Can explain to me why boundaries causes such an uproar here?

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

I haven't read too much about it but they seem to drag on for ages without one clear resolve of whatever the 'issue' is. In fact, maybe there isn't an issue but I haven't ever read any of those threads because they're too long.

Someone enlighten me as to of what all the fuss is about.

 

[sylvester the cat]

In before the ten page p1ssing contest.

Threads about boundaries are an AW's wet dream.

And they attract Sophists like flies to sh1t.

Image from http://assets.perfectlytimedphotos....c/resized/perfectlytimedphotos-com-a0bedd.jpg.

 

[ArcBound]

I haven't read too much about it but they seem to drag on for ages without one clear resolve of whatever the 'issue' is. In fact, maybe there isn't an issue but I haven't ever read any of those threads because they're too long.

Someone enlighten me as to of what all the fuss is about.

Group X says that in order to get your woman to behave properly in a relationship, you have to set boundaries and enforce them.

Group Y says boundaries don't work.

Group X says boundaries do work because you train women similar to training a dog.

Group Y says you can give a girl boundary but it doesn't mean she will follow it. Now she knows what to hide if she does want to do something on the side.

Group X says women want dominance and setting boundaries, and not letting her push them, is passing a sh!t test.

Group Y says boundaries only work when the woman is interested in you, as soon as her interest drops, so will her agreement to uphold said boundaries.

Then continuous back and forth where the argument starts getting personal because dipsh!ts on both sides can't structure their arguments without personal attack.

But that's it in a nutshell.

 

[zekko]

I take part in these discussions and this is why it gets so heated, I'll try to keep this very brief:

First you have to understand that the discussion is really about whether or not you want an "exclusive" girlfriend to spend time with male friends and orbiters. Nobody seems to have any objection whatsoever to setting any other kind of boundary (like smoking, getting fat, etc).

That said, some anti-boundary people say that if you have a problem with your girl having male friends, then you are insecure, and that makes you unattractive. No one likes being called insecure, so right there the game is on. Then some boundary guys will call the anti-boundary guys insecure because they are afraid to speak their mind on the subject and are afraid of losing attraction with the girl. More name calling. That's it in a nutshell.

 

[sylvester the cat]

You rarely if ever see a boundary guy initiating an attack on a guy who did not use a boundary.

This is why I equate the anti-boundary group to feminists and feminine imperative.

https://stubbornthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/734b3tm.gif?w=560

 

[sylvester the cat]

Prove me wrong. I have only returned attacks when the "insecures" start coming out.
.

There were no attacks on boundary guys in this thread. Your attack on anti-boundary guys was the first.

 

[sylvester the cat]

I am not attacking them, I am drawing an analogy of their actions. .

Ok. Let's see how they respond to this analogy.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17mm4vg1hqmnbgif/original.gif

 

[Between_The_Lines]

Because boundaries are necessary but also completely useless. That's probably the most succinct way I could have put it.

 

[sylvester the cat]

I do find it interesting that you stated you use boundaries, but your actions are only to question my position and not the others. Why is that?

I'm not questioning your position regarding boundaries. I fully understand your position. But I also understand the other's position too.

I am questioning your claim about who's attacking who though. An intelligent man like yourself cannot tell me that calling another man a feminist because of his means of discipline wasn't designed to provoke a strong reaction.

 

[No.Danny]

Not 1 anti boundary guy has said they don't set them because they feel it'll make them feel insecure.
They don't set them because a grown woman or any woman knows what's acceptable in a relationship just like you do as a man. If you need to tell a girl sleeping around or 1 on 1 dates with guys while dating you is unacceptable. What does that tell you about your lady?
This type of stance can lead to very harsh and remote breakups but the way I see it you come into this earth alone and you leave alone.

And danger, you begin your 1st post by comparing the Anti-boumdary crew to feminist but that's not an attack? Ignorance ehh? :yes:

 

[sylvester the cat]

In the other thread you were questioning only the boundary crew, yet claimed to place boundaries.

.

I believe I questioned both parties. My conclusion was as follows:

Both parties set boundaries. The 'anti-boundaries' set them passively and covertly whereas the 'pro-boundaries' set them aggressively and overtly.

 

[Between_The_Lines]

I believe I questioned both parties. My conclusion was as follows:

Both parties set boundaries. The 'anti-boundaries' set them passively and covertly whereas the 'pro-boundaries' set them aggressively and overtly.

I don't think you could have encapsulated it any better although I suspect two specific members (and I won't say who) will probably get their thongs in a bunch upon reading that.

 

[sylvester the cat]

As a result of these discussions I hereby state that setting out boundaries is NOT evidence of a man's insecurity.

If a man forced his boundaries upon a woman by telling her that she could not go out with or date other men then this would be evidence of his insecurities.

I understand that the pro boundary crew are not seen to be insecure by setting out boundaries as they do not force a woman to do anything.

I further state that if a man does not set out boundaries for fear of appearing insecure or fear that his woman will not comply then this IS evidence of a man's insecurity.

I stand resolutely in the pro boundary camp.

 

[BrainDamage92]

This is all BS.

If youre not on the same page, youre not on the same page. You cant force a woman do as you will, they will always beat you at this game. You may think you have your boundaries or whatever set then when you find out about all the stupid stuff she did behind your back you will go bananas. Its like teaching a kid to stay off the cookie jar - it doesnt work.

Like dating a party girl and telling her not to go to clubs, what will that do? Even if you explain to her how seriously commited people shouldnt go to clubs she wont get it. She will accuse you of being a controlling prick and she be right. Just stop messing with her and she will find another target.


You cant change a person into whatever ideal you have regarding them. It dont work this way. With a virgin girl - maybe. But with a woman who's had **** up her vagina - nah. Problem is, most women feel entitled only for having a vagina, and its up to us to change that **** and demand women who are grown as personalities. But society doesnt deman women to grow, nah it demands them to have a vagina to succeed. **** this ****.

To put it simply - dont go serious with obvious emotional volatile girls (hoes) and if everyone did that she would straighten up. Couse any girl dreams of a serious thing, regardless of wheather she is ready for it. So if everyone was like "Grow up *****" there wouldnt be a problem and she would grow the **** up actually.

But no, us men are *****s too, **** men man, and **** women, **** people, no empathy, no nothing. Dudes ****ing their best buddy's girl are common. **** that **** man... I think most men are as much *****s as most women. Just have values and live according to them man. Its that simple.

I had a GF of a buddy of mine flirt with me. I told her - dont do this **** - hes a decent guy. Dont you ****ing dare doing this **** or I will ****ing break your neck. I know you for 3 months, I know him as long as I remember. Who do you think I care more about?

If more men were like me, hoes wouldnt even exist. ****ing faggots.

 

[Konada]

What do you do when the fat kid keeps stealing from the cookie jar? You take away the cookie jar. Simple.

Of course its better to tell the fat kid beforehand that stealing is wrong so he can't say 'I did not know stealing is wrong.'

Likewise boundaries have to be enforced when they are broken after being mutually agreed upon. I like to think of it as mantaining one's sanity rather than the 'what if she doesnt know whats shes doing' bs.

 

[stevo]

Oh yet another boundary post. . .the dead horse is DEAD leave it be!

I like to think of it as mantaining one's sanity rather than the 'what if she doesnt know whats shes doing' bs.

Seriously? You are taking the fatherly, moral instructor role in her life so she knows left from right, right from wrong and so "she knows what shes doing"?

If she doesnt know what she's doing, why do you want to be with her?

You're not there to fix her, she's not broke, she just might not be compatible with you.

You buy a relationship meaning SHE HAS TO HAVE ALL THE RIGHT PARTS!

You dont buy a car hoping it'd know what to do, wth?

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

God dammit, what have I started......

 

[No.Danny]

Oh yet another boundary post. . .the dead horse is DEAD leave it be!



Seriously? You are taking the fatherly, moral instructor role in her life so she knows left from right, right from wrong and so "she knows what shes doing"?

If she doesnt know what she's doing, why do you want to be with her?

You're not there to fix her, she's not broke, she just might not be compatible with you.

You buy a relationship meaning SHE HAS TO HAVE ALL THE RIGHT PARTS!

You dont buy a car hoping it'd know what to do, wth?

You could always give it boundaries :crackup: :crackup: I crack myself up

 

[Soolaimon]

It's the boundary guys who make a big deal out of it.

If they didn't mention boundaries there would be no discussion of it. Cause nobody would be talking about it.

Verbal boundaries are useless when the woman has free will to do what she wants.

These boundary guys think cause they told her "once" not to hang out with other men that she will follow all "their rules" and not hang out with other men even when her interest is low.

That's how delusional they are.

They live for boundaries cause without it they can't function in relationship.

They need to hear the woman's verbal assurance to ease their worried mind that "she won't hang out with other men."

That's insecurity right there folks.

And they want to argue that they are not. LOL

First you have to understand that the discussion is really about whether or not you want an "exclusive" girlfriend to spend time with male friends and orbiters. Nobody seems to have any objection whatsoever to setting any other kind of boundary (like smoking, getting fat, etc).

Not the same as setting a "verbal boundary" telling her "not to hang out with other men" cause of your own insecurities.

If you had any value at all she wouldn't need hang out with those other men and you wouldn't need a boundary.

You feel it's ok for your woman to text other men from work. But you have no clue that she can break your boundary going out for drinks with them when you are not around after they get cozy from all that texting.

Prove me wrong. I have only returned attacks when the "insecures" start coming out.

This is it in a nutshell. Although most of the name calling and belligerence is aimed at the boundary crew. You rarely if ever see a boundary guy initiating an attack on a guy who did not use a boundary. But once an attack starts....like others say, it is "game on".

This is why I equate the anti-boundary group to feminists and feminine imperative.

LOL. You are proven wrong every time you type.

You are a liar. You say that above and you make your lame insults below.

The boundary crew always attack men for not setting a boundary. They call them , "weak", "feminine", "limp wristers" etc mostly done by Danger himself.

When you think of it it's the weak feminine men who whine setting a boundary with the woman. "Oh please don't hang out with another man."

Every thread where a guy has a relationship problem the crew says 'You should have set boundaries."

If the woman doesn't respect the guy with no interest the boundary isn't going to work.

All of these boundary guys have past failed relationship with boundaries. But they never mention that in their "pro boundary mantra".

Boundaries only work while the woman has interest and attraction.

When it's gone the boundary is broken.

You can't understand that through your delusion and insecurity.

What do you do when the fat kid keeps stealing from the cookie jar? You take away the cookie jar. Simple.

Are you going to "take away" all men that come in contact with your woman? How insecure is that?

Of course its better to tell the fat kid beforehand that stealing is wrong so he can't say 'I did not know stealing is wrong.'

The fat kid must be stupid not to know stealing is wrong just as the woman who doesn't what an exclusive relationship is.

So you tell the fat kid that stealing is wrong. If he is hungry for a cookie he will steal again if he wants to. Telling him it is wrong won't prevent him from stealing again.

So you tell the woman "not to hang out with other men" once. When she is losing interest and a guy she likes texts her to hang out she will even though she knows.

She will say "We can't let my boyfriend find out we are doing this".

Verbal boundaries are useless and a waste of time.

It's for the insecure man to calm his fears needing to hear the words of assurance having the woman "verbally agree" to his terms swearing not to see another man.

"Oh please don't hang out with another man." LOL

Likewise boundaries have to be enforced when they are broken after being mutually agreed upon.

Boundary guys are afraid to enforce the boundaries they set when they are broken.

When they are broken you need to dump her.

Enforcing a "weak punishment" shows you are a soft man and she won't take you seriously which is why she loses respect and cheats on you not taking your boundaries seriously.

I like to think of it as mantaining one's sanity rather than the 'what if she doesnt know whats shes doing' bs.

So you admit you are afraid and insecure of the woman trying to preserve your sanity.

You need to set a boundary in order to have phony assurance of security in your own mind.

Telling her verbally once isn't going to prevent her from not seeing other guys.

That's how useless your boundaries are.




I've been saying this in over 11 threads now and the boundary guys refuse to admit it.

They are insecure men afraid of the woman hanging out with other men. They set a boundary for phony assurance trying to get her to agree to "their terms". They also want a fake power trip so they can control her to do what they want.

The whole concept of their boundary goes against true DJ Logic.

They are judging a woman on her words instead of her actions.

Always judge woman on her actions and NOT her words.

When you are judging a woman on her actions you can see she understands what an exclusive relationship is.

There is no need to set an useless insecure "verbal boundary" that can be broken anytime.

 

[Atom Smasher]

Women are continually bombarded by the media that they are entitled, privileged, and immune to accountability.

When a man sets boundaries, she learns that this mindset and behavior will not fly in his world. It brings her down to earth and provides the definition she needs.

Women are by nature amorphous like water. They flow around everything that shapes them. Like water they need boundaries in order to understand who they are RELATIVE to the man.

Experienced men (not theorists, but men with experience) show time and again that when a woman understands boundaries the relationship is far more likely to remain stable than when her relationship remains undefined and amorphous.

I've mentioned it before, and I'll say it again here. Three times in my life my girlfriends have snuggled up to me and told me "I love how you set guidelines for us". That is all the proof I need that women appreciate a man who displays caring and leadership by making sure boundaries are defined for both parties. A quality woman experiences this as caring, love, protection and security; not to mention personal inner strength and an ability to lead.

I would submit that the problem of the theorists is that they haven't a clue as to how to set boundaries in a way that is attractive to women. When I set boundaries, I give them what they crave. Therein lies the paradox.