all 12 comments

[–]369 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

(I had to edit a line below)*

Boy this is an interesting article...
Naturally, the last part is hard to stomach. "Testing" (shit testing, which is a great sign) is par for the course with any woman at all. A woman that doesn't "test" you is probably just vying for a pay day or a meal ticket.

Otherwise, there's maybe a couple of things I either don't think she explained adequately or maybe she just seemed confused about:

Sensual Effeminacy


It’s difficult, but any guy who doesn’t master chastity is no man.

So, men's value is largely formed by his access to resources. A man with a lot of resources doesn't need chastity. He can have exactly what he wants, he can far exceed his biological duty and instead have a prosperous lineage, winning the sexual competition and win out against all other participants without a close second.
There are glaring exceptions to this thinking and most women who cannot handle the dynamic between sexes that attribute to them their value are set in stone.

Let's use the next part, about overeating and sweets:
Again, a man who has nearly endless resources doesn't give half a fuck about his figure. This is why you see disgusting walruses with literal models, plenty of the time a bit less than half their age. So, again, glaring exception there, upon which the hole market literally hinges.

Overeating and drinking too much, though, is a pretty big issue and this is hard to disagree with, just like playing video games for too long. Although, if a guy doesn't need more resources, why does it matter how he gets dopamine? If he has no kids and endless resources for which he doesn't need to work, this is again pretty much a null point. Even "habitually sleeping in late". If a guy doesn't have to work, who gives a fuck when he wakes up?

Most of my critique is that these things don't exactly apply to men that have the most valuable trait any man can have - plentiful resources.
Of course, his lineage will be tained in some way if he doesn't supplement these behaviors before they become too detrimental. Ultimately, this is a frame being used to protect the woman's value - women benefit extensively from veiling their dependence upon resources and they need to protect their ability to garner attention.

The point about porn is easy to agree *(this should say DISAGREE, for the record) with.

Emotional Effeminacy

Actually, a willingness to emote is a crucial trait for a women to observe in a mate. Exhibiting conscientiousness or compassion is important for a woman to observe because she needs security in feeling her offspring are well protected and cared for.

Men get pleasure out of complaining.

I don't even know what to say about this... This seems like a very emotionally loaded sentence. Maybe this is a Freudian slip or something.
Otherwise, it's not that bad though. Also, the last line is sort of odd because it contradicts most women who insist that a man should "be a man" and "do what's necessary". This is just an example of modern women having their cake and eating it too.

Intellectual Effeminacy

I don't think she realizes what she's saying, considering she just did a 180 in a matter of three lines. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Where women are intuitive, men are analytical. Women often think men are dull because they don't pick up on intuitive "hints" women give to men, thinking communicating the way they communicate together somehow translates to inter-sexual communications. This is desperately naive. Men are prone to overthinking things because analysis usually pays off for them. It helps them plan properly in terms of finance, general life choices or in their occupation. Analysis is entirely crucial for all endeavors, even beyond any particular sex.

What she's going for but missing is that men need to be decisive. With that, I clearly agree, despite the value of analysis.

Volitional Effeminacy

She seems to be have something in mind for this one as well. Maybe she got upset with a recent boyfriend who couldn't stop being too attached to his mother or something, or maybe she really wanted a guy to commit to her and he just couldn't decide on her or another woman...
Besides, can married men not be vain, narcissistic or selfish?

The rest is okay, like this:

A real man sets aside pleasure to pursue greatness, not just professionally, but specifically in virtue.

She's talking about delayed gratification here, it appears. Delayed gratification is dependent on discipline, essentially the fulcrum of Masculinity. I think she's aiming to equate disciplined men to masculine men there.

The lower faculties (appetites for food, sex, and sensual pleasures) are subordinated to the higher faculty of REASON (is it right or wrong to do this thing in this circumstance?).

Each time I hear or read this from women, it feels really bitter, like they got upset in the past because a man chose something over her. The real concept or lesson she's trying to promote is actually a very important an philosophical topic, but she just cannot get it together enough to really apply it. You shouldn't do those things to "be a man", but to be a keen spiritual being. In reality, adhering to carnal desires is generally a pretty masculine thing to do. The catch is that abusing carnal desires is where it again comes off as feminine, like with gays.

This is why women give awful advice about women, guys. They just don't seem to understand this topic at all. Please don't go to women for advice. That is truly simp behavior and will lose you any respect you've somehow escaped with thus far in the eyes of any woman.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I think something you are missing is when you talk about men with resources you seem to have in mind only the born wealthy who sit back and do not much, maybe they get a cool job through their connections which they don't do very well.

Actually the vast majority of men with resources are hard working, ambitious and competitive. You actually don't see many fat millionaires and billion because their constant competition with other men keeps them sharp. The stats show this, the poorer you are the more likely you are to be fat, unfit and unhealthy.

Your idea of how people live doesn't tally with reality.

[–]madcow-5 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, people born wealthy are raised with higher expectations of accomplishments. It's all about who you consider your peers. That's who people size themselves up to in order to gauge how well they're doing. You don't get to just go all Billy Madison and expect not to be mostly cut off and regarded as the black sheep of the family. Also, families that are that wealthy tend to be large families, not single-child households with no siblings, cousins and other relatives in the picture, as was depicted in that movie.

[–]369 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was only saying chastity being effeminate doesn't account for men that have a lot of resources, who have displayed enough competence to be trusted with the community's resources. These men don't care at all about a woman's commitment because they have no shortage of options, which is due to their value.

Oops this should say promiscuity, not chastity, in the first line.

[–]369 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Your idea of how people live doesn't tally with reality.

We agree for the most part. I don't see how this makes any sense to say.
In all, sure, having an abundance of resources doesn't make you immune to displaying those traits, but being competent enough to garner all of those resources is rarely accompanied by displaying said traits, as you've pointed out.

The argument was that levels of chastity don't appear to correlate with how masculine or effeminate men appear. I used an example of a man with abundant resources to display this exception.

[–]madcow-5 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I agree if a woman's not shit-testing you at all, something's up, or you're dating way below your league.

But plenty of women also take shit-testing way too far and there's no definitive line between a girl shit-testing and generally treating you like shit.

[–]369 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You're wrong.
Women that use egregious shit-testing are testing your boundaries entirely on purpose. Women usually do this when there aren't adequate father figures in their lives and they haven't learned to respect the dynamic between sexes yet. This is why women treat men like shit; they don't know what it's like to be in a submissive role because they've never had to be in one.

This is actually a decent sign if you can overcome it: you've got a life-long partner who will really trust you and enjoy your company. Also, you can be pretty sure she'll have high standards with who she considers submitting to, which means she's less likely to look for a man with higher value.
This was a pretty potent method of hypergamy, if I say so myself. It also coincides with her explanation, which I think was accurate, about a man being in control of his emotions.

Don't let women demean you. She'll go for the jugular when she has nothing left and that's when you have the opportunity to really secure her.
If she goes there, you can always talk about how much you've enjoyed strip clubs and maybe ask her where the nearest one is.

[–]madcow-5 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

"If you can't handle me at my worst, you don't deserve me at my best."

Got it..

..But what about that guy who got his dick cut off by some BPD chick? Should he have overcome it? Was there a future in that relationship, him not having a dick afterwards and all?

One of my buddies had a loaded shotgun pointed in his face by a girl. A girl he kept dating a month or two after he broke his leg from her dragging him by her car. Was that just shit-testing too?

[–]369 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There's an obvious difference between being violent or insane. You shouldn't value those women anyway and considering some strategy to deal with them is pointless.
Obviously, I see your point man. I clearly wasn't talking about women that go nuts.

[–]madcow-5 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The point is there’s not. I’ve had the displeasure of dating crazy and my exact mentality was like yours.

Shit testing is a thing, but it’s important to make the call on when to abandon ship. It’s not always clear if you’re a frog in the pot.

[–]369 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, I think it's more about how much you're willing to tolerate.
It felt like we were talking about only women that are worth giving that chance to.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Typical 2nd Wave Feminist BS, designed to manipulate men. I'll stick with MGTOW.