Pickup artist culture is actually proof of the objectification of men

[PatrickC]

Maybe PUA is the answer--then everyone can be equally objectified and we can wallow in that for a while before being forced to find a new solution?   

 

Well I hope not But I do think it's up to men to make the difference. But it's great to hear women like yourself apologise for some of the excesses of the recent past by feminists. It adds a little turbo to our endeavours.

[Mishelle]

I wonder if anyone has seen the Daniel Day Lewis film Nine?  One of greatest actors today, imo.

 

I ask because this is what I'm picturing with PUA, teaching a man the skills to have his choice of women--only somehow without the drama and heartache?  Maybe I'm stuck on this Don Juan reference.  In that case maybe it does make sense in reaction to feeling superfluous in society, or that society is headed that way?

 

But it's just this kind of film that shows this still-repeated image of women as "one of many" -- unique but interchangeable--this is what feels like such an injustice to women.  I would argue that women playing the field, even young ones today, unless very immature and not worth too much attention anyway, are not happy.  Women are still nesters and want to settle down. This is obvious when you look at lesbian couples.  What's the oft-repeated joke?  "What do lesbians do on a second date?"

"Rent a U-haul."

 

ok wow xelent, that was sexy 

[Omega 3 snake oil]

Maybe PUA is the answer--then everyone can be equally objectified and we can wallow in that for a while before being forced to find a new solution?   

 

Cheeky but I think you're getting at something here. It's definitely going to get worse before it gets better.

[Mishelle]

"Cheeky but I think you're getting at something here. It's definitely going to get worse before it gets better."

lol!

my grandpa used to say "smart mouth" but really, he meant well! and he did say it with care.

 

so, for us nesting types, what does worse look like, that we might prepare a bit?

[Omega 3 snake oil]

so, for us nesting types, what does worse look like, that we might prepare a bit?

Cats. Lots and lots of cats.

[MrCapitalism]

A single woman living with her parents/white knight boyfriend/ government provided housing/ and raising her 2 children, both from different fathers, neither of which is in a relationship with her.

 

If women want to settle down and have children, there's nothing about modern society that holds them responsible for that decision.

[King David]

I can concede that women are more vulnerable in consequences but certainly not in the field.  Todays day and age it is women whom have the leg up(or legs if I was to venture an inappropriate pun) .  Boys are basically getting hosed in this department of our upbringing.

 

Which brings me to what I think is more to the issue.  That being decision's, it should be the woman's and it should be wise.

 

My opinion is that your sexual behavior is not only central to a large part of your identity, but as well your physical being.  Though there are different forms of birth control, anything that is chemical I would think is nothing more than an attack on yourself.  The entire reason anyone comes into being is to procreate, Chinese medicine shows that so long as your fertility is intact then most of your health will follow.  This is clearly a critical organ, one that should be left to its own devices.

 

It may be unfair, but none the less this must be the case that if a woman is not ready for the consequences, she should learn restraint.  Therefore the decision with whomever she pairs with must not be whimsical.

 

There needs to be more onus on responsibility, from a younger age, on both parties.  An honest, forthright, and helpful discussion with pubescent children is something that I think is beyond discussion under the current societal paradigm to the detriment of us all. 

 

My experience is that people take all this "alpha" behaviour WAY to seriously, which is probably part of the reason this problem will go unchecked in the mainstream and education system.  Real alpha is taking care of your shit, not peacocking or whatever else it is those losers do.

 

The tragedy is that their are many/almost all women are at the very least, susceptible to this charade. 

 

 

King David

[Mike Fleming]

Government has every incentive to encourage baby-making.   How else will they get the young to pay for the old?  And if they can't pay the old, how will they retain their loyalty and support for the system as a whole?  If people get taxed, but then the government were to say, "oh, we can't afford to pay for you in old age", how would that go down with people?   

 

The grand tradition of everyone having as many babies as possible, in order to keep society going in centuries past, provides cover for the government's behaviour.

[PatrickC]

My experience is that people take all this "alpha" behaviour WAY to seriously, which is probably part of the reason this problem will go unchecked in the mainstream and education system.  Real alpha is taking care of your shit, not peacocking or whatever else it is those losers do. The tragedy is that their are many/almost all women are at the very least, susceptible to this charade.

 Well said David for your whole post. I quite agree with your definition of alpha here too. This peacocking as you put it seems to take us back to the OP Omega's point. I'm tending to think, that as guys find hot women an initial attraction for them, conversely women find funny guys trigger the same attraction in them. I recently watched Christopher Hitchens response to a female rebuttal of his essay, 'why women aren't funny'. He makes some interesting points that relate to this topic. Most notably I thought was that if men didn’t learn to make women laugh, that they rarely got laid. Women’s laughter he goes on is a kind of surrender. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7izJggqCoA This isn’t to prove the PUA’s point, but I wonder if a woman’s draw to humour is more hot-wired than we first thought. I’m tending to think that it is.

[PatrickC]

But I agree with King Davids view that men need to be much more than peacocks for any long term strategy to work.

[King David]

"Most of you know this, but for convenience here are the factors I see as contributing to the diminishment of men's value in the modern dating scene:(1) Wide availability of cheap birth control.(2) No fault divorce.(3) Welfare and other such programs.(4) Universal public education, mostly delivered by female teachers prior to high school, which both provides subsidized day care, and conditions boys within a matriarchal environment.(5) Delayed adulthood largely caused by ever escalating state-mandated educational and licensing requirements, as well as the distortion caused by the subsidy of mass higher education (hiring criteria, student debt).(6) Modern feminist ideology largely arising from the replacement of men as providers with the state as provider." 

 

 

Like I said on page 2, machines and mechanization has contributed to this effect as well.  If dildo's are the objectification of men, what then of vibrators?

 

The context and scope of this issue includes the economy, and economy is all about decisions.  The economy largely has catered to women since mechanization and this has been acceptable because women control the  lion's share of the economy, and thereby the lion's share of our societies morals and ethics.  This is telling really when you consider how long that blood diamonds have been sought after.

 

Think about toys for example, a hundred years ago toys were reserved for the children of the wealthy and were rare artifacts,   Now days they are a veritable billion dollar industry,  Never mind smart phones and whatever else.

 

These technologies and economies for the most part undermine the patriarchy  and empower women.  This is debatable to degrees for sure, but the point is that our economy is no longer focussed on the family unit as the patriarchy has lost its teeth.  Consumerism is the name of the feminist game, it is egocentric, and it plays right into the palms of the government and ruling classes.

 

There is a MGTOW web post that points out the matriarchal bubble we live in.  Generally anything that women find valuable is a bad investment.  Women think that conventional assets like gold, real estate, and consumerist crap are good investments so any of those things are in fact inflated and are terrible investments.  Get your prepin gear and diversify, diversify, diversify.

 

King David

[Mishelle]

 "Though there are different forms of birth control, anything that is chemical I would think is nothing more than an attack on yourself."

It's actually extremely easy for a girl to know when she is fertile, this could be achieved by any 14 year old, the problem is this isn't taught to her.

 

"It may be unfair, but none the less this must be the case that if a woman is not ready for the consequences, she should learn restraint.  Therefore the decision with whomever she pairs with must not be whimsical."

 

Hogwash.  Let's hope the days where chastity until marriage is the expectation are long gone and buried!  Folks are way to up tight about sexuality, imo.   There's a huge gray area between restraint and nympho, and if most women fell somewhere in the middle instead of at either extreme, I think this would be a much happier world.

Christopher Hitchens clip was great, totally agree in theory. Thanks for posting.  But my personal experience is the women I like are hilarious and when we are together I'm often aching from laughing so hard.  It shifts in the company of men, especially men they don't know.  Ask some happily married men if their wives are funny and I'll bet they say yes!

[PatrickC]

Christopher Hitchens clip was great, totally agree in theory. Thanks for posting.  But my personal experience is the women I like are hilarious and when we are together I'm often aching from laughing so hard.  It shifts in the company of men, especially men they don't know.  Ask some happily married men if their wives are funny and I'll bet they say yes!

 

I'm surprised you missed Hitches main point. It's not that funny women don't exist, they do. It's the fact that women don't need to be funny, compared to men.

 

"It's ok ladies, we (men) find you attractive already, thank you very much."

[Mishelle]

No, no, I got that, that's where I agree, along with we should try harder!

My point was just to say yes, and, women are trained to be more reserved around men, and, much of the time men don't understand our humor, and vice versa.  Get a bunch of men together smokin and jokin, and most women are not going to be laughing for long!

I would also add that by noticing these publicly funny women are lesbian, butch, or jewish he's making an important observation that goes unmentioned, it seems--This is about showing dominance by eliciting attention from attractive admiring women.

[PatrickC]

I would also add that by noticing these publicly funny women are lesbian, butch, or jewish he's making an important observation that goes unmentioned, it seems--This is about showing dominance by eliciting attention from attractive admiring women.

 

Sorry Mishelle, can you clarify what you mean here.

[Mishelle]

It seems perfectly in line with PUA culture I think, from what I understand so far.  Stef has said "every man wants to be Alpha" -- and this actually shocked me in the moment.  Could that be true?  Is that true?!

 

But just for argument sake let's say it's true and this is for most a basic, and so largely unconscious driver.  So the goal of the "dominant" is to have his/her pick of partners, and this works the same for women and men.  Woman gets her pick of relationship partners by being attractive, accommodating, supportive, nurturing. Man gets his pick of sexual partners by being intriguing, masterful, competent---this is where the funny plays in.  That and you can tell A LOT about a man from his sense of humor, so it does indeed help women to discern.

 

So, a dominant woman would take on the role of a dominant man, which he does elude to I guess, but I think there's more to it--women are not raised to voice themselves in public, period.  Look good, smile, keep quiet, that's the tradition. The same thing happens to women in any mixed gathering, hetero women make themselves smaller--it's innate and it's a tactic of securing safety and relatedness.

[MooMoo]

It seems perfectly in line with PUA culture I think, from what I understand so far.  Stef has said "every man wants to be Alpha" -- and this actually shocked me in the moment.  Could that be true?  Is that true?!

 

Personally speaking, I don't believe that to be true. I suppose in times of needs, the role of alpha would serve me, but that is only a matter of convenience and it is certainly not true in the absolute sense that it was given in. My goal in the life is not to be the alpha and don't wish to be in such a position.

[Holo Cene]

The PUA movement has so many detractors, but you have to remember it is in it's infancy. The whole PUA movement was and is a direct result of the paradigm shift in the relationships between men and women. The first answer might have been to redistribute the disposability back to the females and then use tactics and tricks to mimic alpha behaviors and qualities to achieve sex. The movement has evolved so much beyond that, but people's stereotypes and prejudices remain. If anything PUA is the beginning of the solution. It is an adaptation for men to re engage with the female world head on, with courage, aplomb and love. How we as men will come to a solution will either heal and repair the wound, or let it fester and infect. It is paramount that men of integrity join the cause of healing the rifts. Of course there are dangers and pitfalls in all of this, but that is why PUA is so beautiful. It is men sharing information with each other and evolving the collective consciousness of men in our current poisoned milieu, and developing strategies in order to avoid the crocodile traps and black holes of the dating world.

 

MGTOW is completely obliterating holes in society in places like Japan and while I understand the sentiment of anger that precedes and causes the proud schadenfreude of the plight of the feminist it is ultimately just as damaging. Without men, women will turn to the state every time.

[PatrickC]

If anything PUA is the beginning of the solution. It is an adaptation for men to re engage with the female world head on, with courage, aplomb and love. How we as men will come to a solution will either heal and repair the wound, or let it fester and infect. It is paramount that men of integrity join the cause of healing the rifts. Of course there are dangers and pitfalls in all of this, but that is why PUA is so beautiful. It is men sharing information with each other and evolving the collective consciousness of men in our current poisoned milieu, and developing strategies in order to avoid the crocodile traps and black holes of the dating world.

 

Well, it's difficult to ignore the PUA tactic of tapping into a womens base sexual instinct. I mean in one sense we have to do that in order to attract partners. But beyond that, it simply doesn't fly as a long term strategy for a fullfilling relationship. If PUA is developing or rather PUA's themselves are maturing, then I'm interested in hearing about that process.

[Holo Cene]

Well, it's difficult to ignore the PUA tactic of tapping into a womens base sexual instinct. I mean in one sense we have to do that in order to attract partners. But beyond that, it simply doesn't fly as a long term strategy for a fullfilling relationship. If PUA is developing or rather PUA's themselves are maturing, then I'm interested in hearing about that process.

 

The base sexual instinct of women is something a lot of men don't even take into account, let alone tap into. 

[PatrickC]

The base sexual instinct of women is something a lot of men don't even take into account, let alone tap into. 

 

With respect, I wasn't disagreeing with you. But you make no mention of my other points.

[Mishelle]

 If anything PUA is the beginning of the solution. It is an adaptation for men to re engage with the female world head on, with courage, aplomb and love. How we as men will come to a solution will either heal and repair the wound, or let it fester and infect. It is paramount that men of integrity join the cause of healing the rifts. Of course there are dangers and pitfalls in all of this, but that is why PUA is so beautiful. It is men sharing information with each other and evolving the collective consciousness of men in our current poisoned milieu, and developing strategies in order to avoid the crocodile traps and black holes of the dating world.

 

HC, that's just gorgeous!

 

What are some of the crocodile traps and black holes and the strategies to avoid them?

 

I was very involved with a New Age community of women for several years called Feminine Power and they are trying to do something similar in regards to relations with men and each other.  It's all about getting women outside victimization and co-dependency to create "evolutionary partnerships" with men and women of high consciousness.  This is all in order to culturally evolve and fulfill the needs of both sexes as long-term couples.  There are women of all ages and around the world and the coursework was very intense, deep in self-knowledge and spiritual awakening.  I know that last part doesn't fit well here, but it absolutely changed my life and relationships for the better. 

 

So, just so you know, women are out there trying to solve this too, and in whole new ways.

[Holo Cene]

With respect, I wasn't disagreeing with you. But you make no mention of my other points.

 

I was writing some stuff down about fulfilling relationships but it was turning into a muddled paragraph and just cut it to make a stronger point, but ultimately a strategy for a fulfilling relationship has a lot more involved than just meeting women and attracting them. That journey is much more personal as each person must find the value in the decisions they make. For instance, lets say I develop a PUA skill set and I can go out and get laid every night of the week if I choose. This decision to keep going out and having sex with a different girl every night is going to be moderated by so many factors, mostly which leads back to childhood, as Stef always points out. Objectification, disposability lack of intimacy, societal rewards, etc etc.. Its a mess of different competing impulses/desires which leads to a choice for hedonism. This is the infancy of the man's journey into healing. He fills that feminine energy in his life with random women and avoids the inner issues which probably has a lot to do with a cold and selfish mother. This is of course all broad strokes, but in essence a man who does not know how to talk to women, is a man perpetually stuck in childhood. The first step is to have the courage to, at the very least begin the journey towards female interaction, which is ultimately interaction with the self. The maturity process cannot begin without this. It is a stepping stone, what a man decides to do with it is of course his decision. He cannot be happy with hedonism though, that is a fools path simply because he addresses nothing within himself. He applies pleasure to balm over his scarred childhood. This isn't even mentioning the mountain of female problems, but others have already delved into this. 

 

Basically this paragraph turns into a mish mash of ideas which are here and there and I now see the value in distilling and honing them for other peoples perusal in the future, so thank you.

HC, that's just gorgeous!

 

What are some of the crocodile traps and black holes and the strategies to avoid them?

 

I was very involved with a New Age community of women for several years called Feminine Power and they are trying to do something similar in regards to relations with men and each other.  It's all about getting women outside victimization and co-dependency to create "evolutionary partnerships" with men and women of high consciousness.  This is all in order to culturally evolve and fulfill the needs of both sexes as long-term couples.  There are women of all ages and around the world and the coursework was very intense, deep in self-knowledge and spiritual awakening.  I know that last part doesn't fit well here, but it absolutely changed my life and relationships for the better. 

 

So, just so you know, women are out there trying to solve this too, and in whole new ways.

 

Thanks, I thought it was a beautiful idea too.

 

Well there's bad marriages, there are women who are vampires, women who cheat, cuckoldry, false rape allegations, child support, alimony, hypergamy, dissatisfaction of women. I mean I don't think these are necessarily intentional, but a man must learn self-respect at the minimum to avoid bad behavior or disastrous character assessments. A man with no ability with women in his life, will fall  into a honeypot of female horror, if a predator takes his naivete and pedestal to stomp on his nuts. 

 

I think the female side of this equation is troublesome. There is no balancing mechanism at this point to their positions of power in the mating arena. MGTOW is a boycott to try and get women to see the consequences of their indoctrination and to try and shift the balance of power. In Japan though women have just adjusted and they themselves have adopted a sex aversion. PUA I think is a healthy start since it addresses the women's needs and desires, but how does a woman satisfy an indomitable craving for security, cause by childhood traumas, abuses and deprivations? She must recognize that it is a problem and MSM and society works hard to prevent that, lest she stop shopping. It is a pickle.

If the mating game dictates that men must do the approaching then the course of male behavior must change. If females have a lack of understanding, they must be exposed to men who have achieved understanding. You are the solution. We used to have strongly knit social circles, made up of neighbors and ethnic communities. All of that has been obliterated. Unless you want to go to church. Approach, approach, approach.

[King David]

"A man who does not know how to talk to women is perpetually stuck in childhood"

 

Never mind the thousands of creative and technical geniuses who added to progress over the ages that have never figured out the lizard tongue double speak that women en masse perpetuate daily, and is ever more alienating what otherwise would be ambitious young boys both from the dating scene and the work force.  And because, like I was saying before that the entire modern world that exists today is due to men's presence in these fields until now, this is kind of a big deal.

 

This is the typical rhetoric that can be expected from the public. A man's sexual validity, and even identity must be validated by a female, whom by and large have little experience in any real life hard knocks that men will eventually face.

 

MGTOW is not trying to speak to women, we see the futility of trying this.  Most women will never acknowledge there ever was a problem let alone reflect on themselves on how to fix a greater societal issue that really has little to do with their immediate needs, or dalliances.

 

PUA is not a healing of the rift.  It is engineering a formula to get into a girls pants, through the satiation of a womans desires.  Although I'm not entirely opposed to their technique and knowledge, I think that a healing of the rift would start with what a male identity is actually comprised of without the female. 

 

If people no longer have social circles and communities to live within as you say "obliterated", then we are most certainly doomed.  If you look at anything that relies entirely on itself for everything it needs you must realize how much harder life is alone.  Just in saying that you betray naiveté.  Community, and thereby social responsibility is the very core of our existence.  If you cannot grasp that then you will never understand a woman anyways, or man for that matter.

 

King David

[Holo Cene]

"A man who does not know how to talk to women is perpetually stuck in childhood"

 

Never mind the thousands of creative and technical geniuses who added to progress over the ages that have never figured out the lizard tongue double speak that women en masse perpetuate daily, and is ever more alienating what otherwise would be ambitious young boys both from the dating scene and the work force.  And because, like I was saying before that the entire modern world that exists today is due to men's presence in these fields until now, this is kind of a big deal.

 

This is the typical rhetoric that can be expected from the public. A man's sexual validity, and even identity must be validated by a female, whom by and large have little experience in any real life hard knocks that men will eventually face.

 

MGTOW is not trying to speak to women, we see the futility of trying this.  Most women will never acknowledge there ever was a problem let alone reflect on themselves on how to fix a greater societal issue that really has little to do with their immediate needs, or dalliances.

 

PUA is not a healing of the rift.  It is engineering a formula to get into a girls pants, through the satiation of a womans desires.  Although I'm not entirely opposed to their practices and knowledge, I think that a healing of the rift would start with what a male identity is actually comprised of without the female. 

 

If people no longer have social circles and communities to live within, then we are most certainly doomed.  If you look at anything that relies entirely on itself for everything it needs you must realize how much harder life is alone.  Community, and thereby social responsibility is the very core of our existence.  If you cannot grasp that then you will never understand a woman anyways, or man for that matter.

 

King David

 

Male identity without the female? What does that even mean?

 

You say that MGTOW will heal the rift between the sexes. That makes no logical sense. MGTOW is men not interacting with women, thus not bridging any gaps. Its just a childish ploy to get attention and to passively use a boycotting technique to create desperation in women. The problem is that this spirals into more hypergamy, not less. The scarcity of good men becomes a trigger for an animalistic, harem based mating structure as all these women compete for the few remaining alphas, because they desperately want stronger genes to combat the hostility of the environment.

[King David]

"Male identity without the female? What does that even mean?" 

 

My point exactly.

 

I didn't say that MGTOW heals the rift, I don't believe anything of the sort.  Nor do I care about such things.  My concern is simply my self preservation, as anything past this has become demonised by state, workplace, marriage, community and otherwise.  It's called being passive aggressive, and it's how to deal with a situation where your identity has been completely nullified. 

 

If I cared about the outcome of settling this so called rift more so than my own well being, I might go as far as to go on a hunger strike, but I don't. I would probably starve to death, ironically without anyone noticing anyways.

 

PUA IS the trigger of animalistic harem based mating structures. LOL

 

KD

[Holo Cene]

"Male identity without the female? What does that even mean?" 

 

My point exactly.

 

I didn't say that MGTOW heals the rift, I don't believe anything of the sort.  Nor do I care about such things.  My concern is simply my self preservation, as anything past this has become demonised by state, workplace, marriage, community and otherwise.  It's called being passive aggressive, and it's how to deal with a situation where your identity has been completely nullified.

 

PUA IS the trigger of animalistic harem based mating structures. LOL

 

KD

 

PUA is not the trigger for harem based mating structures. It is adding men to the mating game that would otherwise have no idea how to interact with women. If you add more men who can attract women then  that lessens the impact of hypergamy and harem based mating. It's just math. If there are 300 alphas in a city of 10000 men, then you add another 200 through PUA then essentially you have lessened the impact of a harem based strategy. 

 

PUA is nothing more than adjusting men to the new sexual dynamics of our modern era. If the dating world dictates that you have to approach women, and impress women then that is what you do if you choose to want women in your life. When there were more social arenas, the men wouldn't have to resort to these things because they could display their qualities and value through shared activity, and thus trigger attraction and mate.

[King David]

PUA is not the trigger for harem based mating structures. It is adding men to the mating game that would otherwise have no idea how to interact with women. If you add more men who can attract women then  that lessens the impact of hypergamy and harem based mating. It's just math. If there are 300 alphas in a city of 10000 men, then you add another 200 through PUA then essentially you have lessened the impact of a harem based strategy.  PUA is nothing more than adjusting men to the new sexual dynamics of our modern era. If the dating world dictates that you have to approach women, and impress women then that is what you do if you choose to want women in your life. When there were more social arenas, the men wouldn't have to resort to these things because they could display their qualities and value through shared activity, and thus trigger attraction and mate.

 

You think this crap is new and original?  That is almost as ridiculous as literal creationism. 

 

The only thing that is new in this game is massive state power and machines that can do everything that families used to have to manage through division of labour, when people actually really depended on people doing things, not just emotionally.

 

Again, speaking for me; I choose to not want women in my life.

 

And, so PUA uses the collective of women's attention to inflate your own identity in a public setting, through a series of ineffectual displays of "alpha", that you are really fighting to liberate these women from there would be harem masters.

 

I think not broesky.

KD

[Holo Cene]

You think this crap is new and original?  That is almost as ridiculous as literal creationism. 

 

The only thing that is new in this game is massive state power and machines that can do everything that families used to have to manage through division of labour, when people actually really depended on people doing things, not just emotionally.

 

Again, speaking for me; I choose to not want women in my life.

 

And, so PUA uses the collective of women's attention to inflate your own identity in a public setting, through a series of ineffectual displays of "alpha", that you are really fighting to liberate these women from there would be harem masters.

 

I think not broesky.

KD

 

I'm just talking about solutions and possibilities. You have these disjointed arguments where you hem and haw, I never stated you weren't allowed a choice. You seem to not have a coherent argument here which most likely means you are emotionally disturbed by the topic. Who is fighting to liberate women from the would be harem masters. Women choose the best options for their situations, just like men. 

 

The world we live in is here, we can take our ball and go home or we can do the best with what we have.

[King David]

I concede my material is not exact and coherent, but in the broadest scope, this topic has world wide global economy implications as well as the future of our species involved.  It's complicated, interwoven and can be difficult to get your point across without stumbling onto something else that requires to have its own discussion.

 

Emotionally disturbed? yes.

 

I realized what was going on where that government and women have undermined male value towards close to nothing without any compensatory equivalents.  It would be pretty hard to not be emotionally moved if you do in fact have a pulse.

 

I do agree that women are trying to make the best choices with what is available to them, this is natural.  Their choices though, by and large have no acknowledgement for my best interests and women therefore, receive not my loyalty or attention.  This is also natural, you catch more bee's with honey than you do with vinegar.

 

The solutions you provide including wearing funny hats, and using backhanded compliments on women do not seem to me to be very substantial.  In fact, if it is funny hats alone that is proposed to save you then PUA is the objectification of men and it means there is little that can save you.  It is a pity we have become victims in this zero sum game but it is what it is.

 

The real rift is not so much social (I actually get along with many women quite famously) as it is political and cultural.  My contention is like that of Stefan's, where the only political and cultural entity capable of creating enough change to make any significant improvements would be that of women themselves; which would amount to a self imposed feminist hair cut.

 

If that is not the mother of all paradoxes (pardon the pun) I don't know what is.

 

KD

[PatrickC]

Male identity without the female? What does that even mean?

 

You say that MGTOW will heal the rift between the sexes. That makes no logical sense. MGTOW is men not interacting with women, thus not bridging any gaps. Its just a childish ploy to get attention and to passively use a boycotting technique to create desperation in women.

 

I can't speak for KD on his definition, but for some of the lesser known MGTOW exponents I've recently met and interacted with are far from saying they will never interact with women again. For the most part they are attempting to build better and stronger ties with the men in their lives. They understand the enormous potential that men find in each other and in themselves.

 

This doesn't mean to the detriment of their relationships with women. It just means that they will not accept white knighting and mangina type behaviour as acceptable ways of approaching women. Neither will they accept the woman who ingratiates herself in the privileges the current culture give her. A few of the long term exponents of MGTOW (before Barbarossa and his ilk) are indeed married now. Boycotting bad behaviour or ideology in women seems an entirely rational approach to make when deciding on life partners.

 

So perhaps you misunderstand the MGTOW approach in the same way we might be misunderstanding PUA. Although, I'm seeing a lot of game theory being mentioned, rather than principles.

[Holo Cene]

I concede my material is not exact and coherent, but in the broadest scope, this topic has world wide global economy implications as well as the future of our species involved.  It's complicated, interwoven and can be difficult to get your point across without stumbling onto something else that requires to have its own discussion.

 

Emotionally disturbed? yes.

 

I realized what was going on where that government and women have undermined male value towards close to nothing without any compensatory equivalents.  It would be pretty hard to not be emotionally moved if you do in fact have a pulse.

 

I do agree that women are trying to make the best choices with what is available to them, this is natural.  Their choices though, by and large have no acknowledgement for my best interests and women therefore, receive not my loyalty or attention.  This is also natural, you catch more bee's with honey than you do with vinegar.

 

The solutions you provide including wearing funny hats, and using backhanded compliments on women do not seem to me to be very substantial.  In fact, if it is funny hats alone that is proposed to save you then PUA is the objectification of men and it means there is little that can save you.  It is a pity we have become victims in this zero sum game but it is what it is.

 

The real rift is not so much social (I actually get along with many women quite famously) as it is political and cultural.  My contention is like that of Stefan's, where the only political and cultural entity capable of creating enough change to make any significant improvements would be that of women themselves; which would amount to a self imposed feminist hair cut.

 

If that is not the mother of all paradoxes (pardon the pun) I don't know what is.

 

KD

 

I definitely appreciate those sentiments since i share them myself. The thing is PUA is evolving. Its not funny hats or backhanded compliments anymore. That was a man trying to sell a specific system, that was selling "tactics" to get at peoples money. He was trying to monetize it the most efficiently by making it hard to break from those routines. The PUA movement has in large part shifted to a more group therapy, principle based approach. They change attitudes and learning patterns by chnaging core beliefs and challenging outdated perspecitives on women. The systematized PUA is pretty much dead. 

 

While I do agree that the political/cultural change is at the center, we can be pro active about this. PUA is just a bunch of men who approach women. That is all. They learn how to attract, and date women.

[steve_]

I think the word objectification is way overused. Objectification seems a more appropriate label to give to the farmer cattle relationship, or the hitler jew relationship. They view them as objects without applying any idea of 'rights' to them. If I just care about a women for her looks, or care about a guy for his football betting tips, I don't think I'm objectifying them.

[Omega 3 snake oil]

 If I just care about a women for her looks... I don't think I'm objectifying them. 

I disagree and think that you would be objectifying her. Not saying I'm necessarily or completely above it, but in my life I have shown a strong preference for women who along with being good looking are thoughtful, sincere, funny, and sensitive. An apparent dearth of this type of woman is admittedly part of the impetus in starting this thread. Women who are all looks seem to prefer men who are all entertainment, all status (whether real or perceived makes little difference).Now, as I've been over in this thread, I'm not saying it's necessarily immoral to objectify another person (we all do it in business and it usually goes just fine), but when men and women fully and completely objectify one another, well, I think we can safely call it problematic.

I definitely appreciate those sentiments since i share them myself. The thing is PUA is evolving. Its not funny hats or backhanded compliments anymore. That was a man trying to sell a specific system, that was selling "tactics" to get at peoples money. He was trying to monetize it the most efficiently by making it hard to break from those routines. The PUA movement has in large part shifted to a more group therapy, principle based approach. They change attitudes and learning patterns by chnaging core beliefs and challenging outdated perspecitives on women. The systematized PUA is pretty much dead. 

Good, valid points here. But none of it necessarily refutes my argument(s).

 

 

 

While I do agree that the political/cultural change is at the center, we can be pro active about this. PUA is just a bunch of men who approach women. That is all. They learn how to attract, and date women.

Your first sentence seems somewhat undermined but those that follow.  If men are supposed to be proactive about cultural change, why should they focus on mastering relationships that tend to be vacuous, anti-intellectual, amoral?

[Guest Exceptionalist]

I disagree and think that you would be objectifying her. Not saying I'm necessarily or completely above it, but in my life I have shown a strong preference for women who along with being good looking are thoughtful, sincere, funny, and sensitive.

 

 

A dildo is an object of sexual arrousal but a woman can only be seen in that particular matter as an potential partner for sexual intercourse. That's why the look matters. Don't buy into feminist drivel, it could turn you into a zombie and be undermining critical thinking.

 

 If men are supposed to be proactive about cultural change, why should they focus on mastering relationships that tend to be vacuous, anti-intellectual, amoral?

 

 

What is anti-intellectual about a sexual relationship? That would imply that any sexual intercourse was anti-intellectual. It is just non-intellectual in the that matter, that it only focuses on primal instincts.