The Problem With Women Today

[Tomas]

.


-skipair-
Birth control works pretty well, though.

........

The Pill makes women pick bad mates

Ability to sniff out a compatible partner affected by taking contraceptives

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26180187




.

[mansman]

So what! Should not blame women for the million of warped and futked up children resulting over past many decades, its the MEN after all who design the Pill and the MEN who allow women to swallow pills, it all the MENS fault so if you blame political women for their actions and hold them responsible for their decisions that wrecked their society then you idiot and make big mistake. In same way if you blame men who design Pill for so many cancer-tits cut off innocent women bodies again you are IDIOT because women had NO choice to swallow them because men otherwise force them with sex to loose freedom with baby's both arms, all the fault is the MEN, ok, the MEN are to blame for EVERYTHING!
sTUPID.
And if you try to show how futked up your society is better not add suggestion who to blame or what movement to blame, no, forget about WHY is all screewed up your life and world, dont matter, just explain HOW because if you add WHY for some magically reason it makes the How futked up it is less true.
Now dont forget!

[Dan Rowden]

I do believe the limits of my powers to interpret gibberish have been exposed.

[Shahrazad]

And I was getting ready to hire you as a gibberish interpreter.

[Dan Rowden]

He may have a point in there somewhere; he just needs to calm down long enough to be able to make it coherently.

[Shahrazad]

I'm still trying to figure out what language it's written in.

Reminds of when I had to translate a doc from Chinese English to Spanish. I had to guess through the whole thing. Should've charged 30% extra for the mind-reader skills.

[Tomas]

.


-Mr. Bubbleman-
mansman - So what! Should not blame women for the million of warped and futked up children resulting over past many decades, its the MEN after all who design the Pill and the MEN who allow women to swallow pills, it all the MENS fault so if you blame political women for their actions and hold them responsible for their decisions that wrecked their society then you idiot and make big mistake.

-tomas-
Are you referring to Jane "Barbarella" Fonda?




-Mr. Bubbleman-
In same way if you blame men who design Pill for so many cancer-tits cut off innocent women bodies again you are IDIOT because women had NO choice to swallow them because men otherwise force them with sex to loose freedom with baby's both arms, all the fault is the MEN, ok, the MEN are to blame for EVERYTHING!
sTUPID.

-tomas-
So, Mr. Bubbleman, what are you doing (out on the streets) to reduce this decadence?




-Mr. Bubbleman-
And if you try to show how futked up your society is better not add suggestion who to blame or what movement to blame, no, forget about WHY is all screwed up your life and world, dont matter, just explain HOW because if you add WHY for some magically reason it makes the How futked up it is less true.
Now dont forget!

-tomas-
This is the main reason as (you have so graciously written) is why I'm no longer a political consultant! The "movement" doesn't like people with opinions, they prefer the go-along-to-get-along crown (tiara).

Peace Up


Tomas


.

[BGen]

"We are living in a very special time. Children leave home at a young age; relationships between couples are not as close as they used to be. Today, women are in the same social circles and have the same power as men and in many cases even more. As a result, the feeling of emptiness and attempts to find fulfillment and happiness are no longer related to family ..."

A Woman's Happiness - Today It's More Than Family and Career

[Tomas]

.


Should Single Men Be 'Bagged and Tagged?'

-snip-
There are a variety of reasons why some married women might feel threatened by the sight of a happily unattached male.

Reader "Jim," a 47-year-old single male, is curious as to why so many married women find men so intolerable:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/ask-dr-hel ... and-tagged



.

[JemyM]

Tell me what you think of this.
http://theproblemwithwomentoday-reality ... gspot.com/

Will be solved once the writer got laid.

[Rhett]

I don't know if you're still around skipair, i just thought i'd respond anyway.

So, according to you, a breeder is someone good at sexual communication, and from what you have said previously, sexual communication centers around breaking down the inhibitions males place on women, so the women can plunge into their preferred state of sexuality, and male attention and valuing towards her?

It depends on how you look at it, but I wouldn't necessarily say that it is males who are responsible for a woman's sexual inhibitions. It's an interdependent system.

But in general, yes. Sexual communication is a guy who allows himself to be openly horny with women. This makes them horny, which makes him more horny, and the dance begins.

Okay.

When sexual communication results in a casual encounter, part of that involves a woman jettisoning her natural inclination for social/economic climbing (through sexual choice). Sexual communication says give up the mind, all of it.

R: In relation to this, i add, that men place the greatest value on women as sexual objects, and women, having a passive mentality, have absorbed and hold themselves in this light.

S: Again, I'm not sure if we can resolve a chicken before egg argument.

But it is interesting that when I used to respect woman's character, she didn't have much use for me. Only once I found them dispicable could I look on them as purely a sex object, and only then did they love me. Pretty shocking.

When I see a pretty girl and let my eyes linger on her face she'll usually look away. And she does this in a way that says, "why are you looking at my face, why don't you look at ME." So if I'm chasing my dick around and am trying to get with a girl, when she talks I blatantly look at her breasts. When it's my turn to say something I look up at her and say, "wait, what?", and have her repeat it. Then I'll probably go back to her breats.

This kind of thing doesn't really make any sense from a larger perspective. Breats are cones of fat. But I think I'm going to have to let this kind of behavior run its course. Perhaps I'll be able to sqeeze the last few drops from the desire in a year or two. I have more thinking to do, but no matter for now. Just have to focus on what I can.

Okay.

Here are three scenarios by which a man looking at a woman's breasts makes her feel sexy.
1. Women over the ages understand that a man looking at her breasts is often a prelude to sexual contact.
2. Breasts are a symbol of femaleness, him looking at them affirms sexual dimorphism.
3. Men indicate that breasts are sexy and women absorb this. Women unconsciously hold mens views as being inherent, as true in all worlds, or at least as the only values worth holding.

R: To what extent do you consider sexual communication to be non-verbal versus verbal?

S: 99% non-verbal.

Okay.

The breeder thinks about sex when in the presence of a woman, about dominating her, about his emotions being relieved by contact with her, and doesn't get nervous. She likes that.

R: You talk about key phrases, i suspect you have more phrases than the common ones like "you know you want it", "fun", "no strings", "you're gorgeous". I think when women want no strings fun, sexual communication aside, they prioritise the males appearance and confidence and status as a 'man'.

S: Sexual state is a flow state, so there are no plans or key phrases in the strict sense. It's the kind of thing that when you drop into it, you already know what to do. It's wired in.

R: Stepping aside from the sexual communication approach for a moment, and speaking with regard to those women that choose to breed with unintelligent breeders

S: This doesn't make sense to me. If by "breeders" you mean the ones good at sexual communication, it makes no difference if they are "intelligent" or not. The woman are automatically attracted to them, with no mind of their own. You can't "step aside" from it.

I think women's choice between intelligent versus unintelligent 'breeders' relates in part to whether she is worried about falling in love or not. It's about love and control. The intelligent one she may fall in love with and lose control. The unintelligent one she will be able to control and thus won't fall in love with (unless she wants a partner she can dominate).

[skipair]

When sexual communication results in a casual encounter, part of that involves a woman jettisoning her natural inclination for social/economic climbing (through sexual choice). Sexual communication says give up the mind, all of it.

Pretty much. The way I see it some specific social/economic aspects are included in the image he/she gets horny on. We can't totally separate the primitive from modern brain, but I'd say when the primitive gets max stimuation it overrides the concerns for social consequence, etc.

I think women's choice between intelligent versus unintelligent 'breeders' relates in part to whether she is worried about falling in love or not. It's about love and control. The intelligent one she may fall in love with and lose control. The unintelligent one she will be able to control and thus won't fall in love with (unless she wants a partner she can dominate).

My guess is you think this because you consider yourself to be intelligent, and it's a nice to think a consequence of that is women falling in love with you. In my experience there is very little correlation between a man's intelligence and the woman's ability to control him. The reality is that intelligence predominantly hinders sexual communication (since its non-intellectual), and sexual communication is the predominant thing associated with romantic love.

[Loki]

I think women's choice between intelligent versus unintelligent 'breeders' relates in part to whether she is worried about falling in love or not. It's about love and control. The intelligent one she may fall in love with and lose control. The unintelligent one she will be able to control and thus won't fall in love with (unless she wants a partner she can dominate).

My guess is you think this because you consider yourself to be intelligent, and it's a nice to think a consequence of that is women falling in love with you. In my experience there is very little correlation between a man's intelligence and the woman's ability to control him. The reality is that intelligence predominantly hinders sexual communication

You are defining intelligence too narrowly, treating it too objectively. There are many types of intelligences.

It requires intelligence to flirt skillfully, to break down a woman's defenses by pushing just the right buttons at just the right time. Great observation skills, imagination, humor and memory are required if one is to be in control.

On the other hand, Rhett is right, some men are not as conscious when they interact with women, and end up being submissive males, less in control, and more of a slave to her, rather than a master of her.

[Carl G]

The problem with women today is that they do not want to give anything.

[BMcGilly07]

The problem with women today is that they do not want to give anything.

The problem with women throughout the ages is they don't know what they want, and accept society's fashion as mandate (which it pretty much is).

For a woman to go against that she would be harangued and mocked by her fellow women. If she remains a woman she'll most likely go insane or get back in line, otherwise she'll have to become a man.

[skipair]

You are defining intelligence too narrowly, treating it too objectively. There are many types of intelligences.

I have to narrow it somewhat, otherwise I can call everything a skill, from shooting up heroin, to planning a murder, to blah blah blah. (I'm so cynical!). But the point is that in my experience, it is predominantly people we might call unintelligent (or unintellectual), who have skill in sexual communication.

Of course there are exceptions, but not enough to substantiate Rhett's seeming wishfull thinking. What say you Rhett?

[Loki]

I just read a book by comedian Ian Coburn, God is a Woman, and this guy took "scoring with chicks" very seriously. He started off having bad luck with women, but he learned from his experiences, and through analysis, good observation and courage, he really became a man of unusual depth and intelligence. He credits his atheism to the harsh reality he faced about women. I found his insights into psychology, and into life in general, surprising and unusually intelligent.

Basically, the guy has become very good at making chicks fall in love with him, and that's because he is smart.

Like Rhett said, "she may fall in love with (the intelligent one) and lose control"

I think Rhett is just stating a relative truth. Relatively speaking, the more intelligent guys get chicks hooked and keep them hooked.

But you're right, if you become too intelligent, then she won't be able to even see you. You'll become invisible to her. It's a bit like climbing so high that you appear small, or you might even vanish.

[Carl G]

The problem with women today is that they do not want to give anything.

The problem with women throughout the ages is they don't know what they want, and accept society's fashion as mandate (which it pretty much is).

For a woman to go against that she would be harangued and mocked by her fellow women. If she remains a woman she'll most likely go insane or get back in line, otherwise she'll have to become a man.

But they do know what they want. They want clothes, a man, children, a house, furniture, a nice car, money, and to be listened to.

[BMcGilly07]

But they do know what they want. They want clothes, a man, children, a house, furniture, a nice car, money, and to be listened to.

On the most base egotistical level they want to be told what to want. It is in their nature to submit, they want to be dominated and directed. Those things you mentioned merely anchor them to their support system, to the very society which directs them to place value on these things.

[skipair]

Basically, the guy has become very good at making chicks fall in love with him, and that's because he is smart.

He's smart enough to learn a new skill which requires some forms of adaptation. But that skill is based on learning how to shut down intellectual aspects of the mind to allow nature to run its natural coarse. It's learning how to be unconscious of the process while still participating in it. This can lead to interesting psychological insights since it is precicely the rejection (even the unconsciousness) of false beliefs about women that takes down mental walls. But it is a vast overstatement to say that it is the intelligence in men that triggers a woman into love and loss of control. My evidence for this is the huge number of unintelligent men that are regularly sexed, the lesser number of intelligent men, and the fact that it merely takes some disciplined practice to get the skill. Go be logical with a woman and tell me how she sucked you off for hours. :)

[Dan Rowden]

Raw Will to Power attracts women. Thoughtfulness often indicates the opposite - it indicates that reality has gotten the best of you in some way and you are therefore frail or given to failure.

[Carl G]

But they do know what they want. They want clothes, a man, children, a house, furniture, a nice car, money, and to be listened to.

On the most base egotistical level they want to be told what to want. It is in their nature to submit, they want to be dominated and directed. Those things you mentioned merely anchor them to their support system, to the very society which directs them to place value on these things.

First you say they don't know what they want, then you say what they do want. Which is it?

But my point still stands, today's women do not want to give anything. To men, that is. To their kids, everything.

[Carl G]

Basically, the guy has become very good at making chicks fall in love with him, and that's because he is smart.

He's smart enough to learn a new skill which requires some forms of adaptation. But that skill is based on learning how to shut down intellectual aspects of the mind to allow nature to run its natural coarse. It's learning how to be unconscious of the process while still participating in it. This can lead to interesting psychological insights since it is precicely the rejection (even the unconsciousness) of false beliefs about women that takes down mental walls. But it is a vast overstatement to say that it is the intelligence in men that triggers a woman into love and loss of control. My evidence for this is the huge number of unintelligent men that are regularly sexed, the lesser number of intelligent men, and the fact that it merely takes some disciplined practice to get the skill. Go be logical with a woman and tell me how she sucked you off for hours. :)

Women conniving to get women to suck them off. Ho-hum!

[Shahrazad]

Dan,

Raw Will to Power attracts women.

Define will to power.

Carl,

today's women do not want to give anything. To men, that is.

What would you have us give you?

[Carl G]

In general, today's American women are self-centered and rigid. They do not want to cook, clean, please a man sexually, engage in conversation about things that interest him, work together with him on a life-plan, support him with her loyalty (believe in him), or consider her or them trying anything that is at all outside of her narrow comfort zone.