ImTheDoubleGreatest!
Master Don Juan
I read something that caused me to deeply think about the true nature of women. From this thread (http://www.sosuave.net/forum/threads/insight-into-female-behavior.238568/), I found this quote:
I have contemplated the nature of women before. I developed a theory, (in part because of Bonecrcker and his wisdom about Western Women). It may still be in the development stage as all things in life are varying and changing. However, I believe that all answers about nature can be found within ourselves through intuition and through the guidance of us here as well as the legacies of others (long live Pook and his contemporaries of SoSuave and the DJ Bible). Feel free to add to this.
The True Nature of Women
I believe that women at their most primal and most natural state are submissive, subservient, docile, observing, 'sensational' (this isn't the correct word for it, but I believe that anything that relates to sensations such as the sense of touch, taste, smell, emotions/feelings, physical & mental pain/ecstasy, gut instincts, foresight, all of it; women feel all possible sensations more intensely than men do), and social. All in that order as well. That is what I believe to be the most primal and natural state of women. As people they differ, but as women they are the same.
Hypergamy
Is it real or no? Yes it is real, but not in the way you think. Women do look for and want the best man. After all, they are observing like I said (because women are not doers; the act of doing is a masculine trait, not a feminine one). However, their hypergamy is only true in the sense that a stronger man must take her over. If another man is BETTER (aka more masculine/alpha) than her current partner, that means that he is able to make her submit to him over her previous partner. That is the core of female hypergamy. The new man must be strong enough to make her submit to him. How he makes her submit can only be done if he is stronger than her current man, meaning more alpha. Evolution has it so that women are able to detect who has alpha traits. These traits tend to be masculine traits, hence why Pook so strongly advocated masculinity.
Lying & Deceit
It is not innate for ANYONE to lie or be deceitful as the poster above had stated because it can oftentimes be harmful to yourself and to others. Women lie when they have to just like anyone else. This is not a 'man' or 'woman' characteristic, it is a person characteristic. If a woman does it for sport, that isn't because it is in HER nature to lie, it is because it is in HUMAN nature to acquire power, and lying can give one such sense of power.
Honor & Dignity
Honor and dignity are beliefs that one has to feel inside of themselves. Like lying/deceit, honor and dignity are a matter of individual rather than male or female. What is considered honorable is dependent on the person as an individual and on what a society values. Why women do not have honor or dignity is because women are naturally submissive. Submission means that they will bend to the wills of others and shape into whatever they want them to become. This includes your rules. Your morals. Your values. What YOU honor. She will mold herself to fit whatever you want her to become if you are able to tame her. What happens if you have no rules or values though? She will go everywhere and is at the mercy of wherever her emotions take her. If there are no walls to contain her feminine chaos, if there is nothing holding her together, then what does she become? Nothing, and everything. This is one of the traits of women that Otto Weininger believed. Women do not have essence. This is why they do not have a sense of intrinsic honor or dignity like how a man does. They are not troubled by the passions, because they are simply the embodiment of them.
Boundaries
The boundaries are already there. You set them by how you act, how you talk, your body language and expressions, your mannerisms and gait, what you value and are passionate about, etc. A woman in the beginning stages of first meeting you will always try to feel you out and read you if she is interested. By determining what kind of person you are and how you are early on, you set the stage for what she believes is acceptable and unacceptable between you two. You shouldn't have to give verbal warnings and tell her what you believe. She already instinctively knows by how YOU are, and by what society values as mentioned in the above section. Whether or not she respects those boundaries is dependent on how much she respects you. How much she respects you is dependent on how masculine you are. It should still be noted that women consider themselves most free when they are most bound. This is the equivalent of dominating a woman (after all, they all love it; some more than others
).
'Back Then' and 'Now'
As the poster above states, a long time ago, society was much harsher on women than they currently are now. Men were rulers and women were our servants. He says it was because men back then recognized the behavior of women and how they are. I thought about this several times before though. I thought that this was the case but something just didn't seem right. I realised that it didn't make sense because if society, particularly men, were to consciously realize what women could become if you allow them to, then we never would have allowed women to gain such enormous amounts of freedom to the point where it would suppress their own. It is akin to same way how once you take the red pill, you can never go back. Part of the reason why women were 'oppressed' before wasn't because men knew how they were, it was because men were more masculine, and as such, women respected their boundaries more and desired their men more. It would make sense why women tend to be unhappier now more than the previous century (especially since second-wave feminism).
In my next thread, I shall talk about why women suck more than ever now, specifically in the West....
I thought about it. It seemed almost unnecessarily harsh. I understand that men must wake up from a utopian ideology, but this dystopian viewpoint is not reality.
I have contemplated the nature of women before. I developed a theory, (in part because of Bonecrcker and his wisdom about Western Women). It may still be in the development stage as all things in life are varying and changing. However, I believe that all answers about nature can be found within ourselves through intuition and through the guidance of us here as well as the legacies of others (long live Pook and his contemporaries of SoSuave and the DJ Bible). Feel free to add to this.
The True Nature of Women
I believe that women at their most primal and most natural state are submissive, subservient, docile, observing, 'sensational' (this isn't the correct word for it, but I believe that anything that relates to sensations such as the sense of touch, taste, smell, emotions/feelings, physical & mental pain/ecstasy, gut instincts, foresight, all of it; women feel all possible sensations more intensely than men do), and social. All in that order as well. That is what I believe to be the most primal and natural state of women. As people they differ, but as women they are the same.
Hypergamy
Is it real or no? Yes it is real, but not in the way you think. Women do look for and want the best man. After all, they are observing like I said (because women are not doers; the act of doing is a masculine trait, not a feminine one). However, their hypergamy is only true in the sense that a stronger man must take her over. If another man is BETTER (aka more masculine/alpha) than her current partner, that means that he is able to make her submit to him over her previous partner. That is the core of female hypergamy. The new man must be strong enough to make her submit to him. How he makes her submit can only be done if he is stronger than her current man, meaning more alpha. Evolution has it so that women are able to detect who has alpha traits. These traits tend to be masculine traits, hence why Pook so strongly advocated masculinity.
Lying & Deceit
It is not innate for ANYONE to lie or be deceitful as the poster above had stated because it can oftentimes be harmful to yourself and to others. Women lie when they have to just like anyone else. This is not a 'man' or 'woman' characteristic, it is a person characteristic. If a woman does it for sport, that isn't because it is in HER nature to lie, it is because it is in HUMAN nature to acquire power, and lying can give one such sense of power.
Honor & Dignity
Honor and dignity are beliefs that one has to feel inside of themselves. Like lying/deceit, honor and dignity are a matter of individual rather than male or female. What is considered honorable is dependent on the person as an individual and on what a society values. Why women do not have honor or dignity is because women are naturally submissive. Submission means that they will bend to the wills of others and shape into whatever they want them to become. This includes your rules. Your morals. Your values. What YOU honor. She will mold herself to fit whatever you want her to become if you are able to tame her. What happens if you have no rules or values though? She will go everywhere and is at the mercy of wherever her emotions take her. If there are no walls to contain her feminine chaos, if there is nothing holding her together, then what does she become? Nothing, and everything. This is one of the traits of women that Otto Weininger believed. Women do not have essence. This is why they do not have a sense of intrinsic honor or dignity like how a man does. They are not troubled by the passions, because they are simply the embodiment of them.
Boundaries
The boundaries are already there. You set them by how you act, how you talk, your body language and expressions, your mannerisms and gait, what you value and are passionate about, etc. A woman in the beginning stages of first meeting you will always try to feel you out and read you if she is interested. By determining what kind of person you are and how you are early on, you set the stage for what she believes is acceptable and unacceptable between you two. You shouldn't have to give verbal warnings and tell her what you believe. She already instinctively knows by how YOU are, and by what society values as mentioned in the above section. Whether or not she respects those boundaries is dependent on how much she respects you. How much she respects you is dependent on how masculine you are. It should still be noted that women consider themselves most free when they are most bound. This is the equivalent of dominating a woman (after all, they all love it; some more than others
).'Back Then' and 'Now'
As the poster above states, a long time ago, society was much harsher on women than they currently are now. Men were rulers and women were our servants. He says it was because men back then recognized the behavior of women and how they are. I thought about this several times before though. I thought that this was the case but something just didn't seem right. I realised that it didn't make sense because if society, particularly men, were to consciously realize what women could become if you allow them to, then we never would have allowed women to gain such enormous amounts of freedom to the point where it would suppress their own. It is akin to same way how once you take the red pill, you can never go back. Part of the reason why women were 'oppressed' before wasn't because men knew how they were, it was because men were more masculine, and as such, women respected their boundaries more and desired their men more. It would make sense why women tend to be unhappier now more than the previous century (especially since second-wave feminism).
In my next thread, I shall talk about why women suck more than ever now, specifically in the West....
