Here's another Perplexing Conundrum on Women.

[A-Unit]

Women are very much a product of their families. Whatever, however their parents marriage is, they want to mimic alot of the facets of their family life. If mom is a stay home mother who is very dependent on daddy, and daddy is very much the breadwinner of the house, by and large, most women will want to be stay at home mothers who are dependent on their husband.

Likewise, if the family is somewhat independent in that the mother has a career, or even wears the wants in the family, the girls will also want to follow suit of that as well. Many bull-headed mothers who become the breadwinner create women who are much the same way as well.

Women/girls are very much a sensitive product of their family life. I don't think that's a far-fetched assumption, is it? Chime in if you think either way.

Now, most of them women, if I worked down the line, were already pre-made and molded into what they will be. Unless tragedy strikes, I've never seen a woman do a 180 degree change in personality. It's as if they're on auto-pilot. And it isn't that they can't, b/c we've all seen/heard the testimonials, especially on various self help programs or new age material, but it's as if their EMOTIONS prevent them from doing so.

Gf's I've had that had dads walk out were very UNSTABLE in relationships and like a ticking time bomb, would eventually nuke the relationship because she assumed I would do the same.

Gf's who's daddies divorced their mommies and didn't treat them very well, ended up being very mistrustful of their bf's. Not that they are bad people, but they tended to be overly jealous or controlling to prevent a similar outcome.

Gf's with very caring and attentive mothers, who demonstrated love toward their father openly, tended to do the same.

Gf's with rough and gruff party mothers tended to be the type you'd see on Girls Gone Wild. (One such girl who's dad abandoned her family and mother remains single and partying, parties with her mom weekly, she just finished getting a boob job, and constantly dates older men (by 10 years or more).

It's never really failed for me to view things. Obviously NOT all people stay in those modes, however, its must more COMMON than UNCOMMON.

Now...the catch 22 being. After women are products of their family, they still want to MIMIC and CONTROL what their family becomes, and want their future family, to be like that, consciously or unconsciously. Sometimes she just knows she wants it like that, other times she does it that way out of programming. However she does it, that becomes her reality. The FISH BOWL she grew up in for 18/21 years is still what she will try to create once again.

But, but, but...

I thought women wanted a MAN TO BE A MAN?
To lead?
To be a BIG TIME BREADWINNER?
To make the DOLLAZ and be a BALLA?
On the one hand, women are products of their family life, and seek to recreate that. They want men to lead, but they want to control HOW the family life goes and often times NEED to live near THEIR relatives when having a family.

How can this be? Has this be examined? Thought about? Am I missing something?

We are VERY pussified today.

You can't have a COMPANY where you WANT a certain GREAT manager working there, but then have the EMPLOYEES and VP calling the shots. The employees and company have to FULLY trust the President. Just like a sports team, you don't second guess the management and/or captain. "Too many chiefs, not enough indians." If men are great at managing resources, then let MEN LEAD. Let them deal with the resources. It isn't that todays man CAN'T...it's that for 18 years he's not had the CHANCE to demonstrate and practice those abilities in society.

Maybe its my analytical mind, but when I hear people speek and watch their actions, it's like I can see all the BS unraveling. It makes no sense.

If you examine television, stories, articles, most of them portray a mother who's overly involved and controlling (ala Everybody Loves Raymond) with a simpfied man. Yet, I've always admired the sports coaches and fathers who retain control and rule with an ironfist. A few of my relatives are this way. A few of them are not.

I went to a cookout over the weekend with my gf, and only a FEW of the men were actually together, talking, bonding, chatting, and have beers. A good many of them were perched up next to their wives or looming over them, standing, arms on the chairs, grabbing them drink after drink, while the ladies talk about the latest decorations, wedding, children, or ongoings of family. All the talk was clean and devoid of any MALENESS. Few incidents of sports were discussed (even though there's plenty to talk about). And when a man would deviate from the larger social pack to grab a beer, or converse with fellow men, he'd be rangled in and guilted ("what's the matter? you don't seem happy? are you miserable?")

I've yet to quite get that family and its males. I spent the brunt of my time downing beers and playing ball with the teenages and kids. Only at the end of the night did I move back into the larger pack, and that's when the mutual social conversation moved away from boring arse feminine crap I didn't care about or know about, to more jovial, fun, and controversial talk.

What has happened to men?
Has it always been this way (aside from watching movies or presuming what it was like) 10,20,30,50,100 years ago?

I don't think it needs to be a VIOLENT reaction, unless men, or people, are at the hilt. There's such a lack of maturity, philosophy and intellect its staggering.


A-Unit

 

[squirrels]

It's funny, man...I notice these same kinds of things. It's by that you can tell who the MEN are and who the BOYS are.

I'm starting to realize how important it is to maintain the dominant frame in any situation. And you're right...boys aren't taught to do that any more. And the ones who do...those are the so-called "alpha males". You can pick them out instantly in any group.

I find it interesting that you said you ended up playing ball with the kids. I've been feeling "immature" in comparison to a lot of my friends lately, but in a Peter-Pan-ish way. It seems like the more time goes by, the more people I know get "neutered"...sacrifice their freedom and their passions for some bullsh!t commitments to the same old sh!t as everyone else.

 

[Colossus]

As you alluded to, I think most women are a product of their relationship with their father. Its reliable and clinically proveable.

I think a key screening protocol in any DJ's toolbelt should be to sort of flesh out what her relationship with her father is/was like, and what he is like as a man. You can learn so much invaluable information about her and what to expect from her, and if you deem it the best decision, nix the relationship before the skeletons come tumbling out of the closet, so to speak.

Im not saying one should base a stay-or-go decision solely on this aspect, but study basic psychology and use good judgment.

 

[joekerr31]

the matrix is a complicated place. nothing is what it seems and the truth is always covered by an illusion.

i dont think things are as simple as 'she had this kidn of father, or this kind of mother so now shes this kind of woman.'

its a factor in thing, but there are endless other variables that could play in to all this. was she raped? was she molested? was she a nympho and gang banged by the football team?was she fat but now skinny? was she skinny and now is fat? was her best friend a wh*re? was her best friend a saint? were her male friends mature or immature? did she do drugs?

on and on and on. all those things can drastically change who a woman is.

as ive gotten older i've personally found that the best thing to cut through the matrix with is a very very very simple question.... does she look to server or does she look to master?

and i ask the same thing about men as well.

most people are looking to master others - ie. TAKE TAKE TAKE.

i have no interest in having those people in my life.

other people are looking to serve - ie. GIVE GIVE GIVE.

the givers are the ones to have in your life.

now i dont mean serve/give in a doormat way. the givers still have a life to live - they work just like the rest of the world, they have their own problems etc. BUT, when they form relationships with other people they NURTURE those relationships.

they seek to strengthen the relationship by giving as much of themselves to it as they can. they are honest, reliable, caring - towards their family, friends and lovers.

find the GIVERS and toss the TAKERS. most people today, men and women, are takers.

 

[Bonhomme]

Gotta wonder where the cart and the horse are here.

Let's not forget the effect having a lot of the same genes as one's parents might have... or the mutations brought upon said genes in these days in which we're bombarded with biologically unfamiliar chemicals that are demonstrably emasculating wildlife. For example, in some rivers a very small % of salmon are being born male. It only makes sense that this would be affecting humans as well.

 

[Luthor Rex]

What has happened to men?
Has it always been this way (aside from watching movies or presuming what it was like) 10,20,30,50,100 years ago?

Socrates said something like "if you want a young man to learn something, teach it to a young woman first... because young men will do whatever young women want."

Young women said they wanted pussified males, and *poof* here they are.

 

[speakeasy]

Yeah, if a girl had a bad relationship with her father...LOOK OUT!

 

[jophil28]

I am about old enough to be a veteran of many LTRs and what A-unit says reflects my experiences exactly over the past 30 odd years.
I have been in about 15 LTRs including marriage and I can say that from my experience that women ARE a direct product of their unbringing and in particular they replicate their family model,whatever that was, good, bad or ugly.
A-unit's comment about women acting as if they were on "autopilot" cracked me up because I have used that same word in the same context.
Women act "robotically" - they never seem to question,challenge or filter out any of Mom or Dads modelling which is no longer productive.
I have noticed one VERY disturbing fact in my LTRs and that is this- women who had dysfunctional Dads (drunks, cheaters, workaholics or just weak,dominated or distant dads ) are NOT good candidates for relationships. ) THis has been my experience over and over again.
There are more factors at work here BUT I have never found a woman to be skilled at maintaining an LTR who had a poor relationship with her father.

The problem of finding a decent woman gets worse as we get older.
Firstly we older men are fishing in a pool of failures -we date other mens unwanted ex wives and G/fs.
Secondly, most women NEVER grow into self awareness. They play victim and blame their Ex Husband. Therefor they do not feel any need to change themselves because it was always "his" fault. There is there is never any perceived need to alter or improve THEIR OWN actions.
The end result is a group of women who are not good at relationships and see no need to be any better.

Gloomy prospects ahead guys.

 

[RedPill]

We are all born into different sets of circumstances, and it's our job to navigate the course of our lives from the unknown waters of those circumstances into the reality we desire.

For some, the gap between their inherited reality and their desired reality are oceans apart. I think most men give up and drop anchor at some point in early adulthood because they figure that the dramatic changes they desire are unattainable in their lifetime. That, and the unspoken naysaying of thousands of blue pill-taking sheep constantly erodes away their dreams, drive, and faith in themselves to make the voyage.

Be it our parents or our peers, our education, our introctrination - chances are the information, habits, and emotions instilled into us from our formative environment will be the single biggest hurdle any of us have to overcome to build the life we want. Until one has the resources to block out powerfully negative external influences, significant growth can only take place from within. It's this inner battle to effect change that determines whether you move closer or further from gaining control over your reality.

Today's threat to growth is neither barbarians nor a plague - it's groupthink. In Westernized countries, it's feminized groupthink. Women are more susceptible to the ills of groupthink because they are more prone to their emotional state, and in a feminized society, less accountable for the perils of groupthink. This explains a greater observance of women being subject to the conditions of their background - they aren't required to change in order to thrive.

The moment you give in to the pressures of groupthink is the moment you die.

 

[joekerr31]

We are all born into different sets of circumstances, and it's our job to navigate the course of our lives from the unknown waters of those circumstances into the reality we desire.

For some, the gap between their inherited reality and their desired reality are oceans apart. I think most men give up and drop anchor at some point in early adulthood because they figure that the dramatic changes they desire are unattainable in their lifetime. That, and the unspoken naysaying of thousands of blue pill-taking sheep constantly erodes away their dreams, drive, and faith in themselves to make the voyage.

Be it our parents or our peers, our education, our introctrination - chances are the information, habits, and emotions instilled into us from our formative environment will be the single biggest hurdle any of us have to overcome to build the life we want. Until one has the resources to block out powerfully negative external influences, significant growth can only take place from within. It's this inner battle to effect change that determines whether you move closer or further from gaining control over your reality.

Today's threat to growth is neither barbarians nor a plague - it's groupthink. In Westernized countries, it's feminized groupthink. Women are more susceptible to the ills of groupthink because they are more prone to their emotional state, and in a feminized society, less accountable for the perils of groupthink. This explains a greater observance of women being subject to the conditions of their background - they aren't required to change in order to thrive.

The moment you give in to the pressures of groupthink is the moment you die.

excellent post!