This one really explains a lot of things well. I would pay close attention.
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/about/best/van/152468438.html
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/about/best/van/152468438.html
Francisco d'Anconia said:Not meaning to derail the thread but I found another post on CL that merits reading for its entertainment value (at least to me). It's a post pointing out the delusions of a particular woman who may need to rethink her selection criteria for men.
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/about/best/nyc/185232520.html
What an intriguing idea (if you post the responses you get back)...Bonhomme said:This is Bible material. The one on the gal's criteria is priceless, though I think he was very generous with some of the percentages, which should probably have narrowed it down to 1 or 2 men. I oughta have a go at that sort of analysis on some online chick who has an absurd "laundry list," and see what kind of hate letter I get back.
Fukking Gospel! I've been preaching this forever, but the guy nails it - respect.women want to maintain the self-delusion that they already understand men. Women everywhere claim that they understand men and that "men are simple creatures." The truth is that women haven't a clue where most men are coming from and furthermore they care only insofar as they want to control us. Nonetheless, they want to maintain the fiction that they have us figured out.
It's a pride and status thing. A woman who doesn't "understand" her man can't control him, and a woman who can't control her man is a loser. The more you try to explain yourself, the more complex and multi-dimensional you become (a.k.a. "difficult"), and the less she can claim to understand you.
ScrewIt said:Something similar
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q3/women.607.html