The Manipulated Man - Required Reading

[BeTheChange]

Required reading. Understand that as long as you still crave intimacy from women you are open to exploitation. Women have been subconciously trained their entire lives to exert psychological control over men and men have been conditioned to love their chains.

Call me a sociopath, but my belief is that you should always be thinking "how can I best get my needs served", not "how can I make her happy".

What I like about this book is how it takes the central contradiction implicit in the "burden of freedom" and applies it to intersexual dynamics.

Ever since I read Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov" as a teenager, man's struggle with coming to terms with its ability to govern it's own life, has always fascinated me.

"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us make us your slaves but feed us"

This is why men are so quick to allow themselves to be consumed in relationships. Pat me on the head, sing my praises and occasionally provide with your devine pvssy and I am yours for life! They desire servitude because it frees them from their agency. They want to be told what to do. If men can cast aside this societal brainwashing that seeks to castrate and control...well surely this is the first step towards true transcendence?

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Funny you mention this. I actually just very recently (about 2 or 3 days ago) thought about this. Men want to be told what to do in a way because it gives them a purpose. Finding your own purpose is so much harder because it requires finding out more about yourself and in doing so your weaknesses, which no man, or person for that matter, ever wants to face.

I've referenced Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs before and I shall do it again. The highest step was originally self-actualization. But in later years he added self-transcendence, which is essentially a true form of altruism. Now if you are told what to do, you now have a purpose, right? So say you complete whatever it was that you were told to do, now you have made someone else happy and they will give you external validation for it. Assumingg your physiological and safety needs are already met, by completing the task the other person will applaud you for it and praise you. There goes your love and belonging and esteem needs too. And because you have fulfilled your purpose, you are now self-actualized. Now when you become exclusive with a woman, you are now giving yourself to her. When you give yourself to her, that is basically the essence of self-transcendence; giving yourself to something higher than yourself. Men give themselves to women because it is the easiest since that means they will likely want to have kids and give themselves to their kids as well.

Of course, this is all just a lie built around the weakness of a man, and while a man CAN truly transcend the hierarchy this way, he likely will feel some kind of unsettling discontent or discomfort with it all unless he is completely gone and 100% blue pill to the point of no return. And as we all know, if you are that extremely blue pill, you WILL get abused and that will cost you your social and esteem needs. There is something about giving yourself away to something greater than yourself though. People who DO go beyond fulfilling something just for themselves tend to commit the greatest feats of all time, hence the Medal of Honor or the Victoria Cross or whatever. Look up the men who earned those or anything equivalent (if you can lol). Those men are the best examples of people who have transcended.

 

[Serenity]

Craving intimacy is alright, as long as it's with a woman craving the same.

 

[BeTheChange]

Craving intimacy is alright, as long as it's with a woman craving the same.

If you think a woman craves intimacy with you in the same way that we as men desire it from woman, just wait until she's had a child or two.

 

[BeTheChange]

Funny you mention this. I actually just very recently (about 2 or 3 days ago) thought about this. Men want to be told what to do in a way because it gives them a purpose. Finding your own purpose is so much harder because it requires finding out more about yourself and in doing so your weaknesses, which no man, or person for that matter, ever wants to face.

I've referenced Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs before and I shall do it again. The highest step was originally self-actualization. But in later years he added self-transcendence, which is essentially a true form of altruism. Now if you are told what to do, you now have a purpose, right? So say you complete whatever it was that you were told to do, now you have made someone else happy and they will give you external validation for it. Assumingg your physiological and safety needs are already met, by completing the task the other person will applaud you for it and praise you. There goes your love and belonging and esteem needs too. And because you have fulfilled your purpose, you are now self-actualized. Now when you become exclusive with a woman, you are now giving yourself to her. When you give yourself to her, that is basically the essence of self-transcendence; giving yourself to something higher than yourself. Men give themselves to women because it is the easiest since that means they will likely want to have kids and give themselves to their kids as well.

Of course, this is all just a lie built around the weakness of a man, and while a man CAN truly transcend the hierarchy this way, he likely will feel some kind of unsettling discontent or discomfort with it all unless he is completely gone and 100% blue pill to the point of no return. And as we all know, if you are that extremely blue pill, you WILL get abused and that will cost you your social and esteem needs. There is something about giving yourself away to something greater than yourself though. People who DO go beyond fulfilling something just for themselves tend to commit the greatest feats of all time, hence the Medal of Honor or the Victoria Cross or whatever. Look up the men who earned those or anything equivalent (if you can lol). Those men are the best examples of people who have transcended.

Agree wholeheartedly with your first two paragraphs. One of the reasons men struggle after breakups is because they experience a significant loss of purpose. They willingly attach their self worth to their wives/girlfriends. It is necessary to apply diety like status to these beasts because how else does one submit to a "higher" being. The pedestal is a necessary ingredient for manipulation and it's men who place women on it.

Regarding your third paragraph I think awards like the Victoria Cross rather than being an example of opportunities to transcend, actually represent the most brazen type of manipulation - give your life for another (probably a woman) and experience the highest praise society (your mother) can offer.

Women live their lives for themselves and then for their children (as narcisstic extensions of themselves). Men live their lives for women.

 

[bigneil]

Required reading. Understand that as long as you still crave intimacy from women you are open to exploitation. Women have been subconciously trained their entire lives to exert psychological control over men and men have been conditioned to love their chains.

Call me a sociopath, but my belief is that you should always be thinking "how can I best get my needs served", not "how can I make her happy".

I read it in 2011. Did you read the part about how one man can never satisfy a woman? That a vagina can fit a child through it, so the idea that a penis could stretch it is false? So we shouldn't expect women to be faithful really. That hasn't been your stance. Your stance seems to be "she cheated and will sleep around so she is no good".

If a man has options, he can't be "exploited" that much. She needs to know she is replaceable.

Why not negotiate a way to make her happy while getting your needs served?

 

[bigneil]

Craving intimacy is alright, as long as it's with a woman craving the same.

It's more like enjoying the intimacy when she offers it is alright. It's when we get addicted to it and need it that we suffer. Men should focus on behavior that makes her offer it (namely gathering resources), not the intimacy itself.

I'm thinking certain people have never actually made love to a woman. They don't seem to know what Oxytocin feels like (bonding or cuddle chemical). It is the woman who creates it. It is she who is designed to receive us and it is feminine energy to form relationships. Men create Testosterone which makes them want to go spread their seed far and wide. Done correctly, the woman will overwhelm a man who is trying to leave her. It's when men act like women and want to form relationships that things get weird. He has to be trying to leave and she has to be holding him for it to work, the reverse is not true except in the first 1-2 months of courtship.

 

[Carpathian]

If you think a woman craves intimacy with you in the same way that we as men desire it from woman, just wait until she's had a child or two.

I could not agree more. My ex wife of 16 years just went over a cliff edge in terms of sex and intimacy after we had our two daughters. We went from a great sex life pretty much every day to zero in the space of a few months. She was just not interested in me in that way any more. I did all the providing, told her I loved her, I was a good, reliable,fun, caring husband to her etc, I tried to initiate sex but she just cold shouldered me with endless excuses. I am sure she loved me as well but all intimacy was gone. Fvkk knows how or why it happened. It just did,

I have lost count of buddies who have experienced the same thing and persevere with outwardly OK but inwardly loveless and sexless marriages. I see this so many times.

 

[Carpathian]

It's more like enjoying the intimacy when she offers it is alright. It's when we get addicted to it and need it that we suffer. Men should focus on behavior that makes her offer it (namely gathering resources), not the intimacy itself.

I'm thinking certain people have never actually made love to a woman. They don't seem to know what Oxytocin feels like (bonding or cuddle chemical). It is the woman who creates it. It is she who is designed to receive us and it is feminine energy to form relationships. Men create Testosterone which makes them want to go spread their seed far and wide. Done correctly, the woman will overwhelm a man who is trying to leave her. It's when men act like women and want to form relationships that things get weird. He has to be trying to leave and she has to be holding him for it to work, the reverse is not true except in the first 1-2 months of courtship.

.... and this is when they say sh1t like "I love you but I'm not 'in love' with you"

 

[BeTheChange]

I read it in 2011. Did you read the part about how one man can never satisfy a woman? That a vagina can fit a child through it, so the idea that a penis could stretch it is false? So we shouldn't expect women to be faithful really. That hasn't been your stance. Your stance seems to be "she cheated and will sleep around so she is no good".


If a man has options, he can't be "exploited" that much. She needs to know she is replaceable.

Why not negotiate a way to make her happy while getting your needs served?

I expect women to be faithful because to be frank, they are optimising their sexual strategy by being with me (in that they are securing the best possible male their looks and feminity can accomodate). If that situation changes they are free to leave (and often do). Men would do well to embrace and accept this reality. Women are incapable of loyalty for it's own sake. What drives them is fear of loss. Loss of losing the best is what keeps them in check. In an age where morality and religion have lost their power, this is the only kind of "loyalty" men can reasonably hope to obtain.

On your second point we are in agreement to an extent. But one can only take a look at the countless high value men (e.g. celebrities like Brad Pitt) who meltdown when they lose their woman. Clearly, "having options" is not sufficient to prevent one from being exploited by women.

On your third point, what makes you think I am not already doing this? It's the motivation behind the behaviour that provides insight. I may take a girl out not because pleasing her is the ultimate goal but because I enjoy being around positivity and I'll get to fvck a beautiful body at the end of the night.

 

[dude99]

I could not agree more. My ex wife of 16 years just went over a cliff edge in terms of sex and intimacy after we had our two daughters. We went from a great sex life pretty much every day to zero in the space of a few months. She was just not interested in me in that way any more. I did all the providing, told her I loved her, I was a good, reliable,fun, caring husband to her etc, I tried to initiate sex but she just cold shouldered me with endless excuses. I am sure she loved me as well but all intimacy was gone. Fvkk knows how or why it happened. It just did,

I have lost count of buddies who have experienced the same thing and persevere with outwardly OK but inwardly loveless and sexless marriages. I see this so many times.

Some women are hard wired to want sex until they have had a kid or 2. Then once the children are born that desire to have sex ( or in reality reproduce,) gets shut off in their brain because they feel they have accomplished their goal.

I have a buddy whose first wife was the exact same way. Sex pretty much every day for the first couple of years they were married and then the tap was completely shut off after child number 2 was born
He discussed his frustration with her and she was completely clueless as to why this would even bother him. Her mentality was we have 2 kids. We don't need sechs in our life anymore.

In men the desire is to have sex. In women the desire is to have babies. Once that happens your lady could lose interest in sechs.

 

[bigneil]

I could not agree more. My ex wife of 16 years just went over a cliff edge in terms of sex and intimacy after we had our two daughters. We went from a great sex life pretty much every day to zero in the space of a few months. She was just not interested in me in that way any more. I did all the providing, told her I loved her, I was a good, reliable,fun, caring husband to her etc, I tried to initiate sex but she just cold shouldered me with endless excuses. I am sure she loved me as well but all intimacy was gone. Fvkk knows how or why it happened. It just did,

I have lost count of buddies who have experienced the same thing and persevere with outwardly OK but inwardly loveless and sexless marriages. I see this so many times.

Sorry to hear this. This is why marriage can't work. Women wanted the ultimate security and got it - the man can't even game her back in that situation usually or she can divorce him (well, she can anyway but this way she can demonize him).

I know why it happened. Because marriage gives 100% of the power to women by design.

 

[sazc]

Sex pretty much every day for the first couple of years they were married and then the tap was completely shut off after child number 2 was born. He discussed his frustration with her and she was completely clueless as to why this would even bother him. Her mentality was we have 2 kids. We don't need sechs in our life anymore.

When this type of scenario plays out, there is usually something in the woman's past that is actually causing it. Abuse that occurred before he came on board (emotional, sexual, physical abuse that becomes linked to her body, her female bits, her sexuality) that has her thinking that sex is purely functional, a way to pro create, and once that has occurred, she can shut it off. I've had friends tell me of exactly this scenario and there was always sexual abuse in her past. Unless he is an a$$hole and she is cold shouldering him because of the dynamics that have occurred in the marriage.

In general, in my experience, if a woman is ovulating there should be HUGE desire for sex from her man at least 3-4 times a month. When a females body heads toward releasing an egg, she is thrown into a heightened state of sexuality, pretty much needing that sexual release.

This wont occur if there is past abuse.

I agree, it is manipulative and not fair and females should be ashamed for doing this.

 

[sazc]

I know why it happened. Because marriage gives 100% of the power to women by design.

You guys have such a simplistic view on this stuff. It's as if you say "well, I dont want to REALLY know why this stuff occurs, so let's cop out, take the easy way, and blame the female.

If your car stalled on the side of the road and you came to find out the engine seized, would you 'simply' blame the manufacturer?
Or would you ask WHY the engine seized? What caused the engine to do that?

Copping out and simply blaming the female for being manipulative, or having all the power, indicates that there's no critical analysis of the situation going on.

Be smart, use you brains. I promise, it doesn't hurt and just may help you understand stuff AND feel better about it!

 

[bigneil]

You guys have such a simplistic view on this stuff. It's as if you say "well, I dont want to REALLY know why this stuff occurs, so let's cop out, take the easy way, and blame the female.

If your car stalled on the side of the road and you came to find out the engine seized, would you 'simply' blame the manufacturer?
Or would you ask WHY the engine seized? What caused the engine to do that?

Copping out and simply blaming the female for being manipulative, or having all the power, indicates that there's no critical analysis of the situation going on.

Be smart, use you brains. I promise, it doesn't hurt and just may help you understand stuff AND feel better about it!

Leave it to a woman to brush aside that teensy little part about her owning us.

What caused the engine to break down? The State. They thought "How do we keep all these young males from growing up to kick our ass? I know! We'll make them slaves to their wives!" and they proceeded to base society on the most unstable force in the Universe: whatever makes her happy at that moment.

The fact a woman can marry a man, never have sex with him, sleep with other men like the landscaper - and rub it in - and have her friends say it's his fault - and she can take his house - is not a system where women have to play fair. It's a bad contract, something women don't understand because they are not focused on logic and honor, but on resources and emotions. I'm not saying women are bad, just that marriage can't work under laws where women have all the power.

I will never get married, but I would cohabitate and support a woman and I would contribute to a savings account for her. At any time she can take the money and leave. Under no circumstances will I owe her one more dime if she does, and I won't pay the bills anymore. That means she needs to find someone who will take care of her AND who she is more attracted to, not just one or the other.

 

[JohnChops]

Required reading. Understand that as long as you still crave intimacy from women you are open to exploitation. Women have been subconciously trained their entire lives to exert psychological control over men and men have been conditioned to love their chains.

Call me a sociopath, but my belief is that you should always be thinking "how can I best get my needs served", not "how can I make her happy".

What I like about this book is how it takes the central contradiction implicit in the "burden of freedom" and applies it to intersexual dynamics.

Ever since I read Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov" as a teenager, man's struggle with coming to terms with its ability to govern it's own life, has always fascinated me.

"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us make us your slaves but feed us"

This is why men are so quick to allow themselves to be consumed in relationships. Pat me on the head, sing my praises and occasionally provide with your devine pvssy and I am yours for life! They desire servitude because it frees them from their agency. They want to be told what to do. If men can cast aside this societal brainwashing that seeks to castrate and control...well surely this is the first step towards true transcendence?

ahhh yes the man who gets consumed in a relationship, drops his hobbies, friends and passions, really sad to see a man lose his way. My mom said it best, even in a relationship, you are still an individual.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Agree wholeheartedly with your first two paragraphs. One of the reasons men struggle after breakups is because they experience a significant loss of purpose. They willingly attach their self worth to their wives/girlfriends. It is necessary to apply diety like status to these beasts because how else does one submit to a "higher" being. The pedestal is a necessary ingredient for manipulation and it's men who place women on it.

Regarding your third paragraph I think awards like the Victoria Cross rather than being an example of opportunities to transcend, actually represent the most brazen type of manipulation - give your life for another (probably a woman) and experience the highest praise society (your mother) can offer.

Women live their lives for themselves and then for their children (as narcisstic extensions of themselves). Men live their lives for women.

I see what you mean. The point of that example wasn't just that some men truly do feel a strong sense of patriotism and 'greater good', so to speak.

 

[dude99]

When this type of scenario plays out, there is usually something in the woman's past that is actually causing it. Abuse that occurred before he came on board (emotional, sexual, physical abuse that becomes linked to her body, her female bits, her sexuality) that has her thinking that sex is purely functional, a way to pro create, and once that has occurred, she can shut it off. I've had friends tell me of exactly this scenario and there was always sexual abuse in her past. Unless he is an a$$hole and she is cold shouldering him because of the dynamics that have occurred in the marriage.

In general, in my experience, if a woman is ovulating there should be HUGE desire for sex from her man at least 3-4 times a month. When a females body heads toward releasing an egg, she is thrown into a heightened state of sexuality, pretty much needing that sexual release.

This wont occur if there is past abuse.

I agree, it is manipulative and not fair and females should be ashamed for doing this.

Could be. But i will confirm he was not an ******* at all in the marriage in fact he treated her too good when she didn't deserve it.

To be honest she was a woman with an agenda and she took advantage of him. He paid for her education when they were only dating. He bought her the car she needed for transportation. He paid for the wedding he paid for the house. She had the two kids the shut the tap off. After 3 years like that she suddenly started having affairs and then left him for another man. He was a guy who didn't get many dates so he saw her as his last chance. His lonelyness trumped his rational though and he stayed with her.

I think she saw him as nothing but a means to her agenda. A bank or an atm. I had been telling him for years to kick her to curb but he wouldn't listen.

Was she abused? We will never know. But she was definately a user and bottom bottom rung low quality

.

 

[Carpathian]

I expect women to be faithful because to be frank, they are optimising their sexual strategy by being with me (in that they are securing the best possible male their looks and feminity can accomodate). If that situation changes they are free to leave (and often do). Men would do well to embrace and accept this reality. Women are incapable of loyalty for it's own sake. What drives them is fear of loss. Loss of losing the best is what keeps them in check. In an age where morality and religion have lost their power, this is the only kind of "loyalty" men can reasonably hope to obtain.

On your second point we are in agreement to an extent. But one can only take a look at the countless high value men (e.g. celebrities like Brad Pitt) who meltdown when they lose their woman. Clearly, "having options" is not sufficient to prevent one from being exploited by women.

On your third point, what makes you think I am not already doing this? It's the motivation behind the behaviour that provides insight. I may take a girl out not because pleasing her is the ultimate goal but because I enjoy being around positivity and I'll get to fvck a beautiful body at the end of the night.

Very wise words, eloquently phrased and articulated, if I may say so.

 

[bigneil]

But one can only take a look at the countless high value men (e.g. celebrities like Brad Pitt) who meltdown when they lose their woman. Clearly, "having options" is not sufficient to prevent one from being exploited by women.

I disagree here. Angelina Jolie was proportionally just as famous and hot as Brad Pitt.

So here we have a man and a woman of high value and the woman won - that's just the same situation you and I are often in, scaled up to Hollywood level.

Also, I don't recall Brad Pitt melting down. He probably doesn't have oneitis. He probably hasn't gone months without sex.

Remember: Brad Pitt became famous in his 20's, a time when he was still naïve. Had Brad Pitt married a complete unknown she would have stayed with him in all likelihood, so the fact he had options is misleading here.