anyone to buy it, probably because she didn’t have any men to help get her in the right circles (it was the early 1900s and let’s face it, she would of needed male buy in I won’t deny that).
When the patrnt expired and cars became the main mode of transportation, windshield wipers where invented using her basic design.
So though she didn’t get any credit for it, sadly, until much later, she did in fact invent something that is used world wide still to this day.
That’s kind of cool to me. And while I do acknowledge that there are far more men who created and invented things, men, rather than women of those times, where taken more seriously and had far more finanical opportunities and doors open to them to successfully create, and less women of those times were even interested in doing those things anyway.

 

[sazc]

Again, it's been a patriarchal run society for a very long time and, as such, the women who were the driving forces behind many inventions were shuttered into silence.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ca9e67e4b00705db4ca2f5?ec_carp=5439551583837504683