squirrels
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Messages
- 6,628
- Reaction score
- 178
- Age
- 45
Is it out of control??
Men trying to "get over" on women, women trying to "get over" on men. The power struggle seems like it's escalating out of control.
The "classic family" has the man as the authority of the household and a woman more as its vision.
At some point, men started regarding women as the "inferior" sex and began taking them for granted. In some cases, they abused them or treated them as property to be exchanged for things like money or political favors.
Then there's the backlash...the feminist "girl-power" movement, where women began to leverage their own sexuality as a way to get "one-up" on the men. But in a way, the "feminists" became exactly what they were trying to destroy. It wasn't enough to live "with" men, they had to live "over" men, as men had lived "over" women. With feminism came this constant brinkmanship, formerly the domain of aggressive men, and this "adversarial" relationship where each gender is trying to prove its own worth in front of the other.
And then there's this forum.
This whole "PUA subculture" seems more and more like a reactionary backlash in the OTHER direction...a "masculist" movement. Feminism focused not on gaining rights for women, but on making them equal to men, either by putting women up or (unfortunately, more often) putting men down.
Society embraced it to the point where men are portrayed everywhere as lost doofuses, completely beholden to a "smarter, wiser" woman directing things behind the scenes.
The more I look around this forum, though, the more I see the same things in what I'll call the "masculist" movement. This desire to blame women for the sad state of the romantic power-struggle, the same way feminists blame the men.
I don't know how many threads I've read JUST TODAY where I've seen some link posted to a mainstream article or current events example that suggests that men "ain't what they used to be". What's the reaction? "Well...uh...what about the feminists!! THEY MADE us this way! We're just reacting to all their BS with marriage and relationship domination and their Cluster B psycho personality disorders..."
You know why so many Western women are crazy? It was their way of striking back at a perceived male superiority complex. I'm not saying that it was done on purpose, to maliciously put women down, but it was done. So women taught their daughters a new set of rules to play by. The brinkmanship escalated. Dating was no longer a simple system...it started becoming a war.
Men feel sleighted now...and rightfully so. But what's NOT so "right" is the feeling that MEN now need to retaliate BACK against women.
All of these "PUA guidelines", these mind-games that are encouraged on this forum, this push-pull, power-struggle nonsense, all gauged in a way to gain CONTROL from women, the same way women try to CONTROL men...isn't that "stooping to their level"?
In our quest to "win" the battle with "crazy women", have we become "crazy men"??
Are women now looking at MEN and thinking about how "crazy" and "entitled" and "cluster-B" WE all seem sometimes? Is the "masculist" movement being regarded as an insanity equal to that with which we regard feminism?
Is that going to encourage them to change for the BETTER? Or will they just ESCALATE the level of emotional conflict even FURTHER??
And is this REALLY what EITHER men OR women want??
Do you really want to DOMINATE women? (I mean, in bed...but other than that... ) Is it really essential for us to establish ourselves as the "better sex" by shaming women for being women and trying to develop strategy to "get one over" on them? Or are we just trying to survive in the "dating game" while searching for fair companions with caring, nurturing, and supportive feminine virtues?
Do women really want to DOMINATE men? Or are they just trying to survive in the dating game until they can find fair companions with ambition, self-respect, and honor?
Are men and women really two warring tribes with such bitter resentment toward each other that they are beyond a diplomatic compromise??
When I first started out on this forum, I read a lot of articles that suggested that this was as much about "attracting a woman" as about "being a better man" and that women should appreciate what men were becoming because developing our masculine virtues better honored and complemented their OWN feminine virtues and gave them "men worth dating".
I don't know if this website or this community is turning out "men worth dating" any more.
I feel like it's starting to teach a sort of respectless adversarial relationship with women. Sure, you have to avoid putting yourself in a position where anyone, especially a woman, can take advantage of you. But the focus has shifted from "avoiding" crazy or no-good women and more toward "winning the battle" with them...the only end to which is that you have to sink to their level.
Worse...it starts to regard ALL women as "crazy, entitled, self-centered Cluster B headcase b!tches". That may be a "safe" way to go through life, but 90% of the women out there would LOVE to just set aside this bitter rivalry if men were willing to do so as well...then we could all step up and be better people.
As it is, we have two genders, male and female, constantly at arms against each other in some kind of sexual civil war, both sides just hoping for the day when we can put the guns down and embrace each other again, but neither side trusting the other to want to do the same.
Is there no room for peace?
Sun Tzu once said that "conquerability lies with the enemy, but unconquerability lies in the self". So it begs the question...why, when all we want to do is enjoy the company of a special woman (or women, in some people's cases), and all women want to do is enjoy the company of a special man, can't we lower our guards and work our way through the TRUE "crazies" in the dating world to find our way to each other??
I think it's because we don't have confidence in ourselves.
We need to PROVE that our gender is superior, and get the other to acknowledge it, because deep down, we truly don't know. Men AREN'T confident in their masculinity, and women AREN'T confident in their femininity. So they have to stay "at arms" until they conquer and destroy the "threat". Deterrence and brinkmanship, indeed.
We, as a gender, can no longer "love and lose" without losing a piece of ourselves. Why is that? Why is it so important to "win every time"? Is it the video games? Why are we so insecure that defeat causes us to despair, instead of learning? Why does a failed date or failed relationship cause us to either lash out at women or turn our anger inward on ourselves? Why does there have to be a "winner" and a "loser"?
It wasn't always this way. Before, you just learned a little better what YOU wanted out of life, what you DIDN'T want, and used that knowledge to determine what situations you put yourself in, what kinds of people you associated with, and what experiences you exposed yourself to.
Now, anything short of total victory means "the terrorists win". Romance is no longer exciting, it's discouraging and draining. Why are men no longer men? Because men don't know what it MEANS to be men any more. To them, "being a man" means fighting an endless battle that he cannot win and then being forced to blame someone for his loss...usually himself. Easier to just curl up on the couch and play video games.
Contd...
Men trying to "get over" on women, women trying to "get over" on men. The power struggle seems like it's escalating out of control.
The "classic family" has the man as the authority of the household and a woman more as its vision.
At some point, men started regarding women as the "inferior" sex and began taking them for granted. In some cases, they abused them or treated them as property to be exchanged for things like money or political favors.
Then there's the backlash...the feminist "girl-power" movement, where women began to leverage their own sexuality as a way to get "one-up" on the men. But in a way, the "feminists" became exactly what they were trying to destroy. It wasn't enough to live "with" men, they had to live "over" men, as men had lived "over" women. With feminism came this constant brinkmanship, formerly the domain of aggressive men, and this "adversarial" relationship where each gender is trying to prove its own worth in front of the other.
And then there's this forum.
This whole "PUA subculture" seems more and more like a reactionary backlash in the OTHER direction...a "masculist" movement. Feminism focused not on gaining rights for women, but on making them equal to men, either by putting women up or (unfortunately, more often) putting men down.
Society embraced it to the point where men are portrayed everywhere as lost doofuses, completely beholden to a "smarter, wiser" woman directing things behind the scenes.
The more I look around this forum, though, the more I see the same things in what I'll call the "masculist" movement. This desire to blame women for the sad state of the romantic power-struggle, the same way feminists blame the men.
I don't know how many threads I've read JUST TODAY where I've seen some link posted to a mainstream article or current events example that suggests that men "ain't what they used to be". What's the reaction? "Well...uh...what about the feminists!! THEY MADE us this way! We're just reacting to all their BS with marriage and relationship domination and their Cluster B psycho personality disorders..."
You know why so many Western women are crazy? It was their way of striking back at a perceived male superiority complex. I'm not saying that it was done on purpose, to maliciously put women down, but it was done. So women taught their daughters a new set of rules to play by. The brinkmanship escalated. Dating was no longer a simple system...it started becoming a war.
Men feel sleighted now...and rightfully so. But what's NOT so "right" is the feeling that MEN now need to retaliate BACK against women.
All of these "PUA guidelines", these mind-games that are encouraged on this forum, this push-pull, power-struggle nonsense, all gauged in a way to gain CONTROL from women, the same way women try to CONTROL men...isn't that "stooping to their level"?
In our quest to "win" the battle with "crazy women", have we become "crazy men"??
Are women now looking at MEN and thinking about how "crazy" and "entitled" and "cluster-B" WE all seem sometimes? Is the "masculist" movement being regarded as an insanity equal to that with which we regard feminism?
Is that going to encourage them to change for the BETTER? Or will they just ESCALATE the level of emotional conflict even FURTHER??
And is this REALLY what EITHER men OR women want??
Do you really want to DOMINATE women? (I mean, in bed...but other than that... ) Is it really essential for us to establish ourselves as the "better sex" by shaming women for being women and trying to develop strategy to "get one over" on them? Or are we just trying to survive in the "dating game" while searching for fair companions with caring, nurturing, and supportive feminine virtues?
Do women really want to DOMINATE men? Or are they just trying to survive in the dating game until they can find fair companions with ambition, self-respect, and honor?
Are men and women really two warring tribes with such bitter resentment toward each other that they are beyond a diplomatic compromise??
When I first started out on this forum, I read a lot of articles that suggested that this was as much about "attracting a woman" as about "being a better man" and that women should appreciate what men were becoming because developing our masculine virtues better honored and complemented their OWN feminine virtues and gave them "men worth dating".
I don't know if this website or this community is turning out "men worth dating" any more.
I feel like it's starting to teach a sort of respectless adversarial relationship with women. Sure, you have to avoid putting yourself in a position where anyone, especially a woman, can take advantage of you. But the focus has shifted from "avoiding" crazy or no-good women and more toward "winning the battle" with them...the only end to which is that you have to sink to their level.
Worse...it starts to regard ALL women as "crazy, entitled, self-centered Cluster B headcase b!tches". That may be a "safe" way to go through life, but 90% of the women out there would LOVE to just set aside this bitter rivalry if men were willing to do so as well...then we could all step up and be better people.
As it is, we have two genders, male and female, constantly at arms against each other in some kind of sexual civil war, both sides just hoping for the day when we can put the guns down and embrace each other again, but neither side trusting the other to want to do the same.
Is there no room for peace?
Sun Tzu once said that "conquerability lies with the enemy, but unconquerability lies in the self". So it begs the question...why, when all we want to do is enjoy the company of a special woman (or women, in some people's cases), and all women want to do is enjoy the company of a special man, can't we lower our guards and work our way through the TRUE "crazies" in the dating world to find our way to each other??
I think it's because we don't have confidence in ourselves.
We need to PROVE that our gender is superior, and get the other to acknowledge it, because deep down, we truly don't know. Men AREN'T confident in their masculinity, and women AREN'T confident in their femininity. So they have to stay "at arms" until they conquer and destroy the "threat". Deterrence and brinkmanship, indeed.
We, as a gender, can no longer "love and lose" without losing a piece of ourselves. Why is that? Why is it so important to "win every time"? Is it the video games? Why are we so insecure that defeat causes us to despair, instead of learning? Why does a failed date or failed relationship cause us to either lash out at women or turn our anger inward on ourselves? Why does there have to be a "winner" and a "loser"?
It wasn't always this way. Before, you just learned a little better what YOU wanted out of life, what you DIDN'T want, and used that knowledge to determine what situations you put yourself in, what kinds of people you associated with, and what experiences you exposed yourself to.
Now, anything short of total victory means "the terrorists win". Romance is no longer exciting, it's discouraging and draining. Why are men no longer men? Because men don't know what it MEANS to be men any more. To them, "being a man" means fighting an endless battle that he cannot win and then being forced to blame someone for his loss...usually himself. Easier to just curl up on the couch and play video games.
Contd...