Female Cognitive Dissonance.

[Jeremiah]

Dictionay.com defines CD as:

noun Psychology.
anxiety that results from simultaneously holding contradictory or otherwise incompatible attitudes, beliefs, or the like, as when one likes a person but disapproves strongly of one of his or her habits.

Can the uniquely female phenomenon of saying X but doing Y be attributed to cognitive dissonance? When a women says that she does not want to be dominated by a man - this is cognitive dissonance, not duplicity, correct?

Women want alpha males. Biology tells us that alpha males enjoy harems. Women tell us they want fidelity.

Women say they want an equal relationship. The fifth Commandment of Poon is "Give your woman 2/3 of everything she gives you." Roissy calls this the "golden ratio".

Good examples of female cognitive dissonance are infinite, so I'll stop there.

Feminism is essentially a guide on how not to get laid. Are feminists aware of this? I've heard feminism described as a "smoke screen" to keep beta males at bay.

All this must be cognitive dissonance because I see the anger in the faces of my feminist professors. I hear indignation in their voices. It's sincere.

I don't understand how a human being can function in this world when there is that large of a disconnect between what they say and do. Krauser talked about this on "London Real". In the same interview he said something along the lines of (I'm paraphrasing) women don't interact with the real world, because they can't.

Initially, I thought he was referring to the fact that women are not capable of taking down an ox or fighting off the rival tribe. I thought he meant that a man is better suited for surviving, by himself, in the woods.

What I think he actually meant was that women can't interact with reality in anyway. Not physically. But not mentally either.


I hope I'm not bringing up a stale topic.

Laterz -

J.

 

[BPH]

With the time and effort it took you speculate all of this you probably could have gotten laid, just sayin

 

[flashpoint]

AFC - average frustrated chump. why does that come to my mind here?

 

[( . )( . )]

With the time and effort it took you speculate all of this you probably could have gotten laid, just sayin

AFC - average frustrated chump. why does that come to my mind here?

Yeah how dare this loser make some valid points and wants to discuss the psychology of women, where does he think he is? You 2 turkey's should lighten up a bit.

 

[flashpoint]

Yeah how dare this loser make some valid points and wants to discuss the psychology of women, where does he think he is? You 2 turkey's should lighten up a bit.

well at least now he knows he is not the only loser

 

[( . )( . )]

well at least now he knows he is not the only loser

Zinggg!

 

[HalfPUAHalfAFC]

Go read all the material on these blogs:

The Rational Male

Chateau Hartiste

RooshV

And I mean all the material. It will all slowly start sinking in.

Others you might want to check out:

The Badger Hut

Alpha Game

Krauser's PUA Adventure

You may not agree with 100% of what you read, but try to distill the general message you get from them as a whole.

 

[Zarky]

Can the uniquely female phenomenon of saying X but doing Y be attributed to cognitive dissonance?

Right, because men are never hypocrites. Yawn, another "Women are all [X, Y, Z]" post.

 

[DonJuanabe]

You need to understand and accept that women alter their view of reality to fit how they feel. It doesn't matter why they feel a certain way, once they feel that way they will alter reality in their mind to fit their feelings. You can argue with this all you want but since what matters primarily to women is how they feel you are wasting your time.

 

[Atom Smasher]

Yeah how dare this loser make some valid points and wants to discuss the psychology of women, where does he think he is? You 2 turkey's should lighten up a bit.

Exactly.

The guy is posing a legitimate question in an intelligent manner and he gets called names in response.

The same guys here who don't want to label women as having general characteristics are the quickest ones to negatively label and shame those men who want to discuss and learn.

 

[Jeremiah]

Right, because men are never hypocrites. Yawn, another "Women are all [X, Y, Z]" post.

Seriously?

Unique was the wrong word, Zarky, but you know exactly what I'm referring to - the idea that women don't know what they really want.

I'm not talking about "hypocrisy", either, you silly goose. Hypocrisy is saying one thing and doing another. Cognitive Dissonance is believing one thing and doing another.

Flashpoint, Rollo Tamassi is a DJ administrator and one of the most respected writers on the Manoshpere and he is constantly analyzing female psychology. Is he an AFC, you dope?

For a moment, I thought about putting this thread in the "Everything Else" section, because it doesn't directly refer to getting laid, but I decided to give you guys the benefit of doubt.

My mistake.

Is theory not welcome on the DJ chat boards?

I hate to use coarse language, but all dissenters can take a long walk off a short pier.

J.

 

[SgtSplacker]

It's funny you bring up this topic, I have been giving this alot of thought lately. I have concluded that women do in fact ask for things they really do not want. A woman is fully capable of ruining a relationship by just getting what she wants. If I get everything I wan't i'm buying a ring soon... I think part of cognitive dissonance is that the subject realizes their desires are conflicting, I don't think woman understand the implications of their desires so maybe it does not apply?

Problem: Woman wants man to wait for sex, man complies proving his beta status and woman loses interest. Woman want the badboy alpha dude, and alphas don't wait for sex right?

My solution: Tell her i'm seeing other people, be distant but keep in touch until she gets over her BS, go out together every once in a while. I keep in touch to give her a chance to come around, I tell her i'm seeing other people to prove to her I don't need her sex and her policies do not matter to me.


Problem: Women say they want a nice guy, but are quickly turned off by too much consideration and kindness.

My solution: Be nice in person, but make sure to hint at other women in your life. Cancel plans with decent frequency. Be sure to call her out when she makes a mistake. Be generally unavailable.

I dunno the examples/solutions might be a little off but generally speaking...

 

[ArcBound]

Niceness and jerkiness are probably the last thing on a woman's mind. She looks for other values and if you have those values, she won't care whether you are nice or an asshvle and will rationalize everything you do as making her happy.

There are woman who probably do want a nice guy. But a good looking nice guy who has more social status than her and possibly a better career and more money.

 

[Jeremiah]

All mothers want their sons to marry and impregnate a beautiful woman. Every mother wants her son to have healthy relationships.

These same women will downright outlaw masculinity in their homes. They will emasculate their browbeaten, beta husbands, allowing their sons to witness the daily neutering of the most influential male role model he'll ever have.

Women **** test their sons. From what I've noticed, the more passive the father is the more frequently the mother **** tests her son.

This is why I believe women are not capable of understanding the consequences of their actions.

Women desperately want their sons to succeed in the sexual marketplace while simultaneously (and relentlessly) exposing them to stimuli that will undoubtedly hinder their ability to attract the opposite sex.

I recently read a Tomassi post arguing that deep down women know they're full of ****. I'm not convinced of this.

My feminist professors (which were all of my professors ) believed every word they said.

American universities, especially the liberal arts departments, are so thoroughly drenched in misandry it is impossible, I mean, literally impossible, to express a sentiment that strays far from "Yeah women, boo men" without becoming a classroom pariah.

 

[BPH]

With the time and effort it took you to comprehend his post, perhaps you could have gotten laid.

Just saying.




Men don't say they want fat warpigs and then sleep with slender hot girls.


Why post in this thread when you could give us insight on your latest POF pickup?

I didn't read the post because I had already taken AP Psychology and understand cognitive dissonance. The reason I previously failed with women was because I overanalyzed situations, which is what I suspect this guy is doing.

Dissecting the female mind isn't necessary to get into one's pants. Don't try to understand her world, bring her into yours.

 

[BPH]

Yes it is a well known maxim that you bring her to your world. That is another discussion entirely.



What you were doing is called a shaming attempt. It was done on someone for taking the time to think about women. You also make the gross assumption that anyone who does such a thing is poor with at getting laid. You would be wrong on that assumption

If that were the case, then there would be no Pook's, Rollo's, Roissy's, Roosh's, etc,...

I'm saying his effort was misplaced. This reminds me of topics where people post text and physical interactions with a girl they're infatuated with for an entire week then ask what each sign "means".

I don't assume he is bad at getting laid, I assume he could have gotten laid with the time he spent researching a topic that will not improve his standing with a woman in the least.

 

[TRSX]

Dictionay.com defines CD as:

Dictionary.com *

 

[Zarky]

Unique was the wrong word, Zarky, but you know exactly what I'm referring to - the idea that women don't know what they really want.

Nobody knows what they really want. Or, to be more accurate, some do, some don't. Men, women, black, white, tall, short. Some have that attribute, some don't.

Is theory not welcome on the DJ chat boards?

If you weren't rehashing all the "manosphere" mumbo-jumbo this might be an interesting thread.

Or not. Any post that lumps all 3.5 billion women on the planet into a group, assigns a behavior to that group, and then judges that behavior isn't exactly enlightening. Especially when it does so in the "tut-tut" holier-than-thou way that the typical manosphere writer does. Why don't you substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" into your sentence above and see how that goes over. Same principle.

I get sick of women saying stupid sh*t like "All men like a chase" but then I see men saying sh*t about women that's just as stereotypical. It's so boring. "Men are all 100% rational, women completely irrational, ain't it awful, ain't it awful."

I don't understand the mentality. All the chicks I've boned are different in their own ways. To cubby-hole an entire gender seems outrageous and, even worse, it takes you away from understanding how to bang chicks.

Stereotypes are bad and wrong. They are anti-intellectual. Believing in them makes you a worse seducer.

 

[Burroughs]

@Jeremiah ..women are forever children who remain 12 years old their entire lives, they are only fit to raise children to age 5 then cook and care for her husband and family.

man was meant to rule women mind, body and soul no exceptions.

thats it

end of story

and for thousands of years 99% of high level civilizations operated this way.

but that will only get you so far in todays world if you want to get your d!ck wet ....so you need to master the crucial arts of fitness, money and seduction.

 

[Zarky]

Fascinating there are so many sexists here. I'd be curious to see who is getting laid more.. sexist guys or non-sexist guys. That would be interesting.

My theory is that sexism ruins game. And it does so because it blinds you to certain wisdom about humanity.

Just as your interactions with people of different races, religions, or nationalities would be stunted if you had blanket stereotypical ideas about them, your interactions with women will suffer as well if you have sexist notions about them.

And if your interactions with women are stunted, you're less likely to get laid.

That's my theory. I could be wrong.