The seeming passivity of women in the process of rewriting social norms to the exclusive benefit of women is what is throwing Sunshine Mary off. She can easily test this by coaching one of the boys to suggest that the girls show some reciprocal form of deference to the boys during a future celebration. Perhaps the girls should serve the boys refreshments during their next celebration, as Anonymous Reader suggested:The artificial and non-accidental nature of the female imperative is inadvertently revealed by female attempts to police it, quite often with the help of their usual white knights. What I want to point out in particular is the way that emotion, particularly anger, is the most reliable weapon in the male arsenal; an angry woman can almost always be provoked into volunteering unsolicited the sort of secrets she would otherwise endure torture to avoid revealing. This isn't a new revelation; Agatha Christie even mentioned it in one of her Poirot novels.
One way to damp down the entitlement princess training just received by the boys / young men deferring to the girls / young women would be to cause the girls and young women to defer in a different way to the boys and young men. For example, at some future time you might consider having the AH girls serve the Boy Scout boys, perhaps by seating the boys at table and having the girls bring trays to the tables.
If this is suggested the lie of the girls’ passivity will come out in force. It won’t come out in the form of a logical reaction, even if on the surface it appears to start that way. For example, they are likely to bristle at the idea of having their moxie damaged by deferring to the boys, and make a feminist argument for equality. However, if this is simply about equality one could then propose that instead of serving the boys the girls have the boys go first through the treat line, and agree to take turns at this from here on.
At this point the reality of the feminine imperative will become evident, because while the girls were seemingly passive when everything was going their way, any deviance from this will be met with emotional outbursts. Whoever proposes either true equality or simple reciprocity will become the object of great irrational anger, and at this point the passivity turns to aggression. While the girls (and their mothers) won’t know why they are so angry, they will know that whoever proposed such a thing is a terrible person.
Encouraging the passive-aggressive to reveal their underlying desire to control and dictate the actions of others can be tremendously revelatory. Just keep in mind that you may be in for the same sort of shock that men who are forced to recognize the nonexistence of the pedestal upon which they'd been placing women for all these years must endure. Seeing the black heart and long red fangs of what you'd always assumed was a gentle sheep can be more than a little startling, but any time you see irrational anger arise on the part of a perfectly reasonable request or suggestion, you can be relatively sure there is a font of aggressiveness hidden beneath the apparent passivity.
Getting back to the imperative, Dalrock's post was particularly insightful in observing how the female imperative is transformational; this effect can be seen in everything from medieval chivalry to the current NFL.
"The feminine imperative took the original idea of chivalry – a code of honor amongst men – and attached to it a code of acceptable conduct for men in relating to women. In doing so it effectively remodeled chivalry to benefit the feminine and limiting the power men held over them by enlisting other men to participate in regulating it."
26 comments:
10 Acts a Chivalrous Husband Does for His Wife:
"Fortunately for all of us – men, women and children – we have come a long way from medieval Europe, and a system of social protocols that made productive relationships based in equality virtually impossible."
Yes, the male sacrifice still applies, but the fundamental reason for it no longer does.
Vox, I inadvertantly experienced your insight about using a woman's anger against her personally more than once.
One time in particular was extremely instructive. Several months ago, my wife, in a fit of pique, mentioned a "Plan B" that she had if she felt things didn't work out between us (meaning, very clearly, that things didn't go her way). I barely had to prod her to reveal that when our youngest hits 18 (SIX years from now), she'd file for divorce. Now, I know, prefix everything a woman says with "right now, I feel..." But clearly, even though since then she has distanced herself from this statement, the feeling behind it is still latent.
Another time, I so enraged her that she (for the umpteenth time) threatened to throw my computer (which I use for my livelihood) or some part of it away. She did it so often, I just ignored it as I was going out (fully cognizant that she actually sounded like she might do something this time). I came home to my hard drive removed (and hidden away) and all the wires connecting the case to the motherboard pulled out. She was ANGRY. Although she was later contrite, and was even worried that I had filed for divorce after her act, to this day, she still asserts a "right" do this, if she can't get my attention (or whatever else she wants from me) in some other way, as if she is entitled to it. This attitude might do us in at some point, because obviously it irks me that she feels entitled to destroy my property (and quite literally my source of income) on a whim. My wife is on the extreme end of this, I readily admit (things have improved, but she is a lot of work, and sometimes I wonder if it's worth it). But the red pill helped put it all in perspective so I can stay cool when she rages.
Shimshon,
Your wife is crazy.
I respectfully disagree that the feminine imperative is under passive-aggressive female control. It seems like a biologically-driven strategy which men are as complicit in carrying out as women are. I think it has improved the reproductive success of both males and females.
Now, the feminist imperative, on the other hand, is pure resource-rape. I think that's where the irrational anger will flare up.
-sunshinemary
@ Shimshon
Talk about an inconsiderate wife.
@ rycamor
*reads the link*
Wow. That writer has the gall to talk about "equality" when the husband is doing all the deferring and bowing and scraping.
Note that he did not say what she is supposed to do for him; indeed, the very suggestion would be considered chauvinist.
Just knowing your wife is chock full of Cluster B, does not mean you've "swallowed the Red Pill."
You've merely tasted it.
I've been mostly ignoring this for a few years now. At buffet lines I will typically get in line as soon as I and the food are ready (which is generally before most women because they are too busy gabbing). On the occasions when someone comments that women should go first I remind them that equal rights dictates that ladies should receive no preference. Guys will sometimes argue with me. I've not had a woman yet counter but the look on their face tells me that don't particularly like it.
And I follow this with a smirk and the statement "and they can change their own flat tires too..."
Don't worry Vox, I'm sure Aunt Giggles will post her 'new' acceptance of the Feminine Imperative redefined for beta consumption any day now and we can all rest easy finally.
@ rycamor
That could.subtitled "unleash your inner.gamma" of "ensuring roissy is.more likely to shag your wife than you are"
Women do love.chivalry. they love.the free resources, lesser responsibility, pretending to be worth the effort. But they aren't turned on by it.
If you enjoy listening to women cry about men they have sex with, open the door. If you want to be the guy they sleep.with, you're better off shutting the.door in their face.
I had one LTR before my wife with a pretty normal girl, so yes, I know how out there (and borderline batshit) she is.
Nonetheless, Unending Improvement, I have gone from sex MAYBE once a month (and all that implies) to roughly twice weekly, with her actually making an effort to justify why she can't do more (even if the justifications make no sense, she never even felt the need before). Given who I'm dealing with, I'd say it's a pretty good indicator that I've more than tasted it.
since feminism's full takeover in the early Eighties, i've had women blithely stroll in front of grocery lines, so used to their invulnerability and entitilement -- and the emasculation of males -- that they KNEW they could do it, and i wouldnt utter a word (because rebuking a female is a misdemeanor, Verbal Harrassment, yes they WILL put you in chains for it)
of course, each time the line-jumping occurs, i Verbally Harrass the poor victim anyway, to wit Get Back in Line
the response is ALWAYS the same: waving of arms accompanied by extremely loud protestations (desgined to attract Big Strong Men, and preferably the Police, to enforce Cupcake's evil and put down the Perp)
i've had them rush at me running, flailing their little arms, and hauling back for big swings at my face . . . which always stop just short of my skin
. . . but ONLY because the look on my face says, If you touch me your Police wont get here fast enough
what they are used to, of course, is males backing down, and grovelling, and apologizing for now allowing Her Will to Be Done
extrapolate the fem imp entitlement to the workplaces, schools, family, "law" -- what you get is vast and smug anti-male tyranny, sold as equality, fairness, progress, and enforced by her State
after 30 years of Hatefest, a few women finally are questioning -- tee hee -- whether a Feminine Imperative exists . . . but only now that their malls and schools are being shot-up by their former targets
denial of the fem imp illustrates how impossibly cocooned females are from the consequences of their own iniquity and mega-selfishness, and how completel cut-off modern females are from the degraded experience of being male in their fem-totalitarian kultures
@ rycamor
Alternate title: "How to never get laid again in ten easy steps"
Retrenched, it's not that bad, as long as the rest of the relationship is in the right place. I regularly do many of the things on that list, with the exception of lots of public hand-holding. But, I do them when they are necessary or appreciated, or deserved, or all three at once, and without making. And, I do them with an air of leadership, not servility, and without making a big production out of the act. And it's worth noting that this is how one treats a wife, not a woman one is trying to woo.
But yes, the tone of the article is what sets my teeth on edge, including this gem:
So feel free to be your wife’s knight, ride up on your noble steed, and demonstrate your dutiful affection
and
He opens the door (Not just the car door, but every door, every time)
Yeah, honey, just wait there at the door while I rush across the room like an obsequious maitre d' and embarrass us both.
"Given who I'm dealing with, I'd say it's a pretty good indicator that I've more than tasted it."
You're free to believe that, but you're still playing the game by her rules.
It's all about frame, not about whether you walk on the street side, get the door for her, etc.
Alpha guy does it, he makes her gina tingle (because his frame is leadership/dominance)
Beta guy does it, he makes her gina shrivel (because his frame is servile, bargaining for sex, etc)
It's key to 1) not make a big production out of it (it's something that you just do) and 2) frame it for your benefit, not hers (for example, if I clean the kitchen after my fiance cooks something, the message is always that "it needed to be done" or "it's not a bother for me". I don't make any grand announcements or anything, I just do it, and fifteen minutes later, it's done. And she generally tries to talk me out of doing the dishes)
You want to see it in action, just try to deny women what they evidently think is their absolute right both to enter and exit the elevator first.
Many times I have been standing right in front of the elevator door, and still some female will dart in front of me without so much as an "excuse me".
was at my favorite sports bar tonight and overheard a stranger, a fellow 30-something beta professional with no red pill exposure, tell his buddies that a man doesn't "need to spend more than $10k on an engagement ring," but it's important to spend that much to show his fiancee how much she means to him. At that price, we can only hope that the recipient reciprocated with a ring made from her maidenhead embedded in Lucite...but I seriously doubt it.
@Unending Improvement, what's your point? That incidents that happened six month ago, and haven't been repeated, are symptoms of chumpitude on my part? Sure, in some ways, yes. You have no idea at all what I've gone through. Or where I was coming from. I never said my situation was ideal. I continue to be me with my wife because she has demonstrated to me in a sufficient, but not ideal, manner that she wants to stay married to me. She is the "wife of my youth," and as long as things are improving at a pace I am generally satisfied with, I will take her over a younger and hotter woman I would have no problem finding (I'm 46). It's the goggles, you know. They are real. Close to 20 years since we first met. If you actually knew of my situation a mere 13 months ago versus just a few months later, let alone today, well, it's pretty drastic.
My main point in mentioning those incidents was as examples of what women are capable of saying or doing when they don't get their way (and she wasn't in either incident).
@ssm: those are bold claims that go against mass anecdotal evidence by men. Care to elaborate?
@ Josh (December 27, 2012 9:18 PM) wrote:
"It's all about frame, not about whether you walk on the street side, get the door for her, etc."
"Alpha guy does it, he makes her gina tingle (because his frame is leadership/dominance)"
"Beta guy does it, he makes her gina shrivel (because his frame is servile, bargaining for sex, etc)"
An EXCELLENT point. It's not "what is done"; it is not even "WHY it's done" -- it is WHOSE "why" dominates.
And if it is *her* "why" instead of his, that way to female contempt.
Unending Improvement, some of us are coming from a place deeper in the blue zone and further on the spectrum toward Gamma than others. Improvement is relative to where one started from. I am also dealing with a batshit crazy who has made huge strides toward proper submissive wifeyness due to my stepping up and drinking deep of red pill truth. Is she all she should be? No, and neither am I. But compared with the near-divorce days of three years ago, this is Nirvana.
@Desert Cat, well said.
About a year before firmly swallowing the red pill, I told my wife I wanted a divorce. Months later she told me that when I did that I was more attractive to her than I had been in years. My first taste of a greater truth.
I have seen the fangs come out and it is absolutely shocking and disconcerting. It still frankly puts me off my step pretty easily. And I see in my nieces and nephews how it comes to be. My mom and my sister were laughing the other day about my niece essentially being a child-sized manipulative bitch. A few minutes later they were speaking glowingly about how sweet and gentle my nephew is. Here we have a future fully-grown manipulative bitch who will have learned by then to hide the fangs and a future sweet and gentle fully-grown sissy, still being manipulated.
All of this is so United States and western Europe. As an Gringo living in South America for 5 years I can tell you that all of this bullshit simply does not exist here. If you are tired of it then go Galt, learn Spanish and live like a king where this bullshit simply does not exist. Or take similar steps in some other place. Stop banging your head against the wall.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.