Convention has it that women are the gentler sex. But when it comes to relationships they are more likely than men to be controlling and aggressive, a study claims. Increasing numbers of women can now be classed as ‘intimate terrorists’, meaning that they are verbally and physically violent towards a partner.I have to admit, I don't know a single male control freak of the sort that are so often portrayed in the media. But I do know a number of men who can't sit through an entire football game at a friend's house without receiving at least two or three telephone calls from their wives.
Psychologists at the University of Cumbria questioned 1,104 young men and women using a scale of behaviour which ranged from shouting and insulting to pushing, beating and using weapons.
They discovered that women were ‘significantly’ more likely to be verbally and physically aggressive to men than vice versa. They concluded that violence was linked to controlling behavior such as checking up on partners and persuading them not to see certain friends.
Some handle this female tendency better than others. My favorite was the time that, after a friend received a call from his wife during the game, he responded by giving her the following instructions:
- Turn on the TV to channel X
- Do you see there are little men running around? Good.
- When the little men stop running around, set a timer to 15 minutes.
- Don't call me again until the timer goes off.
16 comments:
Duh.
And funny.
Despite my lack of game, I, long ago, did similar.
Worked.
The third bulleted line from the article ...
>It suggests 'intimate partner violence' may not be motivated by patriarchal values, as previously thought
What? You mean patriarchy isn't the source of every problem?
Re: your question, I would guess that she is attractive because a man who would respond that way would be able to attract and keep an attractive wife.
When I think of the “relationship terrorism” women practice, I usually think of the implied threat “Do what I want/comply with my demands, or I will break up with/divorce you, and then you will go an indeterminate time with NO SEX. I will get a new guy inside of a week. As for you, it will be weeks or months, maybe even years, before you get any new pussy.”
For men with no or poor Game, that threat is very, very real. And effective.
The shit-test death spiral. These "control freak" women probably started out making small, random, unconscious shit-tests, and their gameless mates failed. So the women kept upping the ante, throwing more and more - and worse - tests at the guy, subconsciously hoping he would "man-up" and pass. The more failures, the lower his SMV sank in their eyes and the more unhappy (genuinely unhappy, rather than unhaaaaaaapy) they got. Eventually it's just contempt, and they're looking for an excuse to get out.
Based on what you know of Game, do you think she is attractive or not?
It depends on your definition of the word "attractive." If that definition centers solely on physical attributes, then who knows. Each man has his own floor and ceiling.
If, on the other hand, your definition of "attractive" encompasses the whole gamut of attributes, then I'd say no - unless the husband has a fetish for running dread game. If that's what he's into, then she's the ultimate dream wife.
Shit tests are kind of like weeds. You have to keep pulling them/poisoning them until they give up on growing where you don't want them. The weeds will stop growing there except for the sporadic one that pops up every now and then. Easy enough to deal with, you kill it. But if you don't, more and more will follow.
Vox's friend probably does not have to run dread game with her all the time. He just killed that weed that took a chance at growing there. And, like Jack Amok said, these shit tests are likely not maliciously thought out or planned. If you know that they are merely an annoying feature (like weeds are with gardening) you can choose to accept it and deal with them as needed. Those who just can not accept it and harbor disdain for the existence of the feature should probably choose to not garden.
I don't know, maybe when married it's different. But I have out and out told my women not to call, and that I wouldn't answer. That is what the power button on the phone is for. Use it. It's why I love that tech. If the house is on fire, I have suggested, call the fire department. Heck, on long trips, I simply pull the battery if I don't want a weird call at a busy traffic time, I don't care who it is. If you need a phone for work, and have to be on some sort of call, get a different line, one that your woman doesn't know, and be done with that. That way you can shut either, or both, off, as needed or wanted.
I have sort of given up on modern "men". And they seem to have given up on themselves.
i let my girl know that when i'm watching tv i turn my phone off & i do.
A related note: I discussed this with my wife and it came up that many don't like how we communicate (I "control her" as they see it) when in public. I noted that hypocrisy is visible here because many today have no problem with a wife who tells her husband what to do, but get offended if a husband does it to his wife. Not only do they oppose God's way, they support the exact opposite.
What? You mean patriarchy isn't the source of every problem?
They are forced to berate and beat you because you need to atone for patriarchy. If there was never patriarchy this wouldn't be necessary.
many don't like how we communicate (I "control her" as they see it) when in public
Example?
I was a weak man in my first marriage. Looking back, there's no fixing it without the destruction of the marriage. Either she changes (to get more accommodating) or you change (to either get a backbone or kowtow a lot more). There's no in between compromise. You get stressed out or get out, or she breaks up with you (my situation). Perhaps I should have gotten out, but it actually worked to my advantage financially when she chose to breakup. There's no life with a temperamental bitch. Just break up.
What I don't understand is how a women would voluntarily get into a relationship with a man who she does not find physically intimidating. I guess she just settled for some wuss and doesn't actually have any respect for him?
What I don't understand is how a women would voluntarily get into a relationship with a man who she does not find physically intimidating. I guess she just settled for some wuss and doesn't actually have any respect for him?
Well, you gotta remember, some guys slack off after they get married. Sort of like how some women pack on the pounds after the wedding (or at least after the first kid).
"But I do know a number of men who can't sit through an entire football game at a friend's house without receiving at least two or three telephone calls from their wives."
Where do people find these cell phones, that have neither power switches nor ringer volume controls?
It's no mystery. You get the behavior you tolerate. You simply tell her what's what and expect that she will get the Hell over it... and she will.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.