After bitterness from this thread (
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=102353)
I wanted to transmit that energy into a rational 'lesson' to be learned.
This isn't politicly correct, but there is no reason why you should expect reality to fit the man-made ever changing confines of what is PC. It may seem cold and scientific, but thats because I tried to keep it objective. Some of it you will not agree with, and some of it might make you mad.
There are alot of ways in which society teaches men to think about relationships that are not congruent with what women actually respond to. It was fucking with my mind because I couldn't figure out what was going on. Ya i know, blame society, whatever.
There is this big push on equality. I believe that men and women are of equal VALUE, but nothing else about us is equal. Equal doesn't mean identicle. Men and women have different mating strategies hardwired into us in the form of unconcious emotional reactions. These hardwired emotional imperitives were developed because they help us to survive and reproduce, the two factors in being successful in the genepool, and therefore prolific in the population. But men and women naturally fell into 'roles' that were relativly universal among all cultures. This is a survival strategy because men and women are good at different things. Its starting to become appearent to me that the fundamental male energy is to 'do', and the fundamental female energy is to 'feel'. This is expressed esotericly by the ancient elements of fire and water. Its why in a respectable religion there should be priests AND priestesses to express both, not just one or the other as in Christianity or Wicca respectively (and respectfully). As men and women evolved in a codependent relationship, they were a team like the bee and the flower. We developed together, but it's two seperate lines of development in one system, not one line of development 'together'. Think of two strings twisted up, not one string. We were dependent because of our differences, not our similarities. Since men and women have reproductive systems with different operating perameters (a women has 1 egg per month, a man has 50,000 sperm a day), different emotional circuitry was developed by each sex to most effeciently utilize their biology and spread their genes fruitfully. They also developed different emotional survival strategies. I don't think any of this affects us much on the concious level when we are logicly picking who to date, but I think its deeply ingrained in our emotional circuitry. A man has sperm to spare, this is why men tend to be attracted to a young healthy female with a hip to waste ratio that looks least pregnant. (Pregnant women are still beautiful in their own way of course, but not as appealing sexually.) Also, as a women becomes pregnant, she is physicly vulnerable, and if she does not have a strong male to protect her, not only could she lose the baby, but she could die as well. Not good for the survival and reproduction. Therefore women are generally attracted to a strong alpha male, who has a good ability survive to provide for her. In modern times, this emotional reaction is stimulated by status, money and power. These things indicate survival ability. Yes, there are gold digging women who just want to spend a mans money, but in general women are attracted to money (legitimatly) not only to spend it but because it shows that if nothing else, the man can take care of himself. Also because of this, women tend to feel attraction for someone who they percieve to have higher social value than themselves. Why would they want to date 'down'? That would negativly affect their survival ability. The problem is boys grow up and hear women complaining about 'asshole' guys all the time and vow to never be that. In trying to avoid being an asshole they give away all their power in a relationship. They try to please her until it's she's annoyed, then they apologize for being annoying, compliment her, thank her for being nice enough to like him, call her 10 times a day, they never set any boundaries or stand up for themselves, they show that they have no self worth or pride, and the girl loses attraction. It's not her fault, its just not part of her emotional program to feel attraction for the weak dependant beta male. This is why there is the cliche saying the "the asshole gets all the girls". It's true, but not because girls like someone who acts like a dickhead. It's because the badboy behavior communicates independence, strength, non-needyness, confidence, all the things stimulate an emotional reaction of attraction from a female. I keep using the words 'emotional reaction' because I want to iterate that these aren't choices we make, and they aren't always nice, they are just unconcious hardwired responses that, in the majority of time our species has existed, have helped each individual assert his/her genes.
Feminism was a perfectly legitimate movement to get equal pay in the workplace, and suffrage for women. Thats fine. But its effect on the cultural conciousness of the people was to create a kind of role reversal or mix up about masculine and feminine energy. (Both men and women have both yin and yang, but men tend to have more masculine energy and women tend to have more femenine energy. The polarity is what creates the attraction. This is true even with gays/lesbians as the more masculine tends to be attracted to the more femine one, and vice versa. And this I dont think this is linked to homosexuality, as there are masculine and feminine straight guys, and masculine and feminine straight women. Incedentally a masculine female can be attracted to a feminine male. As long as there is that polarity in energy.) The feminist ideology lead to a sort of masculinization of women, followed by another movement partially inclusive to the 'hippy' movement, where men were feminized. Because of this, men and women have all this intellectual conditioning from society which acts contrary to their emotionally hardwired survival and reproductive strategies. In other words, people are confused. Men don't know, "Should I open this door for her? Should I lead? Should I help her fix her bike or will she think I'm calling her a technicly incompetant girl?". People don't know their roles. Women go through similar confusion I think. Its still pretty obvious for a girl how to be attractive. Culture still shows them this. Youth, health, large breasts, wide hips, lipstick and blush that simulate sexual flush, clear skin, being pretty, and being sexually available. I know it's superficial, but were talking about attraction which is a primal emotion and doesn't care if you think it's 'right' or not. Guys however tend to be clueless as to what 'does it' for a girl. Society just doesn't tell us. Too many guys pretty themselves up in ways that are overly feminine because they are trying to project what THEY as men find attractive in women, incorrectly assuming women also find it attractive in men.
Primitive man's best reproductive strategy was to persue sex directly and promiscuously (50,000 sperm (the majority of which are actually warrior sperm designed to fight other males sperm in the uterus)). Primitive womans best reproductive strategy is to find a strong male to stick around at least long enough to help her through her pregnancy and hopefully take care of offspring. This was a big clue to me when I kept wondering about the games women play. Male reproductive game is usually as deep as a puddle of spilled beer and as obvious as "hey baby lets do it". Female game is a collection of very odd behaviours. What is she trying to accomplish? Men are trying to get sex...women are trying to....fight sex? No thats not right. And it hit me...DUH. Girl game is about getting a male and keeping him around long enough to fall in love with her and feel 'pairbonded' to her. Girls are told by their moms, and learn with experience that if she 'gives it up' and gives sex immediatly, the male mating game is over, and many men will lose interest. In the same sense, if a guy 'gives it up' and falls in love too easily, the girl feels like she didn't have to earn it and maybe he doesn't have as much value as she thought he did. She wants to be true to herself, and how can she beleive that is what she is doing if she didn't have to earn his affection. It is the exact corralary to womens 'dont put out too early' rule. Once a guy falls in love, the girls game is over, and her interest goes right down the drain. This is a huge realization for me. I think some girls don't even really realize this is why they are playing hard to get and whatever, for many it happens on an emotional subconcious level. Also in a womans games are tests to see where her boundaries are. She will push and push and if he isn't man enough to put his foot down and show her some boundaries, she will walk all over him trying to find them. How is she supposed to beleive he could protect her in a bad situation if he cant even stand up to her? Then she will lose attraction and dump him for being a pussy. She will feel like she's on a pedistal and probably feel bad for being a bitch, and not know why she feels the way she does. "He lets me treat him so badly" He is unaware that she just wants him to be a man and stand up for himself. She doesn't know why she doesn't like him, he was so nice. She might even feel stupid for 'ruining it'.
[no conclusion]