Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Confidence


I am increasingly convinced that the male-female communications divide is essentially similar to the dialectic-rhetoric divide.

51 comments:

D. Lane said...

The most shocked reactions I have ever received from women have been when approaching some personal position from this angle. Agree (in as few words as possible), say nothing, or ask her to elaborate. Anything else scores negative points.

Unless the chick digs dialectic, that is. But those are few and far between.

Myles said...

I've had this conversation with both male and female friends and I find widespread agreement:

Women don't necessarily like jerks; they like confident men but nobody ever taught them how to distinguish between the two.

Cail Corishev said...

I knew a woman who was known for her dispassionate attitude and logical thinking, to the point where people called her "cold." Once I got to know her, I discovered she was as emotionally driven as any woman but just hid it well.

I'd say some women can use dialectic with enough training, but it's like learning a second language; it may never come naturally.

Cail Corishev said...

Women don't necessarily like jerks; they like confident men but nobody ever taught them how to distinguish between the two.

If that were true, you'd never hear a woman say, "I know he's a jerk, but I love him."

Crowhill said...

Since you define rhetoric as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion then there is certainly something to what you're saying. Women seem far more able and willing to find the emotional weak spot and pounce.

MidKnight (#138) said...

@Cail - actually - you would hear that. They just process a guy doing what he wants to do/telling her no as "being a jerk" - which goes back to 'can't tell the difference"

Crowhill said...

Fortunately I don't run into this sort of problem with my wife very often, because she is a very reasonable woman. But I'm wondering about the best response when a woman (i.e., that you actually care about) chooses to say something that is objectively false but intended to have an emotional impact.

Maybe something like, "Are you trying to make a point, or are you just trying to hurt me?"

verusconditio said...

But I'm wondering about the best response when a woman (i.e., that you actually care about) chooses to say something that is objectively false but intended to have an emotional impact.

No.

~ Stingray

hank.jim said...

An attractive man is confident. Otherwise, he is a jerk.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

So true. What I've been finding in recent years is that I've become "intimidating" to a lot of girls--or so they've informed me. And not in a bad way. A couple of years ago, while visiting an athletic club with a view to joining, the membership director--a gay dude--had a similar reaction and almost lost his shit. I'd rather be that big threatening guy than a meek sperg in the
corner. The trick is to not give a shit.

Cail Corishev said...

MidKnight, that's true, but that means they're good at making excuses for the sake of appearances, not that they can't tell the difference. My point was that it's false that women don't want jerks, only confidence, because even when a woman can admit her man is a jerk (or worse) she'll still want him. More than ever, in many cases. Chicks dig bad boys. We all knew this by the eighth grade.

It's not that a woman can't tell a jerk from a confident, dominant non-jerk. It's that the differences between them don't matter to her, so she ignores them. (To the extent that she does perceive a difference, she'll probably see the jerk as more exciting and/or in need of her womanly efforts and choose him anyway.)

Cail Corishev said...

By the way, if it seems like I'm being pedantic, I have a reason. Whether Myles intended it that way or not, his statement is a common white-knight claim: women don't really want jerks (because women are pure and good and smart); they're just confused/tricked/victims of whatever. So don't blame the woman who keeps going back to the boyfriend who beats her and cheats on her; it can't be her fault she keeps choosing him.

But women DO want jerks, and they don't have to be confused or tricked into it. Granted, they want a jerk who won't go too far, and ultimately they hope to be able to control his jerkitude and enjoy it more than they suffer from it. But they do enjoy that 'jerk' quality very much.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Top-quality comments here. Sometimes the comments are even more instructive than what Vox writes.

Matt said...

It might sound nice to a "student of evolutionary psychology", that a woman likes the jerk for what his jerkiness represents, but its not true, as a rule. They just like jerks. The average frustrated chump truly has bo idea how vile women can be

Matt said...

Agreed, Laguna Beach Fogey.

Matt said...

Vox, you used to talk about your very good looking friend, I think you called him Chilly, and how he was clueless with women. Did they tire of him, or would he jusy never make the first move?

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

With that knowledge, does it change the way you view and/or treat women? I'm drawn to them today just as strongly as I was at 16, but the "magic" surrounding them has diminished over the years. I first noticed it when I discovered the Red Pill in my mid-20s, and the loss has only increased since then. I suppose that it's a downside of dark enlightenment.

D. Lane said...

The average frustrated chump truly has bo idea how vile women can be.

In my experience, the AFC is more inclined to deny the reality of his own observations to protect his investment in feminine innocence. It's easier to rationalize away common female behavior than concede that you were rejected on the basis of some demonstrable inadequacy. This is especially true if you view your inadequacy, whatever that may be, as a virtue.

jay c said...

It eased a lot of stress in my marriage when I realized this. Now when my wife says "You never..." or "You always..." I pause to translate it before responding if any response is even necessary.

Cail Corishev said...

With that knowledge, does it change the way you view and/or treat women? I'm drawn to them today just as strongly as I was at 16, but the "magic" surrounding them has diminished over the years.

Same here, but I don't consider that a loss, because the "magic" was a lie and believing it cost me dearly. I actually like women much more now that I don't expect them to be something they're not. It doesn't frustrate me when they're illogical and flighty, just as it doesn't frustrate me when my dog rolls in something that smells bad. That's what they are.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

CC, agreed.

MidKnight (#138) said...

@Cail - point taken

Unknown said...

Cc, I'm the opposite: the more I understood women, the less I liked being around them. For the most part they are boring and a liability in every situation.

Matt said...

@LBF

Yes and no. I didnt pedalstalize women until late high school and even then it was in a warped hateful manner. Too much to explain here.

Apart from being something nice to look at and screw, I dont care about them. Its in their nature to deny any responsibility when deciding what to eat for dinner. Just dealing with my mother is stressful enough. On top of that, I dont really enjoy feminine energy all that much. I like being alone and if im not alone its because im out, attempting to complete a task of some sort. I have no use for them beyond their holes.

Hammerli280 said...

I suspect part of the problem is that many women have little to offer. They've soaked up feminist misandry, and provide no comfort, help, or affection to a man. Not all women...but enough to warp the market.

VD said...

But I'm wondering about the best response when a woman (i.e., that you actually care about) chooses to say something that is objectively false but intended to have an emotional impact.

Say nothing. I mean, literally say nothing. Smile a little, perhaps shake your head, and either change the subject or let her talk.

If a woman talks nonsense, don't engage it. Believe me, she knows its bullshit. She's just seeing if she can get you to dance for her. Don't do it.

Crowhill said...

@VD, that sounds both reasonable and respectful.

Johnny Caustic said...

Cail is right. Women respond sexually to the arrogant guy, jerk or not. Within the class of arrogant guys, they prefer guys with some provider traits for medium-to-long term relationships. (For short-term couplings, provider traits are irrelevant, unless they're so prominent or so absent as to be glaring.) But it's a weak preference; they far prefer the arrogant jerk over the non-arrogant good guy. And Cail's right to be pedantic; women who date jerks have not been "tricked", and their complaining does not mean that they got a bad deal. They complain partly as post hoc justification of why they're dating a guy who treats them in ways that look bad to her social circle, and partly to test the jerk himself; women are biologically programmed to try to beta-ize guys (and usually pleased when they fail).

Having said that, it is possible to lose a good relationship by having too few provider traits to balance the alphaness. I rarely see this discussed in the manosphere, because the kinds of guys who talk a lot on the Internet usually err in the opposite direction. Guys in more macho cultures, however, often do lose relationships because they bring too much jerk and not enough provider to balance the macho alpha.

liberranter said...

Now when my wife says "You never..." or "You always..." I pause to translate it before responding if any response is even necessary.

I've been doing the same thing --ALOUD-- for the last few years. It drives her nuts, but she eventually admits that my hamsterlations are 100.percent correct.

liberranter said...

@Hammerli280:

One hundred percent correct, especially for North American women.

maniacprovost said...

I'm going to say it's not necessarily jerkiness is attractive, but it's not confidence by itself either. It's social dominance.Jerks are socially dominant within their sphere.

Desiderius said...

Cail,

"But they do enjoy that 'jerk' quality very much."

It's how they can tell that they've sufficiently maximized their hypergamy.

Doom said...

Yep. I decided that before I knew the proper terms. So long as you know this, it's easy to avoid... as a man... or to hit every time. For as squirrely as women are, they are even more regular than men, and don't change fundamentally. Women do change, but it's... of epochs. Child, maiden, mother, and crone. Know these, and that each women has each going on beside their prime, and go for the gooey if you want positive, dark if you want pain, mix, match, and be happy. As well, figure out her moods and cycles. Get what you need from her, in her time... season, like a farmer... don't abuse or expect more than what is there, and it is all good. She can't do this, you have to be her principle, though. Let her sing, just choose what she will sing, how long, and such.

I realize that logic doesn't work, but they can be brought to see. Just got to lead them to it, if they are in that place, and let them figure enough of it out. Sometimes you just have to be patient while she... does... whatever. Just don't, also, expect that to always matter. Wonderful creatures, if tended well. And... there is something to rhetoric, the feminine, so long as you don't follow it to hell. Gotta lead it or let the heck go.

Michael Maier said...

@ insanitybytes: Seriously, bitch: GO. AWAY. You're worse than trollish, you're really fucking boring. You owe everyone here many apologies for wasting the energy it takes to scroll past your shite.

Jay Lucas said...

Re: insanitybytes22

Projection.

Re: The actual conversation

Yes, engaging hollow topics is making an action to be interpreted. If you usually do the dishes then don't it's harder for her to read things into it than if you don't usually do them and do. (Why is he being nice, is he feeling guilty?)

The female approach to courtship is thematically passive. If the real game you're playing is about whether your opponent approves of you, rather than who wins, then you have to accept your own objective. If they believe in passive strategies, you must be able to adopt them at appropriate times.

Come to think of it, there's an interesting overlap between the "lying, confident jerk" hiding his shortcomings and the competent professional. Maybe one of the layers of the onion is a respect for the jerk's willingness to play the game the same way she's inclined to: with the goal of never losing face socially.

I don't read romance novels, but I'm willing to bet if I cracked one I'd never find the male leads practicing their trades, much less failing at them.

Johnny Caustic said...

Maniacprovost is right that "it's not confidence by itself either". I really think "confidence" is the wrong word for this discussion. I know plenty of confident guys who get no play. John Molloy did an experiment decades ago where he sent actors into a single bar to hit on women. The ones who acted "confident" didn't do particularly well, but the ones who were instructed to act "arrogant" did very well. So until a better word comes along, I'm using "arrogant", not "confident".

Rek. said...

@ johnny Caustic: "John Molloy did an experiment decades ago where he sent actors into a single bar to hit on women."

Could you dig it up?

Earl Thomas said...

'I am increasingly convinced that the male-female communications divide is essentially similar to the dialectic-rhetoric divide.'

Yeah with men you dig more into what they say...with women it's either testing you, not meant to be taken seriously, or just nod in agreement. Digging into it more forces her to think and revealing bad feelings she may not want to know about.

Think about it...'I like men who are confident in any situation.' It's a statement that can't really be taken too seriously. Sure they like confidence...but there is no man on the planet who is 100% confident in every given situation because they either truly have no fear, are faking it, or are ignorant of the situation. Either way to her, it's confidence.

Gunnar von Cowtown said...

"Now when my wife says "You never..." or "You always..." I pause to translate it before responding if any response is even necessary."

I must have been absent from class that day. What's the proper translation of "you never" / "you always"?

SarahsDaughter said...

What's the proper translation of "you never" / "you always"?

"This is how I feel...at the moment."

Gunnar von Cowtown said...

Ah-ha. Much obliged.

jay c said...

What's the proper translation of "you never" / "you always"?

What SarahsDaughter said. Longer version: "What you didn't do/did do just now is the biggest thing in my head right now, so it's pretty much the only thing that exists until it shrinks a little."

David The Good from FloridaSurvivalGardening.com said...

Crowhill: "I'm wondering about the best response when a woman (i.e., that you actually care about) chooses to say something that is objectively false but intended to have an emotional impact.

Maybe something like, "Are you trying to make a point, or are you just trying to hurt me?" "

I was going to say "say nothing... just raise an eyebrow and smirk." That's my default response. Others lead to trouble and/or long stupid conversations.

VD beat me to it.

HickoryHammer #0211 said...

Dilbert should know... they prefer the kind who are too dumb to know when they shouldn't be confident... #barbariangame for the win!

Conscientia Republicae said...

I agree with this statement 100%. Those declaratory statements are simply of an indicator of her current emotional state.

Conscientia Republicae said...

When my wife is upset with me, she moves to the airing of the grievances. I tell her to calm down and talk to me later in the day. Then I ignore her.

VD said...

Stop cyberstalking, Old Rancid Vagina.

Johnny Caustic said...

@Rek: "Could you dig it up?"

Maybe, maybe not. It was in one of his print books; probably either "Dress for Success" or "Molloy on Success". I can perhaps look for it tomorrow when I'm back home. Unfortunately, he didn't give many details.

Dexter said...

So until a better word comes along, I'm using "arrogant", not "confident".

So what's the difference between the two?

Is it all a matter of perspective, i.e.,

I am confident.
You are arrogant.
He is a total fucking jerk.

?

Johnny Caustic said...

@Dexter: "So what's the difference between the two?"

As best I can tell:

Confident = confident, but not in a way that would rub anybody the wrong way = dry kitty.

Arrogant = confident to a degree that creates tension and risks pissing some people off = wet kitty.

I think the big difference is the ability to hold social tension or sexual tension without releasing it or smoothing things over. Most guys--even some very confident guys--rush to make everyone feel comfortable, not realizing that they're killing any chance of a sexual vibe. As I said, plenty of confident guys get no play; they haven't clued in that they need to hold the tension.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.