QUOTED BY=DoubleBarrel....
No. I think the essence is irresponsibility. The trademark of irresponsible people is that they blame others for their problems and condemn others for being who they are -- simply because that person isn't fulfilling the role in their life the way they want that person to.
No matter how well-thought out or intelligent it can appear to be and how many logical reasons or justifications we organize doesn't change the fact that it's still fueled by resentment.
For example, we can have all the reason why and how our employers 'use' us. We can complain about working to make someone else rich. We can claim the benefits they offer is just a bribe to keep us there. We can create unions and start protests to defend our 'rights'. What's the result? Wasted energy. Or we can save ourselves that wasted effort and put it somewhere else by looking for alternatives. We can start our business and 'transcend' the whole system itself by creating our own.
I think it's the same with women. Marriage is their business. But if we quit that 'job', then we're free to create our own dating life where numerous women fit into OUR system instead. And like a business owner, some employees fit while others don't. But so what? We keep the ones that work, and let the one's that don't go.
And who said anything about psycho-analyzing Pook? Isn't there are huge difference between psycho-analyzing and make a strong judgment of character by observing the symptoms of fear someone emits?
I've always considered it extremely important to make a clear evaluation of everyone's character that I take advice from, for we'll take on the same world as the person whose advice we take.
Sure, the information is first. But, at times, the character underneath it is just as important.
For what if their advice is actually leading us down a dark path? Then what? And with someone who has a history of great advice, doesn't it become difficult to notice when a change takes place because we're susceptible to being blinded by their past credibility?
People are but a reflection of our own attitudes. I think Pook has even talked about this law before. So what does that say of a person who sees women as manipulators? Hmmm.
Go to women with an angry attitude and women will respond with resentment. Then we encourage ourselves to see women as angry. But just maybe it was us who caused that response?
Think about it. Let's say I go up to a stranger and punch him in the face. The instinct is for that person to retaliate. Maybe we'll become sworn enemies from then on. But if I approach the same stranger with a smile and "hi", how do they respond? Openly. And who's to say that we won't even end up life-long friends.
Two very different perceptions of the same person. But guess what? I was responsible for how they responded to me BY the approach I used.
Sure, this is an extreme example, but it's the same principle underneath all relationships in life, including women. We are 100% responsible for how women treat us, NOT them. Our attitude towards them determines how they'll respond to us.
Guys who have an attitude that women are the enemy and are evil manipulators will draw out the dark side of women... just as punching a stranger in the face will draw out animosity.
I think the enemy is fear. Fear is always the motivator for manipulation. Women have fears, just like we do. Yet there are few people who ever master their fears in life... a VERY select few!
So why should we blame someone else for not mastering their fears? That's their business, not ours. Our business is in NOT letting others fears affect us!
That should be the focus.
If Pook were smart (because we all know he's intelligent as hell), he'd focus on identifying specifically how women manipulate (along with everyone else -- for we all use the same manipulation methods fueled by our fears) while keeping it minimal -- THEN expand on HOW TO communicate it won't affect us.
Or maybe that's just my focus when it comes to women -- and life.
But one thing I'm sure of is that there is a huge difference between being smart and intelligent. Smart is a CHOICE.
Smart is choosing to make our own choices, which means we don't allows others to make them for us.
This means first not blaming anyone else for how WE choose to respond to them -- regardless of how 'bad' or 'wrong' their actions were, for that's their decision, not ours. Second, it means learning to respond to the situation other people create around us with their behavior from WITHIN our thinking more effectively. And third, learning to communicate to others that they can't and won't make our choices for us.
For what's the reason men become angry at women? Women making their choices for them! But we always have the power to stop others from making our choices for us, even if we don't exercise it. Why would or should we allow women be exempt from honoring this power?
It IS still within us all!
Angry men who see women as the enemy haven't learned to tap into that power yet. Instead, they repress it. Then make excuses or blame women for their feelings of powerlessness.
I think that is the key! Learning to set it free. And that's what all discussions concerning women and manipulation should revolve around -- assuming you want to keep your joy. Talking about how women use men WITHOUT focusing on the REAL problem of dealing with it will only lead to anger, which will repel any sort of healthy relationships with the women that do come into our lives.
It's IMPOSSIBLE to have a healthy relationship with a woman who you don't accept for who she is.
So to those who read Pook's Mill, I ask you: Is his blog helping you accept women for who they are... or giving you all the reasons to despise and reject them? Worth consider, non?
