This whole time she thinks that she is protecting herself. The more bitchy and standoffish she becomes the more convinced she is that she's protecting herself from being used for sex. Or maybe she convinces herself that she's the one using them for sex. Whatever the case, because of her experiences she develops no desire to understand the male sex and because she has no desire to understand the male sex she never figures out why she keeps getting used. She never figures out the cycle that is keeping her in Penis Land. The hell raising bitch never considers that although men want her they don't want her personality, they don't want the personality that other men have ruined. She can't understand why men want virgins, and if men are so awful why don't they just stop being awful? Someone on the internet once said that being a straight woman is crazy because you have to date your only natural predator. Well being a straight man is crazy because you have tolerate being judged by your food. Some people say that men only want one thing and it's disgusting. Others say that if it's so disgusting why don't you wash it? What nobody gets is that there's a dual nature to heterosexual relationships. First, there is the need for men to be fed, to feed. Simply put, her pussy is food and he is hungry. The second is the relationship between the two people. The relationship works the same way any other relationship between two people works and when two people treat each other with respect, and refrain from using sex as a weapon, the relationship flourishes. The other component is the regular feeding that the man needs.
You would not adopt a dog without feeding it everyday and you would not adopt a man without fucking him every week. Does this mean that men are dogs? Why yes in a sense we are. Get used to it bitch. Do you want a healthy relationship with your dog or not? Then feed it. Having a pleasant attitude is just about mutual respect and the worse your attitude the faster you fall down the slope towards penis land. Men aren't the only ones who have to be tough and have a good attitude to succeed.
A dog can't build a life with an owner that withholds food as a weapon, nor an owner who is bitter because other dogs used her for food, nor an owner that is resentful every time it places food in the bowl. The owner needs to feed the dog regularly and without resentment.
Your relationship has two components, and they are separate from one another in the eyes of men. One is sex and the other is the relationship. He is not necessarily only tolerating you so he can get sex. In fact every dog would love to have a loving relationship with his owner. He would love to have a loving relationship with mutual respect and regular feedings of the tastiest kibble. It is women who make everything complicated by denying the nature of dogs. In fact there's nothing wrong with male sexuality at all. What's wrong is how the clitoris is basically a vestigial organ of the penis. Nature had to develop a penis in order for the species to replicate and the clitoris is a side effect of that process. This is just like how male nipples are a side effect of the natural process that created female nipples. Nature designs every system to the absolute minimum necessary for its functioning. Attention in exchange for regular sexual feedings is the minimum necessary criteria for survival and reproduction of the species. In fact relationships of exchange exist all throughout the animal kingdom and women are as vacuous and needy as they are precisely so they have a motive to touch a penis and get pregnant. You are what you need to be to force you to deal with him just like he is what he needs to be to force him to deal with you. You are too complimentary shapes tortured into existence by evolution and compelled to deal with one another. You have loneliness because nature programmed you to have loneliness, you have a sex drive because nature programmed you to have a sex drive, you need to talk at high speeds and for some man to listen to you because nature needs you to need him. There's nothing personal about any of it and the shapes don't have to fit together precisely to work. Your neediness, denial of reality, and vacuous nature are exactly what evolution created in order to force you to need a man, but it can also be exploited to make you too neurotic to deal with men. In such cases you will fail to breed and pass on your genes. Falling into penis land causes either genetic spinster-hood or single motherhood.
Evolution designed your nature to respond to an environment where men have power over you. What that means is that when the technology of birth control takes you out of that environment and gives you more power than you normally would have many women fall off the genetic ladder into extinction because they are too irrational to breed without coercion. Nature made all of us to function in one environment and now we are trying to function in a radically alien environment. Economics is the study of machine nature and how that nature is incompatible with human nature. Oh sure they would say that it's the study of scarce means and unlimited wants, but really it's the study of how humans systematically misunderstand the machine they operate within. Right now with dating apps a handsome Chad can hook up with thousands of women and ejaculate into latex bags with every single one of them. He may never once pass on his genes, but his lizard brain tells him that he is incredibly successful from a reproductive standpoint. Many men are led to their extinction by their own out of control libidos. The same process occurs in a mirror form with women and hypergamy. The bitterness you may feel towards the male sex is not the consequence of the nature of men but the consequence of the alien environment you find yourself within as a result of technology. Feminist indoctrination makes you resentful of the natural world, it makes you believe that the sexes are exactly the same, it makes you resent the difference between the sexes. You have this resentment even if logically you know the sexes are different. Who is more evil: the teacher who teaches you to hate difference? Or the difference that you can never change? You are out here hating men because they are not what you want them to be, because they are not exactly the same as women, but that's just your indoctrination. It was the teacher who taught you to hate that is evil, not the nature of men. If you throw yourself into studying the male sex and figuring men out you'll be able to play them like a fiddle and make them love you whenever you want. But instead you become embittered because you foolishly believed everything the jewish education system told you. There is nothing wrong with a natural process and it's the job of humans to master them. To control nature one must first understand it. Refusing to understand men out of some sort of moral spite is a loser's ideology, and an absolutely deranged self sabotaging way to deal with it.
Feminism teaches women to interpret all male needs as sexism and be offended by them. Feminism teaches women to literally be offended by men expressing their needs. This is a crazy level of sabotage and sheer stupidity, but apparently when men let women become teachers this is what they do to each other. This is what happens when you compromise your ideological sovereignty by allowing a foreign tribe to teach your women and by allowing women to teach each other.
The way you find a husband and avoid becoming a single mom is actually really simple and involves shit testing of course. Basically you want to shit test him for reliability, not for dealing with your awful personality, not for how much he can endure of your abuse or nastiness. You want the guy who will get you something when you need it, who will pick up the kids from school, who will pay the bills. All of your shit testing should be geared towards figuring out whether or not he's going to be reliable with only a minimum amount allocated to making sure he can deal with your craziness. You want to know if he's reliable, if he can provide resources, and if he can function under stress. The traditional environments like sports venues and card games let you test for stress resilience. Acting a little crazy and seeing how he responds lets you test for whether he can handle you. Denying him (the first time) lets you test whether he will go into a jealous rage and become bitter. Asking him to do things and plan things tests whether or not he can be counted on. You should not just expect, you should ask. This is because you will definitely have to ask later. Having kids is an endless time management and coordination problem and you need to know that you have somebody moral who will show the fuck up and pick the kids up from school when you are at work. I used to work at this retail outlet and the black girl who worked there absolutely freaked out one night on the phone with her baby daddy because he was messing with her, saying that he wasn't going to pick up the kid from daycare, and she couldn't leave since she was the only employee in the store and I was doing security. The man basically messed with her psychologically by threatening to abandon the child. Apparently he hated her so much that this type of psychological torture was pretty common for him. This is the kind of toxic dynamic you can have when your spouse isn't a moral person. You never want to be chained to a bad person by having a kid with them. Your analysis of a man's character should take precedent over literally everything else. The stakes are too high for you to operate on feels and tingles, and being hot for violent bad boys can be a recipe for disaster. Above all your man must be moral. He has to be the kind of guy who would drive 100 miles through a snowstorm to rescue you, and you have to be almost as reliable and at least as pleasant to be around. What nobody says is that civilization collapses when people cease to be moral just because having children, who are then motivated to have children of their own, is a highly moral exercise. Your children are going to be brats, they're going to wine and scream, and they're going to complain when you put the mashed potatoes too close to the peas. Your patience will be tested and while love is great and necessary and will probably come naturally the little extra that separates a bad childhood from a good one is whether the parents are moral people. And whether the parents are moral people determines whether the children will want to be parents. The greatest thing women can do to help both themselves and civilization is to insist that the men they breed with meet a minimum moral criteria. Immoral civilizations should die, and immoral civilizations do die all the time.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep it civil