The Capt. Save-a-ho Inclination

[Desdinova]

I thought it would be interesting to discuss this...

Although I shed my AFC ways years ago, I still find myself having the desire to "save women" from either themselves, or their AFC boyfriends. I'm more leaning toward this inclination to be natural in men, since it seems that most men posess this need or desire to protect or save women.

However, the media is full of stories of "the knight in shining armour". Disney is a fantastic example of a company who makes millions from promoting this fantasy, and children eat it up thinking that this is the correct way things should happen in real life. Is it possible that this need or desire to be a woman's saviour is learned rather than being a natural instinct?

 

[kyphan]

I am pretty sure this, like most things in life, is a learned trait.

Why? It seems like a perfectly natural inclination. Men are trying to save women because biologically we are supposed to protect them. It's some deep-seeded "need or desire." Perfectly valid point, Desdinova.

Then why have I spent my whole life telling them to shape up or get out?

Trust me, I was a semi-AFC for a looooooong time. I've always had my own agenda, my own rules, and my own life; I simply did not know how to properly act around a woman. I put them on pedestals and rarely had the guts to say anything. When I did it was often sappy and somewhat pathetic. I did not think of them as sexual creatures at all, I thought that was something it would take months upon months to get at.

Trust me on this one thing: I have never gone beyond my means to save a woman. I see the problem, I help them with it. If they didn't listen I'd tell them that was life and they needed to deal with it, and if it became I problem I left them (which I have done twice). Looking back, I remember thinking I might have been better for a girl than her man, but there's no way I was going to "save" her from her situation. That's up to her to decide.

Don't get me wrong - if I could help everyone change their perspective and be happier, stronger, better people I would. It's not up to me to change that person. Thing is, if this were a natural trait then why would I not act that way? It seems like the perfect AFC thing to do. Yet all I wanted were happy, somewhat independent (re: didn't depend on me) women in my life. That's still the foundation to what I want. To me, it's a learned mindset, not something we are born with.

 

[Vulpine]

I'll say natural. Now, before I get flame-broiled like a whopper, let me explain.

"Captain Save-a-ho" is harsh, maybe in extreme cases of trying to polish a turd it's appropriate. But often people apply the term to every little good deed a man tries to do for a woman. People want to help others, you know, "looking out for fellow man" and such? When a person tries to help out a male friend, do you still call it "save-a-ho"?

I think the desire for men, and women, to help others is always there. I hate to use the term "Alpha" here, but the "Alpha" of a social group tends to "look out for their peeps". In fact, when a person "watches over" or protects a group, the group holds that person in higher regard.

Take, for example, a work situation where a supervisor takes better care of their subordinates than the manager does. Over time, the supervisor will likely take over the manager's position because employees will demand it: "tending the flock" is part of being a good leader.

HOWEVER, when you couple this natural desire with AFC social programming, then you get "Save-a-Ho" situations. The social programming seems to act as a "multiplier" of the natural desire to "help". Now, instead of a certain level of unconscious behavior, there is a conscious effort to "Save-a-Ho" as well. And, the ho saving is indiscriminate! As in, "I'll save any and all hos that need saving because that's what Disney wants!"

Now back to the misuse of "Save-a-Ho": I am in the process of "saving" one right now! Am I AFC? No, you need the details, don't you? An old GF got in touch; she's married, overweight, has 3 kids, husband beats her, and of course, miserable. Now, noone needs to get beat, and kids don't need to watch mommy get beat, either. She's miserable because she (was) fat, and jackass wife-beater-boy doesn't need to stay in the picture. We hooked up and I made her feel good. She'd freak out about the situation, and I'll cool her down. She lost weight (60+ lbs), is getting a divorce, and we hang out and "have fun".

Ok, now that you understand the goings on in that case, in order to properly determine AFC or DJ, you must understand the motivation. See, this chick is a good person: great attitude, responsible... fun and positive in general. I am most certainly "Saving-a-Ho", however, I'm not saving her for myself. Are you kidding me? A divorced single mother of three kids with a mortgage? No, I'm saving her from an AFC husband. An AFC wifebeater husband soon to be single and coughing up huge chunks of his paycheck to support the kids - call it a "fine for beating women" or "AFC tax". I have no remorse, no guilt, I am completely righteous for helping an old friend out.

If you had the power to help someone who is suffering, you would, wouldn't you? Right, and that's why I feel it's a natural behavior. Now, when a guy can't get laid and lowers his standards in order to get laid by a "busted" woman, or tries to stay and fix a "busted" relationship out of fear of being single, that's not "helping fellow man", that's "Save-a-Ho". The password is "compassion". Humans have it naturally. But, society plays to it and blows it up to a point where we go around with "Practice random acts of kindness" bumper-stickers.

I guess what I'm driving at is that the basic ho-saving inclination is natural, but, innappropriate, self-defeating, "help in order to win the favor of a woman" ho-saving is learned.

 

[Bonhomme]

I think it's both (no such option in the poll, so "unsure" was chosen as the best answer), but probably more learned than natural, for reasons kyphan already went into.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

I only checked unsure because I'd argue that it's both nature and nurture.

Reproductive coping contrivances of the AFC

The Savior Schema –an expectation of reciprocation of intimacy for problems solved.

This is a learned/developed behavior that results from men's natural propensity to deductively search for the most rational solution to a problem. It's really a linear logic - I need sex + women have sex + I must discover what is required for me to get sex from women + I will perform/embody/identify with said requirements = woman will reciprocate with her intimacy. Needless to say this is simplistic at best, but men have a tendency to believe that women will respond as rationally as they would in performing and meriting her stated desires. This forum is full of men who can tell you this simply isn't the case for any number of reasons, but sadly they still think that women ought to live up to their "agreement."

The fundamental flaw of the Savior Schema is that it is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine. You can fix a woman's flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she'll still go fukk her outlaw biker BF because that intimacy is genuine unnegotiated desire.

What AFCs fail to understand is that all the financial, emotional, dependable support you could possibly offer a woman is no substitute for raw, unmitigated, chemical desire. Some of the most irresponsible, unreliable, poverty level washouts often get more sex than any AFC suffering from a Savior Schema.

Of course the flip side to this argument is the Protector Dynamic which is the natural propensity for a man to want to provide protection for his mate. Over the course of our evolutionary history certain psycho-biological behaviors proved to be beneficial to the survival of our species. Specific hormonal releases prompt different emotions and behavioral reactions as a response to our environments. Women, for instance, produce higher volumes of oxytocin and estrogen thus prompting a natural instinctual feeling of wellbeing and nurturing her children (which also, interestingly enough, is released after female orgasm). The same is true for men. Being generally physically stronger and posessing 17 times the testosterone, men have evolved chemical ****tails of their own and thus feel a natural protection instinct when prompted.

The conflict comes when the AFC confuses this Protector Dynamic with a Savior Schema. The natural feelings derived from his biochemistry only serve to reinforce his Savior mentality and solidify it as part of his personality. Even when a woman's repeated behavior directly contradicts this notion of reciprocating intimacy for help (or his idea of 'protection') the Savior Schema only rationalizes it as being inconsistent with a single, individual woman.

 

[Sir Drinksalot]

I think Captain Save-A-Ho is a common subspecies of AFC.

God knows I was trapped in this sick mentality for long enough to explain it.

Here's how it works: AFCs have low opinions of themselves. They let other people dictate how high on the female food chain they can go, and internalize it.

Most AFCs settle for the best they can get, typically a fat, domineering shrew. Not The Captain. He can't bear to be seen with the readily available ranch of sows. But he still doesn't value himself enough to go after high quality, attractive women. What to do.

Well one way to handle this is to find women with less visible defects (has kids, stupid, broke, reputation for sleeping with black guys, drug addict, missing limbs, criminal record, mentally ill, the list is endless) that knocks her value down closer to "his level." He figures he can clean her up and make her high quality, a la "Pretty Woman."

This is the same mentality as a guy who longs for a hot sports car but can't afford it. So he gets a rusted out Trans Am with a cracked engine block for $500 and spends the next ten years restoring it.

It doesn't occur to him that this will cost him the same as a good sports car in the end, or how much he could have earned in all the time he wasted.

Nor does it occur to him that the woman will not feel grateful enough to stay out of better garages when he's done cleaning her ratty a$$ up.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

QUOTE=Sir Drinksalot]I think Captain Save-A-Ho is a common subspecies of AFC.

Most AFCs settle for the best they can get, typically a fat, domineering shrew. Not The Captain. He can't bear to be seen with the readily available ranch of sows. But he still doesn't value himself enough to go after high quality, attractive women. What to do.

Well one way to handle this is to find women with less visible defects (has kids, stupid, broke, reputation for sleeping with black guys, drug addict, missing limbs, criminal record, mentally ill, the list is endless) that knocks her value down closer to "his level." He figures he can clean her up and make her high quality, a la "Pretty Woman."

QUOTE]

...

 

[Vulpine]

Settle, VU, settle...

A guy just told me the other night, "I've met her friends, but they are only into black dudes." It's a common "reputation" that implies "they are into huge cawks and you don't stand a chance, whitey". Essentially, it's penis envy: it's a common AFC barrier. Completely relevant to SD's AFC relations.

Myself, I laughed at the guy, "So? I like black women... I like asian women, indian women, amish women... let's hook 'em up anyway. WTF man?"

 

[wayword]

I'll say both - we have an instinct to help those in need...but a lot of it is also learned from social propaganda...and can be unlearned.

Again, most human behavior is a combination of Nature & nurture.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

My inclination for saving people (in general) is only when they are in dire situations which they have no chance of controlling themselves and I have a very high likelihood of surviving. For example this would include (in some cases) saving someone from drowning or a fire; again it would depend on my likelihood for survival.

As for saving people from bad relationships or from themselves at best I would throw them a life preserver and hope that they catch it (for their sake, not mine); no more no less. It's easy to desperate yourself when you don't base your existence on the survival of others. You do what you can if and when you feel like it, otherwise you just look out for yourself. It's actually easy being a selfish bastard.

 

[kyphan]

I think the biggest difference in opinions comes from our definitions of "Captain Save-a-Ho." To me, it's finding a woman in a bad situation and going out of my way to help her see how things could be. I absolutely love to help others accomplish things. They have to WANT to accomplish those things in order for them to happen.

In my book, Captain Save-a-Ho does not pay attention to whether or not she truly wants to change things, he simply tries to help her. And he keeps giving her his support even when she consistently does things that fly in the face of positive change. Are people born with the desire to help others? Maybe - Captain Save-a-Ho is an extreme position, though, and I highly doubt anyone is born with that disposition.

Again, that's my personal perception.

 

[grinder]

I chose learned as that’s been my experience.

I differentiate between helping a woman and rescuing a woman.

Once you assume the role of rescuer you remain in that role forever as no one can be rescued.

Think Sisyphus, pushing that fvcking rock up the hill only to have it fall down again.

 

[Sir Drinksalot]

Settle, VU, settle...

A guy just told me the other night, "I've met her friends, but they are only into black dudes." It's a common "reputation" that implies "they are into huge cawks and you don't stand a chance, whitey". Essentially, it's penis envy: it's a common AFC barrier.

I don't think that's it. I think it mostly stems from the negative things that go along with "black culture," like high STD (http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/dstd/press_Releases/AfAmericans2000.htm), and violent crime rates (http://www.crab.rutgers.edu/~goertzel/drag.html).

But regardless this is getting off topic. It's really not fair to judge women by any of the things I mentioned, like missing limbs or having a mental disorder, or just being garden variety fat. In a perfect world none of that would matter, but this is reality, and there are plenty of things that can hurt a woman's open market value. That was my point, not getting into some political argument.

 

[So Many Ways]

Settle, VU, settle...

A guy just told me the other night, "I've met her friends, but they are only into black dudes." It's a common "reputation" that implies "they are into huge cawks and you don't stand a chance, whitey". Essentially, it's penis envy: it's a common AFC barrier. Completely relevant to SD's AFC relations.

Myself, I laughed at the guy, "So? I like black women... I like asian women, indian women, amish women... let's hook 'em up anyway. WTF man?"

Settle? Why should he settle?

Racism = The belief that you are superior to someone else based on skin color.

The reason why Sir Drinksalot has an issue with a white woman who is with a black guy is because deep down, he thinks that he is superior. Simple as that.

 

[wayword]

The reason why Sir Drinksalot has an issue with a white woman who is with a black guy is because deep down, he thinks that he is superior. Simple as that.

Or maybe he wants to avoid racist WOMEN who ONLY date Black men because they believe they are superior to all other types?

Although the increased STD risk is also a legitimate factor in itself... Just simple math, really.

 

[Vulpine]

You are right, So Many Ways.

I just can't relate because I just never hear it the same way. I only hear the penis envy, never hear that black people are inferior but actually superior.

Now that you point it out, yes, indeed, the comment has very racist overtones. However, my stance is still the basic underlying "perceived problem" is that of penis envy. You can cite STD's, violence, crime, unemployment... whatever you want, the only reason it's perceived as a problem at all is because some hillbilly redneck has a small wee-wee and is jealous because "there's one more girl I won't be getting."

Period. I'm not taking off my rose-colored glasses for anyone.

 

[Augie]

Interesting question, out of interested I work in a high stress workplace, and while I treat both men and Women the same, is it AFC to To tell a Women that I rate her workplace performance, again I try to treat all the same.

 

[edmond]

myself[/I]. Are you kidding me? A divorced single mother of three kids with a mortgage? No, I'm saving her from an AFC husband. An AFC wifebeater husband soon to be single and coughing up huge chunks of his paycheck to support the kids - call it a "fine for beating women" or "AFC tax". I have no remorse, no guilt, I am completely righteous for helping an old friend out.

If you had the power to help someone who is suffering, you would, wouldn't you? Right, and that's why I feel it's a natural behavior. Now, when a guy can't get laid and lowers his standards in order to get laid by a "busted" woman, or tries to stay and fix a "busted" relationship out of fear of being single, that's not "helping fellow man", that's "Save-a-Ho". The password is "compassion". Humans have it naturally. But, society plays to it and blows it up to a point where we go around with "Practice random acts of kindness" bumper-stickers.
.

Why get involved with a woman who wants to eat and looks like a pig,it was HER CHOICE to stay with her violent husband, by the way there are just as many women who beat up their husbands. So she has lost a few pounds and left him and as usual with the f@ck ups, she will gain the weight back on and go crawling back to him because he,"loves,"her and the kids need a"dad."
Life is to short, so stop wasting time and getting involved in OTHER peoples problems, which might get you knifed, by either husband or wife and get a life.
I never even give my Exs the time of day, they became Exs for a solid reason and will always stay in the past. I spend my free time doing stuff for myself ONLY.

 

[joekerr31]

you dad screwed your mom. you were born. your mom then became a mom.

at this point she became dependent on your father (most likely).

you grow up. noticing (if only subconsciously) that mom is dependent on dad. odds are mom has a few issues and isn't completely happy either.

you love mom. you wish she could be happy / happier. your mom is a woman.

you get older. you start dating women. for some reason you find yourself drawn to women who need to be saved.

ta-da.

its both nature and nurture.

most serial killers had VERY cold, distant and abusive mothers. its one of the major traits of serial killers. they have NO desire to save a ho, instead they want to kill a ho.

the problem with nature versus nurture is they are not independent. you arent BORN with one desire over another per say - except with certain things like homosexuality or eye color.

when you are born NATURE isn't fully defined yet. your brain is a big ball of neurons just waiting to be programmed. the programming never stops, but most of it is complete by say around age 10. this then becomes your 'nature' if you will, even though it was learned.

you can always unlearn and reprogram your nature though.

in a wierd nature the only "nature' element to you is that you are learning organism - your nature is to learn.

anyway, not saying freud was right in everything, but a HUGE part of the save a ho thing is most men see themselves as a secondary protector for mom. Dads the first line of defense, but if something happens, the son then steps up and protects mom.

its no surprise with that kind of wiring in our heads that we are disposed towards being drawn to women who need protecting.

 

[ElChoclo]

Notice how you were saving an ex girlfriend Vulpine. If I asked you to help out some ugly hag I selected at random, you wouldn't be so enthusiastic. Which is the essence of the Saviour mentality. You only want to save the ones you've either had sex with or want to have sex with.