“The 22 Psychological Triggers That Make Women Chase You… Starting Tonight”
Forget the cash, the cars, and the chiseled jawlines. Female desire operates on a completely different frequency. Primal. Subconscious. Triggers that bypass her logic and hit her on a gut level. Most guys are totally blind to them.
I know because I was one of them. The overthinking. The paralysis. The silent drive home kicking yourself for freezing up. Watching average guys walk away with the girl while you stood there stuck in your own head.
Then I decoded the psychology behind what actually makes women tick. 22 hard rules. Subtle behavioral shifts that rewired my entire reality. The anxiety evaporated. Women started leaning in. Investing. Chasing.
Why men are losing interest in women
- Thread starter Joe The Homophobe
- Start date
“The 22 Rules That Flip the Script With Women… And How You Can Use Them Tonight”
Most guys accidentally kill attraction before they even speak. They assume they need a bigger bank account, a better physique, or smoother lines. They miss the point.
Female desire operates on a specific set of psychological triggers. Break them, and you're invisible. Follow them, and you become magnetic.
I learned this the hard way. Years of freezing up. Getting friend-zoned. Watching other guys walk away with the girl I wanted. Then I discovered a set of 22 simple rules that rewired my entire approach.
sparky0000
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2006
- Messages
- 669
- Reaction score
- 4
Remember this saying...it is very true:
Heaven is: An English House, American Salary, Ukraine Wife, and Chinese Food.
Hell is: A Chinese House, Ukraine Salary, American Wife, and English Food.
Heaven is: An English House, American Salary, Ukraine Wife, and Chinese Food.
Hell is: A Chinese House, Ukraine Salary, American Wife, and English Food.
Friendly Otter
Don Juan
DevanE, pay attention to the paradigm you have been taught. Have you read 1984 by George Orwell? There's this whole vocabulary, "Newspeak," designed to steer the way people think by the words they use. Today we have the same condition in regard to many things in society. "Hateful" and "sexist" are shorthands we use without really thinking. If we hear that something sounds hateful and sexist -- beeep, away with it, don't listen. We also learn to use "double standard" for the same purpose.
What is "double standard"? I don't have double standards, I have separate standards, for separate sexes. The sexes aren't doubles of each other. Who are the feminists to tell me separate standards are a bad thing? They invent "double standard", give it a negative charge, get countless hours of airtime to repeat it until it sticks, and presto, a new bit of Newspeak.
"Sexist" we understand, of course, is to be negative toward women. Notice how there is no word with the same weight for disrespect toward men - the disrespect shown every day when our positive traits are ignored, and when we are told that we are "oppressors" when the truth is that genetic differences, not oppression, cause different behaviors.
Women are more closely gathered around the IQ mean - men have more outliers. Same in every field, like mathematics, music, language, you name it. That's why the memorable geniuses will almost always be men. Yet we are told this is due to "sexism". Thereby the maleness of the great ones can be ignored, while the maleness of most criminals is highlighted. Why, of course men will commit more crime, and men will be more violent, than women. We do everything more than women. We invent more computers and we rob more banks. We run faster and we fight more. We are master chefs and we kill in wars. We do more. Yet only the negative is highlighted. The positive is attributed to "sexism" keeping women away from reaching the same heights.
Few women in the boardrooms - that's "sexism." But people would do well in taking a look at headhunting these days. The corporations, politically correct as they are (going along with your government's social policies is good for business), are often giving orders to headhunting firms to find women bosses, not men, if possible. They want women in top positions. In Sweden and in the U.S. But they find few who fit, who can take the heat, who have both the energy and the creative spark needed to belong at the real top.
I read an article about this by Filippa Karlsson, a woman who created a fashion brand called Filippa K, and who owns a chain of clothing stores for women. She wrote about these things I have just mentioned - she, a woman wealthier than 99 percent of Swedes. She is there at the top, she can see what is going on, and doesn't have to be afraid of anyone.
Ever notice how few women in top offices are feminists? Margaret Thatcher said: "I owe nothing to women's lib."
And still women have a chip on their shoulders today, as they are taught they are victims and therefore sacred, while men are guilty and the enemy.
Is it any wonder we want nothing to do with these women, who ignore all research in favor of propaganda? Who treat us like suspects? The hell with them. Let them stay home and dream away to Sex and the City while the real men and women form functioning, healthy families together. Luckily only fifteen percent of women in Sweden call themselves feminists, though most of them are tainted by its basic assumptions. This is a situation we can work with. Despite their access to the media, despite their books being present in every college sociology class, the feminists have failed. Nature wins in the end.
What is "double standard"? I don't have double standards, I have separate standards, for separate sexes. The sexes aren't doubles of each other. Who are the feminists to tell me separate standards are a bad thing? They invent "double standard", give it a negative charge, get countless hours of airtime to repeat it until it sticks, and presto, a new bit of Newspeak.
"Sexist" we understand, of course, is to be negative toward women. Notice how there is no word with the same weight for disrespect toward men - the disrespect shown every day when our positive traits are ignored, and when we are told that we are "oppressors" when the truth is that genetic differences, not oppression, cause different behaviors.
Women are more closely gathered around the IQ mean - men have more outliers. Same in every field, like mathematics, music, language, you name it. That's why the memorable geniuses will almost always be men. Yet we are told this is due to "sexism". Thereby the maleness of the great ones can be ignored, while the maleness of most criminals is highlighted. Why, of course men will commit more crime, and men will be more violent, than women. We do everything more than women. We invent more computers and we rob more banks. We run faster and we fight more. We are master chefs and we kill in wars. We do more. Yet only the negative is highlighted. The positive is attributed to "sexism" keeping women away from reaching the same heights.
Few women in the boardrooms - that's "sexism." But people would do well in taking a look at headhunting these days. The corporations, politically correct as they are (going along with your government's social policies is good for business), are often giving orders to headhunting firms to find women bosses, not men, if possible. They want women in top positions. In Sweden and in the U.S. But they find few who fit, who can take the heat, who have both the energy and the creative spark needed to belong at the real top.
I read an article about this by Filippa Karlsson, a woman who created a fashion brand called Filippa K, and who owns a chain of clothing stores for women. She wrote about these things I have just mentioned - she, a woman wealthier than 99 percent of Swedes. She is there at the top, she can see what is going on, and doesn't have to be afraid of anyone.
Ever notice how few women in top offices are feminists? Margaret Thatcher said: "I owe nothing to women's lib."
And still women have a chip on their shoulders today, as they are taught they are victims and therefore sacred, while men are guilty and the enemy.
Is it any wonder we want nothing to do with these women, who ignore all research in favor of propaganda? Who treat us like suspects? The hell with them. Let them stay home and dream away to Sex and the City while the real men and women form functioning, healthy families together. Luckily only fifteen percent of women in Sweden call themselves feminists, though most of them are tainted by its basic assumptions. This is a situation we can work with. Despite their access to the media, despite their books being present in every college sociology class, the feminists have failed. Nature wins in the end.
Friendly Otter
Don Juan
Regarding the queer discussion in the thread: yes, homosexuality is a genetic aberration. Those who tell you there have been no studies on this (like that university class "debunking unscientific theories" someone mentioned) are lying. Studies of the human genome have found what is believed to be the mutated homosexuality gene, or part of a group of genes that together cause homosexuality - it is being researched further. However:
--Homosexuals will typically have longer ring fingers, as long as or longer than their middle fingers, than normal people. This is because the flawed genes cause too much testosterone production, which short-circuits behavior somehow - I don't remember exactly, but anyway, the extra testosterone causes longer ring fingers.
--The inner ear of homosexual women looks the same as the inner ear of men.
However, it should also be clear that a lot of people can be influenced given enough treatment by the media - and boy, do they get that treatment. Just as we get a heavy dose of feminism in TV show after TV show, where the joke is on the husband while the woman wags her finger (Everybody Loves Raymond to name one....), so do we get a heavy dose of charming, funny and oh-so-endearing homosexuals. Take Queer Eye for the Straight Guy - we learn that normal men are idiots and need homosexuals to lead them around by the nose. And there's a British sex-help show that runs in Sweden, where a woman teaches women to improve, while a homosexual man teaches men to improve so they can satisfy the women better.
Every day do we see funny and charming homosexuals. Any character who criticizes them is ugly, stupid, and disliked by the main characters.
Combine this with the treatment we get in the public school system, teaching the same thing. Obviously, many weak-willed men will be affected. They will be taught they are really, in truth, homosexuals. You could teach them to get hot and bothered by horses if you wanted to and had enough media power.
Those men who aren't convinced they are homosexuals, are at least demoralized, seeing how normal men are bad and homosexuals are good.
Obviously, like feminism this weakens a society built on normal, healthy families, needing normal, healthy families to survive.
--Homosexuals will typically have longer ring fingers, as long as or longer than their middle fingers, than normal people. This is because the flawed genes cause too much testosterone production, which short-circuits behavior somehow - I don't remember exactly, but anyway, the extra testosterone causes longer ring fingers.
--The inner ear of homosexual women looks the same as the inner ear of men.
However, it should also be clear that a lot of people can be influenced given enough treatment by the media - and boy, do they get that treatment. Just as we get a heavy dose of feminism in TV show after TV show, where the joke is on the husband while the woman wags her finger (Everybody Loves Raymond to name one....), so do we get a heavy dose of charming, funny and oh-so-endearing homosexuals. Take Queer Eye for the Straight Guy - we learn that normal men are idiots and need homosexuals to lead them around by the nose. And there's a British sex-help show that runs in Sweden, where a woman teaches women to improve, while a homosexual man teaches men to improve so they can satisfy the women better.
Every day do we see funny and charming homosexuals. Any character who criticizes them is ugly, stupid, and disliked by the main characters.
Combine this with the treatment we get in the public school system, teaching the same thing. Obviously, many weak-willed men will be affected. They will be taught they are really, in truth, homosexuals. You could teach them to get hot and bothered by horses if you wanted to and had enough media power.
Those men who aren't convinced they are homosexuals, are at least demoralized, seeing how normal men are bad and homosexuals are good.
Obviously, like feminism this weakens a society built on normal, healthy families, needing normal, healthy families to survive.
"Stop Asking Your Friends What to Text Her"
Your buddy Dave has been single for three years and thinks "hey u up" is a valid strategy. Your other buddy Mike just got dumped and told you to "just be yourself."
You showed them her text. You asked them to decode the emoji. You drafted four responses and sent the screenshot to the group chat for a vote.
She's been waiting forty minutes.
Put the phone down. Stop crowdsourcing your love life. Type something that sounds like you. Hit send. Then go do literally anything else with your evening.
Friendly Otter
Don Juan
Why do the TV shows never tell us how full of diseased homosexuals are? Why don't they tell us how homosexuals use drugs to a much wider extent than normal people? Why don't we learn of how they are much more likely to have mental diseases? Damaged brains often have several symptoms: homosexuality is often followed by e g paranoia or mano-depression, the same as with other mental diseases. Note the study on homosexual men being more likely to be bulimic, below.
Why don't we hear of how homosexual subculture is obsessed with sex and here-and-now, feel-good hedonism? Homosexuals make the perfect liberals, it seems: they know they are the last in their line, so they'll waste their lives with Feel-Good philosophy and reject philosophy based on Duty. They have no posterity to work for. Hence the drugs, the alcoholism, leading to higher levels of violence, depression, and suicide.
A perfect wrecking ball against normal, traditional families, just like feminism.
Some statistics on homosexuality:
http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html
“We see higher rates of suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse.”
“homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence”
“The first study was on male twins who had served in Vietnam (Herrell et al. 1999). It concluded that on average, male homosexuals were 5.1 times more likely to exhibit suicide- related behavior or thoughts than their heterosexual counterparts. Some of this factor of 5.1 was associated with depression and substance abuse, which might or might not be related to the homosexuality. (When these two problems were factored out, the factor of 5 decreased to 2.5; still somewhat significant.)”
“This study showed a significantly higher occurrence of depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance abuse and thoughts about suicide, amongst those who were homosexually active.”
“Since homosexuals have greater numbers of partners and breakups, compared with heterosexuals, and since longterm gay male relationships are rarely monagamous, it is hardly surprising if suicide attempts are proportionally greater. The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals (Whitehead and Whitehead 1999, calculated from Laumann et al 1994).”
“A good general rule of thumb is that suicide attempts are about three times higher for homosexuals.”
“Third, does pressure from society lead to mental health problems? Less, I believe, than one might imagine. The authors of the study done in the Netherlands were surprised to find so much mental illness in homosexual people in a country where tolerance of homosexuality is greater than in almost all other countries.” (Same with the tolerant New Zealand and Denmark, the study says.)
“Secondly, it was previously noted that 43% of a bulimic sample of men were homosexual or bisexual (Carlat et al. 1997), a rate about 15 times higher than the rate in the population in general”
“A strong case can be made that the male homosexual lifestyle itself, in its most extreme form, is mentally disturbed. Remember that Rotello, a gay advocate, notes that ‘the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.’ Same-sex eroticism becomes for many, therefore, the central value of existence, and nothing else–not even life and health itself–is allowed to interfere with pursuit of this lifestyle. Homosexual promiscuity fuels the AIDS crisis in the West, but even that tragedy it is not allowed to interfere with sexual freedom.”
“And, according to Rotello, the idea of taking responsibility to avoid infecting others with the HIV virus is completely foreign to many groups trying to counter AIDS. The idea of protecting oneself is promoted, but protecting others is not mentioned in most official condom promotions (France in the ’80s was an interesting exception).”
Also some thoughts by a professor who has criticized anti-scientific feminist and homosexual advocates in the academia for more than two decades:
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/howthink.html
“Some of these men are seventy years old and half the things in their houses are still phallic symbols.”
Why don't we hear of how homosexual subculture is obsessed with sex and here-and-now, feel-good hedonism? Homosexuals make the perfect liberals, it seems: they know they are the last in their line, so they'll waste their lives with Feel-Good philosophy and reject philosophy based on Duty. They have no posterity to work for. Hence the drugs, the alcoholism, leading to higher levels of violence, depression, and suicide.
A perfect wrecking ball against normal, traditional families, just like feminism.
Some statistics on homosexuality:
http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html
“We see higher rates of suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse.”
“homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence”
“The first study was on male twins who had served in Vietnam (Herrell et al. 1999). It concluded that on average, male homosexuals were 5.1 times more likely to exhibit suicide- related behavior or thoughts than their heterosexual counterparts. Some of this factor of 5.1 was associated with depression and substance abuse, which might or might not be related to the homosexuality. (When these two problems were factored out, the factor of 5 decreased to 2.5; still somewhat significant.)”
“This study showed a significantly higher occurrence of depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance abuse and thoughts about suicide, amongst those who were homosexually active.”
“Since homosexuals have greater numbers of partners and breakups, compared with heterosexuals, and since longterm gay male relationships are rarely monagamous, it is hardly surprising if suicide attempts are proportionally greater. The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals (Whitehead and Whitehead 1999, calculated from Laumann et al 1994).”
“A good general rule of thumb is that suicide attempts are about three times higher for homosexuals.”
“Third, does pressure from society lead to mental health problems? Less, I believe, than one might imagine. The authors of the study done in the Netherlands were surprised to find so much mental illness in homosexual people in a country where tolerance of homosexuality is greater than in almost all other countries.” (Same with the tolerant New Zealand and Denmark, the study says.)
“Secondly, it was previously noted that 43% of a bulimic sample of men were homosexual or bisexual (Carlat et al. 1997), a rate about 15 times higher than the rate in the population in general”
“A strong case can be made that the male homosexual lifestyle itself, in its most extreme form, is mentally disturbed. Remember that Rotello, a gay advocate, notes that ‘the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.’ Same-sex eroticism becomes for many, therefore, the central value of existence, and nothing else–not even life and health itself–is allowed to interfere with pursuit of this lifestyle. Homosexual promiscuity fuels the AIDS crisis in the West, but even that tragedy it is not allowed to interfere with sexual freedom.”
“And, according to Rotello, the idea of taking responsibility to avoid infecting others with the HIV virus is completely foreign to many groups trying to counter AIDS. The idea of protecting oneself is promoted, but protecting others is not mentioned in most official condom promotions (France in the ’80s was an interesting exception).”
Also some thoughts by a professor who has criticized anti-scientific feminist and homosexual advocates in the academia for more than two decades:
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/howthink.html
“Some of these men are seventy years old and half the things in their houses are still phallic symbols.”
Friendly Otter
Don Juan
Who has told you these inflated numbers?TillTheEndOfTime said:Gays are 10-15, MAYBE 20% tops of the population.
The ten-percent number was based on a study which relied on voluntary test subjects - it wasn't your ordinary study where you seek out people and ask them. Guess who have an interest in distorting the experiment by showing up in disproportionate numbers?
Later, homosexual leaders have even admitted that they knew they were lying in the 80s and onward - "for the good of the cause," of course....
The real number is about 1 percent for women, and at the most 2 percent for men. If someone has the exact figures I would be interested in hearing them, I don't remember right now.
Last Man Standing
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2006
- Messages
- 3,956
- Reaction score
- 37
MR Otter - being a homo has nothing to do with genetics -- there is no absolutely "NO" genetic findings , although they are trying hard to find something so that they can try to make their perversions and deviancy "normal"!!!!
When they find a gene that makes the penis go into an anus please let me know!!! This is a purely lustful decision and not a genetic trait!!!
When they find a gene that makes the penis go into an anus please let me know!!! This is a purely lustful decision and not a genetic trait!!!
daSoCalpimp
Don Juan
As much as I dislike feminism
My Bitc* better get her a** to work and bring home a paycheck
My Bitc* better get her a** to work and bring home a paycheck
“The 22 Rules That Flip the Script With Women… And How You Can Use Them Tonight”
Most guys accidentally kill attraction before they even speak. They assume they need a bigger bank account, a better physique, or smoother lines. They miss the point.
Female desire operates on a specific set of psychological triggers. Break them, and you're invisible. Follow them, and you become magnetic.
I learned this the hard way. Years of freezing up. Getting friend-zoned. Watching other guys walk away with the girl I wanted. Then I discovered a set of 22 simple rules that rewired my entire approach.
Marlimus
Senior Don Juan
Good to hear such intellectual debate, particlarly regarding the many fallacies of feminism. It appears I have more comrades-in-arms than I thought.
If you would like to actually do something, or join a community that actively seeks to address men's issues, please go to mensactivism.org, it is perhaps the main clearing-house of the mens movement.
If you would like to actually do something, or join a community that actively seeks to address men's issues, please go to mensactivism.org, it is perhaps the main clearing-house of the mens movement.
Joe The Homophobe
Master Don Juan
Good stuff there. We need to fight this with all our might.
dannowillbookem
Master Don Juan
so me being totally knocked out the first time seeing my ex girlfriends picture - a thin, well kept pretty girl named jane who looked sensitive - is a good sign?
meh never thought of things like that
meh never thought of things like that
Socialreject
Senior Don Juan
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2005
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 4
I don't hate feminism... it's only an "idea", or maybe an "ideal". I don't hate feminists either... i just pity them. How can you do anything but pity a person who denies his/her own sexuality... in fact their NATURE?!AverageFC said:this is great. I hate feminism with a passion
There is not a single species on the planet who actively seeks to reverse or otherwise "damage" gender roles... save mankind. But why? Well I'm not sure, but i somehow think that what sparked this whole movement (that went completely over the top) was abuse. Men abusing their power...
The writer of this article talks about an exchange of power for love. How many men took the power, but never gave love? How many men never did their part, and are essentially not worthy of the term "man".
Women, were in need of protection! Not protection OF men, but protection FROM men. A HAPPY woman, does not complain, nor feel the need to join the ranks of the complainers. A happy woman wants things to stay as they are. We all KNOW that women are instinctively ADVERSE to confrontation. Yet in order for feminism to even get started, women had to confront men... STRONG men... I think this in itself pretty much proves that there was a NEED for protection FROM men!
And their calls did not go unheard. They received protection. Protection in the form of pro-female laws. Protection in the form of being able to provide for themselves, to protect themselves. In so doing, women were given power, power that before this, only men enjoyed...
Power corrupts. If there is any universal truth, it's that power corrupts! When the weak willed individual gets a taste of power, they only crave more power, and more, and more. So it was with weak willed women. They tasted power, they wanted more, and the same systems that were meant to protect them gave them exactly that. More power, more than men.
Feminists include weak-willed women, feminised confused men, power hungry men with a political agenda, power hungry women with a political agenda... That's it...
No sane or strong willed men or women are feminists.
Unfortunately "strong will" is a rare trait, in both women AND men. But men are more susceptible to "adopt" this trait from a strong male role model, or father figure. Because they mirror themselves to this model. Women, mirror themselves to other women. If those women are feminine, their social conditioning will reject their traits and they will grow up without a model, or they will replace it with a male role model.. OR worse, they will look to the model of a feminist who seems to have all the "easy" answers.
To a woman who is looking for herself, who has grown up without a model, or rejected their models, a feminist is like a politician who promises to take care of ALL your needs as a citizen. Of course you are going to vote for him, who wouldn't?! Confused women are told they can have it all. Independence, respect, power! Dedication, hard work, taking charge, taking responsibility as a leader? None of these things are the "job" of the feminist female. Why? Because they are pardoned by society and MEN from these responsibilities! Why? Because they are women and are not expected to take charge!
If a man makes nothing out of himself, they tell him he's a loser who will never amount to anything, a dud, a weakling. If a woman makes nothing of herself, they tell her everything will be alright, she had a bad deal, or hasn't met the right man yet...
It's sad!
The problem with feminism is the same problem that is at the root of EVERY problem society faces. PEOPLE ARE SH!T. I realize this a strong statement, but just think about it. Most people essentially have good intentions. But how many are responsible enough to handle any amount of power? How many are strong enough to resist abusing power? If people in general were responsible to handle power, strong enough not to abuse it... would there really be a need for global governing? A need to micromanage EVERY person on the planets' productivity in order to insure the less fortunate are not left behind? To insure that we remain humane?
Without boundaries, limits, borders and governing the human race would destroy itself. Murder, war, large scale abuse, slavery, they would be omnipresent... I don't think this is a big secret. Feminism is a fart in a windstorm that is human weakness. Even a simple and reasonable thing like women's rights can lead to large scale abuse! It's almost frightening...
Some of you guys feel that there is a need to "fight" this feminism in particular. I don't see that need. In fact i think that "fighting" feminists will only increase their drive...
These people, feminists, do NOT operate on logic, do NOT find drive in justice. They operate under an emotional drive, most likely driven by a combination of frustration, bitterness, and pure hatred. Any man opposing feminists publicly will put them up in arms. If even ONE male politician peeps about gender roles, feminists will parade the street for WEEKS, he will have to leave office, or get kicked out, they will slaughter him publicly and nationwide and he will never enter office or any prestigious position EVER again.
Feminists are like a pressurizing geyser... just waiting for someone to peep under the lid so they can erupt all the years of frustration and self imposed emotional distress into the guys face.
For me personally, my "struggle" against feminism starts with myself. I refuse to be a victim of feminism. I refuse to bend to their wishes, to their badgering. I am a man. I LOVE being a man and i LOVE feminine women. No one can take this from me, and as long as I'm around, there is someone "opposing' feminism. As long as I'm around, a real woman has the chance to find a real man. In my own world, there is no place for sexism, racism, or any other form of narrow minded faulty beliefs and as long as that's true i know there is hope... and i know that i am doing my part and contributing to the fight. If everyone did the same, these extremes would not exist at all.
Fight feminism by not letting it have a place in your life... Anything more than that and you are no longer trying to restore balance, you are replacing one extreme with another.
This is a awesome thread because it's opening my eyes even more wider. As I wanted to know about more about feminism and their goal for "equality", I came across this thread. I know it's going to be hard to read it but read the whole thread and laugh or feel sad for these people. http://synaptic.bc.ca/Contact/viewtopic.php?t=2045
I had to post what the Thread creater wrote for a reply "I am just admitting that women are fully superior to men, and if a guy cannot handle that, then no woman in her right mind would want anything to do with him."
I had to post what the Thread creater wrote for a reply "I am just admitting that women are fully superior to men, and if a guy cannot handle that, then no woman in her right mind would want anything to do with him."
"Nervous Around Beautiful Women? There's a Rule for That"
I could talk to any woman I wasn't attracted to. Charming, funny, relaxed. Then a gorgeous woman looked my way and I'd become a sweating, babbling mess.
The fix took me years to find and ten minutes to learn. Nervousness and excitement are the same physical state — pounding heart, adrenaline, flushed face. Your brain just picks the label. And you can pick a better one.
Rule 16 shows you how. You feel the nerves, relabel them as excitement, and let that energy pour out as enthusiasm. Women notice the guy radiating it. They always do.
Mr_knowit_all
Senior Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2005
- Messages
- 384
- Reaction score
- 1
Socialreject said:I don't hate feminism... it's only an "idea", or maybe an "ideal". I don't hate feminists either... i just pity them. How can you do anything but pity a person who denies his/her own sexuality... in fact their NATURE?!
There is not a single species on the planet who actively seeks to reverse or otherwise "damage" gender roles... save mankind. But why? Well I'm not sure, but i somehow think that what sparked this whole movement (that went completely over the top) was abuse. Men abusing their power...
The writer of this article talks about an exchange of power for love. How many men took the power, but never gave love? How many men never did their part, and are essentially not worthy of the term "man".
Women, were in need of protection! Not protection OF men, but protection FROM men. A HAPPY woman, does not complain, nor feel the need to join the ranks of the complainers. A happy woman wants things to stay as they are. We all KNOW that women are instinctively ADVERSE to confrontation. Yet in order for feminism to even get started, women had to confront men... STRONG men... I think this in itself pretty much proves that there was a NEED for protection FROM men!
And their calls did not go unheard. They received protection. Protection in the form of pro-female laws. Protection in the form of being able to provide for themselves, to protect themselves. In so doing, women were given power, power that before this, only men enjoyed...
Power corrupts. If there is any universal truth, it's that power corrupts! When the weak willed individual gets a taste of power, they only crave more power, and more, and more. So it was with weak willed women. They tasted power, they wanted more, and the same systems that were meant to protect them gave them exactly that. More power, more than men.
Feminists include weak-willed women, feminised confused men, power hungry men with a political agenda, power hungry women with a political agenda... That's it...
No sane or strong willed men or women are feminists.
Unfortunately "strong will" is a rare trait, in both women AND men. But men are more susceptible to "adopt" this trait from a strong male role model, or father figure. Because they mirror themselves to this model. Women, mirror themselves to other women. If those women are feminine, their social conditioning will reject their traits and they will grow up without a model, or they will replace it with a male role model.. OR worse, they will look to the model of a feminist who seems to have all the "easy" answers.
To a woman who is looking for herself, who has grown up without a model, or rejected their models, a feminist is like a politician who promises to take care of ALL your needs as a citizen. Of course you are going to vote for him, who wouldn't?! Confused women are told they can have it all. Independence, respect, power! Dedication, hard work, taking charge, taking responsibility as a leader? None of these things are the "job" of the feminist female. Why? Because they are pardoned by society and MEN from these responsibilities! Why? Because they are women and are not expected to take charge!
If a man makes nothing out of himself, they tell him he's a loser who will never amount to anything, a dud, a weakling. If a woman makes nothing of herself, they tell her everything will be alright, she had a bad deal, or hasn't met the right man yet...
It's sad!
The problem with feminism is the same problem that is at the root of EVERY problem society faces. PEOPLE ARE SH!T. I realize this a strong statement, but just think about it. Most people essentially have good intentions. But how many are responsible enough to handle any amount of power? How many are strong enough to resist abusing power? If people in general were responsible to handle power, strong enough not to abuse it... would there really be a need for global governing? A need to micromanage EVERY person on the planets' productivity in order to insure the less fortunate are not left behind? To insure that we remain humane?
Without boundaries, limits, borders and governing the human race would destroy itself. Murder, war, large scale abuse, slavery, they would be omnipresent... I don't think this is a big secret. Feminism is a fart in a windstorm that is human weakness. Even a simple and reasonable thing like women's rights can lead to large scale abuse! It's almost frightening...
Some of you guys feel that there is a need to "fight" this feminism in particular. I don't see that need. In fact i think that "fighting" feminists will only increase their drive...
These people, feminists, do NOT operate on logic, do NOT find drive in justice. They operate under an emotional drive, most likely driven by a combination of frustration, bitterness, and pure hatred. Any man opposing feminists publicly will put them up in arms. If even ONE male politician peeps about gender roles, feminists will parade the street for WEEKS, he will have to leave office, or get kicked out, they will slaughter him publicly and nationwide and he will never enter office or any prestigious position EVER again.
Feminists are like a pressurizing geyser... just waiting for someone to peep under the lid so they can erupt all the years of frustration and self imposed emotional distress into the guys face.
For me personally, my "struggle" against feminism starts with myself. I refuse to be a victim of feminism. I refuse to bend to their wishes, to their badgering. I am a man. I LOVE being a man and i LOVE feminine women. No one can take this from me, and as long as I'm around, there is someone "opposing' feminism. As long as I'm around, a real woman has the chance to find a real man. In my own world, there is no place for sexism, racism, or any other form of narrow minded faulty beliefs and as long as that's true i know there is hope... and i know that i am doing my part and contributing to the fight. If everyone did the same, these extremes would not exist at all.
Fight feminism by not letting it have a place in your life... Anything more than that and you are no longer trying to restore balance, you are replacing one extreme with another.
I don't think all of society bends to the whims of feminists. Take for example the Master's golf tournament. It's a private club, that hosts the most prestigious golf tournament in the world, and they don't allow women to play.
Now whether I agree with that stance is debatable, but I do applaud their tenacity. When faced with threats by some "feminazi" ***** to boycott the event, and for advertisers to pull out, the Augusta people told them to stick it.
They didn't cave in...they let the beotch scream and yell, and told the advertisers who agreed with her to take a hike. Once she saw that her blow hard threats weren't working, she ran back under her rock with her tail between her legs.
I'm so proud of those guys. You don't hear anything from this freak anymore. She thought she could bully the Master's into changing their policy, and she FAILED.
Men abusing power didn't predicate feminism. Men losing their manhood did that.
When you have a woman put her trust in your ability to lead you will feel like a man. It will make you feel usefull and needed. Submission is not really a good word for it. Meekness is more accurate. It is the feeling of patient humbleness that is based on trust and love.DevanE said:I still remember this, what a women told me one time was that I like submissive girls, I kinda felt as if THAT is a bad thing, but when I really thought about it, THAT IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE!!!!, this women says that I need to reevaluate myself and I actually thought about that for a while...so in all honestly I feel a little confused yet something inside me tells me otherwise. Rollo, A-Unit, Kevin, and all the good posters please explain in a way that I can seee what you guys see because this might potentially change my life and the way I view the world. :rockon:
P.S:- Keep in mind that I DID read all of the posts, and the articles written by the author, it just feels as if a link is missing in between.
Just imagine how happy you will feel when she needs you protect her and be the head of the family. Imagine how much you would want give to a woman that would allow you to lead. .
A good woman listens to her husband becasue she puts her trust and faith in him to lead. She isn't insecure or trying to prove something. She loves her husband so much that she wants to make him feel needed in that way. In return, the man provides and protects. His sucesss is her sucess and it is the foundation of the family. That is the natural relationship between men and women and it is the one that proliferates life.
Many women today buy into the myth that can have everything. They are told to take away all the gifts that you have as a man and basicaly make you feel useless. They want to make sure that they do not need you. They even prepare for their life after the divorce.
Some would disagree with me, but the joke is on them. In a few generations they will be a minority because they are having few children if any. Everything they do leads to extinction. The path that leads to life is always the most rewarding.
My grandfather said that after WW2 he noticed a real change in the way men acted towards women. He said that it was at that time that men just stoped opening the door for them.Mr_knowit_all said:Men abusing power didn't predicate feminism. Men losing their manhood did that.
With that said I would have to disagree with a previous poster who suggested that the cause of feminism is related to men abusing their power. There might be few examples of this but it wasn't the catalyst. I think it is clear that this is a generational problem that will take generations to heal.
brucevangeorge
Banned
Dear Last Man Standing,Last Man Standing said:MR Otter - being a homo has nothing to do with genetics -- there is no absolutely "NO" genetic findings , although they are trying hard to find something so that they can try to make their perversions and deviancy "normal"!!!!
When they find a gene that makes the penis go into an anus please let me know!!! This is a purely lustful decision and not a genetic trait!!!
While I am not a aware of any "genetic predisposition" of an individual to be GAY. These GAY people have a very small protion of the brain which regulates sexual activity that is similar in structure to women. Straight men do not have this annomaly.
No one knows why it is cause. It could be a phylogenic representation of a gene present in the GAY's genetic information (aka. GENES).
The region is called the "Interstitial Nuclei of the Anterior Hypothalamus" (or INAH for short). This region has been dicovered to determine sexual orientatiion.
Hence, GAY guys like GUYS because they have a region that is similar to that of WOMEN. And WOMEN who have a region similar to men and they are LESBIAN.
brucevangeorge
Banned
I really wish we could do something. Change the media. Fire those wussies in high positions. Shut up those feminists for good.Marlimus said:Good to hear such intellectual debate, particlarly regarding the many fallacies of feminism. It appears I have more comrades-in-arms than I thought.
If you would like to actually do something, or join a community that actively seeks to address men's issues, please go to mensactivism.org, it is perhaps the main clearing-house of the mens movement.
But hey. Not many people are willing to stand.
Did you see the movie V for Vendetta? That's what I think the next 40 years wil be like. Slowly becoming that way.
"She Made Her Decision Before You Finished Your Sentence"
Three seconds. That's how long it took. Your shoes. Your posture. The way you held your drink. Whether you looked at the floor or looked at her.
She already filed you away. Interesting. Boring. Safe. Bold. Before you even opened your mouth.
Everything you say after that is just her confirming what she already decided.
So stop rehearsing lines. Fix the first three seconds. Stand tall. Look up. Smile like you mean it. Walk like you belong wherever you're standing.
The words come later. The impression comes first.