Steven Rhoads, a University of Virginia politics professor who specializes in gender and culture, has written about The Emotional Costs of Hooking Up. He notes that a lot of young men share one student’s view that “he was not interested in love at that point because he hadn’t slept with enough women yet.” The capacity to separate emotional intimacy from physical intimacy is something we consider a typical characteristic of male sexuality. For most women, this is difficult if not impossible, and Rhoads notes that most of his female students who have tried casual sex quickly grow to dislike it. As one female student wrote:
We are told not to be sexual prudes, but to enjoy casual sex, we have to be emotional prudes.
Tyler Blanski, a young male musician and writer, shares her view, and suspects that casual sex stunts emotional growth for both men and women:
I wonder if by pretending that sex is emotionally and morally no-strings-attached, a person becomes an emotional prude. An emotional prude uses sex to escape the commitment and vulnerability required in general relationship.
Ideally, emotional and physical intimacy are in balance. For most people, both emotionally slutty behavior (strong emotional intimacy without sex) and emotionally prudish behavior (powerful physical intimacy without emotion) may be said to describe a state of disequilibrium:
Emotional prudery obviously carries great risk – you’re either succeeding in disconnecting yourself emotionally from a human being you’re having sex with, or you’re catching feelings after all. You tell yourself you don’t care if he hooks up with other people, you’re happy to see where things go, blah blah blah, but face it, you’re getting invested and attached. Blame it on hormones – it’s actually possible to get hung up on a guy you don’t even like that much, just from having sex with him.
There is also great risk in emotional promiscuity. You’re not having physical sex, but your emotions are in overdrive as you connect deeply with another person. We usually hear about this happening in the context of the emotional affair. When there’s something lacking in a committed relationship, it can be tempting to get close to someone new, someone who “gets you.” These emotional affairs often start out innocently. Sheri Meyers, author of “Chatting or Cheating: How to Detect Infidelity, Rebuild Love and Affair-Proof Your Relationship” calls it emotional sex:
Emotional sex is a friendship that escalates into something that feels the same as romantic love and can manifest itself in numerous ways — physically, romantically, emotionally, lustfully, verbally, or virtually.
Friendship becomes emotional sex when the feel-good brain chemicals and hormones that are released when even thinking about that person take over. Any contact with the person becomes as potent as a drug addiction.
…Emotional sex can be even more enthralling than physical sex, and it can cause the same havoc, mistrust and betrayal in a relationship as sexual infidelity, often leading to a break-up.
While emotional affairs are generally discussed in terms of their threat to existing relationships, it’s very possible to be emotionally promiscuous when one is single. It happens when you have a platonic connection with someone that suddenly revs up into something much more. If your feelings are requited, you are likely to wind up in the “In Love” box on the top right. However, if your affection is not returned, you wind up in the unenviable state of heartbreak. Most frequently this takes the form of getting stuck in the Friend Zone with someone you’ve fallen for. If you really have a death wish, you’ll have sex with them anyway, sentencing yourself to that particular hell of being in the In Love box alone.
Whether you’re in a friendship with someone of the opposite sex or have met someone new, it’s important to maintain emotional equilibrium.
- Never get more than one step ahead or behind of the other person emotionally.
- Restrict physical intimacy that does not match the emotional intimacy in the relationship.
- Don’t remain in the Friend Zone. If you’ve caught feelings for someone and they don’t feel the same way, rewarding friendship is impossible. Cut your losses and make a clean break.
- Don’t kid yourself into believing you can pull off the Emotional Prude role. You’re not in the 1%.
Remember, every time you get out of whack emotionally, you’re wasting your time and energy. Ideally, you’ll tread the path from Solitude to In Love. That requires enormous self-discipline, and, as always, a bit of luck.
{ 394 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 »
pvw – ” have known of marriages where spouses take each other for granted; they don’t validate each other, they do what they want and don’t seem to care that what they do might affect their spouse.”
I agree here, and I’m not trying to say that giving validation is bad in a relationship, and certainly not saying that taking someone for granted is a good thing. But as you pointed out, your husband shows his appreciation and gives you validation by simply being involved and helpful towards you. I can completely get that. And for that matter, I tell my SO “thank you” for things all the time. But I don’t think it is JUST validation she wants/gets from the tap to the ass thing. She appreciates the thank you’s, but they don’t get the same reaction as the more “playful” stuff.
I get that she wants/needs this, and I oblige because it makes her happy. But honestly, I can’t help but feel it is demeaning and juvenile. It kinda makes me feel like she is “looking up to me” in a “fatherly” way, and it creeps me the hell out. I want her to respect and love me, but look up to me? I don’t know. There are very few people in the world I “look up” to, and although I feel like I’m a great person, I don’t know that I’m worth that level of admiration.
Hope – “Well, I already said in an earlier comment that I like the slap on the ass and the “good girl,” playfully and teasingly done. Whether other people like it or hate it is none of my concern.”
Sorry if it came across as me picking on you or any woman that wants the smack treatment. I am simply trying to point out how *I* see it.
Richard A. – I can’t add anything to your last post but I wanted to say I think you are DEAD ON. My take on “dominance” in the family is exactly as you described it. It isn’t that I don’t have desires/wants/needs, its that most of them are met without having to ask. Why take the time and effort to form an opinion and state it if I really don’t care about the outcome? I don’t care where we eat as long as we eat something. I don’t care what store we go to as long as it has what we need to buy. I find it completely tiring to HAVE to make a decision in these cases because it is energy I really don’t need to expend. But, I find that my SO wants me to make these decisions, which makes me wonder if she trusts her own opinion. If she wants to eat at Wendy’s, why does it matter if I do as well? As long as I’m not against it, she gets what she wants and we are both satisfied. It’s like another form of validation…
unless she really doesn’t know herself and is asking me, in which case she should just say she doesn’t care where we eat/shop and I would pick something. In most cases it would be whatever popped into my head first though.
I’ll say this very, very slowwwly.
Different strokes for different folks.
What works for me and my husband may or may not work for other couples.
Technically, we are both dominant and submissive with each other. We have taken turns putting each other in the puppy dog / kitten / little kid position, with tremendous love, care and sweetness. We do what feels right to us, and we feel like the “man in charge” model works for us. It’s sexy for me to feel sexually submissive and for him to feel sexually dominant. It infuses the rest of our relationship in some ways, but not in others. I love him all the same if he comes to me like a little lost puppy. It just doesn’t get me in the mood for sexytime.
The primal urges are there because we are embodied souls. We recognize these bodies and biological differences are instructive, and we take it to its logical conclusion. I bear our child while he lifts the heavy stuff. I defer to his decisions and do not second-guess them. If another couple wants to do “woman in charge” or “nobody in charge” or “two headed monster,” they can go right ahead. I’m not here to say “our way is the only way.” But why judge only the “man in charge” model as bad, wrong or evil?
You can call me “childish” or “immature” for being attracted to male leadership and dominance, but I’ve tried the other methods, and they didn’t work. This just works for me. I feel motivated to keep cooking, keep the house clean, keep doting on my man, keep up sexytime, and he loves the feeling of being respected, admired, looked up to and loved.
If something else works for you, go for it.
Herb, Lokland, Dogsquat, Richard, Ted and me are on an interesting tangent here. Can we get some female input up in this biatch, so to speak?
I personally always find this discussions alien. My husband treats me right when I make a mistake he is patient enough to tell me and wait for me to learn from the experience and I do the same. I always remember thanking him from driving me around since I don’t yet and try to make sure he doesn’t have to do it unnecessarily by taking the bus when possible. He does the same for me in other aspects of our lives.
But I’m pro-marriage and monogamy and as big fan of romance I can deal with the idea that every couple is their one universe and their dynamic shouldn’t be like every other’s or fit certain standards (with very few exceptions like abuse even if one of the partners doesn’t mind undermine love and marriage as institution the same for swinging or poly) as long as they are both happy. So yeah if slap in the ass makes a woman and a man happy then I don’t see the ill on it. Although I do agree that if a man has to do things too far from his comfort zone to keep a woman interested he should find a better match for him not just “suck it up”, YMMV.
This recent tangent just seems like another example of men wanting women to be attracted to what men deem acceptable or treated the way men deem acceptable. I don’t get it, but whatever.
I thought the original debate was about why women like to earn a man’s respect/admiration instead of being given it from the get go. I’ll chime in on that aspect.
A man giving a woman things above and beyond what should be given, in the very beginning of a relationship, is a little off-putting. If a man gives a woman physical or emotional validation that is disproportionate to what she has given, or what the circumstances warrant, it seems like he is putting the cart before the horse.
A woman begins to wonder to herself, “He seems overly eager to give himself to me when I barely know him. This is the first date, and he is already bending over backwards for me. What have I done to deserve such behavior besides showing up to this date and being a woman? If that’s all it takes to make him give me the world, he must be very desperate or easy to please.”
I’ve heard countless stories of men giving extravagant gifts or paying for pricey meals on the first few dates with women, only to lament that the woman wasn’t interested later or didn’t reciprocate the gestures. The problem is the men didn’t hold back on these gestures to allow the woman time to qualify herself first. She needs to earn your respect first, just as you should earn hers, before being willing to give her things.
I’m a firm believer in escalating the things given to each other (gifts, emotions, sex) as either person earns it. Don’t spend a ton of money on the first few dates. Don’t wine and dine her or show up with a huge bouquet of flowers for the first few weeks. Hold off on that for awhile. Allow yourselves the time to suss each other out. Go on cheap dates the first few times so that the investment won’t be huge if things don’t work out. When she proves that she is trustworthy and worth the rewards, give them to her.
@Esau
I’m 16, so I’m not sure it’s a question of the times.
@Hope @Tom.s
I’ll agree it’s a fine line. A little dominant playfulness, as Hope said, is certainly no problem (I’m no PC feminist) but I dislike the idea of a girl following my breadcrumb-trail of validation and me having to maintain a strict “master” framework.
If that’s what women crave at their core, I have no interest in knowing them any more than the minimum amount required to get into their pants.
“This recent tangent just seems like another example of men wanting women to be attracted to what men deem acceptable or treated the way men deem acceptable.”
Not exactly. It’s not about men “wanting” something. It’s about the how Susan phrased the “slap on the ass”. Sounded to me as if we’re training a puppy. Perhaps her phrasing was infelicitous.
Women are free to do what they want to do. Men are free to have opinions on the subject. Some of us find it offputting to hear that women want some version of being treated that way.
I briefly dated a woman who would get me talking about one thing or another not particularly involved and then tell me how smart and well-educated I was. Ran into a mutual friend years later and I ventured, tentatively, that “**** was a bit dim, wasn’t she?” “Oh, no. Honors College”. Usually you know somebody’s in Honors College pretty quickly. Hadn’t crossed my mind and I didn’t find out then.
I didn’t like it at all. Wondered what she saw in me that convinced her I needed that.
Oof.
No need to get defensive. There’s no condemnation of anybody’s arrangements here, generally speaking. It’s just that the depiction Susan provided was creepy.
@Sassy @Anacaona @Hope
Don’t get me wrong here. I’m not arguing for automatically having validation as opposed to having to earn it. Guys being over-congratulating and forking out expensive helicopter rides or whatever on a first date is not something I advocate. That’s really just approval-seeking and clinginess from the male side. Approval-seeking and clinginess is something I’m starkly against.
What I mean is I – and from the looks of it, Ted, Herb and Richard – don’t like is the idea of a relationship having a core structure of the man carefully treating the woman to the right amount of validation, making her crave it desperately. A la Roissy.
I can’t relate to anyone who would want that experience, and while I won’t judge those women who do, the notion that this is all or most women’s ideal state disturbs me.
The reactions from the men here to the idea that women may always require a certain level of dominance remind me of similar reacitons from women to the idea that men may always require a certain level of attractiveness. (When this comes up, I always remember my best friend R____, who was very upset at the “sexist” priest who told our high school class, “After you’re married, you should stay beautiful for your husbands.” She couldn’t believe that men would be so “shallow.”)
Having said that, I think the comments from the happily married women in this thread are proof that every marriage is individual and not as two-dimensional as the puppy/trainer imagery suggests.
Broken record time!
Different people are… different.
There are men who love strong, independent, and dominant women who would never “look up” to anyone else, and there are men who love soft, vulnerable and submissive women who show nurture, and “look up” with admiration and a twinkle in her eye at the man she loves.
If you’re the first type of man, cool. No need to diss the second type of woman. I don’t show this side of myself to anybody else in the world except my husband. Only he gets that look from me, the look of total adoration, admiration, love and respect.
If you don’t feel like you want that kind of look, that’s cool, too. You don’t ever have to worry about me giving it to you.
This conversation reminds me of the guys who love sport A not being able to understand why other guys would be into sport B.
Try putting on someone else’s shoes every now and then. It won’t fit, you won’t feel comfortable in them, but those shoes fit that person just fine.
Well, I’m glad a bunch of people have already commented on the “puppy” treatment.
When I read “Yes, that’s dominance and leadership. We like it. We like doing what’s necessary to get that pat on the ass. It feels good,”
I could not believe my eyes.
I made a forum post earlier this week asking whether “red pill” (aka learning PUA-game, or having natural-game) is all about being sexist.
For nice guys, (and by nice, I mean guys who value respect, and believe in equality) that type of “dominance and leadership” is called sexism.
Anyone care to agree?
…. and that’s why it’s ridiculous for women to complain about the SMP, when they’re, admittedly, attracted to assholes.
It’s one thing to say there’s a time and place within a relationship for a “pat on the ass,” but it’s to that’s the validation you like, long for?
To me, liking that type of leadership is like wanting to be on a leash. Something that has obvious negative connotations in terms of respect.
Women don’t want to be respect from nice guys, they want to earn the validation from guys who don’t respect them – misogynist.
But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.
Harkat – “What I mean is I – and from the looks of it, Ted, Herb and Richard – don’t like is the idea of a relationship having a core structure of the man carefully treating the woman to the right amount of validation, making her crave it desperately. A la Roissy.”
yeah, something like that. I’m starting to see that many “game” concepts are really about finding ways to validate my mate, which bothers me. Why does she need my validation at all? I like when she thanks me for doing things, but honestly I would do them anyway because I care. It is the act itself that to me should show her I love and care about her, and the validation for me is that she accepts those acts and reciprocates in kind. And in fact, this is why I get my panties in a bunch about the “work” of gaming her and not getting the credit. If I’m doing all this, and she doesn’t know it or can’t acknowledge it, then to me it has no value in the relationship.
Hope – I’m not picking on anyone, and I’m sorry if you feel that way about my comments. I will tell you that I indeed do the smack to the ass thing with my SO because it generates a positive result, but I don’t understand why she likes it, and I would desperately like to understand it. I am dedicated to meeting her needs, but I find it very difficult to do so if I don’t understand why she has those needs. I don’t do things on faith, I need a reason, and right now the only reason I have for some things is “because it works”, which drives me crazy. That isn’t a reason, it’s an outcome. It is another way of saying “the ends justifies the means”, which IMO is total crap.
I asked the question about “people pleasers” because I genuinely wonder if these displays of validation are something people pleasers want/need. If so, then it makes perfect sense that my SO needs them and I do not. She is a pleaser, and generally I don’t care if what I do pleases anyone unless my intent WAS to please someone. Not to say that I don’t please people, but many times it is a side effect, not a motivating factor. If that validation makes her feel like she is meeting my needs, then I’m completely good with doing them. I certainly want her to know that I am pleased, I guess I just don’t understand how she needs that message to be delivered. I mean, I tell her I love her often, but only because I make an effort to remember to tell her. To me, the fact that I come home every night proves I love her. Saying it almost seems pointless, but I know that she needs/wants to hear it. But me not saying it doesn’t mean I love her any less, it means I don’t value saying it out loud since it doesn’t add any real value.
I’m not looking to vilify anyone’s preferences. I simply want to understand them better.
Correction: but it’s another to say that’s the validation
Hope: Different people are… different.
Hard to disagree with, but you’re letting yourself off way too easily here. Yes, everyone is different, but you can’t possibly learn enough about everyone you meet to fine-tune how you present yourself to them. Everyone — man, woman, frog, alike — has a default attitude that determines/shapes their presentation before they even get the chance to scope out the situation. More pointedly, often it is the default attitude that will determine whether you even get the chance to gather more information.
The pointed, general question before the house, then — which you are free to ignore if you want to talk only about yourself — is this: is it evil for a man to adopt the default attitude of “The man should be in charge, for no reason other than that he’s male” in his social interactions with women? Including women that he’s just met and doesn’t know? (hence, “default”).
Faced honestly (which you are not required to do), it can be a tough choice. If he doesn’t assert sexist dominance then his chances of igniting tingle are greatly reduced; but if he does then he’s philosophically a sexist pig no matter how much attractive lipstick lies on top.
Cooper – “But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.”
Well that makes a lot of sense based on what I’ve learned since the red pill. Remember, woman don’t like to be “hit on” either, unless it is a guy they find attractive, and then being “hit on” is completely OK. So maybe you’re right. In general women dislike sexiest behavior from men, but they crave it from “their” man.
And actually, that also explains a lot. In general, it explains why I see a lot of this as hypocritical. If this is true, then women tend to hold men in general to one standard, but them hold their mates to an entirely different set of standards. And by that I mean how they act and behave towards them inside the relationship. They want a “nice” man in public, but a sexiest in the sack.
So maybe it is the female version of the Madonna/Whore complex?
Harkat, I’m fairly certain that we don’t have a Roissy/Roosh/Rollo Game-style marriage going on or any dark manipulation. He doesn’t carefully measure out his affection, and I’m not like Pavlov’s dogs.
We’re more like a team in a video game, where (nerd alert) he’s the tank/damage dealer, and I’m the healer/damage dealer. Actually we can both play all the roles, but he prefers some roles, and I prefer other roles. Everybody on the team is necessary and contributes.
Cooper, OMG! He slapped my butt and doesn’t believe in absolute equality! What a jerk/misogynist/horrible man!
Absolute equality does not exist. It’s the sort of thing that ignores people’s inherent differences and forcing a shoe that doesn’t fit onto them.
Chances are, you’re not going to wear the same size shoe as your woman.
By the way, I slap my husband’s butt, too. He finds it funny when I do it.
Esau – “Faced honestly (which you are not required to do), it can be a tough choice. If he doesn’t assert sexist dominance then his chances of igniting tingle are greatly reduced; but if he does then he’s philosophically a sexist pig no matter how much attractive lipstick lies on top.
Thank you for explaining that. This is what I was just trying to get at in my last post when I said a lot of this seems hypocritical. Women say they want “nice, respectful” men, but in private they want a man that sees them as a “woman”, which means in a sexist light.
So if that is true, why is it OK, but a man that wants a “whore in the sheets but a lady in the streets” is a pig? I see them as the same thing. I’m expected to be respectful and politically correct when in public, but pulling hair and smacking asses in bed. How is that different from me wanting a feminine and demure women in public that rides me like a rented mule in the bedroom?
@Ted
So if that is true, why is it OK, but a man that wants a “whore in the sheets but a lady in the streets” is a pig?
I was writing a comment responding to Cooper’s quote about “their misogynist” when I looked up, read that line from you and realized you had already made that point. But I wanted to say it in order to point out that the “dominance” thing (the unfortunate imagery of ass patting aside) doesn’t have to be seen as such a horrible thing.
I don’t think any woman on this thread has called men pigs for wanting “their whores” (but if I missed a comment, feel free to correct me). It seems to me that female regulars at HUS are very aware of this desire men have and have learned not to vilify it. So that Susan could bring up the female equivalent and suddenly come up with so much resistance is a little surprising. Is it mostly due to the imagery her phrasing conjures up or is the whole concept truly distasteful?
Esau, I’ve gone down this road before. Years ago I stopped believing in the “sexist” charge. If a guy wants to lead because he has the penis, he is free to do so. Likewise I’m free to choose whether or not to follow him depending on his other qualifications.
I will admit, maleness in itself gives him an edge in my mind. My default mode is indeed to follow a male leader. Maybe that makes me a sexist, too. But I don’t care about the modern feminist way of thought. I grew up on eastern thought, yin vs. yang, and that philosophy runs deep in me.
There’s an old expression: “know thyself.” I know my inclinations. I like to be a follower, but if the leader is incompetent, in the vacuum of power, and I need to get something done, I’ll step up and lead. I don’t follow idiots, crazies or evil malevolent tyrants. I follow my husband because he is worthy.
Ted D, can you point out my hypocrisy anywhere in my comment history? I don’t believe I’ve called any guy a “misogynist,” “sexist” or “pig” here even once. I fully advocate being a lady in the streets and a freak in the sheets. I’ve not said anything to contradict this desire in men, and I strive to fulfill it for my husband.
If other women have done so, that does not invalidate my own position, which has been quite consistent.
Bellita – ” Is it mostly due to the imagery her phrasing conjures up or is the whole concept truly distasteful?”
For me there are two issues here:
1. I am bothered by anyone that requires validation from me to feel “good” about our relationship. Not bothered as in “can’t be bothered to do it”, but bothered as in “why in the hell does she need me to do this? Doesn’t she already know how I feel about her?”
2. My sense of general fairness trips when I see hypocritical behavior. Again, I agree that no HUS regulars seem to be surprised by the madonna/whore complex, but I’m not dating anyone from HUS (although I must admit I’m slightly envious of several male spouses of regulars here for finding such logical and reasonable women to be with). But no one here can deny with a straight face that my statement above holds true for the general populace. I really wasn’t going in that direction, but was more interested in my first point above.
“But I wanted to say it in order to point out that the “dominance” thing (the unfortunate imagery of ass patting aside) doesn’t have to be seen as such a horrible thing.”
I’m not implying dominance is a horrible thing. I’m saying that dominance aside, why would a woman want to be patted on the ass and told she was a “good girl”? Why does she even need that level of approval from her mate at all? I’m not picking on it, I genuinely want to know what need that serves? Because honestly, it strikes me as very similar to a pat on the head and a “good girl” she got from her dad when she brought home straight A’s in school, and it creeps me out. I want to please her as well, but certainly not so I can get her “approval”. I want to please her because I care about her and like to see her happy. the reward is seeing her happy.
It makes me wonder if she does nice things for me simply to get a pat on the ass, if that makes sense…
I don’t want a Madonna/whore, so I’m no hypocrite for disliking this model, personally. I dont find the notion of UNCOVERING TEH FEMINIST LAWYER’S TRUE DESIRES OF BEING BOUND AND FUCKED BY HER DADDY particularly appealing, and distinctly unappealing in the context of an LTR.
I want a loving girl who acts responsibly and doesn’t want me to be her father figure.
For the record, I’m not condemning anyone here. To each his own, but I’m concerned that what me and some other guys want is in seriously short supply.
Ted D, if the approval makes her happy, why not make her happy by giving her approval? You don’t care for her approval, but she cares for yours.
Why does the man and the woman need to do the exact same thing to make each other happy? It’s like saying her boobs make you happy, so you should get boob implants so you can make her happy. Or vice versa… she should grow a penis so she can make you happy the exact same way you make her happy.
That’s the ridiculous conclusion of absolute equality.
Hope – “If other women have done so, that does not invalidate my own position, which has been quite consistent. ”
I’ve never once claimed you have or were ever hypocritical. In terms of this conversation, I was really hoping you could shed some light on why you enjoy that type of validation. I really wasn’t intending to go down the “nature is bad” road, but I admit I was sucked in.
If you can explain it, I really would like to know. I understand that to many people, yourself included, it may seem completely futile of me to really want to understand this stuff, but I just don’t operate on being told to simply DO something. I’m completely OK with doing what is necessary, if someone can explain to me WHY it is necessary better than “because it works”.
And for that matter, if I have ever implied to you or anyone here that their position/opinion was completely invalid because I disagree, then please accept my sincere apologies. I often forget that my standard method of “debate” comes across as very judgmental and alienating. I struggle with it all the time in my personal life. It isn’t intentional, I simply do not present my arguments with emotional considerations in mind. I realize all too well that my opinion of something amounts to nothing in the grand scheme of things. And I certainly don’t want anyone to think I am trying to invalidate their opinions. I’m simply pushing them to defend their opinions, so I can judge for myself just how true they are to their beliefs. If I see someone that has a strong belief in something, I then start to take their opinion seriously. I guess it is a debate shit test of sorts. LOL
Re the talk of women being subordinate, wiggly puppies etc.
I was speaking figuratively – my husband is not the ass slapping type. Nor does he call me a girl. But I know very well when I’ve pleased him. I know the look in his eye, the grin, the way his posture shifts slightly. He lets me know that he’s pleased. I take pleasure in that pleasing – his thinking “I’m lucky to be married to her” is my reward.
It works the other way around too, though the structure of the dynamic is a bit different. When he pleases me I express gratitude, and that seems to lead to his doing more of it. Funny how that works!
My marriage is egalitarian in most respects, but my husband is definitely more dominant. I actually think that part of the spark comes from his having “tamed” such a feisty female. YMMV.
Hope – “Why does the man and the woman need to do the exact same thing to make each other happy? It’s like saying her boobs make you happy, so you should get boob implants so you can make her happy. Or vice versa… she should grow a penis so she can make you happy the exact same way you make her happy.”
They absolutely DO NOT need to be exactly the same, and to be honest I imagine a relationship like this would be boring as hell. But I really don’t operate on faith. It really is in my nature to want to know the why of everything, and I really don’t “get over” not knowing why. I can tell you this with no doubt: if I do not understand the why of doing something, I just won’t do it.
As an example, I got terrible grades in high school, but I aced all my tests. Why was my grade bad you ask? Because I didn’t do my homework? Why you ask? Well, I was getting A’s on my tests without doing my homework, so I didn’t see any logical reason to DO my homework, which of course got me bad grades. However, I didn’t care because the real point of education is to teach, and clearly my A’s proved I learned the material. The grade didn’t prove a damn thing, and I couldn’t care less that they were bad.
Now I find myself having to deal with the exact same behavior from my son. And, I also am finding myself having to explain, in detail, why that damn grade IS so important. If I had understood why getting an A was so important in HS, I would have done my homework. But, my impression of school was to learn, not PROVE that I learned. See the difference?
Validation in the marriage, absolutely key and important; each of us enjoys getting and giving it.
Do I need dominance from him in the form of the playful slap on the butt? I can’t say I need it. I never heard about the notion of “shit tests” until I began reading his blog, yet he has never needed to prove his dominance and masculinity to me; I knew from the start that he had it–masculine competence, and that he knows how to protect his boundaries.
As for him being the dominant head of the household, we don’t relate to each other that way. We are co-captains; there is no scorecard in the PVW family or tallying of points. We focus more on role specialization because that makes the PVW family team work effectively. In certain instances, and with respect to certain roles, I take the lead, and I talk to him about what I’m doing. In others, he takes the lead, and he tells me what he’s doing. If there is disagreement, it comes down to who has the most persuasive solution/approach. More often, there is little disagreement, because we trust each other’s judgment and sphere of competence.
So how did it work when we were dating? Esau asked, is it a matter of: “The man should be in charge, for no reason other than that he’s male” in his social interactions with women? Including women that he’s just met and doesn’t know? (hence, “default”).
I could not have tolerated that, it would have seemed overly domineering and disrespectful of me as an adult.
So how did that work when we were dating? Quite often, I was the one to come up with ideas of things to do, and I’d get his opinion–he’d say yes or veto, or explain to me his requirements. Then he would make the arrangements about getting us there, ie., driving, paying and so forth. That is the model we still follow even now. We’ve been together long enough, that let’s say I wanted to go see a show, I know what his preference is. I’d tell him about it, order the tickets, and he’d take care of the rest.
Back to the “slap on the butt,” now here is the funny part, on occasion, he does that type of dominance thing. I don’t mind it; it makes for fun humor because he is not abusive–he is very loving and attentative.
Just today….I got back from running errands not that long ago, and we were chatting. I asked him whether he had tried something I got him when I went grocery shopping. He said yes, he did, and that I deserved a spanking. I followed up with a joke about it. He then came over and gave me a big hug and a kiss.
@Richard Aubrey:
I wrote this comment on Danny’s (Navy Corpsman) blog about military marriage. Danny’s a senior NCO and he advises his first term sailors not to get married for many reasons. I used to do the same thing for my Marines. This goes along with your comment about military guys having a hard time in relationships.
“Doc, I think young military guys (at least the good ones) are conditioned to be beta as hell.
I’ve been out for awhile, but I was a grunt Sergeant for many years. An average civilian thinks of a Marine LCpl as some kind of Super-Warrior, but I (and you) know the truth.
A good grunt Lance Coolie puts his mission first, his buddies second, and himself last. He does what he’s told without complaint, even if it doesn’t make sense to him. He’ll endure incredible hardship without faltering, because that’s his job. He gets a lot of his self-esteem from suffering:
“Fuck that, Dog! That ain’t shit! This one time, we was up by MSR Sword. It was hot as fuck, and we was almost out of water. The fuckin’ Ell Tee was runnin’ us back and forth, chasin’ some bullshit S-2 fantasy. I din’t get no chow that day on account of Gunny fuckin’ up the head count and Sarn’t P makin’ sure us Team Leaders gave our chows to our guys. Shit was fuuuuucked up, dude! W’unt you know it, I sees Ali Baba talkin’ on a cell phone, all suspicious and shit…right when I get oneathem badass leg cramps. I chased that fucker until I puked blah blah blah…”
The guy who has it the worst gets the most respect.
You drop that kid into a marriage with a selfish young woman and he’s going to get his guts ripped out. Not only is he immature in most respects (he’s 18 or 20, after all), but he’s been conditioned to subordinate his ego/desires, put others first, and embrace being miserable.
What makes him a good Marine at work is exactly the wrong stuff to do in a relationship, especially with an equally immature woman. I’ll bet the young Sailor is exactly the same way, except with more grey paint.”
I understand much of what you’re saying WRT false vs. real dominance. I went through a similar problem with Game when I first discovered it. This type of dominance is different. It’s the difference between a no-shit assault and reconnaissance. Some of it looks the same (the walking, the sneaking, the bugs and the heat)….but if you have to shoot on a recon mission, you fucked up somewhere.
@Sassy
Yes. Also, a woman begins to suspect that in being so easy to please, he’s barely noticing who she is. He wants to fill in that girlfriend blank and her name is as good as any. One young woman recently told me a story like this. She was asked out by a very good-looking guy, but his social skills were very awkward. Conversation was difficult, and he told her up front that he was extremely shy. They went on three dates, and each time conversation got a bit easier. I gave her credit for being open minded, and giving it time. At the end of the third date he informed her that she could be his girlfriend, and that he had never felt this way before. She couldn’t imagine where this came from – they were still covering the basics! She told me that she had the sense he would have put just about anyone into the role on date #3, as he barely knew her at that point. One week later he was in a relationship with a woman he’d met previously but not dated. It’s been about six months and they’re still together, so I guess it worked out. But I honestly can’t imagine why she thought she’d earned a place in his affections. He’s a lot better looking than she is – perhaps that’s the trade she made, IDK.
@Harkat
You’re 16? Wow, you’re incredibly articulate and mature for that tender age!
Ted D, as I recall, your SO is an NF type. In my opinion, approval/validation is more about the NF type than about female nature. There are plenty of women who don’t care to please others (so-called “entitled bitches” in the manosphere — surely you’ve heard of them).
We NF types have overactive empathy and tend to be seen as “people pleasers” because we can practically read other people’s minds and feelings. I’ve written about it here:
http://www.rosehope.com/reading-energies/
Of course, we don’t want to please everybody. We only want to please the ones we care about, and we really, really want to please the one we love.
My husband craves my approval and validation as much as I crave his. We are both INFJ, so we know to give each other what the other needs, doubly so because we’re able to “read” each other so well.
I had tremendous difficulty when I was dating an ENTJ because while he had emotional depth, he simply did not care about me and my emotional state in the same way. I intuitively knew we weren’t compatible, despite the fact he was quite dominant, sexually and otherwise, even more so than my husband. But the connection with him always felt “off.”
I do think it can work between NTs and NFs, but with greater difficulty. OffTheCuff is an NT and his wife is NF. I think he has mentioned that he does the figurative “slap her ass” thing, and he doesn’t care why it works, just that it works. Maybe he’s the one you should be getting pointers from.
I can’t believe we’re arguing about whether females like dominance in males. They do, and that’s nothing new. While I’m personally not a fan of high T, over the top dominance, I have always maintained that women need a baseline level of dominance to feel sexual attraction. It is what it is.
Sounds like it’s time for our 3 PM dose of the red pill.
@Cooper
No, you have that wrong. Women want to earn validation from the man they love or are attracted to. Making a woman earn your affection and respect – that is dominance in itself. Putting her on a pedestal and worshipping her is supplication, and women will punish that harshly.
@Esau
Sexism is the belief that the other sex is inferior. If we don’t place a value judgment on male dominance or female response to it, then it isn’t sexist. The question is about hard-wired and bio sex differences. I don’t believe that it’s sexist to acknowledge them or judge one set of traits superior to the other.
Misogyny and misandry are a result of judging the other sex as inferior.
Gents, don’t get wrapped up in the medium – it’s not the message. I’m as likely to hug and kiss my girl as I am to pat her on her very nice bottom.
By doing so, I am telling her I like her, I approve of her, and I appreciate her. I tell her she’s doing the right things to make me happy. It makes her feel good.
She does the same for me, just in different ways.
@Ted
I am bothered by anyone that requires validation from me to feel “good” about our relationship. Not bothered as in “can’t be bothered to do it”, but bothered as in “why in the hell does she need me to do this? Doesn’t she already know how I feel about her?”
You may be surprised to read that we’re in the same boat.
I’m not very good at handing out compliments or a lot of things that count as validation. And when I started reading Manosphere blogs (and Helen Andelin’s Fascinating Womanhood, haha), it bothered me that they were all saying that men require more open appreciation and admiration than I normally express. (Heck, Andelin shared a story of a woman who made her children look at every paycheck her husband brought home, reminding them of what a hard worker and good provider he was.) And my reaction was very much like yours: “Doesn’t the fact that I’m with a man tell him all he needs to know? Why the need for compliments/gifts/cuddles/fill-in-the-blank?”
But it seemed that whenever a woman asked why adult men needed validation, male commenters would cite that as proof that women don’t really understand that men have feelings, too. But isn’t that exactly what we’re talking about here, with the sexes reversed?
I don’t claim to be able to explain why these things work, but the concept of Love Languages helped me understand then a little better. If your primary Love Language is physical affection and your significant other prefers words of affirmation, then you could spend all day cuddling her in silence and thinking you’ve communicated a lot, but she’d actually be withering inside. (Isn’t one cliche of relationships a wife breaking down and crying, “You don’t love me anymore!” and the exasperated husband saying, “I’m still here, aren’t I?”) Being in a relationship sometimes means learning to speak another Love Language.
But this probably doesn’t take you further than “Because it works”–and maybe even took you in a circle.
For the record, the ass patting and good girl imagery was Dogsquat’s. I simply responded in kind because I understood the point he was trying to make. He’s already shared that his SO is brilliant and makes six times what he does. I don’t think he treats her like a child. But he is a man with her, professional credentials be damned.
pvw – “Validation in the marriage, absolutely key and important; each of us enjoys getting and giving it.”
I get that. I’m just having difficulty internalizing how to go about showing that validation correctly it seems. I derive my validation in an uncommon way, or at least differently than my mate. That isn’t a bad thing, but I can’t wrap my head around it to feel OK simply doing what she needs.
I also would like to say that the way you describe your marriage is damn close to my ideal.
@Richard Aubry re dominance and leadership
Given your experience and, given you’re a woman, you’re likely right.
But, jeez, it sounds demeaning. Like training a puppy.
I’m a woman, and I’m feeling you on this one. I like to see enough of those things from a man to know that he can maneuver in the world, but I don’t want to be dominanted and won’t work for that pat on the ass. My husband is a senior executive at a major corporation. I appreciate the level of social dominance that he exerted to get where he his and provide for us what he does. I’m not interested though in being dominated by him.
Exactly – in a thriving relationship each party is generously rewarding, appreciating and validating the other. The emphasis is on the giving rather than taking.
I think Hope’s point is also important – when two people find one another, are compatible and it works, let’s not second guess their gestures of love in a political way. Like every other human behavior, there’s a spectrum.
I really believe the thread has been hijacked by a pat on the ass!
Whoops, got to the end of thread and see my comment was premature. Sorry, carry on.
Ted D:
…I’m just having difficulty internalizing how to go about showing that validation correctly it seems. I derive my validation in an uncommon way, or at least differently than my mate. That isn’t a bad thing, but I can’t wrap my head around it to feel OK simply doing what she needs. I also would like to say that the way you describe your marriage is damn close to my ideal.
My reply:
Perhaps as someone suggested, it is the personality difference thing of an NF type as compared to an NT type?
You might be an INTJ? Fortunately, Mr. PVW and I are both TJ types; I’m an INTJ, he is an ISTJ. We’re less focused on the “feeling”type thing that others might need.
Thanks for the compliment regarding our marital style!
I’ll chime in on the tangent instead of the original debate. Here are my two cents.
I don’t want a man to be the leader of me simply because he has a penis. Any misogynistic attitude is the quickest way for me to never speak to a man again.
For me, I want a man who can be dominant and submissive, depending on the situation. I admitted in another thread that I am a “wild horse” of sorts. I’m not easily tamed, if it’s even possible for a man to tame me, and I have a very dominant streak within myself. Having said that, there are times when I like being submissive as well. The power dynamic within myself ebbs and flows. Sometimes I want to drive, and other times I want a man to take the wheel.
If a man wants to pick where we eat sometimes, that’s fine. Sometimes I’ll pick as well. If he wants to slap me on the ass, just for the hell of it, that’s fine. I’ll slap his ass too.
What I don’t understand is the uproar over what some people like in their relationships. If it works for them, why does it bother anyone else?
Heck, Andelin shared a story of a woman who made her children look at every paycheck her husband brought home, reminding them of what a hard worker and good provider he was.
I’ve never shown my kids a check stub, but I sure show them the bills.
Hope – “Ted D, as I recall, your SO is an NF type. In my opinion, approval/validation is more about the NF type than about female nature.”
You are correct, she turned out to be an ENFJ, which consequently the link Susan posted claimed was a bad match. LOL. I’m getting the impression that the reason for that is exactly this point.
But, that isn’t a bad thing. I really am OK with it in terms of doing what is necessary as long as it makes sense to me. Its the whole process of “making sense” that becomes my dilemma. I think I will spend some time this weekend reading up on ENFJs. A little bit of “behind the scenes” knowledge goes a long way with me towards making things right in my own mind.
Belitta – “You may be surprised to read that we’re in the same boat.”
In that case my condolences.
Truly, getting compliments from people embarrasses me. I’ve learned to hide it for the most part, but giving me a compliment is just about the only way to guaranty my face turns red. And yes, I constantly have to remind myself that other people not only like compliments, but thrive on them. And what makes me feel worse about it is: I can and do remember to give them sometimes. But, if those people knew that I gave them because I remembered they liked them, they would probably be hurt. And it isn’t because I don’t care about them that I sometimes forget to compliment them, it’s that I just don’t see the point.
I had a conversation with an ex-GF years ago about complimenting her. I made the mistake of explaining to her how I dislike being complimented, and she asked if I meant it when I complimented her about things. I replied that I meant to make her feel good by complimenting her, and she got pissed off because that meant my compliments weren’t “real”. Just because I have to make a conscious decision to give someone a compliment doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them any more than doing the same about saying “I love you”. But for some reason, most people get pissed off when they realize I have to actually think about doing it to *do* it. Like it’s my fault I don’t walk around all day thinking about saying nice things to people!
pvw – “You might be an INTJ? Fortunately, Mr. PVW and I are both TJ types; I’m an INTJ, he is an ISTJ. We’re less focused on the “feeling”type thing that others might need.”
OH yeah, I’m very strongly INTJ, and my SO is a kinda strong ENFJ. I imagine I would get along splendidly with another NT, but they are rare enough without adding in the male/female component. I get the feeling (meaning I haven’t actually looked) that most women are the F types, and female N’s are just slightly more common than a unicorn. I was glad to see she is at least a J, so she doesn’t mind that I’m a judgmental prick at all.
Bellita, this is how I think of NT vs. NF love languages.
NT: “Isn’t it obvious?”
NF: “All of the above love languages please!”
(I look at the 5 love languages quiz, and the only one I could do without is the gifts one.)
pvw, if you ask my husband about the dominance thing, his answer would be closer to yours than mine. I see him as way more dominant and in charge than he sees himself. Just my quirk, I suppose.
MBTI type frequencies among men and women:
http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/estimated-frequencies.htm
There are slightly more N types among men (28-35%) than among women (25-30%). There are a lot more T types among men (55-67%) than among women (24-35%).
Fun facts: INFJ is the rarest male type. INTJ/INTP are the rarest female types. Overall, INFJ is the rarest type, because all the INTJ/INTP males make up for its rarity in females.
@Susan
Oh, sure, I recognize in my interactions with girls that it’s more intuitive for me to take the lead and generally be the more dominant of the two of us. I’m familiar with the red pill and see its teachings in action daily.
Still, there’s me leading the way and there’s me managing her. I understand we’re splitting hairs here, but to me, the notion of doling out calculated doses of validation to sustain her subordination to me, and thus, her interest in me, is very unappealing.
Thanks for the compliment on my articulation BTW. Let me reciprocate by saying this blog is extremely helpful to me.
Hope:
pvw, if you ask my husband about the dominance thing, his answer would be closer to yours than mine. I see him as way more dominant and in charge than he sees himself. Just my quirk, I suppose.
My reply:
It is interesting; it seems to me that a spouse who is aware of his/her status as the “head,” ie., a man who is called upon to undertake the traditional role when the egalitarian ethos (of today) can be in vogue, or the woman who earns more than her spouse in the face of the traditionalist ethos, might tend to soften it in the way you describe.
That makes sense, it seems to me, because it leaves room for recognition that the absolute submission model tends to act as though one spouse is a child. For me, I tend to think of “mutual submission” as the ideal model. To make a marriage work, each spouse must be willing to submit his or her ego for the better of the other and of the team. It can’t be a one-way street.
@Hope
I thought everyone had gotten that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”" (demonstrating leadership) wasn’t necessarily literal. Because metaphorically, it shows that women LOVE earning validation. And that they value a man who withholds it, or sets the mark high.
When will you girls realize that the guy giving you that the guy giving you that type of craving, the MOST, is the guy that respects you the LEAST.
@Susan
It’s not necessarily pedestaling, it’s a matter of having respect for women. I don’t think a man should have to routinely set up hoops for a women jump through, and reward them with a little treat (of respect) – in order for her to feels she had ‘earned’ him.
Not only do I find that concept never-ending; cause god-forbid I actually come to respect her then she’ll look for someone else that she hasn’t yet earned respect/validation from. But more importantly I think of the whole thing as sexist. I essentially have to think less of her (or women in general) as a human-being(s) in order to have her(them) want to earn me.
Do you know why dogs ever-want to seek the validation of their owner? It’s cause they’ve been trained (domesticated) to think that their owners are essentially-important to their survival – more so than themselves.
I just wanted to say hi to Dogsquat. Your comments are highly attractive and I always look forward to your insights. Your girlfriend is very lucky.
Susan:“Sexism is the belief that the other sex is inferior. If we don’t place a value judgment on male dominance or female response to it, then it isn’t sexist. The question is about hard-wired and bio sex differences. I don’t believe that it’s sexist to acknowledge them or judge one set of traits superior to the other.”
Sorry, but I think you’re just spinning here at 3600 rpm, to avoid confronting an uncomfortable truth. But you will have to face it squarely, sooner or later: male dominance is a kind of sexism, period.
Here’s the simple logical chain:
1. I defined “male dominance” as the male of any MF pair — friends, lovers, just-mets, colleagues, etc — behaving congruently with the belief, that by default, the male should be in charge, not because of any evidence that he has better judgement or proper authority but simply because he is the male.. You can euphemize or equivocate or embroider around it all you like, but that’s the essence of the thing and I think we should all face it squarely.
2. For anyone who agrees with or approves of this kind of behavior, if that person is logical and non-insane, then it must follow that their default assumption is that the male of any pair, by default, either gas better judgement or is intrinsically more worthy of having his desires followed. (Nearly everyone in the Mad Men age, for example, probably believed both of these reflexively.)
3. I can’t speak for your values, but I feel I’m pretty safe in saying that most people would take a statement of “I have better judgement than you and/or am more worthy of deference” as a statement of superiority, and hence inferiority from the other side.
So, no, there is no escape: male dominance is sexism, and you should stop spinning and just recognize it.
(On a separate note, I would encourage you to adopt a more productive, and perfectly reasonable, notation, to say that a sexist view is simply any consideration that’s sex-asymmetric, regardless if merit or effect; then it’s easier and more direct to turn one’s attention to whether some particular instance if sexism is good, bad or indifferent.)
@Dosqaut
We get that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”" was a metaphor for rewarding her with validation.
It’s the fact women crave it. The guys that will have them ‘crave it’ the most are usually ones who have the least amount of respect for them.
Lower the inital respect>the higher the bar to meet>the more validated she feels.
This has women seeking misogynist men. (and it has nice-guys turning jaded, by learning they must be disrespectful to be desirable)
They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.
Is no one else pickin up on what I’m laying down?
Hope:
“INTJ/INTP are the rarest female types. ”
Well, fuck me. I bounce between those two. Is the same type always the best fit?
Cooper, I’m happy to report that my husband respects me quite a lot, and in the right way that I want to be respected.
Simple example: I’m giving my husband some foot rubs the other day, and he’s loving it. He starts rubbing my foot the same way I do for him, and I get tickled and don’t like it much at all, so he stops even though he thought he was doing a good thing.
Respect is not just how YOU think someone should be treated. It’s about being responsive to the other person. That person has his or her own thoughts, feelings, needs, beliefs, opinions and preferences. Real respect takes all of that into account, does not force your stuff down someone else’s throat, and does not take a one-size-fits-all approach.
Harkat, I don’t know 100% that the same type should always seek the same type. However, research shows that people like people who are most similar to them:
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/whats-the-key-to-being-liked-and-being-more-i
“You’re much more likely to be attracted to, have a happy marriage with or just be friends with someone similar to you. You seek out friends who are similar to you. Similarity only increases marginally post-friendship. When you ask people they say they want a romantic partner that is complementary but in reality they pick someone who is similar. The single strongest predictor of marital well-being is perceived similarity.”
It’s not women need to stop seeking validation, cause we all like validation. The issue is placing such a high value on it, so much than low-respect becomes an attraction que.
If anyone is looking for the person who can validation them THE MOST, then they’re going to find it with someone had THE LEAST amount of respect for them (or their sex) in the first place.
/Bottomline.
Cooper:
They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.
Is no one else picking up on what I’m laying down?
My reply:
Perhaps it is because some of us who are responding here just don’t experience what you are suggesting in our real lives. Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives. So disrespect is not the price we pay form validation; validation comes with lots of respect and affection.
Cooper, as Esau pointed out, “back in the day” everybody thought in “sexist” ways. Does that mean all men back then were jerks and pricks? Probably a percentage of them were, but the vast majority were good guys who loved their women.
Perhaps society was set up that way for a reason. Perhaps we were foolish to revolt against all of the old ways, because the timeline shows that women are vastly unhappier today than they were when society was more “sexist” and “misgynistic.”
Today, a lot of men who have those earlier attitudes would be more likely to be the more jerkish type, but not all. Women are attracted to male dominance just as men are attracted to good-looking women. It’s not new.
Today, a lot of women bought into the idea that men should be attracted to their personalities and career status, so they let themselves get fat and unattractive. A lot of men bought into the idea that women should be attracted to them if they’re nice, supplicating and support total equality between the sexes, when a good man who’s dominant and a bit “sexist” in the bedroom is what women are attracted to in reality.
It’s not that things were perfect “back in the day.” But you can’t train men to find obese women attractive, and you can’t force women to flock to milquetoast men.
I apologize if I haven’t followed the flow of the conversation, but I wanted to address the whole smack-the-ass discussion. I happen to like smacking my wife’s ass as a kind of affectionate love tap. I suppose women like it, but I don’t think deeply about why. Now some men have a problem with this, and again I think this illustrates the whole talk-past-each-other nature of conversations concerning male and female sexual psychology. I do think the point about clear lines is true, but that applies in management as well as relationships. In other words, its not rooted in differences between male and female sexual psychology. I, for instance, would not be able to overcome infidelity, so I told my wife that up front. She thus knows that if she is to engage in it, she better be a damn good liar (unlikely), or expect the relationship to dissolve. It would hurt me tremendously, but I know myself well enough that I could not get over infidelity, and that its better not to drag out the painful process. As to whether its a good idea for a man to invest prior to physical intimacy, I stand by my previous position. A man should know upfront what he is seeking in a relationship when he meets the right woman. Put off physical intimacy if you are at a place where permanent commitment is possible but don’t have sex until you get a good idea of a woman’s character. When you do have sex, a man should know what he wants out of the relationship first but not yet invest. It is possible that you are wrong about the woman’s character, but if you are invested the emotional cost of a break-up tends to hold bad relationships together past their sell-by date.
Cooper – “They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.
Is no one else picking up on what I’m laying down?”
I’m feeling you, and I’m coming from the exact same angle.
pvw – “Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives.”
I’m asking for a lot here, but is there any way you can describe this for me? Honestly, I cannot figure out HOW to make this work. Probably because of my warped sense of validation, I see what is being described here as demeaning and juvenile towards women, because *I* would feel it was demeaning and juvenile if it was given to me by my SO. I”m not saying I don’t respect my SO. I’m saying I don’t know how to respect her while having to “smack her on the ass” to provide validation. (I’m using “smack her on the ass” metaphorically, to be clear.)
Whatever we do, don’t start arguing the morality of our biology now. Because I fear that’s close to happening again.
@Hope
Women are more unhappy now-a-days because of “feminized-men.”
Feminized-men, as I see it, are men that were brought of my mothers they respected, and were told to respect other women as eqaul too.
It’s the attraction ques that haven’t changed – women are still looking for that man who’ll make he earn him.
In todays’ world, the ones left offering that are the ones still acting sexist.
Hense the whole “nice guys finish last.” We, nice guys, were brought up, or adopted, new-age thinking of eqaulity. And since attraction ques haven’t changed, we are punished, by women, for respecting them.
Ted D:
pvw – “Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives.”
I’m asking for a lot here, but is there any way you can describe this for me? Honestly, I cannot figure out HOW to make this work. Probably because of my warped sense of validation, I see what is being described here as demeaning and juvenile towards women, because *I* would feel it was demeaning and juvenile if it was given to me by my SO. I”m not saying I don’t respect my SO. I’m saying I don’t know how to respect her while having to “smack her on the ass” to provide validation. (I’m using “smack her on the ass” metaphorically, to be clear.)
My reply:
I’m sorry to hear that you are struggling. So let’s look at it from a different angle. Why not look at validation as an expression of your respect and appreciation? I think you mentioned that she seems to be the type to want you to make most decisions, which is wearing on you; she seems to need you to make most decisions as proof of your competence and care for her? She feels validated when you do? She wants the extra level of validation beyond the mere “thanks,” and so she seems needy?
Validation might be that you encourage her to be confident in her own judgments and in your faith in her and that you give her the thanks, of course, and that it is very meaningful to you what she does. Perhaps for an NF woman, that might help? Not demeaning, but just in recognition that any spouse might want/need.
I think that for Me an Mr. PVW, the validation that comes from that mutual respect and dedication is more than enough. It also comes from the little touches, the message I have from him on a daily basis that he is really glad to be with me and that he appreciates me. Now, he doesn’t go on and on every day giving speeches about how he feels, he doesn’t go on bended knee! But it comes from the affection, regard, caring, consideration I get from him….
Cooper, so why not drop the useless, dead weight like an obese woman losing her fat rolls? It’s not impossible for you to become more attractive, despite your upbringing.
You seem like a smart guy, and I think you mentioned you were in STEM. In science, if theory A is falsified, you move on to the next theory. You don’t dwell on it just because it was the model you were taught as a kid. The Sun does not rotate around the Earth, the atom is not the smallest unit, and pesticides are not completely harmless to mammals. Likewise with theories of sexual attraction. The equalist model may be newer than flat Earth, but that doesn’t mean it’s true.
See, I can imitate an NT when need be.
Hope, Cooper.
Now we are getting somewhere interesting. Me and cooper have similar views on this. To me, certain personality traits which may be un-optimal for attracting women are valuable. Is that like a fat woman saying her obesity is actually brilliant and men are wrong for disliking it? In any case, it’s hard to let go of.
@ Hope
Exactly.
If something isn’t working for you, why keep doing it? You can change or try something else.
If you find something that works, stick with it.
If you find something that works, yet refuse to implement it, that’s on you.
I feel like a lot of men and women take the attitude of “People should accept me the way I am” without putting in any work or trying to be the most attractive that they can be. Instead, they mope around wondering why no one wants them or why they can’t keep someone. It makes me shake my head.
If you know that there are ways to improve yourself, why not do what needs to be done? Don’t become indignant about what people find attractive.
Either do what you need to do to become a viable participant in the game or get the heck out of the way.
Hope: Perhaps we were foolish to revolt against all of the old ways, because the timeline shows that women are vastly unhappier today than they were when society was more “sexist” and “misgynistic.”
I admire you for being willing to take a firm and relatively unequivocal line that’s directly in opposition to American feminism. If you post that sentiment at a feminist blog, self-identified as a female, and then respond to all the replies (until you’re banned, which you will be), I’ll pay you $16/hour just to be able to watch.
However, my admiration was quickly quenched again with this:
A lot of men bought into the idea that women should be attracted to them if they’re nice, supplicating and support total equality between the sexes, when a good man who’s dominant and a bit “sexist” in the bedroom is what women are attracted to in reality.
It’s not that things were perfect “back in the day.” But you can’t train men to find obese women attractive, and you can’t force women to flock to milquetoast men.
As they say on the Internets, I see what you did there. I don’t like how you slipped “supplicating” in between “nice” and “support[ing] total equality”; I don’t think “supplicating” is part of the same personality at all, and it’s just nasty for you to imply they come together. Same with the equation, that anything other than sexist and dominant counts as “milquetoast”, that’s a wildly false dichotomy, and highly tendentious. Lastly, “a bit sexist in the bedroom” is a mis-direction, following what I wrote above, which was specifically about the appropriateness/desirability of men acting sexist in day-to-day life, well before getting to the bedroom (and, as a way of getting to the bedroom in the first place).
I normally think of you as one of the better-grounded writers here, but honestly this whole passage is faulty and offensive.
@Hope
I am attractive. (more so than you’d probably imagine) But I’m also stubborn. Men are animals of principle.
Just because I learn that a honest approach has yielded me no results does not mean I’ll change my beliefs.
I am a man of dignity, albeit that has also made me a celibate one as well.
I’m trying to navigate through today’s SMP with keeping my moral compass intact. I may seem a little frustrated at times, but that’s because I’ve been witness to guys with not half the dignity as me score hoards of women.
Like someone mentioned above, male dominance is sexism. And it seems in today’s SMP, dignity (as in maintaining respect and equality) is not associated with dominance – hense not behaviorally attractive.
Esau, sorry that my verbiage offended you. I meant no offense. As for the dichotomy, I was responding to the general spirit of the conversation, which for females was Madonna vs. Whore, and archetypes in themselves.
Cooper, my husband is a good looking guy, who was brought up in the feminist, equalist way to be a nice guy by his mother. She loves him and wants the best for him, and she taught him to never put up with crap, disrespect or bad behavior from women.
He found game / red pill stuff in college, didn’t use it for casual sex, but he did use it to screen out women he didn’t want. He didn’t suck up to me or tell me that he was going to pursue me right away. He judged me as we got to know each other. He only said “my respect for you went up” after I told him I didn’t like dating, wasn’t into stuff like purses and shoes, and demonstrated that I had some smarts.
Also, to clarify, my husband does not need to exert some incredible amount of dominance over me, because my own dominance level is quite low. On the other hand, I don’t act like a doormat, and I do push back on my husband if I feel strongly about something. We are quite dignified in public, and nobody who knows us would even suspect that he has some “old-fashioned” values. It isn’t something he thinks about either. He’s just “himself,” which is far better than if he was putting on an act.
Cooper:
Just because I learn that a honest approach has yielded me no results does not mean I’ll change my beliefs.
I am a man of dignity, albeit that has also made me a celibate one as well.
I’m trying to navigate through today’s SMP with keeping my moral compass intact. I may seem a little frustrated at times, but that’s because I’ve been witness to guys with not half the dignity as me score hoards of women.
My reply:
It seems to me that part of the problem here is recognizing that there is a continuum of male dominance, from one side to the other.
One side being the type spoken of earlier in the show Girls, something akin to “If I f*** you, I’m not sure you can handle it…” That type of dominance sounds indignified and demeaning of women; yet some men are successful at it. If that is what passes for dominance in today’s SMP, I don’t blame you for being pissed off; it is not your style. When I was much younger, I experienced that type of so-called flirtation on occasion, and I did not find it appealing.
The other side is dominance displayed in a respectful manner, ie., male flirtation akin to what Dogsquat has spoken of on occasion and which Dannyin504 has spoken of in his blog. I don’t get the impression that their type of male dominance is one that leaves them with no options. The husband had a type of dominance similar to theirs when we were dating, the respectful kind, and I found that appealing.
@pvw
Was the way that guy, in Girls, was being dominant meant to seem demeaning?
Cause she (Marnie?) seemed fairly “wow”‘d. You can’t deny that her reaction made it seem as though he made quite the impression on her. He even, presumably, had her thinking about cheating/leaving her boyfriend, Charlie.
@Ted
Mr. HUS is INTJ, I’m ENFJ – supposedly a bad match. Take it with a grain of salt.
I see an opportunity to re-derail the conversation.
INTP here. Any advice based on anecdotal evidence for looking for a girl?
@Harkat
Ah, there’s the problem. Do not calculate! It must be organic, a natural ebb and flow in the relationship. I’ve shared this here before – there are areas where my husband has the final word – especially financial matters. He decides whether we can afford a particular vacation (Cape Cod yes, Kenyan safari no). I tend to have the final word re parenting issues. That doesn’t mean we both don’t make mistakes, but each of us has areas where we defer to the other.
I’m on record as being a gender equity feminist – I’ve managed to disgust quite a few in the manosphere with my egalitarian marriage. That said, I like thinking of my husband as being strong – maybe stronger than me.
@Cooper
But I have also always required men to earn my respect. As well as friends, colleagues, etc. Respect and affection should never be granted unconditionally to strangers unless they are one’s own newborn children.
Cooper:
Was the way that guy, in Girls, was being dominant meant to seem demeaning?
My reply:
I haven’t seen the show, but I think that one can interpret the interaction in various ways, positive or negative. It opens up room for discussion–a key aspect of good programming. Whether the writer(s)/producer(s) intended the scene as a bit of cultural criticism or not, one can wonder, of course. It can be read by a woman of a certain type of mindset as something negative, as a type of male energy that that is threatening, not respectful. As I mentioned earlier, I’d been the recipient of that type of male attention when I was much younger. I’m a fairly quiet INTJ type, if anything, that sort of male energy was scary and threatening.
@Esau
OK, have it your way. I want to know, I need to know, that my husband is in charge. If there were a crisis, and he panicked, and asked me, “OMG, what should I do?” I would freak out. I look to him for guidance and leadership. I guess I’m sexist, but make no mistake – I was raised to be feminist. This is biology winning out.
I’m so confused about what we’re actually debating. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought everybody wanted/needed some form of validation.
I could see my bf doing the pat-on-the-butt thing, but it would probably be done in a cheeky half-joking sort of way. (In fact, I could probably see myself doing the same to him.
)
Hope: “OffTheCuff is an NT and his wife is NF. I think he has mentioned that he does the figurative “slap her ass” thing, and he doesn’t care why it works, just that it works. Maybe he’s the one you should be getting pointers from.”
I don’t like the term dominance, as much as leadership. Looking back, most of our disagreements (not fights, which to me is yelling or violent) were often due to her wanting me to make a decision or exert more control, and my mind was stuck in the equalist mindset.
So, now if she shows any sort of dithering about something I make the decision. It’s pretty easy. She wants to be submissive, more than I want to lead, but hey, I will do what’s necessary.
Then again, I literally slap her ass. Hard. I this it amusing to do it in public, like at a party, and gauge people’s reactions to her giggling. They have this look on their face like they’re expecting her to get mad, and then get all confused when she doesn’t. The more feminist the woman, the better!
That said, I like thinking of my husband as being strong – maybe stronger than me.
Strong physically or in what way?
@pvw
That’s a great point. Dominance can be respectful or crass and rude.
@GudEnuf
Not so much physically – he’s a string bean, lol. More that he will protect the family. Is that so surprising? Pair-bonding evolved when women recognized the need to select men for stick-around traits – the primary benefits being resources, i.e. food, and protection for her and her offspring. If there were a terrible crisis – like a nuclear winter – I would look to him for guidance. And I’m not exactly a wilting flower – on the spectrum of female dominance, I suspect I’m pretty high.
I don’t think any woman on this thread has called men pigs for wanting “their whores” (but if I missed a comment, feel free to correct me).
I joke with my husband that I’m a whore with just one client
Perhaps it is because some of us who are responding here just don’t experience what you are suggesting in our real lives. Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives. So disrespect is not the price we pay form validation; validation comes with lots of respect and affection.
I’m sure every married woman will probably feel like I do that if my husband wouldn’t had respected me he wouldn’t had marry me.
Now for some humor
Hubby sent me this comic: http://xkcd.com/441/ followed by this link: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Baby-Manual-Conception-Haynes-Workshop/dp/1844257592/ref=dp_ob_title_bk Should I worry?
@Harkat
Your a very well spoken young man.
Some decades ago, I got a piece of heavy paper telling me that the then president of the USA “reposed especial confidence in my valor and fidelity” and some other stuff, along with insisting that those subordinate to me had damn’ well better do as I tell them. The Aubreys collect these things, for better or worse.
So did about four hundred guys a week at Benning, then there was Ft. Sill for artillery, and the ROTC, and West Point….
I was qualified to push a platoon in Korea if the Norks came south, in Germany if the Russians made a move, or in Southeast Asia.
So I can dominate, did dominate, took care of business. But it’s not a thing I like to do to anybody short of having a war or something.
When I chaperoned kids overseas, I would look for people who were trying not to look as if they were looking at us, make eye contact and…presto. No trouble. No purse-snatching, kid-grope, necklace ripping.
But that’s not a relationship.
People WANT this dominance stuff? Shudder.
@Harkat
Two things.
1. You mentioned leading vs. managing a woman.
You should lead. Your a man that is what you do.
You should not have to manage your SO. That is ridculous.
Its not wrong or improper to have your SO looking up to you as a stronger force. (Be her rock type deal.) It is royally fucked up if you need to dose out validation.
It is not improper for her to want you to be happy with her. The same vice versa.
2. I am an INTJ as well.
I would recommend some introspection in determining what type of personality type woman would suit you.
First is E vs. I.
Personally I can’t stand loud center of attention girls for more than a few minutes whereas the quiet shy girl captivates me endlessly.
You have to make that decision for yourself.
I personally think this is probably the most imortant factor for compatibility.
My fiance is an INFJ. I find we complement quite well. I tend to be more analytical and logical whereas shes feely and emotional.
If you choose this route you HAVE TO get in touch with your emotions (she must also learn your thought process). Its not as difficult as it sounds.
You could also search for another INTJ but I believe those are the rarest types of women.
Someone else will know more.
@Ted D
I’m like you I dislike compliments mostly because I see them as fucking useless. I know when I’m doing a good or bad job I don’t need someone else to tell me. That doesn’t change that some people like the validation of making others happy. I am however a huge fan of constructive criticism.
—————————————————————————————
Now.
Someone explain to me why its wrong for a woman to want her SO to be pleased with her and to acknowledge that?
I want the exact same thing. I would want a different form of acknowledgement but I would still prefer that acknowledgement.
What is a good relationship but two people trying to meet both the needs and wants of the other in an attempt to make each other happy. Would it not make logical sense to acknowledge said person is doing a good job so there not stumblin g around in the dark?
And that was as much blue pill as I can dole out for one day. Off to Roissy.
Lokland:
2. I am an INTJ as well.
I would recommend some introspection in determining what type of personality type woman would suit you.
First is E vs. I.
Personally I can’t stand loud center of attention girls for more than a few minutes whereas the quiet shy girl captivates me endlessly.
You have to make that decision for yourself.
I personally think this is probably the most imortant factor for compatibility.
My reply:
And figure out where/how to meet those type of women that might suit you–the more introverted tyheps. My guess is that in the extremely extroverted environments of bars and so forth, you’re more extroverted “he man” type of male acquaintances/friends are in their element with the “loud center of attention girls” who lap up their type of approach.
@Ted D
Truly, getting compliments from people embarrasses me. I’ve learned to hide it for the most part, but giving me a compliment is just about the only way to guaranty my face turns red. And yes, I constantly have to remind myself that other people not only like compliments, but thrive on them.
I don’t like receiving compliments, either! Hahahaha!
But strangely, I really, really appreciate feedback. I like to know when I’m doing things properly and when I’m doing them wrong. And when a suggested change seems reasonable, I don’t mind implementing it. So like you, I have a problem explaining the way I think to loved ones who seem to believe every act of love and affection should be completely spontaneous in order to be “real.”
Just because I have to make a conscious decision to give someone a compliment doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them any more than doing the same about saying “I love you”.
I agree! In fact, one could argue that because the action depends on a conscious decision, it actually means more.
@Hope
Bellita, this is how I think of NT vs. NF love languages.
NT: “Isn’t it obvious?”
NF: “All of the above love languages please!”
Hahahaha!!! I have several NF friends, and THIS EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!
@Cooper
If anyone is looking for the person who can validation them THE MOST, then they’re going to find it with someone had THE LEAST amount of respect for them (or their sex) in the first place.
Personally speaking, “validation abilities” are not high on the list of what I expect from a potential mate. That doesn’t mean they can’t enhance a relationship when a man happens to have them.
But I can still remember how happy it made me whenever I said something witty (without even meaning to) and made my second boyfriend laugh and say, “This is why I love talking to you!” . . . or whenever I cooked something that would make his eyes light up when he tasted it. And these reactions made me want to spend time talking to him and to keep cooking for him. I hadn’t started dating him because he made me feel good, but the fact that he could was a bonus.
I really think you’re tying yourself up in knots over something that’s hardwired into women but that all the women on this board say they manage to get under control anyway. It’s as if a woman were really upset about a man’s “craving” for an attractive partner and trying to browbeat the men here into accepting that a woman who can be attractive all the time is actually a shallow walking Barbie who puts her appearance before everything else and who will be very likely to cheat on her partner. But we don’t do that because we know that as important as physical appearance is to a man, a man who really loves a woman will stick around even if she is diagnosed with cancer, loses her hair and maybe even has a mastectomy. (Or am I wrong? Are men actually slaves to physical appearance in the way you seem to think women are slaves to emotional validation?)
@Harkat
To me, certain personality traits which may be un-optimal for attracting women are valuable.
I believe it was Deti who liked to point out that “attractive” traits for drawing someone and “comfort” traits for keeping him/her are completely separate sets. (I just can’t remember his actual terms.) His point was that everyone needs both, because someone who can only attract but not build comfort will lose a mate, while someone who can only build comfort but not attract won’t even get a mate. And this goes for both men and women.
Bellita said:
I really believe the thread has been hijacked by a pat on the ass!
________________________________
To be fair, they are really good pats.
Cooper, I went back a ways and re-read some of your posts on this thread. I struggled a lot with some of the same stuff, and I know it sucks. It’s frustrating. I hope you don’t give up on it, and I hope you ask/argue/question/ me until you’re sure you understand where I’m coming from – and only then decide to accept or reject these ideas.
You’re coming smack up against some faulty social conditioning right now, and it’s a cast-iron bitch to overcome. Remember – I’m not necessarily arguing with you – I’m just highlighting where our philosophies diverge.
Apologies in advance for any redundancy or repetition or covering the same thing.
Ahem.
Cooper said:
“We get that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”” was a metaphor for rewarding her with validation.
It’s the fact women crave it.
________________________________
Hmm.
Cooper, women are not so different from men in this regard.
Napoleon Bonaparte said,”A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.”
What is a ribbon? It’s a symbol to other soldiers that an individual soldier has done something – either achieved some martial feat, or survived some noteworthy event. Some “ribbons” feel good to get (most certainly not all – I wish I’d never heard of some I have). The CO gets the whole unit together, then calls you up to the front of the formation. Then, he tells every swingin’ dick there just how badass you are. After the dismissal, your buddies pound you on the back and shake your hand. They let you know they are proud of you, and happy for you. It’s a great feeling – to earn the respect of people you respect in turn.
Validation, writ large and stripped of all subtlety – that’s all awards and trophies and scholarships and bonuses and medals are.
Can you see what an intrinsic part of human nature this is? The source of the validation might be different, but the “craving” of it is very human.
Shit, dude – they even give trophies for eating the most pie faster than anyone else! Fucking PIE, man! Pie should be savored, and anyone with a pie eating trophy is a fucking Philistine and not to be trusted.
Cooper said:
“The guys that will have them ‘crave it’ the most are usually ones who have the least amount of respect for them.
Lower the inital respect>the higher the bar to meet>the more validated she feels.”
___________________________________
There is some kind of fallacy you’re committing here I’m too tired to suss out right now.
Just remember – a man cannot simply decide a woman should “crave” his validation. He’s got to be/become a man she decides on her own to “crave”. Sometimes that’s a man who wears a goofy hat and spouts canned routines in a bar – and sometimes that means a bazilionaire who runs into burning buildings to save kittens and uses his healing touch to cure malaria.
The man is in control of who he is, but who she “craves” is decided entirely by the woman. Men don’t get a say in that part.
Purveyor of High-Quality Oak Casks said:
“This has women seeking misogynist men. (and it has nice-guys turning jaded, by learning they must be disrespectful to be desirable)
They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.
Is no one else pickin up on what I’m laying down?”
____________________________________
I’m not really jiving with you, Daddy-o.
There are many misconceptions (in my subjective view) in the above quote. One that sticks out to me is the notion of respect. Not everyone rates respect. It’s good practice to be courteous to all, but respect must be earned.
A person who respects everyone essentially respects no one. Would you offer a retired schoolteacher your seat on a crowded subway? How about a heroin-dealing pedophile who’s healthier than you are?
I don’t respect some women. I don’t respect some men. Other human beings I respect very much. I treat people accordingly. I desire the respect of some, as well – and work to earn it. I am fortunate to have people in my life who desire my respect as well.
When a man and a woman desire each others’ respect and are willing to earn it, the seed of real love has a fighting chance to germinate. If attraction and circumstance warrant, a healthy relationship may grow from it.
Cooper said:
“When will you girls realize that the guy giving you that the guy giving you that type of craving, the MOST, is the guy that respects you the LEAST. ”
________________________________
Would it surprise you to learn that I’d be happy to work for my girlfriend? Or that I’ve sought her excellent advice (and followed it) several times?
I don’t waste time on people I don’t respect.
Cooper said:
“For nice guys, (and by nice, I mean guys who value respect, and believe in equality) that type of “dominance and leadership” is called sexism.
Anyone care to agree?”
__________________________________
Depends on what you mean by equality.
Is my SO an autonomous being – capable, intelligent, worthy of my respect?
Emphatically yes.
Is she equal to me in every way?
She weighs about half of what I do (she’s maybe 125, I’m about 240). She’s got more raw intelligence than I do, and a better education. She can’t shoot for shit, and isn’t as good at tough intubations. She’s not as good at people skills, either. She needs a lot more sleep than I do, and has more discipline for routine, repetitive tasks. She’s a lot more trusting of strangers than I am, has never been in a fight, and makes a lot more money. I’ve never lost a game of gin rummy or chess to her. I’ve never beat her at Words With Friends. Little kids like her a lot more, and she’s got a knack for foreign languages that makes me positively verdant.
What does equality mean in that context?
Cooper said:
“Women don’t want to be respect from nice guys, they want to earn the validation from guys who don’t respect them – misogynist.
But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.”
______________________________________
I’m a nice guy – kind to old ladies, sick and hurt people, children, and animals. I’m not a misogynist. I respect my girlfriend a lot – I actually look up to her in some ways, and I’ve learned a lot from her.
Annnnnd….she likes a pat on the ass and a “Good girl,” whispered right in her ear every once in awhile.
We really got somewhere with this thread. FTW.
@Dogsquat
To be fair, they are really good pats.
I never said they weren’t!
Napoleon Bonaparte said,”A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.”
Before you explained, do you know what I thought this “bit of colored ribbon” was? The “favor” a medieval lady would tie around the upper arm of the knight she had decided to champion. Even more frivolous and useless than military ribbons, but men have died in jousts for them, too. (We could also argue that jousts are frivolous and useless. They aren’t even real wars.)
Richard Aubrey said:
“Some decades ago, I got a piece of heavy paper telling me that the then president of the USA “reposed especial confidence in my valor and fidelity””
_____________________________________
Goddamn.
All I got was a gum wrapper that reposed special trust in the fidelity and ability of…me… and that I had better damn well do what you said. And beat the shit out of anybody who disagreed with you.
I shoulda gone to college.
(Just busting your chops a bit, Sir.)
[Hand Salute]
“So I can dominate, did dominate, took care of business. But it’s not a thing I like to do to anybody short of having a war or something.”
It’s not the same thing at all, what we’re talking about.
You’re thinking of dominance as in imposing your will, both on a bunch of semi-idiots (I can say that because I was one) a few years out of High School, and on a ruthless enemy organized, trained, and equipped to kill you.
I agree, that shit ain’t fun. It’s less fun in your former boots. I was an Acting Platoon Commander for awhile and it was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done – and I’d been a Sergeant for awhile at this time. I wanted to hug my new Lieutenant when he came aboard. He’s a Captain now, and we still keep in touch. Fuggin’ Good Dude, he is. Ringknocker, too, but from the Academy with a better football team. (Zing!)
These folks aren’t talking about that. I don’t have the Future Ex-Mrs. Dogsquat stringing daisy chains of Claymores in the trees, and she doesn’t know what a single envelopment is. Poor thing couldn’t even piss off a BTR-60 crew with a TOW-2B. To be fair, she is now extremely proud that she knows where the fuel tanks are on a BMP – we’re working on it.
She does know that I have likes and dislikes. She knows I have lines that, if crossed, will mean I kick her right off the Dogsquat Express. She knows that I will give her 100% and that I expect the same in return.
In a way, she’s got all the power. I don’t impose my will unless safety is an issue. She can choose to stay as long as she does a few simple things. Or, she can waltz right off into the sunset.
@Bellita:
LOLOLOLOLOL
Dogsquat. They told us at Benning that squad leader was the toughest job in the Army
“She does know that I have likes and dislikes. She knows I have lines that, if crossed, will mean I kick her right off the Dogsquat Expressy.”
Well, yeah. Suppose it goes the other way, too. In which case, where’s the dominance, since dominance precludes even-steven? That’s a rhetorical question, btw. Not trying to get into your private life.
Looking for definitions.
My Dad said that, if he’d known what being a platoon leader–and occasional company commander, depending on the supply of captains–meant, he’d have refused a commission. Everybody wanted the next higher to show up and take the responsibility, like which squad dies today. He was in the 104th in the ETO, weapons platoon leader. My brother, RIP, was a C130 nav which is a different issue altogether. You don’t have to be dominant–although he was–to cross reference the LORAN or whatever they do.
Anyway, the point is that dominance needs some kind of definition or we aren’t discussing anything. My military background, or having been a frat grad adviser, or several other things, included dominance. All very well, but why would anybody want to be subject to any conceivable type of dominance?
Hell, it’s a free country.
Anacaona:
I joke with my husband that I’m a whore with just one client.
My reply:
Absolutely!
Did you see the movie Pinero: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3omQ5gs5w4? Talisa Soto and Benjamin Bratt starred. Your comment reminds me of this amazing soliloquy: “I’ll be your whore, papi.” I was not surprised to read that they wound up marrying after making the film together.
Doe killers and brick makers
Emotional bonding, affection, strength of intimacy and deference to men varies between women. The degree of this is significantly a function of her exposure to sex with numerous men. The doe-eyed ga ga feminine sweet nervous girl is gone. She becomes hardened and loses that overt emotional dependence on any one man. A man becomes hardened too and he loses that sexual dependence on any one woman. Its equal, sort of. Do women prefer men who have crushes on them or defer themselves just to get sex? Does a man who seeks a life mate prefer a woman who bonds her body and soul to him; who has retained the ability to focus on him; who really gives him the feeling that she is his woman? If a man meets a hardened woman in May and spends some time with her and then meets the doe in June, will he notice the difference? Of the two types of women, which one would the feminists {all hardened btw] consider to be a roadblock for feminism? The personal is the political. What is their method and strategy to get the doe to become a brick?
” Poor thing couldn’t even piss off a BTR-60 crew with a TOW-2B.”
This is the funniest thing I’ve read all week.
Beta. I suppose I’m dating myself when I refer to an M72 or a 106RR?
@Richard Aubrey
“Dogsquat. They told us at Benning that squad leader was the toughest job in the Army”
____________________________
Goddamn. I just read back over this and I am an Infantry Nerd…a Grunt Geek – all the way to my guts.
Hmm. I don’t know if it’s possible to quantify that. Having been both a Platoon Commander (Acting – nowhere near as qualified or good as a Real Deal Marine Officer) and a Squad Leader, here’s what I noticed:
Being a Squad Leader is hard for many reasons.
You don’t get the detachment that comes with larger unit leadership. You’re there with your guys, day-in-day-out. You live with them, sleep next to them, and live in the barracks with them. That means they’re gonna see you fuck up, and they’re gonna see you acting stupid. It means that to be a good one, you’re “on” all the time – even when your unit has the weekend off. The guys are always watching you, every second of the day, and you simply don’t have the space even a 2nd Lt has just to get away and relax. That’s definitely a stress.
That lack of detachment means you get close to your guys – probably closer than is best for mission accomplishment. It sucks telling one of your best friends to wipe his friend’s blood and hair off the SAW and test fire it. If it works, helping him strip the ammo off his friend’s dead body is necessary, but painful. You just can’t look at these guys as “1 Kilo India Alpha” and continue the mission. I suspect that’s a little easier as a commissioned Officer (not saying it’s ever easy, but you know what I mean).
You’ve also got to be able to physically impose your will on the guys at times. Good Squad Leaders are loved, but also a little feared by their squads. The smaller, less tough ones work to cultivate fanatical loyalty amongst the tougher Corporals and Fire Team Leaders to compensate. It’s a weird kind of tribal leadership, I guess. The 2nd Lt has a Staff Sergeant and at least a couple of Sergeants who do that for him – if those guys buy into the Lt, the Lt never needs to worry about his orders being carried out. Big “if”, I know – but still – having a long service NCO enforcing your shit is better than counting on a scared, tired, homesick 19 year old to do it.
Some other things I found challenging about leading a squad was simply controlling everybody. Making sure we didn’t shoot each other on accident or have a few guys get separated and lost is a fucking bitch in urban areas, and only slightly less problematic in jungle/heavy forest. Not all of your maneuver elements will have good (or any) comm, and it sucks.
Then, you’ve got the simple work that comes with keeping a bunch of guys doing their job – where are we, quantities of beans, bullets, and band-aids, So-and-So’s wife just left him so make extra-sure he’s focused, etc.
The Lt has all that crap to worry about, too, but he’s got a dedicated staff that helps him out. In a full strength USMC platoon, that will be an 0369 Infantry Platoon Sergeant with a decade or so experience, and a senior Sergeant who’s billeted as the Platoon Guide. The squads are supposed to be led by Sergeants, but it’s rare to have all three led by a Sergeant. Still, even the junior Squad Leader will be a squared-away Corporal.
I cribbed a little from that to make my life as a Squad Leader easier, usually by stacking my 1st Fire Team with my best (or only, sometimes) Corporal and some senior Marines. Then I’d lean pretty heavily on the 1st Team Leader, expecting his guys to be fairly low-maintenance. That’s got some trade offs, though – leaves you with a weak 3rd Fire Team sometimes.
Still, by the time you get to this spot, you’ve been a grunt for a few years, and you’ve been in the Fleet awhile. You know how it works, you’ve seen it done in real life – both well and poorly.
The Poor Bloody Ell-Tee, on the other hand – he’s coming right out of school. Nobody knows him or trusts him. He’s also at the mercy of his subordinates. If I didn’t like/get along with one of my guys, I could trade him off or fire him. Some units I was in wanted our Staff NCOs involved with this practice, and some didn’t care as long as the Marine stayed in the Company somewhere.
That Ell Tee, though – he’ll get laughed right out of the Company Office if he wants to fire his Platoon Sergeant – especially if he’s still a ButterBar. He’s got way less control than I did in that regard.
There’s also the sheer volume of information to deal with. I can call in a 9 Line Brief, direct mortars and arty, and I’ve called in gunships and fast movers. Our Lt’s are expected to do all that shit at the same time, while still fighting the platoon. If they make a mistake, somebody dies and it’s their fault. If I made a mistake, the Captain would say,”What the hell was Sgt Dogsquat doing that shit for? He shoulda been leading his goddamned squad! Where. The. Fuck. Is Lt Schmuckatelli? Bring me his incompetent head on a platter!”
Takes a bit of the pressure off, that does.
The other thing that’s easier to do as a Squad Leader is gain the respect of your guys. During Phantom Fury, I’d take my turn on being the first guy through the breach/door. I didn’t do it as often as the PFCs, but I did it and the guys respected it.
If an Lt did that, his guys would think he’s a dangerous cowboy and the CO would directly order him to knock it off. So the only way left for the Lt to earn respect and trust is to be right all the time, commit zero fuck-ups, and make sure his guys win. That is way, way, way harder than kicking a door in, tossing a few frags, and not getting capped by Ali Baba in the process.
That’s why I always accord Officers the respect most of society gives doctors or executives. Their job is incredibly difficult, in ways normal people can barely understand. Hell, it’s impossible to really, accurately explain what distinguishes a “good” Lt from an “average” one – especially to someone who’s never fired a rifle.
I do say with great pride that I’ve “broken in” 5 boot Lieutenants. 4 are still alive, and 3 are Captains now. That’s probably the best thing I’ve ever done for the USMC, and getting an email from one of those guys means more to me than all my medals and college money and other bullshit combined.
Dog. Kipling has a poem about that. Can’t recall the name on account of having a glass of wine in me, but the refrain is, “the backbone of the Army is the non-comisssioned man”.
My father told me why there is an officers’ club. That’s where you get your plausible deniability while the NCOs are performing counseling.
Montgomery–or maybe it was Slim–said that an officer should have and value commanding a platoon, a battalion, and a division. Easy for him to say. The thing about a platoon, he said, was that you get to know each man better than his mother did. That’s garrison work, as opposed to, say WW I where you’d be lucky to get his name.
But if you do, and if you take that platoon into contact, you’ll be losing guys who are a cross between brother and son.
As my father ages, he is reminiscing about the less cheerful stuff.
My brother was a C130 nav. One of my Dad’s brothers flew B24 in the Pacific. He wasn’t hurt, but a couple of his gunners will killed. He called on their families when he got home and it didn’t go as in the movies.
My mother had two brothers, one ended up a Marine O5 with five landings, more than his ration, and malaria that bothered him all his life, but no wounds. Her other bro was in the first Coast Guard OCS class, and had a cutter in the North Atlantic. He said that McLean’s “HMS Ulyssies” gets it right. Ran into a shipmate of his/theirs when I was at Valley Forge, guy with some VA issue.
My Dad’s the only one left, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. But when I heard them reminiscing, the take away was that God’s noblest work was the American soldier. “They never quit,” my father said more than once. I recall being home on leave one Christmas when my mother got the mail and said, sadly, that another card to one or another of his guys had been returned. I think he’s the only one left in the battalion, too.
Victor Mature, who claimed not to be an actor and said he had thirty-seven films to prove it, was Chief on my uncle’s cutter. He had a way of dealing with the recalcitrant. Strangely, it was said he demanded a stunt man to open a door on the set.
My sister is the daughter, husband, niece, sister, cousin, aunt, and soon to be mother of soldiers. There’s got to be a better line of work.
When my brother was killed, I got off orders and ended up in Air Defense. Among other things, I ran the notification and survivor assistance roster.
Many years later, I happened to see a notice in the paper that the Lapeer County vets were putting up a Viet Nam memorial. I called the guy in charge and discovered they had contacted nineteen of twenty families, mine being the exception. Figures.
So I started chasing them around. The brother in law was Navy, but he was retired, so that was no help and we didn’t have the ‘puter stuff we have today.
Eventually, I found them by calling the funeral home where we’d buried Joseph H. Marshall III, ILT INF, KIA 18FEB70.
On the way, I discovered two things. Civilians I encountered wondered why I was bothering and veterans said, even if they couldn’t help, “God bless you, brother.” About the nicest thing anybody’s said to me, given the circumstances and the folks involved.
You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….
Fortunately, I married the high school valedictorian, Phi Beta Kappa–no I don’t know what on earth she sees in me, but there it is. She doesn’t need that dominance stuff.
^ Now that’s perspective.
Richard Aubrey said:
“You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….”
______________________________
I just sort of accept it, I guess. It works.
I wonder if I have less of a problem with it because I learned about this stuff as I was getting my shit together after The Sandbox.
I’ve said this before on here, but I was a mess back then. I was called up off of Individual Ready Reserve a little after 9/11. While I was over there, I had a medium-rough time, my fiance got pregnant (not my kid – the ex never was good at math) and I got blown up.
So I was a wreck – body fucked up, mind fucked up, etc. Eventually, I figured stuff out, and got things going again. One thing that helped me a lot was Game. It made sense of what had previously been a very mysterious, painful area in my life. It gave me some control over my outcome.
I think a lot of guys make the mistake of thinking Game describes more than it actually does. At best, it’ll give you sort of a technician’s understanding of things. Push this button, that happens – if not, try this.
The technician is not the engineer who built his machine, nor the scientist who discovered the principles behind it. The technician knows how to run the gear, do some simple troubleshooting, and has talked a bit with the scientist and the engineer. That’s it.
So I can’t tell you definitively why it works, or what it means. I’m just a tech. A pretty good tech, but a tech nonetheless. I’m okay with that. I understand some very good concert violinists can’t build a violin, either.
The Officers will figure all that shit out anyway, and sooner or later we’ll saddle up and move out. Meantime, I’m gonna get some chow and some sleep, maybe have a few laughs with a really cool chick.
There might be some truth to this, but it leads to weirdness if you interpret it literally. Example:
“We have had lots of meaningful conversations and I caught feelings for you. Therefore, my penis needs to be in you soon or things will be ‘out of balance’ .
I think it’s helpful to realize that it is possible to lean in either direction, but up to each person to decide how to handle it once they realize it. It can be good practice to dabble in both sides in some cases. Getting stuck on either side for years at a time is where things really get bad.
DS – “So I can’t tell you definitively why it works, or what it means. I’m just a tech. A pretty good tech, but a tech nonetheless. I’m okay with that. I understand some very good concert violinists can’t build a violin, either.”
That is my problem right there. I get the “tech” mentality fully. But in becoming a computer tech, I took the time to learn now the actual circuits are made, what is inside the CPU chip, and the principles behind how a computer works. At 13 years old when I first heard a synthesizer used by Kraftwerk to make music, I scoured libraries and book stores looking for books on analog synthesizers, and by 15 I built several small analog synth circuits to fully understand how they made music. I’ve helped a person build a drummer from scratch.
I am never satisfied with simply knowing how to operate something. If I care about operating it at all, I want to know exactly what makes it tick. Surely I understand some things better than others, but anything I take the time to learn and practice (as in driving, playing drums, or building PCs) I go full bore on until I feel satisfied that I know enough about how it works to be a competent tech. I never simply learn how from another tech. In fact, techs often get frustrated with me because I ask them why pushing the buttons work, and most of them can only say ” because that is what the button is for.” to me, that is not an educated answer.
Lol I helped a drummer build his set from scratch. Although, since I play drums, I guess I built a drummer too. :-p
“You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….”
Almost of my friends came from shit-holes where freedom, or even security, is nothing more than a concept. A couple from Pakistan, some from Eastern Europe, China, India, Sri Lanka. My brother-in-law’s family is straight out of the Balkans. The only one who isn’t a second or first generation immigrant is Jewish, so you can probably guess how his family history played out.
I am extremely grateful that you guys helped create and preserve a nation where these guys and girls were able to live out their lives safe from psychopaths.
Fascinating stuff. I am an INTJ, didn’t realize it was so rare. My partner is also an INTJ so no problems there. I asked him how he would feel if I asked him to slap my ass and call me good girl and he said as long as it was playful and not daddy issues-related it was fine. We’re both highly educated, reasonably successful people who respect each other so why would we need to begrudge each other a few ass pats. I am not a people pleaser by nature but I do so love to see that he notices what I do for him. For me, a thank you is a bit too stiff and formal and that’s why I prefer the more teasing stuff. I also think there’s an element of wanting it to be about us, not about the action. “Good girl” is a different kind of praise than “thank you for doing X”. Same argument applies to why the wife wants to hear “I love you” instead of just watching you walk in the door every evening. It’s about her, not about what she does for you.
Dog.
As Susan would, and probably did, say, “It is what it is.” A lot of things is what they is and I accept that, but that doesn’t preclude being disappointed.
Doe. The ass slap is metaphorical. What it means is the dominance, masterfulness dynamic, the framework the man sets, that women need. Or, as Susan says, else.
Ted said:
“I never simply learn how from another tech. In fact, techs often get frustrated with me because I ask them why pushing the buttons work, and most of them can only say ” because that is what the button is for.” to me, that is not an educated answer.”
______________________
Again, you and I are wired in a similar manner. You work on computers, I work on people.
It drives me insane when other EMS people insist that 3 doses of sublingual nitroglycerin is the max, for example. They aren’t keeping in mind what nitro actually does – just that you’re supposed to give it for chest pain (unless dude’s rockin’ some Viagra) every 5 minutes until the chest pain is gone or the systolic blood pressure gets below a certain limit.
Nitro is not pain medicine. It opens up the arteries, allowing more blood to get to the cardiac muscle. The pain goes when the cardiac muscle stops bitching about wanting more blood. Then the heart works better.
Knowing this means you ought to intuitively consider nitro in many other situations, but sadly, lots of EMS types never do.
The thing about Game/Red Pill stuff, though, is that it’s in it’s infancy. Computers have been around a long time, and so have cardiologists. There are solid, no-shit FACTS about HAL-9000 and this cold, unfeeling black thing in my chest.
With most Game/Red Pill stuff, we’re still dealing in hypotheses. There’s some data, some experiments, and maybe even some facts – but not many. Half this stuff is so situational and subjective I can’t imagine how you’d definitively prove some hypotheses, anyway.
By default, you almost have to assume the incurious technician role. There’s simply no engineer to talk to, and the scientists all disagree on the “Why?” part, anyway.
Ted and Richard, if you haven’t seen this, take a look.
http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/the-five-stages-of-game/
I asked my husband this weekend, “Do you think you’re the one who wears the pants in our relationship?” (Asked while rubbing his back and neck.)
He replied, “Yes, of course I do. In many ways we have a very traditional dynamic.”
You can twist this up and down all you want and claim he’s a jerk or doesn’t have military experience or whatever, but in the end, it is the traditional family model.
In fact, it works for similar reasons that militaries and organizations have leaders and hierarchies instead of total egalitarianism.
DS – “By default, you almost have to assume the incurious technician role. There’s simply no engineer to talk to, and the scientists all disagree on the “Why?” part, anyway.”
Man, assume is a four letter word to me. I DO NOT assume anything if I can help it at all. In fact, I like to tell my children to never assume becuase:
It makes and ASS out of U and ME.
I get what you are saying though, and I understand it. But, I’m not willing to experiment with my relationship and/or on my SO.
If I was going to experiment on people, it would have to be ones I don’t know or care about. Which is why people that know me well, like that I like them. LOL
But yeah, much of my mental chaos around all this is the fact that there are no concrete facts, there is no tried and true method, and there is no process plan to follow. This is exactly the kind of “work” I avoid like the plague. Of course, the reason I have this problem at all now is I can no longer simply believe that “relationships just happen and work magically”, so mentally I can’t allow myself to ignore the fact that I have nothing to work with here. Prior to the red pill, I naively believed in all that crap, or at least I allowed myself to NOT look at it deeper for fear of what I’d find. Well, I found the mess under the bed and now I have to find some way to make sense of it. I’ve always envied people that truly can function on a leap of faith because it just seems so damned easy for them to jump off the cliff. Of course, those people also tend not to beat themselves up when they miss the target at the bottom, while I would spend the next month telling myself what a dumb ass I was for jumping without figuring out the proper trajectory to hit the target…
In short, this is all “touchy/feely” stuff, and I don’t do emotions if/when I can help it. I can’t “feel” my way through this, because I don’t feel my way through anything. In fact, it is odd if/when I actually acknowledge that “doing” something makes me feel any particular way at all.
I’ve seen that link before, but for the fun of it here is MY take:
1. Denial – Yeah, that one is pretty spot on.
2. Anger – Ditto
3. Bargaining – Here is where I start to diverge/choke/get stuck. At this point we are talking about “putting the plan” into action. Since I don’t have a plan, and there isn’t enough real data to make one, I am sitting a bit in limbo on actual “game” tactics short of a few very small things I am OK with, which are basically just different ways of stating my intentions and whatnot. I get that, because frankly I am not a great communicator, especially to people that expect some type of “feeling” to be passed from myself to them.
4. Depression – Yep, I’ve been in and out of this phase for months as well, probably because I’m stuck at 3.
5. Acceptance – I’m totally willing to accept that my old “methodology” is totally worthless, but I can’t accept this new frame until I can logically decide it is correct, which is damn difficult without any real data. Too many variables unaccounted for, to much left to interpretation. I’m not looking to turn myself into a life-long con artist, so unless *I* believe it (which means I have to prove it to myself) the best I can do is the “fake it” part.
Truthfully this is why I’ve started to just stop focusing on “game” and instead am putting the effort into improving myself. There is plenty of info on getting into better shape, and getting back to writing and making music has gone a long way toward making me feel more comfortable in my own skin. I get why some guys are all over game. Plenty of people go for get rich schemes too, and I bet some of them actually get rich doing it. But, that doesn’t make it a good idea, and certainly doesn’t mean *I* will get rich the same way. In fact, knowing myself, I would be willing to bet that those methods would not work for me at all.
And thanks for the nitro lesson. I tend to enjoy the medical discussions I have with my SO because like IT, medicine is based in a lot of data and process, so I can relate on some level. If it wasn’t for the gross factor, I might have done well in medicine instead of IT. But, when working on PCs, the only blood I encounter is my own, and I like it that way.
(for those of you that do not regularly build PCs, I found that many times a small blood sacrifice is necessary to make the machine function. The need for one usually increases as my patience trying to get a PC to work drops. It is my price for losing my intellectual detachment and allowing myself to get frustrated. LOL)
Hope. Are you referring to organizational efficiency or to the emotional need for dominance Susan says is common in women?
Ted said:
But yeah, much of my mental chaos around all this is the fact that there are no concrete facts, there is no tried and true method, and there is no process plan to follow. This is exactly the kind of “work” I avoid like the plague.
__________________________
You’re in a tough spot, no doubt. I started thinking about this stuff when single, and sort of “experimented” with it in a few different relationships.
I do recommend some dedicated people watching and eavesdropping, though. Go sit on a bench in a mall for an hour every week or so, and discretely watch and listen to how couples interact. The grocery store kicks ass for this, too. I suspect you’ll notice many things you’ve never picked up on before.
Might be some expectation bias, but still….
Ted said:
“Truthfully this is why I’ve started to just stop focusing on “game” and instead am putting the effort into improving myself.”
__________________________
Steel on Target
I think for what you and I are interested in that this is about 98% of it. Why mimic confidence when you can just get good at shit? Why ape scarcity when you’ve got a lot going on?
Honestly, I barely ever pull Game stuff on my SO. I guess I naturally like joking around and teasing, but doing stuff like disappearing for hours with no explanation? Not my style at all.
I will admit to being fairly calculating and tactical at first, being mindful of some concepts I’ve learned (couple three shit tests at the beginning especially), and paying very, very close attention to her without showing my cards, but I don’t think my outward behavior changed too much. I’m still the same dingdong I’ve been for years, just with a much better sense of timing.
It’s funny – I’ve had a lot more spare time recently and I’ve spent more time here, and I notice I get a little hypervigilant about it in real life if I’m not careful.
Again, I my SO and I are in the same (very broad) social circle, and I doubt this would play out the same in a bar scene or something.
Ted said:
5. Acceptance – I’m totally willing to accept that my old “methodology” is totally worthless, but I can’t accept this new frame until I can logically decide it is correct, which is damn difficult without any real data. Too many variables unaccounted for, to much left to interpretation. I’m not looking to turn myself into a life-long con artist, so unless *I* believe it (which means I have to prove it to myself) the best I can do is the “fake it” part.
___________________________________
I know very little about computers so this analogy might BSOD, but:
Maybe you ought to think of Game and Red Pill like this:
You know in MS Windows how you open up the Resource Monitor and can see stuff like CPU usage and network utilization? You can watch how different processes effect your machine, and figure out what’s detracting from it’s performance.
Think of all this stuff you’re learning as having a few processes you’ve never seen before appear. Maybe you’re not an expert on spoolsv.exe (whatever the hell that is) but now you can at least click on it and see if the graphs get all wiggy.
If there’s an issue and all your regular troubleshoting has failed, you can look at the list of previously hidden processes and start figuring them out. Before, you never even knew they were there.
Your Game plan could be 1)start kicking ass on yourself, and 2)just keep an eye on her. Enjoy! It ain’t broke, don’t mess with it – your stakes are too high to be meddling without cause. If things start running like crap, hop on Google and see if anybody’s dealt with that specific issue before.
But I’ll make you a bet:
You start creating more things you’re proud of and building self esteem in other ways, she will take care of all that stuff for you.
Hope said:
“You can twist this up and down all you want and claim he’s a jerk or doesn’t have military experience or whatever, but in the end, it is the traditional family model.”
____________________________
Just to be clear:
I don’t look down on people with no military experience. Honestly, there are so many idiots in the military that being a life-long civilian is often a plus in my eyes.
I just did it for so long and never talk about it in the real world that I probably blab too much here.
I might laugh at a guy who plays a lot of FPS games telling me I was a newb for “camping”, but, when it comes down to it – when I was in uniform, he was my the boss of my bosses, and paid my salary to boot.
And Hope, if you ever feel like I’m looking down on your husband for having a good relationship, post some military divorce rates and tell me to stuff it. Or ask me where my fiance went.
Richard Aubrey, I’m hesitant to say anything here, lest I set off another bomb.
But I will try to elaborate/elucidate.
There are movies like Gladiator, Braveheart, 300 and Spartacus that appeal to men’s desire to see leadership, masculinity, courage, valor, strength, etc. It’s not purely about strategy and efficiency, but also about cohesiveness, loyalty and emotional appeal.
That kind of inspiration works on both men and women. Many women are also moved by those displays.
In these movies, is the male protagonist soft, submissive, and never leads and always follows? Always runs away from responsibilities and making decisions? Always follows… women?
(The new Avengers movie was a lot of fun, by the way. Superheroes / alpha males with a lot of dominance apparently clash when they get together without a hierarchical structure. There was also a very subtle touch: Nick Fury and his female subcommander were like captain and officer, minus any hint of romance.)
People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures. Traditionally, hierarchies existed, and men all knew or figured out where they stood in it. They also subscribed to the notion of every man being the “king of his own castle” (quoted in the Russell Crowe version of Robin Hood).
A man who has the “kingly” status in the eyes of his woman is generally happy. This is partially why men talk about wanting to be respected and looked up to, because this legacy is still deeply ingrained in people. Historical romance as a genre is very popular with women, by the way.
Household organizational efficiency can surely be achieved with a dominant wife in charge and making all the decisions, and the husband following without question. But emotionally (and sexually), does this kind of man appeal to other men and women?
None of this is politically correct, of course.
@ Dogsquat
I think there’s a joke somewhere here, but I don’t get it. Did your boss order you to camp around enemy spawn locations?
Dogsquat, that part about the military was not directed at you.
My husband’s step-father was a Vietnam vet, and his friend since he was about six also served in Iraq. He grew up knowing more about guns and so forth than most guys, though he doesn’t really like shooter games.
I think part of my respect for my husband is that I know he would be quite capable in a fight or survival situation. I respect what you and guys like you do. Certainly it is not something I would personally want to have anything to do with, and that is a part of the survival program in my brain.
When it comes down to it, the woman’s desire for leadership/dominance in a man is about ensuring he has enough testosterone/manliness to be able to protect his family/offspring in case of wars/conflicts/fights/battles, whether with invaders from a neighboring state or aliens from outer space.
It’s all tied together. If you tear this out, then you basically are saying women should be the ones who make up the majority of combat troops in the military, be the commanders in the military, fire the big guns, rockets and cannons, and so forth. It just doesn’t jive with biology.
We’re the life-givers. You’re the life-protectors.
Is that a good enough WHY for the guys here?
DogSquat – “I do recommend some dedicated people watching and eavesdropping, though. ”
Now that it is getting hot outside here in Da Burgh, I’ve been going to the local mall to get my afternoon miles in. Right now it isn’t too busy at lunch, but school will be out soon and it will be crawling with people. I do have to admit I love just watching people interact. Far more than I enjoy actually interacting with people in fact.
“I think for what you and I are interested in that this is about 98% of it.”
Yep, and I can see the effects of my own self improvements in our relationship much more clearly than with any particular ‘game’ tactics I try to use. And since I can clearly quantify the results of my efforts here, I feel much more comfortable putting it into action. I can’t say I will or won’t ever put more time/effort/energy into “game” in general, but if i can do what is necessary without it, all the better.
Now, that being said, like you I can’t simply forget what I know. And, I will use what I know to be more vigilant (that sounds menacing but accurate all the same…) about how I interact with my SO and for any red flags that might present themselves. I’m just not going to initiate actions based on what I consider untested theory. I won’t say game doesn’t work, because clearly it does for some things with some people. But, I can’t mentally justify it at this time, so it will remain an intellectual curiosity to me for now. If nothing else, I do feel a little better knowing the info. I guess it’s like other things in life, just because you know something about it, doesn’t mean you have to do anything with it. I mean, I can look up how to build a nuclear bomb, and as much as I may enjoy knowing the details, I still have no intentions of building one.
Hope – “Is that a good enough WHY for the guys here?”
I just wanted to point out that dealing with my (and some of the other guys here) WHYs is simply preparing you for life as a mother. All kids go through the WHY stage, some of us never grow out of it.
However, those of us that don’t grow out of it eventually start asking really hard questions to answer.
“People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures”
.
Yes – benevolent stand-your-ground macho men
“People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures”
.
Yes – benevolent stand-your-ground macho men
God and the soldier
All men adore.
In times of trouble
And no more.
For when war is over
And all things righted,
God is neglected,
The old soldier slighted.
Yeah. We need Leonidas to lead the equivalent of an SS battalion to protect western civilization. Nobody would want to live with those bastards, had they survived. All honor to them. From the safety of distance. Patton is considered, outside of various military types and not all of them, to be a barbarian.
So, yeah, those are good examples for something or other, but the connection to relationships is not demonstrated.
It’s no different from looking at a particularly rowdy the DIV I football player who gets respect from his teammates. Sure, all that macho stuff, loyalty, courage, whatnot. But he’s not likely to be used as an example of relationship leadership, dominance, circumstance-framing or what have you.
I accept, grudgingly and with some disappointment, that many women have to be treated “that way” as described by Susan. But combat analogues do not compute.
Hope
“”When it comes down to it, the woman’s desire for leadership/dominance in a man is about ensuring he has enough testosterone/manliness to be able to protect his family/offspring in case of wars/conflicts/fights/battles, whether with invaders from a neighboring state or aliens from outer space. “”
If you were to talk this way to feminists or their male cabana boys, you’d get a potload of sneering from people who have no idea they’re living in a cocoon made and protected by better people than themselves. When attention is drawn to that fact, we hear it’s the evil patriarchy and if that could be fixed, we wouldn’t have any problems.
IOW, no connection with your point. Some don’t get it, really, and some understand that addressing it might ruin all they hold dear. So they don’t.
Also, does the need to be reassured about this stuff wrt hubby or the SO generate the quarterly macho check, aka shit test?
Richard Aubrey, I care not for political correctness. I’m interested in how people tick and what makes people tick.
Masculine traits have actual connection to testosterone levels, just as feminine traits are correlated with estrogen levels. In men high T levels signify good health to be able to withstand those levels, and such men have higher symmetry. In women high E levels signify good health and fertility, and such women have higher symmetry.
Research has shown high testosterone is also correlated with lower fear response (courage), faster reaction times, lower rates of depression, higher self-confidence, higher competitiveness (status in the hierarchy), higher bone and muscle density (height and strength), higher libido, sperm production and motility.
The effect is also behavior-based: working out and behaving in a dominant manner increase testosterone levels. Even sitting upright in posture increases confidence and T levels. Testosterone levels do not remain static, and a man behaving in high T manners will increase his levels, causing him to be more attractive to women. Likewise a woman behaving in a feminine way will increase her E levels, although a woman’s levels also fluctuate throughout her cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453004001702
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=and-postures-effect-on-testosterone
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120402093750.htm
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/scoring-goals-spiking-testosterone.html
And lots more…
Hope. We know this. Problem is two-fold. One is that those traits, useful as they are, do not correlate with suitability for a relationship. They do not connect with Susan’s dominance views.
Without annoying details, I can say I react quickly, I’ve done this or that which, afterwards, other guys seemed to think was pretty gutsy. Perhaps it was lack of imagination. All very well, but the connection is not obvious.
The other question is whether the need to be reassured generates the quarterly macho check
Richard Aubrey, the first part:
Suitability for mating and producing offspring = attraction traits. Suitability for relationship = comfort traits.
A person needs both.
Woman keeps herself in shape and feminine = attraction. Man keeps himself dominant and masculine = attraction.
Being loving, honest, ethical, and good partner = comfort and long-term stability.
Second point about shit tests and macho checks.
The macho check from the woman to the man is like the man wanting the woman to dress up sexily every now and then. Sure you know the sexiness exists, but you want to see it on display sometimes.
It’s a mating display. Sometimes if one person goes too long without doing it, the partner does something to ask for it. Ideally they can communicate about it and not make a huge deal about it.
The door is always open if you hate putting on a sexy show for your significant other.
Hope. Still no connection. It’s one thing to ask for a sexy outfit.
But if you have to openly ask for a display of manliness, you have a problem. The guy’s doing as he’s told, which is not the same as dominance or manliness.
As in, “You never stand up to me when we disagree.”
“Okay. Next time we disagree, I’ll stand up to you.”
Does that satisfy?
Probably not, but not being a woman, I can’t say for sure.
@Hope
a sexy show for your significant other
That’s an interesting (and alliterative) way of putting it. The men here who have been down on displays of dominance* that are just for show have a point that these are not really of substance, especially when compared to actual heroics in wartime. But then again, they’re not meant to be.
*I would have written “displays of leadership” because I think it’s the better term, but I wanted to meet Hope’s alliterative bar.
“But then again, they’re not meant to be.”
I agree, but if that is true, what is the point of them at all? If the point of “dominance” is to prove a man can “protect his family”, then wouldn’t a man proving he is capable of killing other men be a better bet than a guy that rides a motorcycle?
Here is the thing: I completely understand why a woman would want a man to protect her and their children. Makes perfect sense to me. But, where it breaks down is that women are NOT looking at traits that actually prove the man is at all capable. Being a loud asshole does not equal good in a fight. Riding a motorcycle and/or wearing leather does not mean he can defend himself or anyone else. Most of the things women tend to claim show ‘dominance’ are actually false bravado, and many of those same guys would turn tail and run at the sign of any real danger.
Meanwhile, that “milquetoast” guy over in the corner used to be an army sniper. Who do you think would be a better protector, alpha asshat or former sniper? Which is more likely to attract female attention with minimum effort?
This is why men (especially those that are military or in dangerous lines of work) get so frustrated with the whole “dominance gets them wet” trains of thought. It just isn’t logical in the least.
@Richard
It’s one thing to ask for a sexy outfit.
But if you have to openly ask for a display of manliness, you have a problem.
This reminds me of the joke about the bridegroom asking the priest to restore the word “obey” to the bride’s wedding vows, “Because my fiancee wants it there and I do everything she tells me.”
Setting the issue of leadership aside for a moment, I’m also reminded of some comments someone left on my blog last year. He said that any change men demand from relationship-worthy women amounts to little more than paying attention to health and hygiene, while the change women demand from relationship-worthy men amounts to a complete personality transplant.
It not only seems unfair, but I also agree with him that it is unfair. Yet short of a personality transplant among women themselves, the attraction triggers are there to stay. Awareness and maturity can keep a woman from demanding that her significant other be 100% attractive, 100% of the time, but if any deal that’s better than that is probably available only in a perfect world.
@Ted
“But then again, they’re not meant to be.”
I agree, but if that is true, what is the point of them at all? If the point of “dominance” is to prove a man can “protect his family”, then wouldn’t a man proving he is capable of killing other men be a better bet than a guy that rides a motorcycle?
And I agree with you! When I wrote that comment, I was thinking about the man who is capable of killing other men (for the sake of his family, of course) buying a motorcycle.
Well, not literally. Hahahaha! I don’t think I completed my thought until I wrote Comment 292 to Richard. I was assuming that the man who is not currently displaying dominance is already a great long-term partner. I was also assuming (perhaps idealistically) that a woman who becomes aware that the dominance she thinks is the real deal is no more than “a sexy show” will adjust her filters accordingly and go for men of real substance. But it would be nice if those men could put on those sexy shows, too.
Bellita.
Okay. Agree. Still disappointed.
From time to time, you’ll see women saying, “I want a man who’ll stand up to me”. Or “call me on my crap.” Or not be a “pushover” or a “doormat”.
Thing is, if you have something important, something that will gain money, please the family, grow the roses, avoid legal trouble, you would not want to be stood up to, overwhelmed, defeated in arguing. If you expect to be right, you’d not want to be the loser in a disagreement.
To be stood up to presupposes ancipating giving the guy crap that’s wrong, that he should resist. Which, by extension, means if he doesn’t, you lose money, kill the roses, offend the family, or get into legal trouble.
IOfurtherW, talk like this anticipates starting arguments about subjects in which you deliberately take the known wrong side and get personal and nasty in support of it.
Great to look forward to.
Richard Aubrey, that’s the point of the female “shit test.” It’s designed so the man would prove his dominance without her asking for it by name. Women are notoriously bad at direct-style communication. My husband has also urged me to speak my mind more.
Ted D, I never said anything about loud assholery, motorcycles or leather jackets. These displays are different for different women. Think of it like how some men get off on heels, other men love lace, and still other men love slinky gowns. Some women like motorcyclists… I personally can’t stand them.
I already know the stuff my husband is made of, so I don’t need most of those tests tests. I know in the middle of the night when there’s a big noise, he will jump up and grab his gun and spring into action, because he’s done it. I don’t need him to make all the decisions on the day-to-day stuff, like choosing the restaurant. He does it most of the time, but I don’t mind choosing.
Bellita, I think men don’t like the idea of “acting dominant” because it can actually be physically dangerous for them to do so. That, and most guys online tend to be on the introverted side, and they think of the obnoxious loud guy who is the center of attention. My husband does not come across that way, and we are certainly not “life of the party” types.
I also don’t want personality transplants. I encourage a single man to find the woman who loves him at a comfortable level of dominance instead of wanting to change him completely. It would be the equivalent of advising a woman that if she happens to be naturally on the weighty side, to not get with a man who wants more thinness, or vice versa if she’s usually thin, to not get with a man who wants more heft.
I’m tired of people strawmanning some caricature of the macho man, as if the leathered up biker is the only thing women can find sexually attractive. For the record, it’s a bit repulsive to me.
While writing my last two comments, I remembered a fitness test I pulled on my second boyfriend when we were still together.
He was a Buddhist who truly believed in non-violence. It didn’t bother me at the beginning of our relationship, but after a heated discussion about guns with a mixed group of friends, it suddenly bothered me a lot. So I asked him, “If we were walking home late at night and some thugs came out of nowhere and tried to attack us . . . and I pulled a gun out of my purse to defend us but got knocked out by a brick . . . and the gun fell at your feet just as I was about to get stabbed as well . . . would you use it or would you let me die?”
He refused to answer for a long while, reminding me that he doesn’t like guns, that he never wants to be responsible for taking another person’s life (which I did respect about him), that he’d have us both back at the dorm at a safe hour anyway . . . But I wanted to know that he would use the gun if he had to, so I kept pushing. Finally, he said, sounding really, really frustrated: “Maybe I would use it. I don’t know. I’ve never been in that situation before and I have no idea what I would do in the heat of the moment.”
I’m not proud of what I did to get that “sexy show” . . . and I concede that it wasn’t very sexy at all.
But would it have been avoided by him choosing the restaurant more often, to take an example given in this thread? I doubt it. I was far less self-aware in college, and I don’t think anything would have stopped that fitness test back then. I share this story because I know what it’s like to demand the show and have no idea that it has no real relation to substance, but also what it’s like to know what the things of substance are but still kind of hope I get the show.
Bellita. Your last graf at 5:06 is unclear.
You didn’t pull a shit test, nor, for that matter, a dominance test. You asked a straightforward question about a guy’s suitability as a partner, or, for that matter, anything more responsible than babysitting somebody’s pet rock.
His answer, whichever way it went, didn’t apply to dominance within the relationship.
It would appear that a shit test is designed to assess dominance within the relationship. The connection to protection against outside threats is tenuous.
Hell. Think of the false positives. A really dominant, positive guy on a date who gets a shit test could decide that, instead of the conventionally-desired reaction, he would end the date politely and never call again. Is she worth this crap on a regular basis? Maybe he has options.
A guy who is competent and dominant enough to handle the important issues might consider reacting to the little stuff a waste of energy.
Does a guy who’s demonstrably competent and dominant in the outside world have to keep this stuff up when he gets home?
I think we’re also going in circles here because we have men who are already in relationships taking issue with what women want in their relationships which have nothing to do with them personally.
Richard Aubrey, serious question. If you don’t have to go home and worry about the “little stuff” with your wife, why worry about what some random women online want? We’re not in a relationship with you, or any other guy here.
And really, if my husband and I are happy with what we have going, why do you feel the need to question it?
@Richard
You didn’t pull a shit test, nor, for that matter, a dominance test. You asked a straightforward question about a guy’s suitability as a partner, or, for that matter, anything more responsible than babysitting somebody’s pet rock.
This is the second time I shared a detailed story about a fitness test I thought I pulled, and the second time I was told it wasn’t a fitness test! Just when I think I finally had it figured out . . .
Now my worry is that I won’t ever be able to stop myself from pulling fitness tests on a decent man because I don’t know what they are!
His answer, whichever way it went, didn’t apply to dominance within the relationship.
I brought it up with respect to dominance because I was trying to get him to say he’d be more dominant if he had to face those theoretical thugs, and not necessarily more dominant with just me. (And I think I felt more dominant, being the gun owner in the scenario.)
I was also riffing off Ted’s point that women often demand “showy” dominance/leadership/strength because it is supposed to be an indicator of a man’s ability to protect and provide, when the best protectors and providers are not showy at all. Inasmuch as my second boyfriend really would not have had me walking the streets at a late hour, we can say he was already doing that part of his “job” with that proverbial ounce of prevention. But I wanted a gun in there when it wasn’t necessary, which was like a demand for a “sexy show” of bravado.
Hope. Don’t get defensive. You’re not so important that I’d be interested in questioning your personal life. Really.
I’m interested in the question in general for a couple of reasons, one being that the requirement for dominance in situations not–to the male mind–requiring it is disappointing.
Another is that Susan, whose views I respect, seems to think it’s so important that if we men don’t do it, women will punish us.
Thirdly, I prefer that things make sense at least internally.
Shit tests, for example, make no sense unless you posit other issues such as the female need for being dominated one way or another. With that assertion, shit tests make internal sense, as annoying as they may be. That means the reality of the need needs to be demonstrated or explained.
Nothing to do with you.
« 1 2 3 »