tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35989029026726859772024-02-07T04:49:08.294-08:00The SexpressionistsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger110125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-46124911455418157832015-11-27T13:29:00.000-08:002021-01-30T02:02:04.493-08:00What Does It Mean To Be "Good At Sex?"<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5iADe5raMzBtnm9C31h7bs7eNAt8E-7RCxtBZQRG_k7b59aipPwDAEN5bbza23d994CLwO6_pX_UOS6h81ovLUIHBLoOfJcq674QiI_Uo_jK2bQLcSLo9cCCNyKwbQICbnpOX9lyXIsw/s1600/great+sex.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="194" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5iADe5raMzBtnm9C31h7bs7eNAt8E-7RCxtBZQRG_k7b59aipPwDAEN5bbza23d994CLwO6_pX_UOS6h81ovLUIHBLoOfJcq674QiI_Uo_jK2bQLcSLo9cCCNyKwbQICbnpOX9lyXIsw/s200/great+sex.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I like sex. A lot. That shouldn't be much of a revelation to anyone that regularly reads this blog. But I'm not just interested in <i>having </i>sex. I like talking about it, too. We have a lot of primal drives, like the drive to eat, drink, seek shelter, seek belonging, etc. We tend to acknowledge and accept all those drives. Our primal drive to have sex, though, is often denied. Yet it's clear sex is among our most influential drives. It's possible to predict pretty much anyone's behaviors with a high degree of accuracy IF you can figure out their sexual strategy. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyway, pretty much all of us believe we're at least above average when it comes to sexual skill. I personally have never met anyone that admitted they weren't very good at sex. In psychology, we call this an illusory superiority bias. While some people are clearly very good at sex, there's an equal number that are kinda terrible. Contrary to popular belief, there is such thing as bad sex.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I personally have always been motivated to learn more about sex because I believed it would make me a better partner, thus increasing the number of opportunities to have sex. Seems logical, right?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's a problem with this idea. <a href="http://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/art-seduction/article/you-dont-need-to-be-great-at-sex-foreplay-signature-move-2015-11" target="_blank">A recent Maxim article shed some light on this idea</a>. In the article, the author discusses how being really good at one or two techniques is far better than trying to be a master at everything. While it wasn't the main point of the article, it highlights a truth I discovered far too late in life - <i>technique is vastly overrated</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Once you learn some basic anatomy, understand the importance of pressure and friction, and understand how to read your partner's physiological signals, you're pretty much good to go. Maybe develop and master one or two really good techniques (per the Maxim article.) </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So If Technique Isn't Important, What Is?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is the part that took me wayyyy too long to discover - sex is primarily psychological, not biological. Even though I heard and thought I understood the phase "the brain is your body's most important sex organ", I didn't really <i>get </i>it. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a lifelong pro-feminist social justice warrior, I had internalized a few beliefs including:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men have to be "respectful" towards women, which I understood as "men need to act like asexual beings with zero interest in sex."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Comfort and familiarity are prerequisites to female arousal.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women require long periods of foreplay to become aroused.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Manly men are a turnoff for women; better to play the "metrosexual" sensitive male role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Mastering anything and everything related to the technical aspects of sexual technique.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Then I started studying gender and the relationship between masculine and feminine. Slowly but surely, I started to recognize the true scope of the importance of psychology in sexual satisfaction (i.e. - "good sex.") In general, I came to see that sexual fulfillment doesn't occur as a function of technical proficiency, but rather the degree of "passion" of an encounter. So what determines passion?</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The passion and intimacy paradox.</b> <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/05/the-paradox-of-intimacy-and-passion.html" target="_blank">I've written about this phenomenon before</a>, so I'll keep it brief (see the linked post for more detail.) In essence, passion, or the desire to have sex with someone, and intimacy, the closeness and bonding we feel with another, are mutually exclusive. Passion requires mystery and distance, intimacy requires mutual self-disclosure and vulnerability. Most importantly, they kill each other. As such, it's important to learn to alternate between the two. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Genetic dissimilarity.</b> Okay, I've known about this one for a while. We give of pheromones that contain information about our genetic makeup. Other people detect these pheromones. The greater the difference between our genes, the stronger we "fall" for the person. "Falling" is measured by the intensity of the feelings we have for the other person, which we often call "having a spark." This is why sometimes we have incredibly powerful feelings for a person that's not our type or feel nothing for someone that's perfect on paper.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Traditional gender roles. </b>This one was tough for me to accept... until I started seeing the effect. Traditional masculinity (not to be confused with the androgyny of the modern metrosexual male) and traditional femininity are kinda like the yin and yang of sexual arousal. The stronger that difference, the greater the potential for arousal. Eliminate one or both and passion disappears. There's nothing remotely arousing about androgynous blobs. It's no surprise the men that join our male-only <a href="http://sdmancamp.com/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a> group universally experience an increase in sexual frequency and quality... men that are good at being men make panties wet. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual dominance.</b> This one was another tough lesson to accept, though the runaway popularity of '50 Shades of Gray' should have been a good hint, but it took the now-rare book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Sex-God-Method-2nd-SexGodMethod/dp/0557036488/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1448655802&sr=8-1&keywords=the+sex+god+method" target="_blank">The Sex God Method</a>" to really hammer home the point - <i>almost all women <b>love </b>sexually dominant men</i>. This is obviously problematic in a society that obsesses over the silly idea of "rape culture" because it makes most men <i>extremely </i>wary about expressing sexual dominance. It's no surprise sexual passivity and being overly cautious is one of the most common complaints women have about their sexual partners. </li>
</ol>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These four elements, when combined effectively, result in a far better mutually-fulfilling sex life. Learning new techniques is a good thing; it gives us a huge toolbox of technique that can help us adapt to new partners faster OR provide novelty for long-term relationships. However, it's a small piece of the puzzle compared to the psychological aspects of sex.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thoughts? Leave a comment!</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-38682971138362275372015-07-25T07:38:00.003-07:002015-07-25T07:38:52.022-07:00Not Happy About Your Body? Fat Batman Isn't Going to Help. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LSDO-VGMoabpGr1gcY6ONz8uvFEwqkIePitc_MKgqfbmN5EBaf5FFAIXIuMTJ1avLqmJ0YoqUFFZl-MtQUDuy09htse2jVLwmKd1i9tBbB002S55weYxT_EJ13pBX94ALF7Qgm1MCyE/s1600/640.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="318" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LSDO-VGMoabpGr1gcY6ONz8uvFEwqkIePitc_MKgqfbmN5EBaf5FFAIXIuMTJ1avLqmJ0YoqUFFZl-MtQUDuy09htse2jVLwmKd1i9tBbB002S55weYxT_EJ13pBX94ALF7Qgm1MCyE/s400/640.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sticking with the physical attractiveness theme <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/07/why-does-attractiveness-matter.html" target="_blank">from my last post</a>, let's talk about body dissatisfaction and the "ideal" body presented in pop culture. An article form the (mostly) satirical site <a href="http://www.avclub.com/article/heres-what-realistic-and-still-badass-lara-croft-w-222856" target="_blank">A.V. Club reposted some pictures</a> from an anti-bulimia website that featured Photoshopped video game and comic characters. Their apparent goal is to represent "real life" body types in an attempt to curb our tendency to feel dissatisfaction with our bodies.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are two serious problems with this exercise. First, the editors of the anti-bulimia website don't really seem to understand WHY we create fictional depictions of an idealized body type. Second, they don't seem to understand the root cause (or solution to) of body dissatisfaction. Let's tackle the first issue.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Why Does the Idealized Body Type Sell?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As much as we fancy ourselves (humans) as rational, logical, intellectual creatures, the survival of our species is contingent on our primal desires to reproduce and get our genes into the next generation. Furthermore, we have to have some assurance that our offspring are genetically fit, and the "fitter" the better. That's why, when given a choice, we'll always fuck the most attractive person we can land in a given situation. What we consider universally "attractive" (which differs for men and women as <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/07/why-does-attractiveness-matter.html" target="_blank">discussed in the last post</a>) has evolved over countless generations as a mechanism to keep our species genetically healthy enough to survive. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The idealized body type we see in works of fiction exaggerate those characteristics we find universally attractive, which helps them sell. That works because we like looking at that which we find universally attractive. Let's say the publishers of Tomb Raider decide to make a size 16 Lara Croft. Would people rather buy and play that version, or would they prefer the older version that featured the current version? As much as we'd love to believe we're "advanced" and would celebrate chubby Lara, we all know the game would be the next E.T.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAxi8Ri_E9nDHxxZRrW0F8olBahauSrd5Y6XnVcYUbK4BM30Rs7-hLShG9LlH2ON4bjVWe1CkZISMcjDh5_q-bnHnYttSuui1ofu-l0HHkwZfhdkS9xKNJis4Opj8zClUC92CwkMDZ5-I/s1600/ET-Atari-2600.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAxi8Ri_E9nDHxxZRrW0F8olBahauSrd5Y6XnVcYUbK4BM30Rs7-hLShG9LlH2ON4bjVWe1CkZISMcjDh5_q-bnHnYttSuui1ofu-l0HHkwZfhdkS9xKNJis4Opj8zClUC92CwkMDZ5-I/s320/ET-Atari-2600.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Per the rules of capitalism, businesses don't produce products that don't sell. Some people like to suggest something along the lines of "If EVERY company dropped the use of the idealized body, THEN we'd solve this problem!" </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Nice sentiment, but that's not how capitalism works. The allure of being that lone company that would buck the rules by playing to our primal desires would be too great. Besides, most people like to frame this as "if only these big, evil corporations would do this... yadda, yadda, yadda" without seemingly understanding that, in almost every case, the profit motivation behind business directly or indirectly puts food on their table. Would you really want the person that signs YOUR paycheck to commit market suicide by producing products that would put them at a competitive disadvantage? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Probably not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I know some readers are thinking "Jesus, why are men such shallow pigs?!? If only they would stop objectifying women's bodies, we could finally solve this issue! Fucking patriarchy!!!!"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My response - which book do ya think would sell more copies:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ4eq4BJa1KlPcKG3zOj_dami4De3aJtjXCdKOWa0MRt22Oc9oee4g7uyvah3jZ5OZifAQjiRFmN5WTCds0hlp1mRXEAfJqDstOvkEQhWrg-4XMTTpoX8ap392qrIQn328xJ295E92IhI/s1600/romance+novel+covers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ4eq4BJa1KlPcKG3zOj_dami4De3aJtjXCdKOWa0MRt22Oc9oee4g7uyvah3jZ5OZifAQjiRFmN5WTCds0hlp1mRXEAfJqDstOvkEQhWrg-4XMTTpoX8ap392qrIQn328xJ295E92IhI/s400/romance+novel+covers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>The knife cuts both ways, ladies.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
What's Really Behind Body Dissatisfaction?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The first issue is pretty simple to explain. This one? It gets a little tricky. There are all sorts of explanations that explain why we tend not to like our bodies, and the issue affects men just as much as women. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Right now, I'm in pretty good shape due to jiu jitsu and mma training coupled with weight training and fairly strict dietary moderation. I'm pretty cut and I love it. HOWEVER, three months ago I was gravitating toward a <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/05/the-manbod-is-bullshit.html" target="_blank">dadbod</a>. It sucked. I didn't like looking at myself in the mirror, felt insecure, and would get mildly depressed. I was experiencing body dissatisfaction.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So why does our self-perception of our bodies affect us so much? <i>It's because we fear social rejection</i>. Take a look at Maslow's hierarchy:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgmqgU1UeAIcVu_wek2J0Tzgq9i87mUICeI4npLSvJ6rqCp6o4NFXKv_dQV-0UVoXxSGL5muKxQjxAl4qkweLFYkLFTNuqt2U-3K96EEw-Pjc3NoDjSW1e6bXKNW9mSvHY_8aD7hLHZSs/s1600/Screen-shot-2012-05-14-at-10.28.00-AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="278" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgmqgU1UeAIcVu_wek2J0Tzgq9i87mUICeI4npLSvJ6rqCp6o4NFXKv_dQV-0UVoXxSGL5muKxQjxAl4qkweLFYkLFTNuqt2U-3K96EEw-Pjc3NoDjSW1e6bXKNW9mSvHY_8aD7hLHZSs/s320/Screen-shot-2012-05-14-at-10.28.00-AM.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
See that yellow middle "love and belonging" section? We need to feel a sense of connection with others, both socially and sexually. We get insecure about our perception of our body image because we know people will like us more if we're physically attractive. <a href="http://legacy.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html" target="_blank">Here's a quick primer for the uninitiated</a>. Want another source? <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201108/why-we-pay-more-attention-beautiful-people" target="_blank">Here ya go</a>. This is a really, really hard pill to swallow and most people would prefer to pretend this isn't the case, but it's reality. It's the same primal, evolutionary mechanism described above. If this were NOT the case, any one of us would be perfectly happy having sex with a random member of the population. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Don't think this is how us humans are hardwired? Let's hang out and we'll play that game where I get to pick someone for you to have sex with. Odds are good your resolve to deny this phenomenon is weaker than your willingness to bang someone on my municipality's equivalent of Skid Row. ;-)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyway, that fear and anxiety of social and sexual rejection is the underlying mechanism that fuels our body dissatisfaction. The key to that - <i>this is a phenomenon that occurs in our own heads and is based on our own preferences for attractive people</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What does that mean? I like looking at attractive people, therefore I transpose my own psychological mechanism on everyone else. I assume THEY also like looking at attractive people. If I'm not feeling attractive, I assume others aren't going to like looking at me and will experience the exact same bias I have against unattractive people. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is an incredibly important point; re-read it until you <i>really </i>understand and internalize it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This concept gets lost in our own heads because we have a lot of other mechanisms at play. For example, we may love looking at attractive people, but if we think they're "out of our league", we tend to set up defense mechanisms to pre-disqualify them as potential mates ("he must be a douche" or "she must be a bitch".) This leads us to actually attempt to match up with people closer to our own "level" of attractiveness, but it doesn't change the primal preference for the physically attractive.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So What's the Solution?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'd offer two pieces of advice to end body dissatisfaction, and neither involves the stupid "feel good" shit like photoshopping fictional characters. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>First, improve yourself.</b> Nothing ends body dissatisfaction faster than making yourself more attractive to others. You can work on getting fit and all the other stuff related to physical attractiveness I discussed in my last post. You can also take a really, really easy short-cut: <i>Learn to exude confidence</i>. That's the single best way to improve how others see you, and it's one of the first things I recommend in my <a href="http://sdmancamp.com/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a>. I'll be honest - I really like fit women with large breasts and round asses (find pics of my wife for a good example ;-) .) However, I find myself attracted to <i>any </i>body type if the woman is confident. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Second, when you do experience body dissatisfaction, understand you're experiencing it because of a fear of rejection.</b> Simply acknowledging that cognitive mechanism can do wonders, but I'd go a step further and actually <a href="http://barefootrunninguniversity.com/2012/12/31/overcoming-fear-an-essential-tool-for-the-brucrew-toolbox/" target="_blank">boot the fear to the curb</a>. When you're free of that fear of social and sexual rejection, you're no longer riddled with body image insecurity. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So there you go. Now you know the problem and the solutions. Please stop posting stupid "everyone is beautiful" ego-boosting shit on Facebook. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-88809903124951350692015-07-23T10:32:00.000-07:002015-07-23T10:32:09.313-07:00Why Does Attractiveness Matter?<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you spend any time on social media, you probably encounter a lot of <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-pose-naked-to-redefine-american-beauty-on-their-own-terms_55ae8994e4b0a9b94852ad67?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000046" target="_blank">posts like this</a>. It's a weird conflation of pro-body image and anti-fat shaming messages wrapped in overly flowery language (descriptor intentional.) While I enjoy dressing ideas in fancy wardrobes to make them more socially-palatable, it covers the the important critical concepts that actually matter. In this case, the author seems to be saying "all women, regardless of body type, are physically attractive." </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What's a better route? How about simple honestly? When it comes to physical attractiveness for men or women, all are "beautiful" if we measure beauty as "do other people find me physically attractive?" Why? Because everyone has their own special kink, and those people will seek out others that fulfill that special kink.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rail-thin fashion model? There are dudes that find that look irresistible. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Morbidly-obese couch potato? Some dudes can't get enough!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One-legged dude covered in a thick mane of curly body hair? There are women that salivate at the thought of riding him.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here's the deal, though. <b>There is an "ideal" that will appeal to the widest section of the population.</b> Not necessarily EVERY member of the population, but <i>most</i>. This is primarily a function of evolution and is controlled by neurotransmitters and hormones in our nervous and endocrine system, but sociocultural factors play at least <i>some </i>role in interpersonal attraction. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Getting closer to that "ideal" will make you more attractive to a wider segment of the population. In other words, it gives you more options. More importantly, it gives you <i>better </i>options where "better" is defined as "an option that is closer to the ideal of your preferred gender." When it comes to reaching that ideal, men and women have much different criteria, however.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
How This Works for Women</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Women really only have one important universal variable to consider: <i>Fertility</i>. While we don't usually think of fertility as being "attractive", the physical markers that indicate high fertility ARE attractive. Youth and health are the two primary components that indicate fertility, so all the female qualities guys find attractive center around those two constructs. Specifically, we (guys) look for a waist-to-hip ratio of about 0.7 (which is curiously independent of <i>actual </i>body size), full breasts, clear skin and shiny hair, facial symmetry, larger eyes, contrasting facial features, and, perhaps most importantly, youth. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Think about all of the things women use to improve their appearance. Push-up bras, Spanx, breast and butt enlargement surgery, and well-fit clothing all accentuate that magical 0.7 ratio. Acne products, exfoliating products, moisturizers, spot-correcting products, concealers, highlighters, blotting papers, hydrating sprays, and powders all give the illusion of clear complexion. Hair restoration products, clarifying shampoos, and most conditioners are designed to enhance hair shininess. Products like lipstick, lip liner, eye shadow, eye liner, mascara, etc. all create an effect that makes eyes appear bigger and/or increases facial feature contrast. And youth? That's the point of our obsession with "age eraser" tools like anti-wrinkle products (including the overuse of sunscreen), hair coloration, blush (which, like lipstick, also gives an illusion of sexual arousal), teeth whitening, primers, lash curlers, and, of course, plastic surgery.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So... the closer women get to the "female ideal", the more attractive they will appear to the largest number of people. In graph form, it looks like this:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn5-yzwRV3vPIWIxHgIgMfKpra7-pmihUGalzZwmRP3jqDHl7XoqPUkt588pubQpGEH_cF5W8DFcM_ptmjMXpq0rUvcP-uK8ddrYvh0p3im5l0QLXEGsS6BU-DhZ_8FJFDRZjGtKl4D-Y/s1600/femalefertilityvalue.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="305" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn5-yzwRV3vPIWIxHgIgMfKpra7-pmihUGalzZwmRP3jqDHl7XoqPUkt588pubQpGEH_cF5W8DFcM_ptmjMXpq0rUvcP-uK8ddrYvh0p3im5l0QLXEGsS6BU-DhZ_8FJFDRZjGtKl4D-Y/s400/femalefertilityvalue.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Unfortunately for women, their "value" is pretty much dictated by their age. Their value increases until about the age of 24 or so, then drops as they continue to age. That's not really a politically-correct thing to say, but it's just the way our species works. Don't believe me? Ask any woman at 55 if she can attract as much male attention as she could at 25. </div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
How This Works for Men</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For men, it gets a little more complex because, well, women's preferences are a little more complex. Again, remember we're talking about universals here. Individual preferences will skew this once we drop from the "all of humanity" level to "Joe, the dude that works at Starbucks" level. Men essentially have four components that determine their value to women: </div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Physical attractiveness</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Confidence</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The man's ability to protect</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">A man's ability to provide</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Why exactly is this so complex? <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-two-hypergamy.html" target="_blank">Hypergamy</a>. Women's sexual strategy requires her mate to possess this combination of characteristics to provide good genes and give both her and her offspring the best chance at survival. Again, it's evolution in action, which produces behaviors that are controlled by the nervous and endocrine systems. When looking for a mate, the typical male is looking for a fertile woman. A woman, on the other hand, is looking for a cornucopia of qualities that are nicely summed up in one of my all-time favorite college dorm posters:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhN7sAWZmfyyOHSqVMCqd5HqOQUHmpAhkXIBVNPWL1u9JZEK50JnVoMApCJo9y6c7iRnO4BpPFzoDWdjAjI7Xuk_wXDKGG-F5elv1KW4yD5-oE4yGLFMODw9w4cCfc_3uR6Es1Uau6Vphg/s1600/everyday-comments-funny-2976.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhN7sAWZmfyyOHSqVMCqd5HqOQUHmpAhkXIBVNPWL1u9JZEK50JnVoMApCJo9y6c7iRnO4BpPFzoDWdjAjI7Xuk_wXDKGG-F5elv1KW4yD5-oE4yGLFMODw9w4cCfc_3uR6Es1Uau6Vphg/s400/everyday-comments-funny-2976.jpeg" width="326" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Just like women, men use this information to make ourselves as attractive to potential mates as possible. Our physical attractiveness isn't based on youth so much as it's based on good genes (because dudes can produce viable sperm pretty much until death.) The indicators of male physical attractiveness are based on healthy genes and current physical health. Things like facial symmetry, high cheekbones, a strong jaw line, and a pronounced chin are most important for genetic health. Fitness (like washboard abs) and an absence of obvious indicators of sickness (like a rash and pale skin) are the best indicators of current health. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Confidence is a weird characteristic, but relevant. Confidence can be displayed by possessing great social skills, dominance and power, and most importantly, confidence <i>around women</i>. That last one is the best indicator of <i>relative value</i> compared to the woman. A woman, per hypergamy, is always going to seek out the highest value male. Nothing screams "high value" like confidence. Here's an example to illustrate the point:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Jane is a female with a rated attractiveness (a tool researchers use to measure a person's measurable attractiveness) value of 5 out of 10. She's always going to look for a male of higher value than herself. Specifically, she's going to search for the highest value male she can attract. She meets Bob. Bob is a 7 out of 10 when combining all four of these characteristics. Because Bob is higher value than Jane, he's not especially nervous around her. He comes off as confident. Jane is really attracted to that because his confidence is an indicator that Bob is high value relative to her own value.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now let's look at Matilda. Matilda is a Finnish bikini model. She's a 9 out of 10. SHE meets Bob. Bob is intimidated by her beauty because he believes she's out of his league. Matilda picks up on Bob's lack of confidence, thus indicating he's low value. As such, she doesn't find him attractive.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Make sense? Weird, but that's how our species interprets male confidence as part of this "male value" formula. Sidebar - Dudes, that's one of the secrets to succeeding with women. ;-)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next is a man's ability to protect. Men are physically bigger than women, thus serve as natural protectors. Also, when pregnant and nursing, women are more vulnerable. As such, women place a value on a man's ability to protect. This is another reason women value fitness in general and displays of athleticism or "fighting skill" in particular. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Finally, we have a man's ability to provide. Like protecting, this is about survival. A man that can provide for his woman and their children is valued higher than a lazy, unemployed bum. It should be noted this doesn't always manifest as "making more money." If a man shows he has the potential to make money and the drive to make money, that's <i>almost </i>as good. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All of these things, in graph form, looks like this:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIU2PbYtN_Vd_DndM2LstBf2687Cme-MHfSKt5ZGuh_C9_vcVWayAj7ynHYt2KV9lJUbNYkjHDzHYUOF5ekrf_DNFHU1bNpWWC-SB1Dg71oiimpBuU4r0MQYaVX3X7al6vUJh7flvfeLw/s1600/malesexualmarketvaluevalue.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="305" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIU2PbYtN_Vd_DndM2LstBf2687Cme-MHfSKt5ZGuh_C9_vcVWayAj7ynHYt2KV9lJUbNYkjHDzHYUOF5ekrf_DNFHU1bNpWWC-SB1Dg71oiimpBuU4r0MQYaVX3X7al6vUJh7flvfeLw/s400/malesexualmarketvaluevalue.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Guys, for better or worse, aren't affected by aging so much as what they accomplish in life. Women more or less get their value simply by being youthful, then have to fight that as they age. Guys, on the other hand, don't get much other than their indicators of genetic health (assuming they're not trust fund babies.) Everything else? <i>Guys have to earn it</i>. That's both good and bad. It means we have incredible control over our own value, but it also means hard work is heavily rewarded and laziness is ruthlessly punished. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Sidebar - this is the precise reason why "just be yourself" advice, when given to men, is ludicrous. If a man isn't actively improving all of these realms (thus working to increase his value), his value is dropping. You've been warned, lazy fucks. Join our <a href="http://sdmancamp.com/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a> to avoid that "value dropping like Wile E. Coyote's anvil off a cliff" trap. </i></div>
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So... How Do We Use This Information?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I know what some of my readers are thinking - "Wow Jason, that's a pretty harsh take on humanity!" Maybe, but it's reality. And sometimes reality kinda hurts. We can either choose to ignore it and leave our head in the clouds and become victims to our ignorance, or we can accept it and use it to make our lives better. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I do not care to wrap ideas like physical attractiveness in flowery language that gives us the nice feelz. I want to know how shit works, then I want to hack it to figure out how to make my life better, and by extension - the lives of my family. Understanding this helps. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A lot.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Questions? Leave a comment!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-57891821146155979112015-07-07T10:03:00.000-07:002015-07-07T10:03:15.311-07:00The Reality of Biology Trumps "Social Justice"<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWugt4dsJsdMPdJZUMEwdZWAIxBIufDzmaR4j1FKDj_c3uUS-IGgIMB5IPHHuOSKNFVf6-sScGPSNnCS7fesORwjcL8nthWqEkOpVc5lfMsrEguF8TBD8WflfNwDG0KBO7zh3MpIv7J-0/s1600/mancampinfographic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWugt4dsJsdMPdJZUMEwdZWAIxBIufDzmaR4j1FKDj_c3uUS-IGgIMB5IPHHuOSKNFVf6-sScGPSNnCS7fesORwjcL8nthWqEkOpVc5lfMsrEguF8TBD8WflfNwDG0KBO7zh3MpIv7J-0/s1600/mancampinfographic.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-91395608593244212862015-07-06T06:07:00.000-07:002015-07-06T06:07:31.447-07:00Why I Don't Care About Converting Beta Males<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7EC4MvYHuRpxGKTNPv-FNOD1_zCZgNk-o9UvvO3jsMgxVA1JZcF6oSneZwDwyfeN6k0q6VTBHtQQ0jSzXaG8YzPaxXbhC6DzfbLqr_wW1qY7esiO36flll4JeoEjM0uY2VrBemtBSdZs/s1600/Beta_infographic_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7EC4MvYHuRpxGKTNPv-FNOD1_zCZgNk-o9UvvO3jsMgxVA1JZcF6oSneZwDwyfeN6k0q6VTBHtQQ0jSzXaG8YzPaxXbhC6DzfbLqr_wW1qY7esiO36flll4JeoEjM0uY2VrBemtBSdZs/s640/Beta_infographic_1.png" width="531" /></a></div>
<br />
I was sharing a correspondence with a male friend a few days ago. He's interested in my Man Camp idea, and was asking what could be done to recruit and convert beta males to our way of thinking. He was somewhat surprised when I told him I had zero desire to do such a thing. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back when I promoted barefoot running, I learned a valuable lesson. If you're promoting an unconventional idea, people are naturally going to resist it unless they have a compelling reason to really listen. Trying to force the idea is not only pointless, but it raises defenses that may make it impossible for them to "come over to your side" in the future. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many people promoted barefoot running as a clearly superior practice to wearing shoes, and got rather militant about it. If someone objected to the idea of going unshod, their response would be to bash their opponent over the lead with questionable science and limited anecdotal evidence. That approach made barefoot running seem even more absurd than it really is.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My solution was to simply put information out there, then create a community for mutual support. At some point, many runners would experience injuries, try all the standard treatments that wouldn't solve the problem, then come to me for more information on this silly "barefoot running" thing. In short, I waited for them to come to me because they would be in a position to really appreciate the ideas. I didn't have to waste time and energy selling them on the idea; I could use my resources to actually help them overcome the injuries and become better runners.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The same thing applies to the Man Camp idea. The men that are interested thus far all fit the same basic profile. Their either alpha-ish and know that value of the Man Camp concept, or have experienced something akin to a running injury. They realized their method of operation as a beta male is ineffective and are seeking something <i>better</i>. They knew something wasn't quite right. They knew the narrative they've bought into their whole lives was flawed. They experienced that uncomfortable realization that they were wasting the most precious resource of them all - <i>time</i>. They've spent their lives building something that promised fulfillment and happiness, and that narrative has delivered the exact opposite. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I see a lot of beta behaviors in the men around me in real life and via social media. Some seem content, but many remind me of the runners I'd see that looked like they were in perpetual pain. I know I could make a few suggestions to dramatically improve their enjoyment and fulfillment, but I know they're not ready to really listen to the message. They need the equivalent of a major running injury to be in a position to listen. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Maybe it's a dead bedroom situation, a boring relationship, or they're tired of being disrespected and nagged by their girlfriend, wife, or kids. Maybe they're tired of being perceived as weak, indecisive, or incompetent. Maybe they're tired of lame, passionless sex. Maybe they're tired of trying to be the sweet, sensitive boyfriend or husband and getting nothing in return. Maybe their wife or girlfriend is secretly seeking out a man that knows how to act like a man. Maybe they're sick of being friendzoned or being ignored by their love interests. Maybe they're sick of feeling like they've had to abandon all of their instinctual masculine drives and defer to women just for the opportunity to maybe earn their love.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Regardless of the reason, there will be guys that reach the end of their rope and realize their worldview is horribly ineffective. Those are the men that will eventually find us. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of course, a lot of men won't even hit that proverbial "rock bottom." They might be perfectly content with their beta-ness. Maybe playing the subservient role is their particular kink and they're perfectly matching with a domineering woman. <i>And that's perfectly okay.</i> I do not care to convert these people. I don't get them and they don't get me. That doesn't mean either of us are wrong. Just like runners that are perfectly happy with their motion-control foot coffins, all of us should have the right to do as we please. We can still run the same races, then share a beer afterward.<br />
<br />
So why bother?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After all, there are those men that suggest we shouldn't help betas at all. In the competitive landscape that is the Sexual Marketplace, career advancement, and a host of other social situations, the alphas reign king. They get the highest value girls, the jobs in upper management, and the charmed life. The more betas, the better the available choices for the alphas. Personally, I don't like this scarcity mindset. I'm as competitive as the next guy, but I'd rather compete against the best than dilute the competition. I suppose it's the teacher in me, but I'd rather help 100 men learn to be better at being men than beat out those same 100 men in competition. Those 100 men will push me to be a better man. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Curiously, I have a fair number of beta males that routinely jump into discussions related to the Man Camp view of gender roles. Their interest is fascinating because I would expect anyone that wasn't interested would simply ignore my ramblings. <i>But they don't</i>. If my barefoot running experiences are an indicator, these dudes have an inkling that their worldview is causing them significant angst and feel the void, but haven't had that "major injury" experience to compel them to overcome the fear of change. Like the shod runners that would take the time and effort to belittle barefoot running, I would expect them to be asking for advice within the year. When they're ready, we'll be here.<br />
<br />
At the end of the day, though, it's a moot point. I don't really care to convert betas because it's a waste of time helping people that don't want it and, more importantly, their beta status has absolutely no impact on my world. It's a lot like batshit-crazy religious folks, the folks that attend comic book conventions, or soccer fans... they're clearly content with their lives, why is it important for me to insist they believe what I believe? Not all men care to learn to be better at being a man. And that's okay.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-28575386035220001702015-07-05T09:11:00.003-07:002015-07-05T09:11:46.451-07:00The Gender Role Cult Problem: How Identifying with One Particular Team Blinds Our Objectivity<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmZQoXevOIU8kY-hcFCNwbhd0T6FvLXzptguicSOGhpgCBLkwNlPl7ZhxYAElo6g7KzMrIM0QDCBl2mMvFYnMPiTQFUu_xcLB1KUHfKuLtOLxeYREskl14RrLra_VhDgFTkwp-32Xn-dg/s1600/ingroup-outgroup.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmZQoXevOIU8kY-hcFCNwbhd0T6FvLXzptguicSOGhpgCBLkwNlPl7ZhxYAElo6g7KzMrIM0QDCBl2mMvFYnMPiTQFUu_xcLB1KUHfKuLtOLxeYREskl14RrLra_VhDgFTkwp-32Xn-dg/s320/ingroup-outgroup.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
"Hey Jason, why do you seem to have a disdain for feminism and all the male responses (men's rights activists, the "manosphere", The Red Pill, etc.), yet use their concepts on a regular basis?"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've received this question a few times over the last few months, and it deserves a little explanation. I really like and can identify with a lot of the goals and ideas of both "sides" of these gender advocates, but the actual movements themselves are wayyyyy too cultish for my liking. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Specifically, the proponents of these ideologies increasingly use the in-group/ out-group bias when considering their particular group. They start framing anything and everything as "us versus them." That leads to a tendency to stereotype "them", which is made worse by the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias" target="_blank">confirmation bias</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We don't know nearly as much about gender roles, relationships, and sexuality as we believe we know, so it makes sense (to me anyway) to remain as impartial as possible. The moment we identify ourselves as a member of a particular ideology, we begin losing the skepticism necessary to really investigate anything. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For me personally, this gets annoying when discussing these issues. People that identify themselves as a feminist or as a men's rights activist have no ability to see the flaws in their own stance because their self-worth is tied to the emotional outcome of the debate. They consider themselves as part of a team and they do not want their team to lose. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This became apparent when I recently posted about the flawed logic <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/07/the-liberals-got-this-one-wrong-why-we.html" target="_blank">liberals use when considering gender</a>. I was hoping to have an actual conversation that would discuss what I saw as hypocrisy of vilifying masculinity as a social construct while supporting transgender folks as victims of biology. As a pretty liberal person, I was curious how others logically overcame that cognitive dissonance. Instead of actually discussing the issue, it turned into a nit-picking of semantics or outright changing the subject.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When you don't play for a particular team, you don't give a fuck who wins or even if there is a winner. Instead, you can focus on what really matters - getting closer to an objective "truth" and seeing the world as it really is, not how you wish it were. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I got a healthy dose of this phenomenon when I was actively promoting barefoot running. Scientifically, we didn't know a lot about running gait. We had some hypotheses related to the superiority of being barefoot, but simple experimentation with minimalist shoes *should* have led us to conclude our hypotheses were incorrect. The people that strongly identified themselves as "barefoot runners", however, completely ignored the obvious and continued to cling to their beliefs. Their complete inability to see what was obviously solid empirical evidence that refuted their beliefs ultimately led me to back away. They knew what they knew and could not be convinced otherwise.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I experienced the same issue with men. It's clear the alpha/beta concept plays an important role in female attraction. Beta males simply do not arouse women. Even most women tell men this. Still, the vast majority of modern men continue to believe women are aroused by sensitive, vulnerable, weak men. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While rejecting the label and refusing to identify with one particular group does provide a degree of insulation, it's not infallible. I still fall for all kinds of cognitive biases. The difference? I expect all my thoughts and ideas are wrong and look for information that confirms my wrongness. It's a pretty simple mental game that turns the conformation bias on its head. This is also the reason I apparently change directions so often. I may promote one idea, then promote a radically different idea for what seems like no apparent reason. People have a hard time understanding that I don't tie myself down with one particular ideology. Ever. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So what can you do?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I like this activity. Get a piece of paper. Make a list of every "group" you consider yourself to be a part of. Think globally. For me, it does something like this:</div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Male</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Resident of USA, California, and San Diego</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Teacher</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Liberal</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Libertarian</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Father</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Stay-at-home dad</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Sort-of Marxist</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Mixed martial artist</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Husband</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Left-handed person</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Caucasian</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Trail runner</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Jiu jitsu player</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Writer</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Detroit Tigers fan</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">French Canadian</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Fitness enthusiast</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Norwegian</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Dude with a beard</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Entrepreneur</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Guns rights supporter</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Pro life supporter</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
...and so on. Once you make the list, think about each item. How does this affect your world view? Specifically, how does this cause you to fall for the in-group/ out-group and confirmation bias? Does membership in this particular group limit your ability to rationally consider new ideas, or are you emotionally-invested in the outcomes related to that particular group? Think about an issue related to that group. Can you compose an effective argument <i><b>against </b></i>your opinions? If you can't, you're too attached to that group and it blinds you to reality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The difficult part of this exercise is this tendency to align ourselves and filter information is hard-wired into all humans. It occurs automatically in every situation. Even when we're aware of the concept, we still fall for it. That requires us to make these thought games a habit. If you're interested in trying to learn how the world really works, this is an invaluable skill that' well worth the effort.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I don't despise feminism and the male variants; I just understand the danger of identifying too closely with them. They have good ideas and should be used as resources, not as lifestyle identities. The concept of gender roles influence pretty much every aspect of our behavior. As such, understanding how they work is more important than joining a team and helping them "win."</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
###Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-69343214773616767682015-07-04T12:22:00.000-07:002015-07-04T13:22:57.180-07:00Operational Definitions: The Glossary of Sexpressionist Terminology<div style="text-align: justify;">
Since I started discussing gender roles, many of the discussions have devolved away from the actual concepts to arguments over semantics. This post will serve as the official Sexpressionist glossary for terms and concepts I use regularly, which will be updated periodically.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Advertising Sex</b> - Passionate, enthusiastic, uninhibited sex females engage in to either win over or "protect" their mate from being poached by another woman. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Alpha Female</b> - The one female that leads a particular group of women. Alpha females are usually the most-admired woman in a group. Identifiable based on the other women's feet; they all point towards the alpha. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Alpha Male</b> - In any given situation, the alpha is the male calling the shots. Alphas are admired by men and desired by women. Alpha status is situational - a man can be an alpha in his career but a beta in relationships. Specific to relationships, women are sexually aroused by alpha males. Beta males often mistake Pseudo-alphas for real alphas. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Androgynous Female (AF)</b> - A genetic and/or biological female exhibiting a primary androgynous gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Androgynous Male (AM) - </b>A genetic and/or biological male exhibiting a primary androgynous gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Androgyny </b>- A gender role with a balance between masculine and feminine characteristics.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>AOS</b> - "Art of Seduction" - a popular book by Robert Greene.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Beta Male</b> - In any given situation, beta males are the males that are not calling the shots. In relationships, betas often provide material comforts but do not sexually arouse their partners. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Biological Sex</b> - Demographic category determined by either the presence or absence of ovaries and/or testes *OR* the appearance of the external genitalia. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Confirmation Bias</b> - Tendency to filter incoming information. If incoming information confirms a belief we hold, we pay attention to it. If incoming information refutes a belief we hold, we ignore it. Changing people's minds always requires us to first overcome the confirmation bias in some way.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Consensual Nonmonogamy </b>- Another term for Social Sexuality.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Dead Bedroom</b> - Intimate relationship where one or both partners is not getting as much sex as they'd like.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Desire</b> - Used interchangeably with "Passion"; refers to the desire to have sex.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Dark Triad</b> - Personality type that includes elements of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Almost all humans are weirdly aroused by people that exhibit the Dark Triad.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Dunbar's Number</b> - Theory that the human brain can only maintain stable social ties with about 150 people. Once this number is surpassed, people lose the ability to related to each other on a personal level and begin relying on group stereotypes. Developed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Feminine</b> - Gender role primarily tasked with expanding and developing society; consisting of the virtues of <i>social facilitation</i> (including intuitiveness, vulnerability, openness, tranquility, flexibility, cooperativeness, and prudence), <i>nurturing </i>(including loving, patience, kindness, cleanliness, thriftiness, and hopefulness), <i>compassion </i>(including empathy, altruism, thoughtfulness, graciousness, mercy, and tolerance), and <i>beauty </i>(including physical attractiveness, sensuality, chastity, self-respect, innocence, and flirtiness.)</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Feminine Female (FF) </b>- A genetic and/or biological female exhibiting a primary feminine gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Feminine Male (FM)</b> - A genetic and/or biological male exhibiting a primary feminine gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Feminism</b> - Social movement advocating for women, divided into four chronological and ideological "waves." The first wave fought for voting rights. The second wave fought for equality under the law. The third wave fought for a variety of social issues related to equality. Some third wave goals actually work towards gender equality; some work toward female superiority. The fourth wave is batshit crazy.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gamma Male</b> - Men that defer to anyone and everyone, including beta males. While I don't like the term, these men are usually considered "losers."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender </b>- Social construct that defines a set of behavioral characteristics that are at least partially controlled by hormones and neurotransmitters; likely has a biological or genetic cause much like sexual orientation. Can be masculine, feminine, or androgynous. "Gender" is mostly independent of "sex."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender Equality</b> - All people, regardless of sex or gender, should have equal opportunity, equal possibility, and equal responsibility. Gender equality does <i>not </i>mean everyone should start from the same point or should have an equal outcome.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender Role Protection Theory</b> - My hypothesis that gender roles evolved as a mutual protection agreement between the masculine and feminine (as opposed to the popular opinion that gender roles developed as a means for men to oppress women.) This is a fundamental principle of the San Diego Man Camp.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender Roles</b> - The practical purpose different genders play within interpersonal romantic relationships, families, and other levels of "tribes."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender Characteristics</b> - Specific behaviors or personality dispositions that can be classified as masculine or feminine.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Gender Virtues</b> - Broad groups of gender characteristics.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Genetic Sex </b>- XX, XY, and all the intersex variations.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Honeymoon Period</b> - Period at the beginning of a relationship where individuals are obsessed with each other. Leads to predictable behaviors like boundless energy, weight loss, extremely high sexual desire, obsessive thoughts, and an inability to see your partner's flaws. Generally lasts about 9-18 months. In the U.S., many expect this feeling to last forever. It doesn't.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Hypergamy</b> - Dual female sexual strategy where women desire a mate with superior genes (alphas) and a mate that is a good provider (betas.) Often varies depending on the phase of the menstrual cycle and can be influenced by oral contraceptives, and may vary depending on age (and sexual market value.)</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>In-Group/ Out-Group Bias</b> - Tendency to see members of our tribe as individuals and in a positive light and non-members as a stereotype and in a negative light. Fuels the <i>confirmation bias. </i></li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Intersex </b>- Broad category of the genetic and biological gray area between "male" and "female."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Intimacy </b>- The emotional closeness we feel towards our partner in a romantic relationship, which is mutually-exclusive to passion. Intimacy and passion are inversely-related. This differs from the pop psychology belief that intimacy is a prerequisite to passion. In my opinion, that particular belief is the primary reason so many long-term relationships fail.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Kink </b>- Any sexual behavior that falls about one standard deviation from the norm. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Madbod </b>- Overweight male body type.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Maintenance Sex</b> - Passionless, mechanical sex women engage in for a utilitarian purpose. Often occurs after the honeymoon period expires.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Man Camp (MC)</b> - Abbreviation for San Diego Man Camp</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Masculine </b>- Gender role primarily tasked with protecting and providing for the tribe; consisting of the virtues of strength (physical capabilities), courage (willingness to face danger), mastery (developing and mastering skills useful to the tribe), and honor (respect earned from the other men in the tribe.) Includes characteristics like independence, emotionally stable, aggressive, assertive, resilient, exhibit a strong in-group/ out-group bias, competitive, confident, physically-active, sexually aggressive, rebellious, free, logical, disciplined, situationally-aware, and protective.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Masculine Female (MF)</b> - A genetic and/or biological female exhibiting a primary masculine gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Masculine Male (MM)</b> - A genetic and/or biological male exhibiting a primary masculine gender role.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>MRAs </b>- Men's Rights Activists - A group of men that advocate for men's rights, especially in the legal and educational realms. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>NBZ</b> - "No Bone Zone" - my sex and relationship book for curing sexual boredom in long-term relationships.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">"Nice Guys" - A type of emotionally-manipulative male.<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank"> Explained in detail here.</a> </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Nonconsensual Nonmonogamy</b> - Having sex with a partner other than your primary partner without their knowledge or consent (aka "cheating")</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Open Relationship</b> - General term used to describe a relationship with a consensual nonmonogamy element.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Pair Bond</b> - Sciency term for a couple.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Passion </b>- Uncontrollable desire to have sex with someone; marked by sexual arousal and associated thoughts and behaviors. Passion is mutually-exclusive of intimacy. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Poly </b>- Polyamory, or a particular type of social sexuality where people form multiple simultaneous emotionally-involved romantic relationships. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Primary Gender Role</b> - The gender role you exhibit most often.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Pseudo-alpha</b> - Caricature of what an alpha actually is, usually manifested by loud, brash, arrogant behaviors without leadership skills (aka "douche".) </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Provisioning </b>- providing for; usually used in reference to males "provisioning" for their wife and kids. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Rated Attractiveness</b> - Measure of physical beauty, determined by having a panel give a numerical rating to an individual. The larger the group, the more reliable the rating. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Rats </b>- Nonviolent social moochers; part of my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Gender Role Protection Theory</a>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">SDMC - <a href="http://sdmancamp.com/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Secondary Gender Role </b>- Gender role we utilize on occasion, usually to amplify the effectiveness of our primary gender role. For example, a masculine male may use feminine characteristics to be more "gentlemanly."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Serial Monogamy</b> - Having sex only with the other person in a romantic relationship, then only switch sexual partners when we enter a new relationship. The predominant way most of us do relationships here in the United States. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sex</b> (the demographic classification) - refers to the genetic or biological classification, can be "man", "woman" or "intersex."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sex-positive Feminism</b> - Brand of third-wave feminism that supports the free expression of sexuality. A major inspiration for my book <i>No Bone Zone</i>. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Attraction</b> - A form of attraction we feel towards another individual measured by our level of sexual arousal. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Market</b> - Term used to describe the dynamics that influence how and why particular people pair up. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Market Value</b> - our individual "value" on the sexual market. Varies depending on the "buyer" and their preferences. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Orientation</b> - Refers to the sex and/or gender that sexually arouses us. Can be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or asexual. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Orientation Plasticity</b> - Flexibility in our sexual orientation. Depending on the environment and other conditions, our sexual orientation <i>may </i>change (like dudes in prison.) Women are generally considered as having greater flexibility in sexual orientation.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sexual Selection</b> - Darwinian tendency to develop or exhibit preferences that others find attractive and helps us find mates. Characteristics that arise as a result of sexual selection often do not aid (or may actually harm) survival (like a male peacock's elaborate feathers.) Muscular males or chesty females are two human examples.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sheep </b>- Nonviolent masses; part of my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Gender Role Protection Theory</a>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sheepdog </b>- Protectors of their tribes, willing and eager to use violence in that role; part of my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Gender Role Protection Theory</a>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Shit Test </b>- Tests humans give to each other to assess their physical, emotional, psychological, and social fitness. Examples would be males teasing each other or women asking "Does this dress make me look fat?"</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Social Justice Warrior</b> - Beta male Sheep that advocates for the expanding of society.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Social Proof</b> - Tendency to observe and utilize the behavior of others as a guide for social behavior; also refers to the tendency to use other people to assess the sexual market value of a particular individual. For example, a woman may find a married man more attractive than if he were single because at least one other woman sees value in him.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Social Sexuality</b> - My preferred umbrella term for consensual nonmonogamy.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sociosexual Orientation</b> - Refers for an individual's capacity to engage in casual no-strings attached sex.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Swingers </b>- Type of social sexuality where couples engage in casual sex without emotional connections with someone other than their primary partner. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Till Death Monogamy</b> - The way we used to do monogamy; we'd have one partner until one or both died.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Tribe </b>- The group you identify with and causes an in-group/ out-group bias. Most people belong to multiple tribes, but one usually takes precedent over the others.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>TRM</b> - "The Rational Male" - A useful book by Rollo Tomassi.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>TRP</b> - <i>The Red Pill</i> - an online community dedicated to understanding male and female behaviors, especially as they relate to each other. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>TWoM</b> - "The Way of Men" - a book by Jack Donovan.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>White Knight</b> - A beta male that provides unsolicited "protection" to women in the hopes she'll reciprocate with attention (usually in the form of sex.)</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Wolf </b>- Violent criminals; part of my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Gender Role Protection Theory</a>.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If I missed something, leave a comment and I'll add it ASAP.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-10592103153351486462015-07-02T09:57:00.003-07:002015-07-02T09:57:34.230-07:00The Liberals Got This One Wrong: Why We Cannot Have Gender Equality Without Supporting Masculinity<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhk44igZj6Pk-pgUcrTt3DP3J0gCEkw3uLBunXe-vCaZrwtZDCTePhW4MswC3d8A9dD6jm6z-drjjFwNbjRHzf7X6zMJDqJNt-9nxvzLwn5eTwGj6uVjifBTlLiC-EnhLUhBAUURK6tsSc/s1600/follow-leading-from-behind-overly-manly-man-580x606.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhk44igZj6Pk-pgUcrTt3DP3J0gCEkw3uLBunXe-vCaZrwtZDCTePhW4MswC3d8A9dD6jm6z-drjjFwNbjRHzf7X6zMJDqJNt-9nxvzLwn5eTwGj6uVjifBTlLiC-EnhLUhBAUURK6tsSc/s400/follow-leading-from-behind-overly-manly-man-580x606.jpg" width="382" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Studying gender roles in-depth over the last few months has resulted in a great deal of reflection on my own preconceived notions about the topic. Specifically, <i>where </i>exactly do gender roles come from, and how can we <i>best utilize them </i>to make our world a better place? The older I get, the more I see my cohorts fall victim to problems associated with their misguided beliefs about gender roles. Specifically, I see:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">People in gender and women in particular that become sexually-bored in long-term relationships (predictably after about four years) and have no idea how to resurrect the passion.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women that are shamed by other men and women for openly displaying masculine characteristics.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men that are shamed by other men and women for openly displaying feminine characteristics.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Husbands and fathers that are continually stereotyped as incompetent, bumbling idiots, which is reinforced through TV and movies.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Transgender friends, both male and female, shamed for choosing to live as the opposite sex.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Parents of elementary school-aged boys struggling to keep them interested in school. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women, as they approach their mid-thirties, becoming increasingly attracted to alpha males.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is just a partial list of issues I've observed, most of which came from the research for <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00R5BF5DY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00R5BF5DY&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=2SLO64A4VVIZDIWE" target="_blank">No Bone Zone</a>.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="color: red;">[tl:dr warning: If you don't care to read my personal account of gender roles, skip to the "The Rationale to Protect Masculinity" heading below]</span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
How My Beliefs Regarding Gender Have Evolved</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back in college when I was studying sex and gender, the nature versus nurture debate over gender was raging. Sociologists, as they tend to do, made the claim that gender was a social construct that was born when man decided to start farming, and was generally used as a tool for men to hoard power and influence while simultaneously oppressing women (<i>Yay nurture!</i>) </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Evolutionary and biological psychologists, on the other hand, noted the physical and biochemical differences between males and females, and made the argument gender roles are mostly innate and serve a utilitarian purpose. Specifically, men played the role of protector and provider, and women played the role of nurturer and social cohesion. The tribes that best-utilized these roles survived to reproduce and send their superior genes to the next generation (<i>Yay nature!</i>)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At the time, I tended to buy into the first idea a little more, partially because <i>social </i>psychology was my primary theoretical foundation. We pretty much believe all human behavior occurs as a function of the environment. At the time, it seemed to me that traditional gender roles caused a lot of problems, so the solution was to simply alter our environment. I assumed there was a biological basis for gender roles, but I dismissed it as being relatively minor. I pretty much ignored what should have been an obvious data point in this debate - the very sad <a href="http://www.healthyplace.com/gender/inside-intersexuality/the-true-story-of-john-/-joan/" target="_blank">John/Joan story</a> (if you've never heard of it, read this now; it'll change the way you think of gender.) I also ignored the behavioral effects of biologically-determined hormones like testosterone (which gives us dudes our upper body strength, aggression, competitiveness, and relentless sex drive.)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I personally grew up in a household where gender roles were very fluid. Both my parents worked, and both shared in pretty much all the responsibilities of running a household and parenting. Our family had some emotional issues that were more or less passed on from generation to generation, which caused me to develop tendencies that would eventually lead me to appear to be a pretty "beta" male (sensitive, passive, empathetic, caring, etc.), which was amplified by a weird type of auditory dyslexia that caused me to be a really good listener (I have to process everything people say to give it context so I can follow a conversation... it's a useful but exhausting skill.)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When <a href="http://shoelessshelbell.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Shelly</a> and I had kids, we more or less raised them based on the ideas in <a href="http://www.gendercentre.org.au/resources/polare-archive/archived-articles/x-a-fabulous-childs-story.htm" target="_blank">Lois Gould's semi-famous "Baby X" story</a> (another must-read.) The goal was simple - we wanted our kids to have the freedom to express themselves as they wish. Our job as parents were to channel that into something constructive and help them understand the benefits and consequences they'd face for their various behaviors. The result - our daughter (10) has an interesting mix of feminine attractiveness and masculine aggression and competitiveness. Our middle son (9) is the most feminine kid in the family (sensitive and nurturing), yet he also has an edgy dark side that comes out on occasion. Our youngest (6) is a pretty "traditional" boy; his behaviors pretty much align with the majority of his male peers. He's hyperactive, loves rough-housing, climbing, and exploring, etc. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For me personally, I started to realize my "beta-ishness" wasn't a function of my innate personality, but rather a collection of coping skills I had learned while growing up. That was partially tempered by pretty traditional "male" activities like hunting and fishing, playing baseball, football, and wrestling. Still, I was really good at observing women then replicating their behaviors, which gave me the appearance of a decidedly beta male.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I increasingly realized I felt like I was living a lie of sorts. When I'd talk to my gay, lesbian, or transsexual friends, their stories of feeling as though they had to bury their true self resonated with me in a weird way. About a decade ago, I took up running, which led to barefoot running and ultrarunning. Both of those activities satisfied some urge I had, but it was hard to verbalize. I now realize it was my desire to compete, to overcome, to <i>dominate </i>an activity. It was a socially-acceptable manifestation of my repressed masculinity.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
About the only time I didn't suppress these tendencies is with the magical elixir that is alcohol. Drunk Jason became fearless leader Jason. I became assertive, confident, and protective of my tribe (my drinking friends.) </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fast-forward a few years. We had traveled the country for about two years, met thousands and thousands of people (many of which would later inspire my rekindled interest in sex, relationships, and gender roles), and eventually settled in Southern California. We were tiring of the running scene, so Shelly decided to join an mma gym. She <i>loved </i>it. Within a month I joined, too. Both of us were now surrounded by what I would define as <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Sheepdogs and Wolves</a>. Both of us, somewhat surprisingly, took to the violent nature of jiu jitsu, boxing, and kickboxing like fish to water. We both discovered we like violence. <i>A lot</i>. We like hurting people (consensually, of course.) We also don't mind <i>getting </i>hurt. When we train, like almost all of our gym teammates, we beg our coach to let us live spar. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like most things we do, we talked about it. We wrote about it. We shared our experiences far and wide. We tried to convince our runner friends to give it a try. To our surprise (then anyway), we had zero takers. In fact, of my thousands of social media friends, only about ten or twelve both run and practice a martial art that involves real sparring. That was the straw that broke the camel's back and made me fully realize I had been living a complete lie for my entire life. I had actively suppressed my masculine tendencies out of fear of social rejection from family, friends, colleagues... pretty much everyone. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>So I decided to come out of the closet.</i> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When phrased that way, it seems a bit silly. Still, that's exactly how I felt. I started making changes. I no longer suppressed my masculine persona. The response from others was interesting. Some friends clearly did not like the change and sort of fell by the wayside. I got a lot of "you must be trying to compensate for some hidden insecurities" comments. It was clear the detractors didn't get it in any way, shape, or form. I lost friends that loved me for my facade, but that's okay. I do not want to alter my behaviors just to win the approval of others. I spent most of my life doing that. It sucks. A lot.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Other friends loved it. It was clear a lot of men (and women) <i>love </i>being in the presence of masculine men. I started attracting more like-minded men and started hearing their stories. As it turns out, there are a lot of us guys that have done the exact same thing - repressed our masculine tendencies for one reason or another, usually because we believed it was the only way we'd get a woman to love us. That mentality undermined careers and relationships to the point where a lot of dudes felt completely and totally lost. It was if their world they believed existed for so long suddenly crumbled and they were left grasping for any shred of understanding. As it turns out, <i>that's exactly what living a lie feels like</i>. In retrospect, it was a really fucked-up thought process, but denial kinda does that.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So here I am today. For the first time in my life, I feel like the me that the world sees is the me I see on the inside. And it's fantastic; it feels as if a humongous weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I feel a degree of freedom I've never felt before. This feeling has inspired me to continue supporting my kids and their free expression of gender roles. This feeling has inspired me to support Shelly and her free expression of gender roles (especially when it comes to the fighting hobby.) This feeling has inspired me to start the <a href="http://www.sdmancamp.com/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp project</a>, which has sprouted excellent discussions in our <a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">male-only Facebook group</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
The Rationale to Protect Masculinity</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm a pretty liberal dude that believes in quite a few liberal causes. I support gay marriage. I support nationalized healthcare. I support environmentalism. I also support the free expression of gender, which includes removing any and all barriers that might prevent all of us from having equal opportunity and equal responsibility. That includes supporting women that want to do traditional "male" careers and activities. That also includes supporting men that want to do traditional "female" careers and activities. Hell, I'm a stay-at-home dad. I'm living the brand. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
However, my thoughts on gender role freedom doesn't seem to resonate very well with my liberal friends. Most will readily support gay marriage based on the premise that sexual orientation, as pretty much any gay or lesbian will confirm, is not a choice. Most will also support transgender folks (thanks Caitlyn Jenner!) on the premise the gender roles, as pretty much any transgender person will confirm, is not a choice. Yet when men (or women) make the claim that masculinity is just <i>who they are</i>, they're stonewalled. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That stonewalling is almost always rationalized by making the claim that masculinity is bad. Masculinity is violent and aggressive and the reason we have murders and rapes and road rage. Masculinity is an oppressive force that subjugates women. Masculinity forces little boys that identify with more feminine gender roles to be someone they are not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I probably don't have to point out the hypocrisy of the anti-masculine sentiment among liberals... I have a lot of faith in my readers. ;-)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The bottom line - if our society is accepting of people like Caitlyn Jenner, we cannot use the "gender roles are a socially-constructed phenomena" to rationalize anti-masculine policies and behaviors. People that identify with the masculine should have the exact same freedom as anyone that identifies with the feminine. To think otherwise is, in my mind, simply inexcusable.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
My Gender Role Framework</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My Utopia (aka "San Diego Man Camp") relies on a simple principle: Gender roles have a significant biological and/or genetic origin and have a profound influence on our behaviors. Anyone and everyone deserves the freedom to express whatever gender role they choose regardless of their biological or genetic sex and they should be free to express that however they wish as long as they are not infringing on the rights of others. In other words, we can't rationalize vilifying masculinity because a small percentage of dudes commit the majority of sexual assaults or murders. <i>Blame the person committing the crime, not the gender role they're identifying with. </i>From a purely logical point, saying we need to discourage masculinity because it harms others is the exact same bullshit excuse given for the religious right to deny gays equality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Furthermore, I strongly believe we need to do more to support men that have a more feminine disposition and women that have a more masculine disposition. This is the gray area where I think our society fails miserably, and liberals are just as guilty as conservatives. People with masculine or feminine virtues tend to gravitate towards environments (careers, recreational activities, social groups, etc.) where they can best leverage their particular strengths. Both feminine men and masculine women can be tremendous contributors to society, but we put up a whole lotta roadblocks. That needs to end.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Specific to men (and the SDMC project), I want to create an environment for a very specific demographic - men that, like me, have long-repressed their masculinity. Through mutual aid and support, I want to help these men learn to express that masculinity in a way that's not going to make their loved ones the enemy (which is my complaint about most "pro-man" groups.) I do not wish to make men a victimized class. I do not wish to vilify feminist endeavors. I do not wish to convince men that my way is the correct way. I merely wish to create a road map to a better place where we have <b><i>real </i></b>gender equality, then assist those that choose to follow. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-46431197102120634152015-07-01T07:59:00.004-07:002015-07-01T07:59:42.744-07:00How Can We Combine Femininity and Masculinity to Become More Attractive<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sometime last year, I reignited my interest in gender roles. Specifically, I started investigating the way gender roles influenced our romantic relationships. During that time, it became apparent "feminine" and "masculine" gender roles played an integral role in long-term relationship success. Unfortunately, this realization came after I had published my book detailing strategies couples can use to spice up a dormant sex life - <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00R5BF5DY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00R5BF5DY&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=7YM66IBYFB2VQYK4" target="_blank">No Bone Zone</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Initially, I made the assumption that the ideal male or the ideal female would possess both masculine and feminine virtues, and could call on them at will depending on the situation. This seemed logical, and it appeared to be confirmed by observation - people that could play both roles tended to be viewed as "high value." </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fast-forward about a year. Over the last few weeks, we've been having gender role discussions in my <a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a>, a forerunner to the actual Man Camp project I'll be launching shortly. We were discussing an article <a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">about being a gentleman that appeared on the excellent website The Art of Manliness</a>. The article made a case that learning to be a <i>man </i>is a prerequisite to learning to be a <i>gentleman</i>. Gentlemanly, civilized behavior is a smoothing out of the rough edges of masculinity. As such, to be a real gentleman, you must first learn to be a man. This was of interest to the Man Camp group because all of us, to one degree or another, is in the process of learning to be good at being men. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It was also of interest because it provided a better framework for my observations about attractiveness and gender roles. Suddenly, the method of how men can combine feminine traits with masculine traits came into perfect focus. Being a "gentleman" was nothing more than using feminine traits like openness, patience, kindness, graciousness, etc. to take the rough edges off the gruffness of masculinity. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This also explained why effeminate men, <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/what-type-of-man-are-you.html" target="_blank">White Knights</a>, and "<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank">Nice Guys</a>" are so damn repulsive to most women (<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/homophobia-analysis-from-gender-role.html" target="_blank">and many men</a>.) They adopt these "gentlemanly" traits but have nothing underneath to back them up. They're all bark and no bite. For example, white knights love to "protect" women from the evil alpha males, but their aggressive posturing and threats are laughed off because it's just a veneer. White knights are cowards that would back down at any hint of actual confrontation because they have no actual masculine "protection" skills. And most women intuitively know this. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
But Not All Men are Betas, Right?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are a few men that DO pick up on the failings of the beta male, then attempt to correct course by adopting a hyper-masculine persona. This is the stereotypical "douche" (think <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey_Shore_(TV_series)" target="_blank">Jersey Shore</a>.) These men kinda get it right in that they recognize women are sexually aroused by alpha males, but the unchecked masculinity a) is sort of obnoxious and interferes with their ability to function as a productive member of society, and b) pretty much assures they're going to suck at long-term relationships. At the very least, the alpha douche wins out over the wimpy beta because they actually have the skill set to protect those they love. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Interestingly, both the beta male and the douche see that each other is ineffective, yet fail to see the same in themselves. Here's a "Nice Guy" take on the dynamic:</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSvI26tDlACgjuHk76FfJCuQ6sYIEKGHAJbMgQze1OBGpfe7K6J4QPaxsIvx-9gvbRVe9kBV3k46u-XIAlMEBGCZwprFedCWerJm-job3EDYBBjpZ-pHgdCIDqr-GrGBYyr2sqPeUrxzo/s1600/2WWzcsK.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSvI26tDlACgjuHk76FfJCuQ6sYIEKGHAJbMgQze1OBGpfe7K6J4QPaxsIvx-9gvbRVe9kBV3k46u-XIAlMEBGCZwprFedCWerJm-job3EDYBBjpZ-pHgdCIDqr-GrGBYyr2sqPeUrxzo/s640/2WWzcsK.jpg" width="256" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you're a regular reader of this website, you'll immediately see the humor.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So Where Did We Go Wrong?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Genetic and biological males have simply lost the desire to really embrace and develop masculine traits. It's almost like most men today have developed an allergic reaction to manliness. For whatever reason, our society has forgotten how to teach men to be men. Most men fall into some version of the beta male trap. A few "rise above" and adopt the alpha douche persona. Yet very few bother to take the time to learn how to really be good at being a man, then learn to temper that unchecked manliness with appropriate doses of femininity.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm finding more and more men (and a few younger women that haven't fully learned how shitty beta males are over the long haul) that buy into a much different narrative - they're trying to "redefine" masculinity. This "redefining" is a wholesale destruction of all four masculine virtues and replacing them with feminine virtues. These men are going a step further than just trying to be gentlemanly without learning the prerequisite masculine virtues; they're actually trying to redefine <i>masculinity </i>as <i>femininity</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This group of men fall into a special category of resentful males I'm going to call "Politically Correct Butthurt Men." These PCBM men not only reject masculinity, they actively vilify it. Why? They have zero confidence in their own ability to learn to be good at being a man. That leads these men to attack any display of masculinity as "compensating for insecurity" and other such nonsense. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Using my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">Gender Role Protection Theory</a>, these men would be the Sheepiest Sheep in the tribe with no ability to protect. In a more dangerous environment, these men would normally be welcomed into the tribe and given appropriate non-protective role. In our modern safe and prosperous society where there's little need for protection, these men have a degree of power and influence and can insist we yank the fangs from our society's Sheepdogs. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These men can't play by the rules that have governed our species throughout our history, so they attempt to change the rules by making men act (and kinda look) like women. They're like the obese kid that lobbies to add a brownie eating contest to the third grade field day events. <i>They can win at THAT game. </i>The problem, of course, is that their version of masculinity is despised by almost all women. Women don't want a woman with a penis. Women want a manly man that has the ability to temper that masculinity with the social savvy of gentlemanly behaviors. <i>That </i>is the ideal man. <i>That </i>is what us men need to become. <i>That </i>is what we need to teach our sons.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So What Does this "Ideal Man" Look Like? </h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The ideal man would possess all four of the virtues effective men possess - physical strength, courage, a mastery of a wide variety of skills that serve his tribe, and honor (defined as the admiration and respect of the other men in his tribe.) The ideal man would also possess enough feminine virtues to temper these masculine virtues in a way that allows him to be a competent social animal. The ideal man has the capacity to conjure their inner-rage if the shit hits the fan, but they also have the ability to control that rage. The ideal man has that masculine aggressiveness at his fingertips and can call on it when needed, but also has the social tools to diffuse situations in a more peaceful manner.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So how do men combine masculine and feminine virtues? Men have to learn to be good at being a man. Once that is accomplished, and ONLY when that is accomplished, they can then learn to judiciously temper that masculinity with the polish of feminine virtues. Masculinity is the sculpture we chisel out of the block of granite that is our personality. Femininity is the sandpaper we use to polish that sculpture to make us effective gentlemen. That's the explicit goal of my <a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">Man Camp tribe</a> - we're a bunch of guys that accept this challenge because we know, at a primitive level, <i><b>that this is the way of men.</b></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-27825862732149107252015-06-27T08:10:00.000-07:002015-06-27T08:10:53.016-07:00Homophobia: An Analysis from the Gender Role Protection Theory<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzy55a7NWRB0UMzDy4cmXJJI2yZk7fHJZB8D1ql4cB7zY5hCqmCN-OwffKKTTDqodMplUfilEto2eDfuew2LsH19qY9J_DUJ2YAjWNczLWuiODuDOb6B1mr0Ilfick-Erl-9ZUZEGnrdk/s1600/100303-protestors-hmed-11a.grid-6x2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzy55a7NWRB0UMzDy4cmXJJI2yZk7fHJZB8D1ql4cB7zY5hCqmCN-OwffKKTTDqodMplUfilEto2eDfuew2LsH19qY9J_DUJ2YAjWNczLWuiODuDOb6B1mr0Ilfick-Erl-9ZUZEGnrdk/s400/100303-protestors-hmed-11a.grid-6x2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Yesterday we started our family vacation, which involved driving about 500 miles. Since I spent the whole day in the car, I missed the news that our Supreme Court ruled on<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obergefell_v._Hodges" target="_blank"> Obergefell v. Hodges</a>, which extended the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to homosexual marriage. As a long-time supporter of gay rights, this came as exciting news. I'm celebrating by enjoying a nice continental breakfast in a small slightly-redneck-ish town in Northern California. By coincidence, I'm preparing to officiate my niece's wedding.<br />
<br />
Anyway, a quick perusal of my Facebook news feed reveals the expected dichotomy of opinion - many people celebrating wildly; a few others bitching about judicial activism and predicting the end of the world as we know it. That last sentiment is interesting. Until recently, I never really understood the visceral disdain some people have for all things gay, especially from people that supposedly support the idea of individual liberty. Even the religious argument doesn't make a lot of sense considering the ultra-religious don't really get their panties in a bunch over other crimes against the Bible to the point where they protest. Why would anyone give a fuck about complete strangers getting married? It made no sense to me... until I stared playing around with the reasons we have gender roles.<br />
<br />
Before I get into the explanation, read the <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">explanation of my Gender Role Protection theory </a>and my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/liberals-and-conservatives-gender-role.html" target="_blank">analysis of liberal and conservative beliefs</a> first. They're short; it won't take much time. It will properly frame the ideas. Otherwise, it'll make little sense. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's okay, I'm not going anywhere.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Got it?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Okay, let's get to work. Homophobia has long been an issue that interested me, mostly because a bias against an entire segment of the population based entirely on who they're attracted to seems arbitrary and pointless. Yet homophobia still persist.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Why?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My hypothesis provides a pretty simple answer. At the heart of it, homophobia isn't about hate. It's about <i>vulnerability</i>. I've noticed a weird phenomenon. Pretty much without exception, my conservative friends have strong anti-gay attitudes. Until, that is, they get to know one or more masculine gay males. If they only knew gay males that had an effeminate personality, the bias persisted.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's when I connected the dots. Effeminate males are assumed to exhibit feminine traits. Remember my chart from the last two posts? Femininity is the <i>protected </i>group, not the <i>protector </i>group. That's important because it brings another weird Sheepdog behavior (usually but not exclusively found in males): <i>Sheepdogs are always evaluating others to determine if they have the chops to protect the herd. </i>That's the same motivation behind hazing behaviors and rites of passage - they're tests for physical, psychological, and emotional fitness.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is absolutely necessary because the sheepdog has to know the fellow sheepdogs has their back. When you're going to war, mutual protection is absolutely necessary. That's a fundamental aspect of playing the protector role. This effect is mostly a male construct because there are more masculine men than masculine women, which is a result of evolution. Men, on average, are more physically suited for violence.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We know conservatives, by definition, play the protector role within our society. As such, conservatives are the group that evaluates others for their fitness as protectors. If a conservative views gay men as effeminate, they assume (probably correctly) that they're going to make poor protectors. This is one of the reasons I think the "Will and Grace" stereotype that all gay men are effeminate was done more damage than good. Anyone that knows more than a handful of gay men knows this is nothing more than a stereotype. In fact, masculine and feminine traits seem to occur in the homosexual male population at pretty much the same rate as the heterosexual population. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is why conservatives getting to know masculine gay men tends to shatter the homophobia. Through personal experience, they recognize the effeminate gay male stereotype is just that - a stereotype. It's as if the conservative Sheepdog suddenly thinks "Wow, I've been wrong about these gays all along! I can totally rely on this masculine gay dude when we're protecting the tribe!"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Just like that, the homophobia disappears. Maybe all we need to do is start getting people to understand the homosexual population is no different than the heterosexual population.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So it doesn't quite work like that with <i>all </i>conservatives, but I've witnessed this very thing enough to at least consider this as <i>one </i>potential cause of homophobia. Some religions complicate matters, and this says nothing about the Sheep that may harbor homophobic attitudes, but it's a start. And sometimes that's all that's needed. While yesterday's Supreme Court decision was a huge victory for personal liberty, it also opened the door for an eventual (and more emotional) showdown between the Fourteenth Amendment-protected rights for gay marriage and the First Amendment-protected right of religious liberty. It's in our best interest to investigate the actual causes of homophobia. Until we really understand the construct, any attempt at reconciling the differences between these two groups will fail miserably. And that hurts all of us. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-86056190560706597932015-06-21T07:08:00.003-07:002015-06-21T07:08:52.917-07:00What Type of Man Are You?<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibO8NKGyqBVbOvnmJZJSE_qmXizVqxT-5XFdpxLiRSWEbALB38GMsOaymlxevE5XjfMnKthZ5p5l1t8l5nuAyH6cr2n3gVruYEp-kEkOEE3bR7YlzLkcPWeKHFNiI8DVOiraqWMqfydko/s1600/man+camp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="298" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibO8NKGyqBVbOvnmJZJSE_qmXizVqxT-5XFdpxLiRSWEbALB38GMsOaymlxevE5XjfMnKthZ5p5l1t8l5nuAyH6cr2n3gVruYEp-kEkOEE3bR7YlzLkcPWeKHFNiI8DVOiraqWMqfydko/s400/man+camp.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Over the last few days, I've spent a great deal of time explaining the ins and outs of my Gender Role Protection Theory, starting with the actual theory, discussing how it applies to political affiliation, and discussing how it applies to homophobia. In this installment, I'm going to talk about the various facets of this theory and how it applies to <i>men</i>. Seems appropriate for Father's Day, huh?<br />
<br />
The goal is to give men a little more insight as to where they may fit within this theory. The very first question we'll explore is which side of the "willingness to engage in violence" horizontal axis do you fall? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7cqSrnkL2zWN8QZsrRylwxkEKRSyKLjt4fa1BYb-SahHUZygnRRM44zqP0mSvj09m614J3tsRBZpfcll2bZgYP07EhIzLOERFe1Rj4uZDc4kJrTcvrJ6wYVGK0LsdH10zjh7ZeFdvXzw/s1600/protection+theory+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7cqSrnkL2zWN8QZsrRylwxkEKRSyKLjt4fa1BYb-SahHUZygnRRM44zqP0mSvj09m614J3tsRBZpfcll2bZgYP07EhIzLOERFe1Rj4uZDc4kJrTcvrJ6wYVGK0LsdH10zjh7ZeFdvXzw/s400/protection+theory+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Are You Capable of Violence or Not?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Before you answer, it's important to note all of us, assuming we have the physical capability, can be provoked to act violently. History has taught us this with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/09/bsp/hitler.html" target="_blank">the German population that aided the Holocaust</a>. One of my personal experimental social psychology heroes, Stanley Milgram, also confirmed this idea with his now <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVlI-_4GZQ" target="_blank">infamous obedience experiment</a>. The general rule of thumb: You can compel anyone to do pretty much anything if you manipulate the right social and environmental variables.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now that we have that out of the way, let's answer the question. How do you feel about violence? Ignoring all other information, could you use violence at the drop of a hat with very little provocation? Or are you the type of person that would only use violence as an absolute last resort? People that have the capability to become violent at will do not hesitate to answer this question. There are no qualifiers, there is no discussion. Just an immediate and enthusiastic yes. Those are the folks at the far right side of my graph.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
If you did have to pause and consider your answer, you'll likely fall somewhere to the left of those folks. At the extreme left, you'd have people that would rather watch their children get raped and murdered in front of them than resort to violence. Worth noting - <i>that extreme probably does not exist</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Men that are Sheepdogs or Wolves</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
If you fell somewhere to the right of zero, congratulations! You're violent! Now let's see if you're a Sheepdog or a Wolf. Generally speaking, do you try to help people, or do you try to exploit people? It's okay if you say "it depends"; most of us would answer this question based on specific conditions. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you absolutely would always help anyone, any time, anywhere and would never exploit anyone for any reason, you're an unequivocal <b>Sheepdog</b>. Your relish the role of virtuous protector, and you do it well. You can sometimes be harsh with the sheep, but it's done to keep them out of harm's way. You know your herd well and are extremely sensitive to and untrusting of outsiders. Sheepdogs also have a willingness to give up their lives to defend the herd. It's important to note that MOST men are sheep, but will assume a Sheepdog role if the situation warrants. One of the eventual goals of my <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a> is helping men learn how to mentally, physically, and emotionally prepare to be better Sheepdogs to be able to protect their loved ones if the shit hits the fan. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you never help anyone else, only think of yourself, and are willing to hurt people to get what you want, you're a <b>Wolf</b>. Given you are not burdened with morality or a conscience, you are the epitome of what we consider "evil." You're a hunter that preys on the weakest of the weak from the herd. The better protected the herd, the more likely you'll avoid it and seek a weaker herd. Wolves also have the willingness to risk their lives to get what they want.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Men that are Sheep or Rats</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
If your answer landed you somewhere left of "zero", you're either a Sheep or a Rat. I know what you're thinking - "Shit, I don't want to be a sheep OR a rat!" Nobody wants to be a rat because, well, they're creepy scavengers that carry disease and eat the bag of Halloween candy we stored in our garage so our nosey little sister wouldn't find it (yes, my disdain for rats is personal.) But Sheep? Aren't they lovable and cuddly? Indeed, but the Internet age has given birth to the purgative term "sheeple", which is a common retort used when we point out ideas like GMO, chemtrails, or 9/11 conspiracies might, in fact, be insane. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyway, if you're nonviolent and prefer to help your fellow human beings, you're a <b>Sheep</b>. You're kind, gentle, and go about your day-to-day routine in as peaceful of a way as possible. You're a bridge-builder that fights for social justice. You help smooth out non-critical problems with nonviolent conflict resolution skills. Your're productive and useful. <i>You are the force that makes our society great</i>. You know there are Wolves out there, but you're confident the Sheepdogs will keep you safe. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you're nonviolent and capable of being productive <i>but </i>prefer to mooch off others? Congratulations, you're a <b>Rat</b>! You're nonviolent, so you rely on petty crime like shoplifting, drug dealing, or jacking cars to pay the bills. Sometimes you may stoop to something like welfare fraud or identity theft. Other times you may mooch off or manipulate Sheep (i.e. - friends and family), beg for cash outside the Piggly Wiggly (or the more white middle class version of panhandling - <i>GoFundMe</i>.) You're generally despised by the other groups because you're unwilling to contribute your fair share. Society tolerates you because, like real rats, you're really fucking hard to eliminate without tremendous time, effort, and expense.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As I mentioned in the original post explaining the theory, there's an important difference between Sheep that want to be productive but, because of circumstance, cannot currently be productive and the Rat that <i>can </i>be productive but chooses not to. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Nice Guys, White Knights, and Social Justice Warriors, MRA's, and The Red Pill</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Over the last few months, I've talked about a slew of different "types" of males. I'll explain how each of these groups fits into the theory. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's start with "<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank">Nice Guys</a>." If you haven't read it, take a look at this post. It's one of my best. "Nice Guys" are Wolves in Sheep's clothing. They hide among the other sheep that are genuinely decent men. They're not interested in robbing or killing their victims; they're interested in <i>fucking </i>their victims. They mold their persona to match whatever their female target is looking for in a man. Unlike wolves that have no need for emotional attachments, "Nice Guys" require female validation and will do anything to get it. Their most common strategy is to give with the expectation of getting their needs me in return. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>White Knights</i> are the men that will defend women without being asked. In many cases, the "saving behaviors" are unwanted and intrusive. The White Knight will usually be "saving" the woman from guys HE deems as unfit for her. The goal is t hopefully impress the woman enough so she'll have sex with him. White Knights are Sheep through and through, but they've learned to bark like the Sheepdogs. They can usually be identified by extreme peacocking because they rely on people fearing their threats. If they do get themselves into an actual physical confrontation, they'll back down immediately, thus revealing their true Sheep persona. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Social Justice Warriors</i> (SJW's) appear a bit like White Knights. They're continually defending people, but not just women. They'll defend any minority or oppressed group. Unlike White Knights, SJW's usually have virtuous goals of expanding society to make it better for all of us. The problem with SJW's is their opposition to the Sheepdogs. SJW's believe the world is a fundamentally safe place and believe the Sheepdogs do more harm than good. The problem, of course, is that SJW's have a really difficult time telling the difference between sheep from other herds and the Wolves that are dressed like them. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Men's Rights Activists</i> (MRA's) are an interesting group I don't discuss much here. This is a group of men made up of Sheepdogs and Sheep that recognize the other Sheep do not like the Sheepdogs and will always try to either convert them to Sheep or ship them off somewhere else (like prison?) The MRA's like to blame the other sheep (especially the eweist sheep.) MRA's fail to see that the ebb and flow of safety and danger is what's responsible for the waxing and waning of "men's rights", not a concerted conspiracy carried out by a particular group or movement. They do serve a useful purpose though. They act as a bit of a buffer to between the Sheepdogs and the Sheep that want to get rid of them. SJW's and MRA's, for what it's worth, engage in some bitter but amusing debates.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/" target="_blank">The Red Pill</a></i> folks are another group I've mentioned, but haven't really discussed all that much. They're essentially a group of mostly men (there are a few women that are part of the movement) that sort of do the same thing as the MRA's, but with a different focus. At the heart of it, they're men that have realized masculinity is vilified in times of peace and security and attempt to learn, discuss, and share the new rules of the game. TRP folks could occupy any of the four quadrants, so they could be Sheepdogs, Wolves, Sheep, or Rats. I personally I found their insight to evolutionary psychology-based gender and relationship dynamics to be spot-on (this coming from a dude that's studied sex and gender for about two decades.) Following their long-term relationship advice will result in a happier, healthier relationship than following pop psychology relationship advice. However, a lot of their writings are littered with anti-Feminist dogma (some valid, some not so valid) which scares away a lot of the Sheep that could use their message. Many sheep perceive them as wolves, but I've found that's probably the least-represented animal group in their community. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Well men, this post should give you a little more insight to where exactly you fit in this theory. Remember, your position is fluid (it can change over time and with new experiences) and situational (you may be in different quadrants based on what's happening around you.) More importantly, you have the power to learn the roles (hopefully you're a Sheep interested in becoming a Sheepdog... we already have too many Wolves and Rats.) </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
How would you identify yourself? Leave a comment!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-56613409567201535482015-06-20T06:07:00.000-07:002015-06-20T06:07:40.123-07:00Liberals and Conservatives: A Gender Role Protection Theory Explanation<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-protection-theory-of-gender-roles.html" target="_blank">In yesterday's post, I proposed a theory explaining "protection" as the reason gender roles developed. </a>In short, "masculine" gender roles serve as society's protectors, whereas "feminine" gender roles are the protected. That's obviously not the only function each role serves, but it's the <i>foundation</i>. In my theory, we have: </div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sheepdogs </b>(the protectors that are willing to use violence to protect), </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Wolves </b>(the bad people that are willing to use violence for crime), </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Sheep </b>(the friendly, peaceful masses), and </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Rats </b>(the nonviolent societal mooches.)</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is what my graph of the types looks like:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMm5PZD2S6y587VPS3TNb6R7O9Q3Tl8jc0raOd5nJVlVFRs0wt2i4dOtsqe-FLaq1i_l4Uy7fIhuFQmNOnSrqmwaq9Cjc68JNT29TDHPMDD_B76wxCYSvWixlI_wlb75IyleEQYg5uHy8/s1600/protection+theory+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMm5PZD2S6y587VPS3TNb6R7O9Q3Tl8jc0raOd5nJVlVFRs0wt2i4dOtsqe-FLaq1i_l4Uy7fIhuFQmNOnSrqmwaq9Cjc68JNT29TDHPMDD_B76wxCYSvWixlI_wlb75IyleEQYg5uHy8/s400/protection+theory+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I specifically developed this theory to better understand interpersonal attraction and relationships, but the theory can be applied to all kinds of societal issues and constructs. Political affiliation is one such construct. We've known for some time that there <a href="http://2012election.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004818" target="_blank">appears to me measurable differences between the biology of conservatives and liberals</a>. One of the most significant differences: <b>Liberals </b>have a tendency to think the world is <b>safer </b>than it really is and try to <i>expand </i>society, and <b>conservatives </b>have a tendency to think the world is <b>more dangerous </b>than it really is and try to <i>protect </i>society. As a result, conservatives tend to lean towards the Sheepdog side of the graph and liberals tend to lean toward the Sheep side of the graph.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In times of relative peace (like today in the United States), we don't have a great need for protection. As such, liberals tend to set most of our public policy which is geared toward expanding society to make conditions better for all of us (this is the "progressive" part.) This is manifested in ideas like sex, gender, and racial equality, universal health care, disarming the police and disbanding the military, expanded gun control, clean the environment, open our borders, opposed to the war on terror, etc. When it comes to how they see others that are different than them, liberals tend to be supportive and welcoming because, in a safe environment, strangers aren't a threat to the tribe. Liberals also tend to be more represented in the "helping" fields like education and medicine.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In times of danger (like war, post-9/11, etc.) we have a greater need for protection. As such, conservatives tend to set most of our public policy which is geared toward keeping America safe. That's reflected in support for military spending, keeping people that exhibit feminist characteristics from taking on protection roles (like the military), eliminating gun control, favoring commerce in favor of environmentalism (to be better able to defend ourselves), closing our borders and cracking down on illegal immigration, etc. When it comes to seeing others that are different than them, conservatives are skeptical and cautious because any stranger is a potential threat to the tribe. Conservatives tend to be represented in the "defending" fields like law enforcement and the military.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The tricky part (and annoying for me) is neither side really understands the other. Liberals scream from the top of their lungs "WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SUCH A PARANOID BIGOT!" while conservatives scream back "WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SUCH AN OBLIVIOUS HIPPIE!" Neither side really "gets" the other side at all, which results in a perpetual struggle for power to carry out their respective agenda. Liberals would like nothing more for conservatives to go away. Conservatives want the exact same thing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Based on my theory, I argue both are necessary because sometimes our world does get dangerous and we need protection. And when that danger recedes, we need to expand our society so we can make progress as a species. A quick look at human history reveals a few telling things. First, every culture in the history of forever has had a conservative and a liberal dichotomy. Second, the influence of each ebbed and flowed depending on the specific situation at the time. Third, and probably most significantly, if by some weird chance one group or the other disappears, the society quickly collapses. A society of all liberals is easily overrun because they can't defend themselves. A society of all conservatives quickly collapses because it can't keep up with it's rivals.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The lesson - we NEED both liberals and conservatives to maintain a balanced society.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So How Does This Influence Gender Roles?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's important to qualify this discussion by stating that "masculine" and "feminine" do not necessarily refer to male and female. A woman can exhibit masculine characteristics and a man can exhibit female characteristics. There are usually specific responsibilities that come with those combinations, such a masculine "protector" woman usually has to do more to prove her worthiness as a protector. Likewise, a feminine male usually has to prove his worthiness as a nurturer. While that may strike us as unfair, it's the small price of violating the conventional norms. It's also important to note that most of us exhibit some combination of masculine and feminine characteristics and will use them depending on the situation. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Okay, got all that?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some of the biggest issues we face today have to do with the vilification of masculinity. While many people like to place the blame squarely on the Feminist movement, I call bullshit. Throughout history, every time of relative peace has experienced this move to expand society and promote progress, which almost always includes giving the formerly protected groups more power. This is absolutely necessary because the masculine sheepdogs that keep society safe kinda suck at <i>improving </i>society. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <a href="http://www.killology.com/sheep_dog.htm" target="_blank">Dave Grossman's article I discussed yesterday</a> (and served as the primary inspiration for the theory), he discusses the idea that the sheep fear the Sheepdogs. They have sharp teeth, bark and growl, and are always eager to fight. That's not necessarily all that bad... except the Sheepdog looks a lot like the Wolf. And the sheep SHOULD fear the Wolf, but most do not. Fearing the wolf would mean they would have to accept the world is a dangerous place, and sheep really do not like to do that. They much prefer to go about their daily lives of producing useful shit and making our world a better place. Since the Sheepdogs move freely among the Sheep, they're a constant reminder the wolves are out there, which makes denial really difficult.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Sheep's solution? They try their damnedest to turn the sheepdogs into sheep. They yank out their teeth, spray paint the Sheepdogs white, and lead them to the pasture. Some Sheepdogs go along, but most simply cannot ignore the Wolves they know exist. This is precisely where the <strike><span style="color: red;">destruction</span></strike> redefining of masculinity comes into play. It's nothing more than the sheep trying desperately to yank the teeth from the Sheepdogs. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We've had an unprecedented period of relative peace and prosperity. We are, right now, better off than any other humans ever. We're so well off, almost all of our most serious threats to our well-being come from eating too much food. Needless to say, the need for Sheepdogs has never been lower. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The mistake liberals make is the assumption that this peace and prosperity is linear, not cyclical. A day will come when the shit will hit the fan and the herd will be overrun with wolves. When that happens, we'll once again need the Sheepdogs. It'll be okay, though, because most of the Sheepdogs don't really relinquish their teeth... they just change the way they smile. They're still there; they just learn to say "Baaaa!" instead of "Woof!"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is a major reason why, as a male that falls pretty far towards the "Sheepdog" side, I've pretty much come to peace with our society's aversion to masculinity. It's also the reason why I don't blame Feminism for stupid shit... the feminists are a major reason why we're enjoying the prosperity we have today. The Sheep build it; the Sheepdogs protect it. Our seemingly new disdain for masculinity is a <i>temporary </i>issue. The real advantage of being a Sheepdog, of course, is that the Sheep simply don't have the capacity to force the Sheepdog to go disappear. We might as well sit back and enjoy our unprecedented progress.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next time you get in a bitter debate with someone with an opposing political view, chill out a bit. If you're a liberal, realize the Sheepdogs you're talking to have provided and will provide the protection needed to keep us safe. If you're a conservative, realize the Sheep you're talking to are the reason you have such a valuable society to protect. Now kiss and make up. ;-)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijvPzwzeUipGOsc5FyOzQqupCNPRNkeN5hxKTqpQca6eNEg1xDwI8bdYMkaO-h4WDEnXHvEi5OJr5y9_TvxtFvEpqgqn89tPS0QUO0CjraQqZCpxRgXBQY6hk7iFFlP1l6QQx9oYfGmUU/s1600/now-kiss-meme.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="311" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijvPzwzeUipGOsc5FyOzQqupCNPRNkeN5hxKTqpQca6eNEg1xDwI8bdYMkaO-h4WDEnXHvEi5OJr5y9_TvxtFvEpqgqn89tPS0QUO0CjraQqZCpxRgXBQY6hk7iFFlP1l6QQx9oYfGmUU/s400/now-kiss-meme.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-35197602409903639422015-06-19T08:05:00.000-07:002015-06-19T08:05:45.545-07:00The Protection Theory of Gender Roles: How the Belief in Oppressive Masculinity Harms Our Daughters and Sons<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've been working on a new way to frame gender roles in light of the work I've been doing recently. The old gender theory I used was based on the idea that masculinity was an oppressive force, and femininity was the recipient of that oppression. It's based on the widely-accepted idea that served as the basis for the gender equality movement that has given females legal, career, and educational equality here in the United States. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This theory is also used to rationalize an implicit or explicit movement to destroy masculinity, usually by compelling men to adopt androgynous or feminine traits. The idea is pretty simple - masculinity is aggressive and violent and domineering and our world would be safe, secure, and peaceful if only we could slay this vile monster. This is almost always framed as attempts to "redefine" masculinity to save males from the oppressive forces flowing through them. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sounds logical, right?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I thought so, too, until I started digging deeper and making some weird observations, including:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women, especially during ovulation, are sexually aroused by masculinity.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Androgynous or effeminate males do not sexually arouse most women, especially after the "honeymoon" period of relationships end.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Almost all men, even those that supposedly accept the idea that women are strong and capable, have a drive to protect women.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When a dangerous situation develops, both men and women look for strong masculine figures for protection and leadership.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Suppressing and vilifying masculinity has a tendency to produce emotionally-manipulative "<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank">Nice Guys</a>."</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Suppressing and vilifying masculinity discourages females from engaging in masculine activities or displaying masculine personality traits.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Relationships without a strong masculine presence (from males or females) tend to end prematurely because the passion dies out and cannot be rekindled.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's just a partial list I've encountered recently. The deeper I dug, the more apparent it became that masculine and feminine gender roles were not only complimentary, but necessary. According to my previous belief about gender roles, that saddened me because it meant we'd never really be able to eliminate the oppressive force of masculinity.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But what if masculinity wasn't oppressive? What if it were <i>protective</i>? Once I reframed gender that way, shit started to make a lot more sense. The pieces started to come together when my friend Shane sent me an article from Dave Grossman "<a href="http://www.killology.com/sheep_dog.htm" target="_blank">On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs</a>." The summary - Sheepdogs are the individuals that protect the masses (the sheep) from the bad people (wolves.) The sheepdogs and wolves are the more masculine members of a society; the sheep are the more feminine members of society. The masculine characteristic, in this application, best refers to a willingness to engage in violent behavior. By definition, the feminine characteristic represents an unwillingness to engage in violent behavior. I adopted this dynamic and placed it on a spectrum. All of us will fall somewhere along this spectrum:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifRgSN_E-rjTkt9kvsr7VHqyZgYuh4yPFyFWIQqInWyemwc0Kaa4_fdMDxRsU516xaLqUplMKAn9IBnrTOUXvA70A0gvc1Ar9GxrsCCbqd3IRL8mrkClLbzZrq2eBH3kl5OQ2UWSSMJRc/s1600/gender+roles+sheep+wolves+sheepdog.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="107" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifRgSN_E-rjTkt9kvsr7VHqyZgYuh4yPFyFWIQqInWyemwc0Kaa4_fdMDxRsU516xaLqUplMKAn9IBnrTOUXvA70A0gvc1Ar9GxrsCCbqd3IRL8mrkClLbzZrq2eBH3kl5OQ2UWSSMJRc/s400/gender+roles+sheep+wolves+sheepdog.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The biggest problem I encountered was differentiating between the protector Sheepdogs and the criminal Wolves. Further, aren't there "bad people" sheep? To rectify this issue, I added a vertical axis measuring the broad concept of "giver" and "taker." This dynamic also added a fourth animal to the mix - The RAT. The rat falls in the lower left quadrant of anti-social feminine gender expression.GIVERS are people that give back to their fellow humans. They do pro-social nonviolent activities like volunteering, donating to charities, and generally try to make other people's lives more fulfilling (sheep), and violent pro-social activities like physically incapacitate and/or kill bad people (sheepdogs.) TAKERS, conversely, are selfish and care more about promoting their own welfare. They're more likely to engage in anti-social nonviolent behaviors like stealing, cheating, relying on others for support if they're capable of self-support, and exploiting the weak (rats.) They also engage in violent anti-social behaviors like assaulting, raping, or killing (wolves.) When graphed, it looks like this:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipxc7hGo2H-_Vdh2isCMIUVfAGAwojitOU-bruR2mNkAtqi14n3j8Sjn6wud__W-au-tpl3NTqr7027DCSfxMnyr6u03pUWltdClbpTh0OAx1PFi9_Dp7QsoYE799IVKlgSK0l2__UdR0/s1600/protection+theory+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipxc7hGo2H-_Vdh2isCMIUVfAGAwojitOU-bruR2mNkAtqi14n3j8Sjn6wud__W-au-tpl3NTqr7027DCSfxMnyr6u03pUWltdClbpTh0OAx1PFi9_Dp7QsoYE799IVKlgSK0l2__UdR0/s400/protection+theory+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
An important key to this theory - gender roles operate independently of genetic or biological sex. In other words, females can be sheepdogs and wolves; males can be sheep and rats. In practice, most of us fall somewhere on the graph, but our position could change based on the environment, social conditions, or internal mental states. Furthermore, our position on the graph can change as a function of time and/or experience. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Further, your position on the graph is determined by your actions, not your beliefs, morals, or self-perception. Why? Carl Rogers noted this in his explanations of positive psychology - humans, even serial killers, are exceptionally good at rationalizing their behaviors. In other words, we engage in decidedly anti-social behaviors, but convince ourselves that we're actually doing something good for the world. Here's a quick synopsis of each animal's defining characteristics:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The Sheepdog</b> - this is the stereotypical police officer, military personnel, or popular leader (think MLK, Gandi, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.) They love their fellow tribe members and will enthusiastically sacrifice their lives to protect others. The farther they fall towards the upper right quadrant, the bigger their tribe they protect. The sheepdog loves the fight and eagerly anticipates the opportunity to defend the tribe. The sheepdog will use violence without hesitation or remorse in order to protect.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The Wolf </b>- this is the stereotypical bank robber, rapist, serial killer, or criminal mastermind (think Al Capone, Jeffrey Dahmer, or Ted Bundy.) The wolf is not burdened with a conscience that produces shame, guilt, or remorse. The wolf can exploit, harm, and kill freely. The wolf is also sneaky and ever-vigilant of the sheepdog, which is why the wolf almost always targets the weakest, most vulnerable members of the herd. The wolf, just like the sheepdog, does not hesitate to use violence to get what they want.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The Sheep</b> - The sheep are the masses. They're generally peaceful, kind, and go about their lives without too much fanfare. The sheep also engage in pro-social behaviors. Specifically, the sheep help other sheep that need caring for and actively work to make the land more peaceful and accepting for all sheep. The sheep have no inclination for violence, and need extreme provocation to invoke violence (think a mother's child being attacked by a stranger.) The sheep like to feel safe and secure, so they have a tendency to deny the wolves present danger or even exist at all.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The Rat</b> - The rats hang around the herd of sheep. They're not going to harm the sheep, but they will take whatever they can get. The rats are scavengers and petty criminals that would rather mooch off others (legally or illegally) than take care of themselves. Rats do not have a propensity for violence, but they may resort to violence if cornered and desperate. Rats CAN take care of themselves, they just choose not to. This is different than a sheep that simply does not have the means to care for itself. </li>
</ul>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So back to gender roles. As Grossman pointed out in the linked passage above, the sheep don't really like the sheepdogs all that much because they're kinda scary and look a lot like the wolves. The presence of the sheepdogs interfere with the sheep's denial that the wolves are lurking somewhere around the perimeter. Specifically, the sheepdogs have sharp teeth and sometimes do scary dog stuff like growl and bark and play fight. But the sheepdog are necessary to protect the sheep from the wolves. While the rats don't threaten the safety of the sheep, they can can annoy them by stealing their food and other important shit. The sheepdogs are there to take care of the rats, too. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's take a look at a real-world example. <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/06/the-problem-with-rape-culture-and-how.html" target="_blank">In the last post</a>, I talked about the danger in the "rape culture" idea that's become a bit of a fourth wave feminist fad. Rapists are wolves. The reason they're so dangerous is wolves are really sneaky. They know how to pick out the weakest sheep in the herd and either isolate and attack by surprise -OR- dress up and act like a fellow sheep. The sheepdogs are there to stop the wolf from preying on the weakest of the sheep. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The problem with believing gender roles are based on the idea that masculinity exists to oppress femininity should be obvious. It gives the herd of sheep a rationale to compel the sheepdog (using Grossman's analogy) to "redefine masculinity" by yanking out his teeth, spray painting herself white, and joining the herd of sheep. And yes, that pronoun was intentional you sexist fucks. ;-)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This theory of gender roles serving a protecting role explains all sorts of weird phenomena, which I'll address in a future post. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Framing gender roles as <i>masculine = oppression, feminine = oppressed</i> not only is inaccurate, but it actively harms us. It gives people the rationale to <strike><span style="color: red;">destroy</span></strike> redefine masculinity to the detriment of society in general and interpersonal relationships in particular. Further, it robs people of the freedom of self-expression. In a just society, there's absolutely no acceptable rationale to prevent people, regardless of genetic or biological sex, from assuming whatever gender role they wish. The folks that wish to <a href="http://feministing.com/2015/03/19/remembering-why-redefining-masculinity-is-important/" target="_blank">redefine masculinity</a> are robbing us of that freedom of expression. Ironic, considering most rationalize their advocacy on the grounds of giving men the freedom <i>from </i>masculinity. While I wholeheartedly support giving men the freedom <i>from </i>masculinity, <b>it's not really freedom if we don't give men the freedom <i>to be</i> masculine. </b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have two sons. One displays considerably more feminine characteristics; the other displays considerably more masculine characteristics. Am I really supposed to fully accept the former while trying to change the latter? To me, that's as morally repugnant as disowning one of them if they were gay or a trans female. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And what about women? They deserve that exact same freedom to be masculine if they choose. My daughter is probably the most masculine of all my children. I cannot, in good conscience, look her in the eye and tell her she can't roughhouse with her brothers, assume leadership of a group, or punch a bully to defend a victim on the playground. Odds are good she's going to be a Sheepdog. Interfering with that is as bad as indoctrinating her to believe her place is barefoot in the kitchen serving her man. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Masculinity and femininity are complimentary, not adversarial. We need them both. More importantly, we need to give all genetic and biological sexes the freedom to express whatever gender they wish in whatever situation they wish. As I mentioned in the rape culture article, as long as we cannot screen the general population and cull the antisocial personality disorder folks, we're going to have wolves preying on the sheep. We <i>need </i>the sheepdogs, and there's no justifiable reason we should prevent anyone, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, age... whatever, from fulfilling that role. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That, in my book, is what "gender equality" really means.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>###</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-5613124644504980642015-06-18T10:43:00.000-07:002015-06-18T10:43:13.855-07:00The Problem With "Rape Culture" and How to Actually Fix the Problem of Sexual Assault<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV8RfP0GUl_iFprsaNkrUDDI-0-YvAVc3TguEABPjkNIwnopbr4o1Xboeo541y5g8rDBc__FiwQ71YFB5emVzErh5mRXrQIw9WbsfZ2ILu7hOYnRCFm7iyzllctjx-XDyCXGIld8-mrKA/s1600/stop-rape-culture.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="233" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV8RfP0GUl_iFprsaNkrUDDI-0-YvAVc3TguEABPjkNIwnopbr4o1Xboeo541y5g8rDBc__FiwQ71YFB5emVzErh5mRXrQIw9WbsfZ2ILu7hOYnRCFm7iyzllctjx-XDyCXGIld8-mrKA/s400/stop-rape-culture.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Over the last few weeks, my research on developing the San Diego Man Camp has brought me to some interesting places. One of the most fascinating has been an exploration of "rape culture." While I've been aware of the idea of rape culture in feminist circles for a very long time, I did not follow recent developments by many of the the fourth-wave feminists. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After doing a lot of reading, all I can do is shake my head and say "Wow." </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
What is Rape Culture?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By definition, "rape culture" is:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
A concept in which rape is pervasive and normalized due to societal attitudes about gender and sexuality.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This sociological concept was first introduced in the 1970's as an effort of second-wave feminists to raise awareness of the prevalence of sexual assault in our society. Prior to their efforts, most Americans assumed rape was an incredibly rare occurrence. Further, most people did not understand that any nonconsensual sexual encounter constituted rape. For example, the ideas of "date rape" and "spousal rape"not only didn't exist, in some cases they were legal due to legal codification.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Needless to say, this effort was both virtuous and needed. And successful.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By the 1990's (when I started studying sex and gender), we had moved well beyond the overly-simplified societal construct of "rape culture" and started looking at individuals. The scientific community correctly identified a slew of antecedents to sexual assault and spend a lot of time and effort to continue digging deeper. Researchers were searching for more reliable and valid antecedents, searching for better triage methods to determine who could most benefit from intervention, and searching for more effective interventions.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By the late 90's, I was teaching high school psychology full-time and backed away from sex and gender research. I did, however, teach comprehensive units on anything and everything we knew about sexual assault and domestic violence. It was my attempt at making a difference.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Eventually I left teaching, traveled a bit, then started blogging about sex and gender here on the Sexpressionists blog. That eventually led to exploring the state of modern relationships. Using my background in second and third wave feminist theory, I started exploring the sex-positive third wave movement and how modern couples are really bad at keeping the spark of passion alive long-term, which led me to publish <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1502931583/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1502931583&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=ROJU6W7F3IKSFIFT" target="_blank">No Bone Zone</a>. There were some weird gender role implications that didn't quite make sense, which led me to my recent exploration of how we treat gender roles as a society.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Eventually that led me to a few interactions with "rape culture" advocates. Based on their level of discourse and apparent knowledge of sexual assault, I dismissed them as naive people that got their information from memes more often than published literature. It popped up enough, however, to cause me to do a little more digging. That's the point where I discovered the fourth wave feminists, many of which were too young to remember the 90's. It became immediately apparent their concept of "rape culture" wasn't based on the science we've been collecting for years; it was based on vague sociological writings that were based off anecdote. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
My Theoretical Underpinnings</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Before I get to the nuts and bolts of my discussion, it's important to lay out my exact current philosophical belief about sex, gender, sexual assault, etc. I'm a staunch supporter of equality. More specifically, I believe all of us, regardless of sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, marital status, body weight, breakfast cereal preference, or whatever other demographic grouping we care to create, all have a fundamental right to equal opportunity, equal possibility, and equal responsibility. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This does NOT mean we give <i>preferential treatment</i> to one group over another group in a way that interferes with equal opportunity, possibility, or responsibility. This also does not mean all of us have a right to equal <i>outcomes</i>, nor does it mean everyone should be given equal resources. We have a strong, stable socioeconomic system in the United States, and we enjoy incredible political stability. Yes, we have a lot of crazy extremists all over the place, but the crazy balances out nicely. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In regards to sexual assault - it's a horrible crime that all of us should work towards eliminating. It affects individuals in negative ways, most of the time devastatingly and profoundly. The ripple effects of sexual assault not only affect the individual, but everyone within that individual's sphere of influence. In short - it fucks people up, and it fucks our society up. HOWEVER, we also have to understand that we currently do not have the tools to completely eradicate sexual assault. No matter what we do as a society, we cannot control all of the worst offenders - serial rapists that have no conscience (those that are afflicted with antisocial personality disorder.) We have trouble identifying them, catching them, keeping them incarcerated, and fixing them. Unless we can develop and implement <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000I8G5B2/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B000I8G5B2&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=B3A74SMQ7RGV2KLU" target="_blank">Gattaca-like</a> technology, we'll always have <a href="http://www.killology.com/sheep_dog.htm" target="_blank">wolves roaming among the sheep</a>. Anyone that believes otherwise is woefully and dangerously naive. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That last part is important because it gives us the rationale to teach people how to avoid being victimized, which is one of my big beefs with the "rape culture" advocates.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
But Wait, You Can't Speak For Me!!!</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When discussing this issue and taking a stance critical of rape culture, pretty much every opponent will play the "you're a straight white cis-gendered middle class male, you can't speak for me/ have an opinion/ not understand this issue!" My response to that?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><b><i>"Fuck you."</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I can say with absolute certainty I've spent more time digging around the science of this issue than 99.9% of the people that buy into the modern idea of rape culture. I was trained as an experimental psychologist with degrees in psychology and history, both of which focused on sex and gender (the history degree focused on the social aspect of 20th century America.) I taught these concepts for over a decade, have read thousands of peer-reviewed empirical published studies related to sex and gender, and have written hundreds of articles about sex and gender. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
None of that really matters though. I'm human and I care about others. That's all the qualification I need to discuss the issue. If more is needed, <i>this issue is personal</i>. I have an uncomfortable number of people in my life that have been raped. As a parent of three kids, I need this to change. As such, I have little tolerance for dumbass ideas that aren't going to affect real change.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lastly, the "you belong to this group, therefore your opinion is invalid" stance is hypocritical as fuck. That's doubly true if you're unfamiliar with the actual research that's been done on sexual assault and the antecedents and interventions that has been conducted over the last four decades. If you're supposedly supporting equality, <i>you don't get to pick and choose which people have a "right" to speak</i>. By playing that card, you're engaging in the exact same behaviors you're supposedly rallying against. If you do not understand that, it's probably best you stop talking about equality. You're doing more harm than good. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
What Does Rape Culture Get Right?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The idea of "rape culture" isn't entirely bad. In fact, many of the observations, on the surface, are accurate. The real problem comes from the explanation of the observations, which tend to be laughably inaccurate. But there are some rays of sunshine that poke through the clouds.</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Our tendency to blame the victim. </b>This is one of the most significant aspects of sexual assault. When we blame victims for the crime, it increases the likelihood of the perpetrator getting off with little or no punishment. Since most rapists tend to be repeat offenders, our failure to remove them from the population automatically makes the problem worse. The problem, which I'll elaborate on later, is that this idea isn't unique to sexual assault. We do this all the time with pretty much anything and everything negative.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b><i>Some </i>populations do actually actively or passively encourage rape.</b> The idea that our entire society condones rape is flat-out stupid. However, there are specific groups and populations that DO implictly or explicitly encourage rape. It doesn't take a lot of digging on the Interwebz to find these groups. I refuse to link to them for ethical reasons. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Porn is a problem.</b> I love porn. I think porn is a net win for society. Unfortunately, porn is just like violent movies and video games... it's rarely an accurate depiction of real life. The problem arises when porn consumers assume porn is real life. This is obviously a problem with rape-themed porn (which caters to the rape fantasy crowd which is sort of an offshoot of the BDSM community and <i>very </i>different than actual sexual assault.) Since porn is now ridiculously easy to find and view, we'd be well-served to start teaching our kids about porn in the same way we talk to them about media violence.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>We need "consent education."</b> Most people get piss-poor sex education, which leads to a lot of bad sexual decisions. The idea of consent is one such blind spot. While it's easy to assume people should know exactly what consent is and how it's applied, that assumption comes with some serious consequences. I believe we could eliminate a great deal of acquaintance rape if we did this. We NEED to teach everyone at a young age (I recommend 10) exactly what consent means.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
What Does Rape Culture Get Wrong</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Almost all of the problems related to the belief of "rape culture" come from a misattribution of elements of sexual assault. This becomes problematic when we try to develop solutions for those various elements. </div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Rape culture promotes the belief that we currently have the capability to end all sexual assault if only we could push through the appropriate agenda.</b> This is one of the most dangerous failings of rape culture because it's often used as a rationale to avoid teaching people how to avoid getting raped. As I mentioned earlier, until we understand exactly what antecedents lead to sexual assault and develop effective interventions, we'll never completely eliminate rape. Given that about 3-4% of our population can be diagnosed with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder" target="_blank">antisocial personality disorder</a>, this shouldn't even be debatable. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Blaming sexual assault on "culture" diffuses responsibility. </b>Rape is 100% the fault of the perpetrator. The moment we say "we live in a culture that normalizes rape", we reduce that 100% number, thus giving the perps an excuse. "<i>Hey, I can't help it. I was raised in a culture that normalizes rape!</i>" </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Rape culture creates a generalized fear of men and situations, which severely handicaps our innate intuition to recognize actual danger. </b>Gavin de Becker, one of the world's foremost experts on personal protection, wrote an excellent book called "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0440508835/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0440508835&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=LSIBFN3MWZ7JTGNA" target="_blank">The Gift of Fear</a>." I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone and everyone. Basically, we get so many false positives, we can't respond when actual danger presents itself. This puts us in situations we'd normally avoid. Our intuition is our best defense against all forms of violence, including sexual assault. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Blaming vague social constructs like "patriarchy" or "masculinity" without regard for specific dispositional characteristics, and automatically assigning these traits to all men while ignoring women that may have the same traits creates the very situation the first and second wave feminists fought so hard to fix. </b>We have a pretty decent idea which personality characteristics are most often correlated to sexual assault, and they include hypermasculinity, hostile beliefs about women, a desire to be in control, and an acceptance of violence against women. Not all men possess these traits. Furthermore, some women possess them, too. We cannot solve the problem of sexual assault by relying on lazy stereotyping. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>"Rape culture" fails to identify <i>actual </i>antecedents to sexual assault. </b>This is a severe problem with the entire field of sociology, which is why it's important to view social problems with multiple levels of analysis. This is glaringly obvious when rape culture proponents are asked for actionable, effective solutions. They come up with dumbass ideas like "let's start a petition" or "let's raise awareness." No, fuckers, we advanced past that point decades ago. Study the literature before you open your mouth.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The current paradigm limits prevention interventions to educating college-age males, usually about acquaintance rape.</b> Because rape culture advocates fail to see the individual antecedents to sexual assault, they also fail to create interventions that work. While on-campus programs are better than nothing, we have a knowledge base that could be used to develop far more effective (and early) interventions. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Victim-blaming, police indifference, or supporting the accused by friends and family are not unique to rape.</b> Other ideas like slut-shaming and sexual objectification are completely misunderstood. We don't blame victims because we support rape. We blame victims because of the <a href="http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v3n2/justworld.html" target="_blank">just-world theory</a>. Police aren't indifferent to rape victims because they support rape. Police are indifferent because they habituate to the pain and suffering they see daily. It's a defense mechanism experienced by doctors, nurses, military personnel, even teachers. The friends and family don't support rape if they support the accused. That's just the human drive to protect members of our in-group. Slut-shaming? That's a strategy women use on each other to disqualify sexual rivals. Sexual objectification? That's our biological imperative; both males and females are physiologically-aroused by the bodies of the members of the sex we're attracted to. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Conflation with Marxism.</b> I can only assume this is a function of fourth-wave feminists learning their ideals from radical left-leaning college professors. This idea first came to light when I stumbled upon a blog post ranting about the dangers of rape culture... and the blogger had a picture of Che Guevara in the sidebar. If you don't understand the problem with this idea, check out some historical primary sources on the actual treatment of women in communist countries. </li>
</ul>
</div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
The Real Solution to Sexual Assault</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At the most basic level, I'm a pragmatist. If there's a problem, I want to solve it. I have zero interest in creating and continuing problems just to fuel a greater agenda. That inspired my opinions about sexual assault when I first studied sex and gender in the 90's, and it still inspired my opinions today. We know far more about sexual assault than the rape culture advocates state, which means we have the ability to develop far better intervention strategies to actually reduce the instances of sexual assault. Here are a few of my recommendations:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Teach age-appropriate comprehensive sex ed starting in elementary school, complete with a discussion on consent, the different types of sexual assault, the warning signs, methods to avoid it, and pornography education (treat porn like video games.)</b> Americans, as a whole, are sexual morons. Personally I blame abstinence-only sex education programs. If we taught a huge swath of our children about the topics I just listed, we'd immediately see a significant drop in sexual assault. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Teach everyone self-defense, including situational awareness and basic physical self-defense.</b> This does not mean we're blaming the victim if they get raped. We know rapists prey on the weakest members of the herd, most notably those that are unlikely to fight back, are chronically oblivious to real dangers in their environment, and those that lack the assertiveness to say "no." Shit, we could <a href="http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/campus/pages/decrease-risk.aspx" target="_blank">cut the numbers of rapes by 80% if we did this</a>. I would go as far to say that advising people to avoid learning to defend themselves should be considered criminally negligent. Aside from reducing the number of rapes, it would dramatically reduce the number of potential victims that DO NOT have the capability to learn to defend themselves, which makes it a whole lot easier for the rest of us to protect them. Let's assume there are 100 million people in the US that we could identify as being at high risk of sexual assault. If we train them in self-defense using a program like <a href="http://www.impactpersonalsafety.com/" target="_blank">IMPACT</a>, we could dramatically reduce the number of people at high risk. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Teach us how to understand inter-gender communication better.</b> This is actually addressed in the IMPACT classes I mentioned above, and I've <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2013/01/shitty-guy-skills-determining-female.html" target="_blank">written about it here on the blog</a>. Men and women are really, really bad at understanding each other's communication methods. It's not a mystery, but we have to be willing to do the research. It's what inspired my <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-one.html" target="_blank">series on understanding females</a> and a major reason I started the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a>. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Acknowledge that alcohol is a huge problem, then devise strategies to mitigate it. </b>Much like porn, I love alcohol. A lot. But it's also a factor in around half of all sexual assaults and affects both the perp and the victim. It clouds our ability to communicate, impairs judgment, and lowers inhibitions. I don't like the idea of outlawing shit (that's my libertarian leanings rearing their ugly head), so I'd fully support adding discussions on alcohol to comprehensive education programs for kids. I'd also support teaching ideas like using designated sober people to watch over drunk friends in situations where sexual assault could be a possibility. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Fund research to further understand the genetic and early life correlational and causal antecedents to sexual assault (like history of physical, verbal, and/or sexual abuse, ADHD, conduct disorder, hypersexuality, sociosexuality, impulse-control, antisocial behavior, hostility toward a person's preferred sex/gender), and continue to develop early intervention strategies. </b>We can't change genes and have limited ability to influence biology and personality, but we may be able to prevent them from influencing us from committing sexual assault if we can influence the negative environmental influences that cause the gene expression. In other words, we need to abandon culture-blaming and focus on individuals.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Understand the actual purpose of gender roles in sex and relationships and work to preserve them, not extinguish them.</b> This involves reassessing the idea that patriarchy developed because of male power versus a mutually-beneficial protection paradigm (to be discussed soon in another blog post.) Feminism has done a lot of great things for our society and other societies around the world. Feminism hasn't been infallible, though. There are some abysmal failures, and almost all have to do with messing around with attempting to change gender roles. Here are a few things we need to change:</li>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>We can't stop "objectifying" each other without stopping our sex drive. </b>Scantily-clad women cause men (and the reverse, too) to become sexually-aroused. No amount of shaming or "educating" changes that. We could change it... if we also eliminate our desire to reproduce.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>The more we require a mechanization of sex, the less people will buy into the ideas that are sold. </b>Sex is fun. If it's consensual, it should be fun for all parties involved. I've come across people that suggest we use formal contracts before any sexual encounter. I've also come across people that suggest positive consent be required for every single sexual act, so Sally would be required to say "<i>May I kiss your lips? May I stroke your arm? May I fondle your genitalia?</i>" Those are noble ideas. They're also idiotic ideas that ignore how people actually have sex.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Vilifying masculinity and insisting men act more feminine will never work as long as women are sexually aroused by masculinity.</b> Hypermasculinity IS an antecedent to sexual assault, which has led to a widespread belief that we can make the world safe for women by killing masculinity (the gender role, not "kill all men".) This is almost always expressed as a call to redefine masculinity, which is essentially turning men into androgynous beings or feminized men. Either way, this is incredibly damaging to any man that doesn't naturally gravitate towards a feminine gender expression (which I fully support, by the way... that's a freedom I demand based on my concept of equality.) This idea not only undermines how interpersonal attraction functions, it's horrifically unethical. Saying we'd solve a lot of problems if only men would act more like women is exactly the same as saying all black people could solve their problems by acting like white people. Masculinity isn't the problem. <i>Rapists </i>are the problem. Conflating the two because of a correlation is flat-out stupid.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Seduction is not egalitarian, and men aren't always in the driver's seat.</b> This is a tricky problem that has to do with our inability to communicate. Seduction involves some sort of pushing and pulling with one person taking the lead. Based on my own observations, younger people today are really, really bad at flirting, mostly because men are hyper-vigilant about pursuing if a woman uses any sort of coquette-like seduction strategy. This has given rise to concepts like "friend-zones", white-knighting, and a host of other weird interpersonal relations. Telling people to not engage in seduction is about as effective as telling people to stop using drugs, stop having sex, or stop breathing. The only viable solution here is to educate people on inter-gender communication so men get better at discriminating when a woman is seducing versus being nice and women get better at discriminating when men are being assertive or giving off signals that indicate they're probably a rapist. </li>
</ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Keep both fathers and mothers in the picture unless they're shitty role models.</b> This idea can be extended to gay or lesbian couples, too. In my Utopia, all kids would have great role models that would give them a framework to understand whatever gender role they associate with. Ideally, their parents would also provide great role models for a solid, healthy romantic relationship. Unfortunately, less than 25% of families fit that mold. Keeping decent relationships together was a major motivator for writing No Bone Zone, and my borderline-militant support of gay marriage serves the same purpose. Kids need role models, and this is probably more significant today for males. If a relationship is toxic, it needs to end... but far too many people throw in the towel for silly reasons (like "the sex got boring".)</li>
</ul>
<br /><h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The persistent belief in "rape culture" not only is bad science, but potentially harmful. We need to closely examine how and why we buy into this idea, which includes carefully examining the available research. I intentionally left out most links to the published research because I write colloquially, not academically. For those that insist on data, Knight, Knight, and McBride provide a phenomenal overview of the data that can be found on the <a href="http://www.vawnet.org/applied-research-papers/print-document.php?doc_id=2107" target="_blank">National Online Resource for Violence Against Women website</a>. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rape is a ridiculously damaging crime that requires a level of discourse that goes far beyond the trivial nature of "rape culture" proponents. If you're not convinced, dig though the VAW link above. Educate yourself and be skeptical of topical dogma. Don't just be an advocate that raises awareness. Holding up a hand-written sign for a social media selfie, contrary to popular belief, <b>doesn't actually solve problems.</b> A<i>ctually do something to make a difference.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-75241974381976147492015-06-12T10:04:00.002-07:002015-06-12T10:34:36.477-07:00Why Feminism Jumped the Shark<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvKYM2JzTwQnqip2D6Uf8hY5gOZQZS3mTj-9whtmG9oHViI73CNe5_6nt3THgVORbPUDvMVS-d94V-4v1fxQ5VNVxlqktw2QXD3QjHLn91s7R3HqxzR5ig9sUi_NFsOVApWDPSQTmQhVA/s1600/feminist.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="295" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvKYM2JzTwQnqip2D6Uf8hY5gOZQZS3mTj-9whtmG9oHViI73CNe5_6nt3THgVORbPUDvMVS-d94V-4v1fxQ5VNVxlqktw2QXD3QjHLn91s7R3HqxzR5ig9sUi_NFsOVApWDPSQTmQhVA/s400/feminist.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Let's play a fun little game. Warning: It's going to cause the vast majority of you some degree of discomfort. For some, it may even cause you to <gasp> reevaluate your thought process. All I ask is that you hold off on the venomous emails until you've read the entire post. </div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyway, read the following passage taken from a KKK website. As you read through the list, carefully analyze your physiological state. Notice your mood. Pay attention to how you feel. After reading the passage, close your eyes and really savor your visceral reaction.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Enjoy!</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<u>Ten Ways Black People Can Become
Better White Allies to the White Power Movement</u></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Understand that white people are
leading the way and affirm their capable leadership. Don’t assert
yourself at the forefront.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When it comes to issues that directly
pertain to white experiences, be quiet and listen.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Back people don’t get to determine if
they are “allies” to the white movement. White people do.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Take responsibility for addressing
black people's issues with other black people, rather than expecting
white people in the white supremacy movement to do all of the work.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Use your black privilege to encourage
other black people to work towards racial equality under white
people's leadership.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Don’t use the label of ‘white ally’
as a way to try to get white people to like you — that’s
disingenuous and counterproductive.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When given opportunities to execute
professional tasks related to white supremacy issues, consider
referring other white people instead.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Educate yourself about the history of
white supremacy and how white people of different backgrounds have
approached the movement.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Acknowledge that sometimes, white
people need opportunities to discuss white supremacy issues without
the presence of black people. And that’s okay.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When white people criticize your
involvement in white supremacy, don’t talk over them or talk down
to them. Actively listen and be accountable.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Take a moment before reading on. </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Close your eyes and process how you feel right now</b>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Got it?</i></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Okay, let's move on. Based on the title of this post, you probably realized this game by the second or third item on the list. It's not produced by the KKK to instruct "white allies"; it's a modified list written by a feminist to <a href="http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/male-feminist-rules-to-follow/" target="_blank">male allies to the feminist movement</a>. Here's the actual list if you don't want to follow the link:</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Understand that women are leading the
way and affirm their capable leadership. Don’t assert yourself at
the forefront.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When it comes to issues that directly
pertain to women’s bodies and experiences, be quiet and listen.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men don’t get to determine if they
are “allies” to the feminist movement. Women do.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Take responsibility for addressing
men’s issues with other men, rather than expecting women in
feminism to do all of the work.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Use your male privilege to encourage
other men to work towards gender equality under women’s leadership.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Don’t use the label of ‘feminist’
as a way to try to get women to like you — that’s disingenuous
and counterproductive.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When given opportunities to execute
professional tasks related to feminist issues, consider referring
other women instead.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Educate yourself about the history of
feminism and how women of different backgrounds have approached the
movement.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Acknowledge that sometimes, women need
opportunities to discuss feminist issues without the presence of men.
And that’s okay.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">When women criticize your involvement
in feminism, don’t talk over them or talk down to them. Actively
listen and be accountable.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've been spending a great deal of time studying sex and gender over the last few months starting with the writing of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/No-Bone-Zone-Curing-Sexual-Boredom/dp/1502931583/ref=sr_1_1_twi_2_pap?ie=UTF8&qid=1434122390&sr=8-1&keywords=no+bone+zone" target="_blank">No Bone Zone</a>, writing posts on the <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-one.html" target="_blank">nature of women</a>, "<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank">Nice Guys</a>", and <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">beta males</a>, right up to the development of the San Diego Man Camp (<a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">still consisting of just a Facebook group</a>.) During that time, I've interacted with a lot of individuals and couples. I've also read extensively on the current understanding of the nature of gender roles, including "The Red Pill" communities and blogs. </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One thing became abundantly clear -<i> there are a whole lotta people out there that really do not like feminists</i>. Assuming this was just a matter of bias in my research (I focused on couples that were in trouble, people that had recently ended relationships, and men that had some reason to not trust women), I largely ignored the anti-feminist sentiment. Really, I just found it hard to believe so many people were opposed to the goals of feminism.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back in the day, I had a lot of great feminist thinkers as mentors that helped shape my ideas of social justice. The first lesson I learned was the idea that everyone should have equal opportunity and equal responsibility. The second lesson I learned (what is essentially referred to as "Queer theory" these days) is that sex, gender, and sexual orientation all occur on a spectrum and we should have the freedom to fall anywhere along those spectrums. There is no justification for a gay African American transsexual female to face any other institutional barriers than me, a straight white cis-gendered male. </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To this day, this philosophy is a foundation for pretty much every one of my ideas and opinions about anything and everything from my teaching methods to parenting to how my relationships work. Hell, the entire premise of <i>No Bone Zone</i> is essentially derived from ideas postulated by the modern-day sex positive feminists. Needless to say, I'm intimately familiar with feminism. I didn't get why so many people seemed to hate a movement, especially since everyone I asked supported the idea of gender equality. I dug around for some research to persuade myself this was just a fluke. Unfortunately, it wasn't. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html" target="_blank">This poll</a> pretty much summed up what I had observed, and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/09/26/study_everyone_hates_environmentalists_and_feminists_partner/" target="_blank">this study</a> gave a little insight.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back in my more activist-ish days, I was used to most people reacting negatively to the more extreme versions of feminism (like Dworkin or MacKinnon), but nothing on this scale. Curiosity led me to investigate more. What I found was both surprising and disappointing. The new-found widespread disdain for feminism seems to result from a confluence of issues. Some is related to a few of the second and third wave feminists' failed ideas (like feminizing men, convincing women they could put off having kids in favor of a career without negative consequences, and the destruction of male-only spaces.)</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most of the disdain, however, is directly related to the perception that feminists hate men. It doesn't matter if it's real or imagined, the vast majority of men AND women do not like that narrative because it directly contradicts the supposed goal of feminism - <i>gender equality</i>. The problem with modern feminism, especially the newest "4th wave", is that feminists have seemingly lost sight of the fact that our society is pretty damn equal and continually attacking stupid shit (can anyone say "<a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mansplaining" target="_blank">mansplaining</a>" or "<a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=manspreading" target="_blank">manspereading</a>"?) or important shit related to flirting, dating, and relationships ("We need to stop men from approaching women in bars!") is going to turn off almost everyone. Which is exactly what's happening.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Remember the exercise from the beginning of this post? The first passage dealing with race was probably horribly offensive to anyone and everyone <a href="http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/82404406/" target="_blank">except this guy</a>. But what about the second? It was written by a feminist on a site that also featured several articles <a href="http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/06/feminism-isnt-about-hating-men/" target="_blank">explaining why feminists don't hate men</a>. I've found far too many feminists are completely clueless that they're actually spewing out pretty hateful shit and they rationalize it away under the virtuous umbrella of "social justice." <i>Hate is hate is hate.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I hypothesize many young feminists have come of age in a society where the vast majority of the population supports gender equality, yet they're fed a steady diet of "women are victims of patriarchy" messages. This leads them to call out (a wonderful byproduct of social media </sarcasm>) men for every imagined sleight they perceive. For example - slut-shaming. Slut-shaming isn't a male construct. It's a female construct. Women do it to disqualify potential competitors for male attention. Yet men are still blamed for it. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Modern feminism has other issues, too. It doesn't help that far too many have conflated Marxist ideals with third-wave feminist ideals, which is never a popular message in a blended, democratic economy. Feminists' tendency to shame women for their decisions certainly doesn't help (see "mommy wars".) The rest of the population, females especially, see that for what it is - really, really stupid behavior. The net effect is to simply write feminists off as crazy activists with too much time on their hands.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I personally have a problem with this because a) we still have pockets of our society where gender equality is NOT the norm (I'm talking to you, STEM industry), and b) there are parts of the world where women are brutalized and <i>actually </i>need advocates. Instead, we have feminists fighting for people to think they're <a href="http://cosmo.cdn.assets.cougar.bauer-media.com.au/s3/digital-cougar-assets/Cosmo/2013/06/24/26389/FE1A1C86D2DF79F86B168B3341D97D_h316_w628_m5_ctpIwlThd.jpg" target="_blank">presentable even if they're not wearing makeup</a>, fighting <a href="http://36.media.tumblr.com/dfb180e1c9056ecb95004f310077474e/tumblr_mw81i6UsJu1ssbonuo5_1280.jpg" target="_blank">battles that were won decades ago</a>, fighting to <a href="https://daniellepearsonblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/381444_10151456017098579_616817664_n.jpg" target="_blank">stop others from making judgments about them</a>, or fighting to <a href="http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md932vZaLM1rnyewg.jpg" target="_blank">stop guys from being interested in dating them</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In other words, people don't like feminism because it's become a ridiculous, laughable caricature of what it once was. Sadly, the same fundamentals of ruthlessly fighting for legal and institutional equality IS still needed in places today, but the entire movement has moved itself into the realm of irrelevant. I would like to be optimistic and think someone somewhere will come along and right the ship, but I don't think that'll happen. The entire fourth wave of feminism is doomed because they don't understand the things they're fighting against have nothing to do with patriarchy, and in most cases, have nothing to do with men <i>or </i>oppression. Worse, they're blinded to the fact that their perceived hatred of men is going to keep them marginalized by the masses that have a more accurate view of reality. People are smart. They see through bullshit, even when it's done in the name of gender equality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
### </div>
</div>
<div>
. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-22364152246459554172015-06-08T11:12:00.004-07:002015-06-08T11:12:57.760-07:00Why Do Beta Males Think All Alphas are Assholes?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQT5w_QTq6tZd3FZkjcvKA_y5kHGsu4L_vNWwo6aUm1PdwLkUmaFFKtxLv4YVyoRVs3WYQjfVhFHza7PuQjKNLHlN_tRV_ygbocjX5_K-geVffD2BrXnaUORg9j13Yd5yO-BD0H9kvk0I/s1600/15911_902619303122992_5442734858186305380_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQT5w_QTq6tZd3FZkjcvKA_y5kHGsu4L_vNWwo6aUm1PdwLkUmaFFKtxLv4YVyoRVs3WYQjfVhFHza7PuQjKNLHlN_tRV_ygbocjX5_K-geVffD2BrXnaUORg9j13Yd5yO-BD0H9kvk0I/s400/15911_902619303122992_5442734858186305380_n.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is an interesting question that was posed in my <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp Facebook group</a> today. Since it really hits at the heart of the distinction between alpha and beta male mindsets, I decided that it warranted more in-depth analysis. I've <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">written quite a bit on beta males</a>, but haven't addressed this specific question. It's exceedingly common to hear betas asking the question "<i>Why do women like assholes?</i>"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The problem, of course, is that the vast majority of women do not like assholes. Rather, the beta male doesn't possess the ability to discriminate normal "courting" behaviors from truly asshole-ish behaviors. So why does this happen? Here are a few reasons:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Betas have been conditioned that women love weak, vulnerable, sensitive men.</b> This leads the beta male to completely defer to women in every way possible, even going as far as adopting as many feminine characteristics as possible. The beta male rationalizes this by assuming all women are weak creatures live in constant fear of male violence (hence the popularity among betas of supporting "rape culture".) Of course women are <i>not </i>weak porcelain dolls that need to be handled with kid gloves. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Betas are really bad at discriminating between assertiveness and douchiness.</b> When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you've internalized a narrative that women love weak men, it's totally natural to assume any man that doesn't defer to and place women on a pedestal are misogynistic, paternalistic assholes. This also feeds into the mistaken beta belief that their willingness to grant women "goddess" status automatically gives them a virtuous-but-pretentious moral high ground. This belief that they're genuinely superior to alpha males is part of what leads to anger towards women when they face the inevitable rejection.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Envy clouds beta judgement.</b> The moral superiority betas believe they possess eventually fuels a much more negative emotion - envy. The typical beta will usually develop a "crush" on a particular woman, worship her from afar, then react with bitterness when that woman rejects his ambiguous advances but totally falls for the alpha that didn't play his "too scared to approach" game. That results in envy, which is almost <i>always </i>manifested in anger. That anger is always directed toward the alpha ("I <i>hate </i>those asshole jocks that have zero respect for women!") or, less commonly, towards the woman, too ("God, she must have really had a messed up childhood to fall for that asshole!") In both cases, the reaction is an ego defense mechanism that assures the beta will fail to attribute his lack of success to his own disposition. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Betas don't understand that alpha behavior with women is based on the principle of abundance, not scarcity.</b> Betas tend to believe in the idea of soulmates; there's one special woman out there that will love them for the person they are. Approaching women and dating is basically a mechanism intended to identify and seduce that one special snowflake. That narrative is reinforced when betas get rejected ("Well, she clearly doesn't appreciate my skinny jeans and "Feminist" t-shirt; she can't be "The One.") For the beta, saying "no" to a woman would be as unimaginable as slapping her for not reading the latest Jezebel article. Alphas, on the other hand, operate on a principle of abundance... there are a lot of women out there that would lead to a fulfilling relationship. Because of this, alphas have the power (i.e. - <i>confidence</i>) to reject women, which is a powerful indicator of value. Alphas understand the economics of love. Betas? Not so much. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Betas assume women's responses to them are the same responses they give to all men.</b> Here's the situation - a women will tell a guy she doesn't like being approached by annoying men, and the dude assumes the woman doesn't like assertiveness. The dude fails to realize the women's response is basically the same response she'd give an Amway salesman... she "already has a supplier for useless supplements and cleaning products." In other words, <b>she's telling him that because she doesn't want that particular male to hit on her</b>. This tends to drive men crazy because men usually don't communicate in such an indirect way. The beta male's inability to really "get" women is usually the very reason they're a beta in the first place, and this situation just makes matters worse. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Unfortunately for the beta male, the mindset is self-reinforcing even though it results in failure after failure after failure, which prevents the beta from objectively evaluating the efficacy of their mindset. When the beta strikes out, he can fall back on the belief that the particular woman he was attempting to seduce either wasn't his type, wasn't "good enough" for him, or the worst conclusion of all - there must be something fundamentally wrong with her. In reality, he just wasn't good enough for her which he confirmed with his beta seduction strategy. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This situation gets worse for beta males that DO land a woman for a long-term relationship, which almost always happens when a woman begins to realize her options for a male that can provide for her are dwindling (usually in her late 20's to early thirties.) Her <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-two-hypergamy.html" target="_blank">hypergamy drive</a> shifts from focusing on alphas to securing the highest value mate possible. The highest value females secure alphas that possess long-term relationship traits. The next-highest tier of women attracts alphas that have potential for long-term relationships (the "taming the bad boy" phenomenon.) What's left are women that have to sift through the available betas and grab the best they can manage to get. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For the beta male, this <i>feels </i>like a significant victory. After years of rejection and getting friend-zoned, they finally get the girl. Life is great! Until the honeymoon period wears off. After two to maybe about four years, the sex cools down and the woman begins to feel less and less arousal towards their beta male husband. She begins wondering if she made the right choice and begins yearning for a more arousing alpha partner. Interestingly, this usually causes her to stop giving her husband the admiration and respect she gave earlier in the relationship (along with kinky, passionate, spontaneous sex.) That causes the beta male to begin questioning if she was indeed his soulmate like he previously thought. The net result - one or both partners begin wondering if the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, and one partner typically gets blindsided with an unexpected end to said relationship. For too many couples, this results in the end of what would otherwise be a good relationship. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The beta male has a piss-poor prognosis because no intervention will convince them they're wrong until they hit the proverbial rock-bottom. Simply being romantically rejected by women and socially rejected by men isn't enough; they usually need to experience having their souls crushed. This is a major reason I don't spend a lot of time and effort trying to convince betas their mindset is a recipe for disaster. Overcoming the defense mechanisms beta males construct to rationalize their approach to life is a Herculean task. It's far easier to show up and help them sift through the rubble to assist in the rebuilding process.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-90912807511973712522015-06-04T09:47:00.000-07:002015-06-04T09:47:40.956-07:00What do Men and Women Really Want in Relationships?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsh2wFjMmcA3mOBXCbsPExiwzMD5RlDq2uDC9suO37F6rKEgL-kkvqZhOF24nL8MS-2EINR8e1ouuRfZVow9YVDiPXeE_kt6xBCgqwh9hF5CcA5AnDnwqBUeWpIr-4eTKttFj3jI59KVA/s1600/manwomanwater.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="276" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsh2wFjMmcA3mOBXCbsPExiwzMD5RlDq2uDC9suO37F6rKEgL-kkvqZhOF24nL8MS-2EINR8e1ouuRfZVow9YVDiPXeE_kt6xBCgqwh9hF5CcA5AnDnwqBUeWpIr-4eTKttFj3jI59KVA/s400/manwomanwater.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
People kinda suck at relationships. Part of the reason is a failure to understand interpersonal dynamics of <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/05/the-paradox-of-intimacy-and-passion.html" target="_blank">constructs like passion and intimacy</a> or the significance of gender roles. Another part of the reason we fail at relationships has to do with assumptions about what our partner wants from the relationship. While there's always going to be individual variability, both men and women are fairly predictable in exactly what they're seeking. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Women generally seek three things:</div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women want a partner that arouses them.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women want a partner that makes them feel safe.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Women want a partner that has the capability of providing for them (and their children.)</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Men generally seek five things:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men want a partner that respects them.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men want a partner that appreciates them.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men want a partner that admires them.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men want a partner that is loyal.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Men want a partner that provides regular, enthusiastic sex.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For each sex, all of these needs must be continually met for the relationship to remain healthy. If there is a lapse in providing any of these, the relationship begins to erode. Indeed, the end of a relationship can be predicted based entirely on observing if these qualities are being met.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the greatest obstacles is recognizing that our partner has needs that are fundamentally different than our own needs. The next greatest obstacle is failing to meet these needs on a regular basis. If too much time lapses without our partner meeting these needs, we tend to look elsewhere. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Weirdly, most of these needs are <i>not </i>reinforced by our current society. Perhaps the best example is a woman's need to feel that their partner can provide for them. Per most people's understanding of gender equality, it should be perfectly acceptable for a woman to earn 100% of the household income while dad stays home and raises the kids. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/04/the-curious-relationship-between-how-much-married-people-make-and-how-likely-they-are-to-cheat/" target="_blank">But it's not</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When it comes to any aspect of human behavior, it's important to pay attention to what people DO, not what people SAY. Our long-term relationships are no different.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-88994159224216825532015-05-31T13:25:00.003-07:002015-05-31T13:25:46.148-07:00Women Gun Owners: Evidence of REAL Gender Equality<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhu55kAjyh6_dtbzf_qLKZ45yZepVTPi7jki40N28_i_-FAisGdg0-gYwgxFkiox2zaDxLHRwTK3MFbuoIleESHLQMHhXut6JkvBsg1TDCGU7tWdu9quTKfNeskQgFGpVMyacRqKTkcgo4/s1600/TRPC_Subpages_038.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="170" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhu55kAjyh6_dtbzf_qLKZ45yZepVTPi7jki40N28_i_-FAisGdg0-gYwgxFkiox2zaDxLHRwTK3MFbuoIleESHLQMHhXut6JkvBsg1TDCGU7tWdu9quTKfNeskQgFGpVMyacRqKTkcgo4/s400/TRPC_Subpages_038.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've been ranting about various aspects of gender roles for a few months. One of the hypotheses I've highlighted is the idea that "traditional" gender roles do not occur as a function of patriarchal oppression. Instead, traditional gender roles develop out of a need for men to use their their greater physical strength and willingness to readily die for their "tribe" to protect women, and women are willingly and enthusiastically complicit in this dynamic.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've went further and hypothesized we'll never achieve true gender equality until two things happen:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Men need to stop protecting women just because they're women. It's fine protecting the weak, but there's a whole lotta women out there that can take care of their own shit. We have to be willing to allow that to happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. Women need to start taking responsibility if they place themselves in situations that could be dangerous. In short, women need to stop relying on men to protect them from harm.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A recent article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal highlighted an interesting (and dare I say <i>encouraging</i>) trend - <a href="http://www.reviewjournal.com/life/public-safety/shot-the-arm-women-helping-shift-public-opinion-gun-control-owners-rights-0" target="_blank">women are buying guns in record numbers</a>. I'm intimately familiar with the debate on the Second Amendment versus gun control laws, but let's ignore that for a minute. The encouraging part - <i>more and more women are taking responsibility for their own safety</i>. THAT is unequivocally a <i>good </i>thing and would be shocked if anyone aside from serial rapists would disagree. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm easily annoyed by <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">white knight</a> sentiment that dismisses a female's capability to take care of themselves, mostly because I think it''s perhaps one of the most passive-aggressive misogynistic beliefs a guy can hold. SOME women may need (and appreciate) an overzealous over-protective male that assumes they're a porcelain doll, but most women I know are deeply (and justifiably) offended by the sentiment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What are your thoughts? Share in the comments section!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-23019808269486859632015-05-31T09:08:00.004-07:002015-05-31T09:08:45.794-07:00Men Need the Confidence to Reject Granny Panties<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiAwiSKNlBvd5sBaAd_oRMfwXvDfwqBsBYFZIh8WNhQDSOCIaXn8EKG3e1yg4oRKQlV7XDrwR1LlE9SMdZgW3GGpWQNbolNDCHO4Du2dbGkeEhCOB5ZmwzDTSB9z_XBpJzbRlpfPWfIMU/s1600/grannypanties.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiAwiSKNlBvd5sBaAd_oRMfwXvDfwqBsBYFZIh8WNhQDSOCIaXn8EKG3e1yg4oRKQlV7XDrwR1LlE9SMdZgW3GGpWQNbolNDCHO4Du2dbGkeEhCOB5ZmwzDTSB9z_XBpJzbRlpfPWfIMU/s320/grannypanties.jpg" width="308" /></a></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Yesterday, I reposted an <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/28/granny-panty-underwear-sales_n_7460524.html?ir=Women&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000046" target="_blank">HuffPostarticle about the rise in popularity in women wearing granny panties</a>
on my <a href="http://www.facebook.com/robillardj" target="_blank">Facebook wall</a>. I have pretty strong opinions about granny
panties - I think they are ugly as fuck. It's quite possibly the
least-sexy undergarment ever made. It's on the level of <a href="https://screen.yahoo.com/oops-crapped-pants-undergarments-elderly-000000402.html" target="_blank">Oops, I Crapped my Pants</a>.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
My own opinion on the matter? Granny
panties would be a deal-breaker. If women are just wearing them in
their day-to-day life, that's not a problem. My issue happens when
they know someone else might see them. Women know that style is ugly
as fuck. If a woman thought there was a reasonable opportunity sex
would happen and still wore granny panties, that would be a clear
signal that she was completely unwilling to impress the man because
he's desperate, thus low-value. That's a really, really bad
foundation for a sexual experience. If she's not even willing to make
that tiny effort, she's probably going to mail in the sex, too. And
lame sex sucks.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
The responses from men were
interesting. About half of the men agreed. The other half expressed
some form of "I'd just be happy to be seeing her in underwear"
sentiment. The problem - <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">this is a total beta male mindset</a> that
ignores <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-one.html" target="_blank">every single thing we know about female behavior</a>. Women love
confidence. Having standards and enforcing those standards is part of
being confident. The dude that does not like granny panties (which
would be 99.999% of the male population) should be willing and able
to demand something better. Unfortunately, far too many guys jump and
any female attention, even from women that obviously see them as
low-value.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
This specific example is part of a
wider trend I see occurring with more and more frequency. Women are
beginning to automatically assume they can get any guy they want
without putting in any effort at all. Indeed, there's a sea of guys
that would take anything they could get, and would gladly exchange
any shred of self-respect to get it. This effect is so pervasive,
even some women are taken aback when a dude expresses their
standards. These women seem genuinely offended that a guy would tell
them "no thank you; try harder next time."
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Yet women do that all the time.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
As men, we need to start plumbing the
depths of our psyche and deciding exactly what minimum standards we
have, then exert the self-confidence to draw a hard line in the sand
and accept nothing less. Saying "no" to pussy, for almost
all women, will actually increase their desire. Unfortunately, the
ability to rock the pussy boat is scary because too many men are too
insecure in their actual value as a partner. It's not at all
surprising that granny panties are making a come-back... we're awash
in a sea of far-too-desperate men.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
### </div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-6964605291148278702015-05-07T09:36:00.002-07:002015-05-07T09:36:51.736-07:00The Greatest Failing of Feminism<div style="text-align: justify;">
Over the last few days, friends have forwarded me two interesting news stories. In the first, <a href="http://cmcforum.com/opinion/04302015-why-yes-can-mean-no" target="_blank">a woman wrote about "yes sometimes means no."</a> The premise is that sometimes a woman affirmatively consents to sex, but doesn't really want to have sex. Her premise is that the very idea of consent is "<i>...a privilege, and it was built for wealthy, heterosexual, cis, white, western, able-bodied masculinity.</i>" So we're clear, she's claiming if a guy wants to have sex with her and she says "yes", it's still considered rape because saying "no", apparently, is something only wealthy, heterosexual, cis, white, western, able-bodied masculine persons can do. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://archive.is/O1lbI" target="_blank">In the second story</a>, four women met an apparently attractive, young dude online, then agreed to meet up for completely consensual blindfolded "<i>50 Shades of Gray</i>" sex in a dark room <i>without having ever actually met the dude face-to-face</i>. As you can probably guess, the dude turned out to be a 68 year old man. He's being charged with "rape by surprise." I'll be the first to say the dude's actions were completely shitty and I suspect he's a terrible human being. But that doesn't change the fact that these women <i>readily agreed to do this</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Both of these issues highlight a trend I've seen repeated again and again and again. Too many women seemingly don't understand that decision-making is power, and with that power comes responsibility. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I know a lot of you <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">white knights</a> and irrational feminists are reading this and your Spidey sense is tingling because we've been taught to frame this sentiment as misogynistic sexism. Unfortunately, that's the very sentiment that creates the issue. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgF-ER4XgU5z8Q93lonq6u1Rd4lvvRRGFyvhxo21cDk2A1vh8gZR00aiWiWWnqHHzYtxxrhGTqRxjB0fjKb9AqfU0pNNi6lcWE3dRAL7_iDjsZGcP1cvjtbHg0sVuhnsLW4PWAmv0jzx1I/s1600/Friend-Zone-Level-Bridge.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgF-ER4XgU5z8Q93lonq6u1Rd4lvvRRGFyvhxo21cDk2A1vh8gZR00aiWiWWnqHHzYtxxrhGTqRxjB0fjKb9AqfU0pNNi6lcWE3dRAL7_iDjsZGcP1cvjtbHg0sVuhnsLW4PWAmv0jzx1I/s400/Friend-Zone-Level-Bridge.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'm pretty sure she was capable of <i>stepping </i>over the stream...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For a long time, I've wondered about the exact nature of the glass ceiling (imaginary boundary that keeps women from advancing to positions of power.) The traditional explanation usually revolves around men creating a "good 'ole boys club" that intentionally works to concentrate power among themselves. Talented women are seen as a threat, hence they are excluded. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But is this really what's happening here?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's a flip side to the glass ceiling known as the "glass cellar." These are dangerous jobs that are performed by men almost exclusively. Think working on oil rig workers, welders, roofers, and waste management workers. There's very little prestige in these careers, hence they have very little power. Why are women excluded from both of these types of jobs?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have two hypotheses.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>First, most men have a "protection" drive that compels us to protect women. </b>This is most obvious when a man steps in to protect his significant other from physical harm (like a mugger or home invader), but is also apparent is the aforementioned white knight behaviors. It's hard for most of us men (myself included) to see our girlfriends, wives, or daughters get hurt. For me personally, I feel far more protective towards my daughter than my sons, even though my daughter is probably the most capable of taking care of her own shit (Shelly is a phenomenal role model.) This protection instinct makes us bristle whenever we see women in danger, which is part of the reason the glass cellar exists and we have mixed feelings about women serving on the front lines in the military. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Second, positions of power or danger require a vetting process <i>regardless of gender</i>.</b> The CEO of a company has to make a lot of important decisions that directly affect the welfare of a whole lotta people, including those below them. A good example is downsizing. If the company is facing a situation where the company will either go out of business or fire half of their employees, the CEO has to be willing to give those people the ax. That could mean many people would not be able to feed their kids. Not everybody has the courage to make that call, hence the vetting process.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In glass cellar jobs, the same principle applies but for a different reason. Many of these jobs require employees to look out for each other (I've had a few of these jobs.) You could literally have another person's life in your hands. These jobs require trust, and that trust has to be measured and earned in some way.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
The Purpose of Hazing</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Enter hazing. Hazing is often seen as a silly, useless activity guys do for no discernible reason, mostly because it makes absolutely no sense. <i>Unless you look below the surface</i>. Hazing does two things - it tests and it conditions. Male hazing <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-eight-does-this.html" target="_blank">is just like a shit test</a>. Whereas women may be testing to see if a dude really is a confident, assertive, compassionate provider, dudes haze to make sure the other dudes have the capacity and willingness to cover their back. Evolutionary speaking, hazing is how guys assure, no matter what, the other dudes guarding the perimeter of their tribe will be willing to stay and fight. Mutual survival <b>requires </b>that dedication. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hazing also conditions by "toughening" each other. This is why guys are always mocking each other and punching each other in the balls. It desensitizes us to emotional and physical pain. Not surprisingly, the more dangerous the endeavor, the more intense the hazing. We can expect dudes deployed in Afghanistan to haze a lot more than male French literature professors at Yale. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sort of off-topic but kind of important: A lot of bullying behaviors can be explained as misguided hazing. In other words, sometimes bullying isn't about the bully having low self-esteem or being a complete sociopath (though that does happen.) In many cases, bullying is an attempt by the bully to "toughen up" those around them. This is relevant because, in my role as a teacher, some bully intervention strategies fall flat. In almost every case, the methods fail because the people doing the intervention do not recognize the bullying as a form of hazing. Once it's reframed that way, the problem gets A LOT easier to solve. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So What Does This Mean For Women?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I would go as far to say the greatest failure of feminism has been the failure to teach women that the power the comes with decision-making requires one to take responsibility for said decisions. When you make bad decisions, you have to live with the consequences. You don't get to claim victimhood. THAT is the nature of power. That's what the women in the "yes really means no" situation fails to grasp. That's what the women that fucked the anonymous online dude failed to grasp. In both cases, the women are making decisions but are not willing to accept the consequences of their decisions. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's worth noting this is not a male and female issue. There are plenty of men that also do not take responsibility for their actions. Not surprisingly, those men also to not rise above the glass ceiling nor do they fall below the glass cellar. More significantly, there are a lot of women that DO accept that responsibility and thrive in positions of power of high danger. Shit, my wife is one such person.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When Shelly and I started training at our mma gym (doing jiu jitsu, boxing, muay Thai, and mma), we immediately noticed we were mostly ignored. Nobody bothered to learn our names, most people would be pleasant, but clearly distant. At first, we just thought everyone was kind of rude. Then we assumed it was just a "California thing." </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Once we got past that stage and were accepted, we realized those behaviors were for a very different purpose. It was a form of passive hazing. While we were being given the cold shoulder, people were also testing us physically. Could we take a punch? Could we tap out when put in a dangerous position? Did we release submissions when someone was tapping out? Were we hotheads that couldn't control our tempers, or were we calm and collected under pressure? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All of that was necessary because we're doing a ridiculously dangerous activity. If we're choking someone out and they don't tap, they'll lose consciousness after a few seconds because there's no blood flow to their brain. If we don't release the choke immediately, there's a good chance they could suffer irreversible brain damage or even death. Same deal with boxing and muay Thai. Essentially, we had to prove to everyone that they could trust us with their lives. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The operative part of this - <i>they treated Shelly exactly like they treated me.</i> Our teammates punch her just as hard as they punch me. Sex was irrelevant. Our ability to survive the test is all that mattered. I see this with my female friends that occupy positions of power. They first had to prove they could handle the shit they are forced to handle as part of the endeavor. They take personal responsibility for their actions. They don't blame someone else. They don't play the victim card. Decisions have consequences. <b><i>Male or female, if you're not willing to accept those consequences, the people that rely on you are not going to trust you.</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All too often, my hard-core feminist friends will demand women have access to institutions that are seemingly exclusive to males. What they fail to realize is that you can't demand people trust you because that trust is critical to the other people that are part of that institution. Many women seem to believe men automatically get a free pass, which is ridiculous. Any man will tell you he has to prove himself to become part of these power or danger-based institutions. What right would I have to go into my gym on the first day and demand to be treated exactly like the people that have been proving themselves for years and years? Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
What Needs to Happen</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Equality, whether it be gender, racial, age-related, or whatever) should involve a simple idea - <b>everyone should have the same opportunity, same possibility, and same responsibility.</b> If a woman wants a job in upper management, she shouldn't get a free pass to the front of the line. She should have to prove herself just like the men. If she can hack it, great! If not, try something else. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the event the ARE actual barriers based on gender that aren't part of the vetting/hazing process (and these DO exist), those absolutely should be removed because they violate the above principle. However, considering the vetting.hazing process as a barrier is flat-out stupid. That process exists for a good reason. It's intended to keep out the unqualified regardless of gender. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I do not want my kids to grow up in a world where we give people power or place them in dangerous positions just because they make the most noise. I want people in those positions because they've proven they can handle the responsibility of the situation. THAT is what equality is all about.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-80938565470099251342015-05-05T08:55:00.002-07:002016-07-19T11:08:02.029-07:00The "Dadbod" is Bullshit<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKBXmpJRbimYOxKKyN7aZliJ5-RzhnNhWsCYXRLpy-LLxtokQRH3PhvfHDbHJ_fipfSa0qTchapeV7MDBBWycKc195km-laUoD_lDgb9w5_cBdWYggygkhNijGuKchUXXtSSBa2E46Pg8/s1600/tumblr_m08c4ap5as1rq4oz7o1_500.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKBXmpJRbimYOxKKyN7aZliJ5-RzhnNhWsCYXRLpy-LLxtokQRH3PhvfHDbHJ_fipfSa0qTchapeV7MDBBWycKc195km-laUoD_lDgb9w5_cBdWYggygkhNijGuKchUXXtSSBa2E46Pg8/s320/tumblr_m08c4ap5as1rq4oz7o1_500.jpg" width="223" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's been quite a bit of talk as of late <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/health/what-is-dadbod-and-is-it-healthy-117886188967.html" target="_blank">about a phenomenon known as the "dadbod"</a>, which is code for "fat." Supposedly, women now prefer this body type over a fitter, healthier body type. Toss out Ryan Reynolds, hello Pillsbury Dough Boy!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not surprisingly, every male over the age of fifteen is rejoicing. Staying fit is tough, and that degree of difficulty seems to increase exponentially as a function of age. If <a href="http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/fat-bastard.jpg" target="_blank">Fat Bastard</a> really were the universal feminine ideal, all of us dudes could confidently plant our asses on our couches and fire up the 'ole Xbox. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But wait - should we really trust this sentiment? </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The original article shedding light on "dadbods" came from a college girl. <i>ONE </i>college girl. And, supposedly, her roommate. While I'm sure she's a bright girl, I tend not to trust life advice coming from someone with so little life experience. Help with a Pythagorean theorem? Sure. Advice on what women want? <i>No fucking way.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When I posted the issue to social media, the response was predictable. Every man that didn't work hard to remain fit jumped on board in support of the idea. Men that did work hard to remain fit just laughed at the other men's naive response. Women we far more skeptical... unless they had a partner with a dadbod -or- seemed to have insecurity and jealousy issues. This helped conform what I suspected all along - this is the exact same fallacy as "women love nice guys" or "just be yourself and your soul mate will come along eventually."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And we know both of those ideas are complete horse shit. Women don't want nice guys. Women want a bad boy they can tame. And "just be yourself" is just a thinly-veiled attempt to get guys to stop trying to appear better than they really are in hopes of landing a better partner. It's the equivalent of a men telling women to stop wearing makeup, hair extensions, pushup bras, Spanx, and yoga pants. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've been spending a lot of time lately counseling dudes that bought into these two ideas, and they follow a very predictable pattern. They internalize these ideas sometime around puberty, then go through years of rejection and friend-zoning. Eventually, usually around their mid-to-late twenties, they land a girl who seemingly appreciates their willingness to sacrifice anything and everything for the love of a woman. They get married, have kids, and quickly settle into <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/DeadBedrooms/" target="_blank">a life of complete, desperate dread</a>. And now, with the popularizing of the belief that women love the dadbod, they can now rationalize completely letting themselves go.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So if women don't universally find "dadbods" attractive, what's actually going on? There could be a few things going on here:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Some women may actually prefer fat dudes.</b> Even though it's not entirely understood, women develop fetishes like men. It's entirely plausible for a woman to be physiologically aroused by fat guys. If this is the case, this is entirely healthy and legitimate. Rock on, chubby-chasers!</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Some women are horribly insecure and possessive, and the thought of their man cheating or leaving them is simply elicits too much anxiety.</b> The solution? Go after undesirable dudes that won't likely be poached by better women. Not surprisingly, this is a stupidly unhealthy mindset for a relationship; the suspicions and accusations will result in abject misery. Any dude that pairs with this woman reaps what he sows.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Her market sucks.</b> Relationship pairing behaviors follow a pretty predictable supply and demand pattern based on <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-three-your-value.html" target="_blank">sexual market values</a>. Hot, young, smart, sexually-adventurous women get the pick of the litter, and everyone else falls in line. If a woman delays "settling down" in favor of career development, her pool of "good men" dries up quickly after about the age of 25. Indeed, just take a look at social media posts from single women over 30. <a href="http://www.theonion.com/article/few-more-items-knocked-off-list-of-desirable-trait-36412" target="_blank">This Onion article is funny because it's true</a>. These women would accept a "dadbod" because it's literally the best man they can get that's decent relationship material. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; dudes do the exact same thing. The lone danger here, for men, is that their ladies may have lowered their expectations, but they're still aroused by fit dudes. <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-two-hypergamy.html" target="_blank">If she gets bored after a few years of the relationship, she may not turn down advances from the buff dudes</a>. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>She's just lazy.</b> The college girl alluded to this idea in her original post. Women may prefer fat dudes because they themselves would prefer to let themselves go. While physiologically-unhealthy, I actually don't have a problem with this. Hell, the only reason Shelly and I are pretty fit is we have stupidly physical hobbies (ultrarunning then jiu jitsu and mma.) Those activities aside, we're complete couch potatoes AND foodies AND we like alcohol. We're one serious injury away from the obesity train. </li>
</ul>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So What's the Harm?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's no harm in having a dadbod, so long as dudes fully understand the true cost. The health angle is obvious, but other costs might not be so clear. Here are a few of the potential hidden costs:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Buying into the dadbod belief means you're unwilling to live up to your full potential.</b> For me, this is the big issue. Men today have a serious lack of drive to excel, and I find that personally annoying as fuck. That's a major reason I chose to do the sports I do - it's hard to half-ass running up and down rocky mountain trails for a day or stepping into a cage with someone that's eagerly anticipating beating your ass to a bloody pulp. In other words, the hobbies self-select the turds. And the "dadbod" rationalization promises to produce a lot more lazy turds.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Your pool of potential female mates shrinks.</b> The number of women that prefer a fit body far outnumber the pool of women that prefer a <a href="http://www.moderntiredealer.com/_Images/news/M-bibendum-the-michelin-man-7-1.jpg" target="_blank">Michelin Man body</a>. Just like the number of women that prefer alpha males far outnumber the women that <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">prefer beta males</a>. Again, this isn't necessarily a problem if you know that going in. The danger, much like the <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/06/why-do-women-hate-nice-guys.html" target="_blank">"nice guy" trap</a>, is that guys expect women to flock to their dadbod, then get bitter and resentful when they get rejected again and again. Personally, I believe THIS is the mechanism responsible for rampant misogyny we sometimes see from men. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>It's unhealthy.</b> That was the main point of the very first link in this post - the dadbod promotes a body type that, based on the available research, is correlated to all sorts of health complications. Yes, yes, I know correlation does not equal causation, but this is one of those cases where it's probably prudent to assume there's a causal relationship. I'm clearly not in the "your body is a temple" camp, but I do think it is important to understand the risks of any lifestyle choice. And there are quite a few dudes that apparently have not heard that being obese is bad.</li>
</ul>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The dadbod phenomenon itself is not a bad thing. The expectation men may develop, especially regarding the universal appeal of love handles and a beer gut, is the root of the problem. Also, it would probably be prudent to question why exactly a woman may prefer the dadbod. If it's due to her own insecurity, that could be a huge red flag. If she's just low on options, it may work out okay as long as she doesn't do anything to increase her sexual market value. If she's just a hedonist, I say wave her around third. <i>Enjoy that shit.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>What do you think? Is this a good or bad phenomenon? Are women being disingenuous? Leave your thoughts in the comments!</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>###</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-13217879181235096432015-04-27T08:02:00.000-07:002015-04-27T08:02:04.134-07:00Get Your Shit Together, Ladies!!!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFFJkZ3B-_hJi9I0hyphenhyphenQLG0XxNyhwE6M8JKpK9Y1gk_kUQu1VA9cSgGHlsPPzYJRoCy_Z-iQEBnJXALybm6wl5jj3jbzK7uVaHqA17i6dLkOk-j6-VvhLCy_zFRtTkJTjFq1RIyVghyphenhyphenSpo/s1600/women-understanding-advice-537038.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFFJkZ3B-_hJi9I0hyphenhyphenQLG0XxNyhwE6M8JKpK9Y1gk_kUQu1VA9cSgGHlsPPzYJRoCy_Z-iQEBnJXALybm6wl5jj3jbzK7uVaHqA17i6dLkOk-j6-VvhLCy_zFRtTkJTjFq1RIyVghyphenhyphenSpo/s1600/women-understanding-advice-537038.jpeg" height="286" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Fat shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Slut shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Bitch shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Skinny shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Boob shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Successful career shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Hairstyle shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Bisexual shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">"You don't wear designer labels" shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Niche hobby shaming</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Mommy shaming</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Over the last few months, I've come across articles, all written by women, about all of the "shaming" topics listed above. Each article more or less followed the same formula: start with an intro, talk about how shaming behaviors are oppressing women, a rationale why women need to stop that specific shaming behavior, (then the kicker) a paragraph explaining how this particular shaming behavior is <i>the direct result of patriarchal, misogynistic men</i>.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yes, that's right. All of the above are behaviors women do to each other, yet men are somehow to blame.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A perfect example: I was reading an article about women that delayed marriage and kids in favor of a career. It's a topic I've discussed at length because we make the "you can have it all" lifestyle seem a lot easier than it really is. Still, a lot of women make that choice. And they get a lot of shit for that decision. In fact, that "shit" is considered the main component of the "glass ceiling" that prevents women from reaching the upper echelons of the corporate ladder. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Until recently, I bought into the idea that the glass ceiling was created and maintained by high-status men that wanted to protect their "good 'ole boys' club" environment. When I started actually researching the topic, I was having a hard time finding these men. Without exception, every man I talked to welcomed women with open arms. The men understood setting an arbitrary barrier (you can't do this because you have a vagina) prevented the best people from assuming the most important positions, which is a policy that's bad for business. In short, the glass ceiling isn't a construct maintained by <i>men</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The glass ceiling is a construct maintained by <i>women</i>. While it was impossible to find a man that wanted to sabotage a woman's success, it was ridiculously easy to find <i>women </i>that were willing and able to sabotage their fellow women. This sabotage almost always took the form of shaming behavior. The higher a woman climbed the ladder of success, the more other women tried to drag her back down. And their methods were nothing short of cruel. When men fight, we have a code most of us follow. We fight to move up our social ladder, and all men intuitively understand the idea of self-preservation. We'll hurt each other, but the injuries aren't lethal (literally and figuratively.) Women? You don't seem to have that preservation instinct, and it really comes out in the ferociousness of shaming behaviors. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Listen up, ladies. You need to get your shit together. Stop treating each other like horse shit. More importantly, stop blaming my gender for your fuck-upedness. Men don't care if you're fat. Men don't care if your roots are showing. Men don't care if your belt doesn't exactly match your shoes. Men don't care which brand of jogging stroller you bought. Men don't care if you decided to climb the corporate ladder instead of pushing out a half-dozen babies. And slut shaming? Boob shaming? Bisexual shaming? Do you women really expect anyone to believe MEN are responsible for shaming those behaviors? Really? C'mon, people aren't that stupid.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's time to stop this mental judo and blaming this dumbass shaming bullshit on men. First, we've spent decades vilifying masculinity presumably because masculinity is responsible for female oppression. That's given our society free reign to attack masculinity at every possible opportunity, and us men are really suffering as a result.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Second, you're sabotaging our own progress. I want to live in a world where we have true gender equality where all of us have the same opportunity regardless of the presence or absence of a vagina. I think men, given our willingness to embrace the emasculating beta mindset, have more than proven we're willing to make a huge sacrifice in for gender equality. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ladies? It's your turn to man up. If you want gender equality, stop fucking shaming each other! Things like "mommy wars" is not only immature and illogical, but it hurts all of us. Every time you insult a fellow woman, you're tightening your own shackles. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-1531449873014555442015-04-21T04:35:00.000-07:002015-04-21T04:35:20.534-07:00Why We Teach Boys Not To Cry<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipvxb_Ej_d5UUT_Jiv7h3ESqZGjkSC5UhhVrMgOjELIMN7BsCF_yFGh2BOXD7mfzM6J_XD2wkP1U8WibFCwany0T3ouiOEk5xWDqn6hHVQ5mCN7O5PPKhNnxqoQ1efY_h20Ue9DNaMOrE/s1600/Boy-Crying-636.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipvxb_Ej_d5UUT_Jiv7h3ESqZGjkSC5UhhVrMgOjELIMN7BsCF_yFGh2BOXD7mfzM6J_XD2wkP1U8WibFCwany0T3ouiOEk5xWDqn6hHVQ5mCN7O5PPKhNnxqoQ1efY_h20Ue9DNaMOrE/s1600/Boy-Crying-636.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I recently got into an argument with a male friend about the topic of boys and crying. He was arguing the moniker "boys don't cry" needs to be abandoned, and his argument was based on the belief that women desperately want men that aren't afraid to show their sensitive side. Naturally, I disagreed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>First, the display of emotion conveys weakness. </b>Throughout our history, men have served as protectors from outside threats. The stronger the perceived strength of any given tribe, the less likely rival tribes would raid, pillage provisions, rape the women, and enslave the children. If even one member of the tribe's protective class showed weakness, the likelihood of an attack would increase, and casualties would result.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is less of an issue today given we don't have all that many rival gangs at the perimeter of our tribe's lands (unless you're a member of law enforcement or the military... cops and infantry are discouraged from sobbing in the presence of the enemy.) However, men are still judged and ranked based on their ability to protect and produce, and visible weakness does reduce a modern male's status relative to other men. Sorry beta males, but that's the price of androgyny. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Second, women are not aroused by weak men. </b>Women make the same attribution other men make. Crying conveys weakness. In fact, I would say the "women love sensitive guys" lie is among the most damaging gender-based beliefs we've spread in my generation. But how could this be? After all, this lie is repeated <i>everywhere</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjm_8VpMqQyXCUTyjvlO7cogzlstDlqoNXK1Y4ovX1Afv_Fa5gChwCZ53vKMoNjem9B-gAwuDm_E6q9JLckoxlAGTnp1ZNtnu9fpAAnhhBuieiUefksPfIV4gIrVOAk4hE5u60PBtz9y8/s1600/ef98957599363b78fc93c8aff639f28993036bf877ed8a8b7e40c6ec5ccf74e9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjm_8VpMqQyXCUTyjvlO7cogzlstDlqoNXK1Y4ovX1Afv_Fa5gChwCZ53vKMoNjem9B-gAwuDm_E6q9JLckoxlAGTnp1ZNtnu9fpAAnhhBuieiUefksPfIV4gIrVOAk4hE5u60PBtz9y8/s1600/ef98957599363b78fc93c8aff639f28993036bf877ed8a8b7e40c6ec5ccf74e9.jpg" height="400" width="266" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Not hot.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you recall our lesson on <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-two-hypergamy.html" target="_blank">hypergamy</a>, women want men that are alphas (who are decidedly NOT weak) and beta providers, ideally in the same package. The problem with a crybaby male is they are the antithesis of the alpha, and the alpha is what turns women on. If a man is willing to cry in front of a woman, that's a powerful indicator he has little or no alpha traits. He may be a great provider, but he's not going to arouse her beyond the honeymoon phase of the relationship. The relationship is pretty doomed to be just another notch in her serial monogamy headboard.<br />
<br />
I have come across several women that insist they find men that cry in their presence "sexy", but every one of these women are in their mid-thirties, have never been married, and routinely lament about the "lack of good men out there." Some of them may have been <a href="http://www.theonion.com/articles/few-more-items-knocked-off-list-of-desirable-trait,36412/" target="_blank">this woman</a>, if you catch my drift.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There ARE exceptions to this rule, but they're very far and few between. Think "death of a loved one", "your team just won the championship", or "the end of <i>Old Yeller</i>."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXh1cxk1e6cMvrO5cESw901RDHtPJf9jPDPjFi9DGw-1O08rfahjoxoTng0txb03JPzyYYQPCxhJXrj4liTW0QbRnktFAzSX_0RDjoLyaV-oYpAzRvT9nNae4R9hNAn_z6FVW4tgYKb4o/s1600/tumblr_ln15atn6UD1qkae66o1_1280.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXh1cxk1e6cMvrO5cESw901RDHtPJf9jPDPjFi9DGw-1O08rfahjoxoTng0txb03JPzyYYQPCxhJXrj4liTW0QbRnktFAzSX_0RDjoLyaV-oYpAzRvT9nNae4R9hNAn_z6FVW4tgYKb4o/s1600/tumblr_ln15atn6UD1qkae66o1_1280.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
So We're Just Supposed to Bury Our Emotions?</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Absolutely not. </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In my last post, I wrote about <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/why-feminists-want-to-kill-masculinity.html" target="_blank">how and why masculinity has been actively and passively extinguished in our modern society</a>. One of the greatest travesties of this process has been the systematic destruction of the male-exclusive spaces. Men simply do not have opportunities to congregate with other male friends in an environment that's free from female influence. In many cases, this is a result of guys allowing their wives or girlfriends to tag along (she's just one of the guys.) In other cases, women have actually <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusta_National_Golf_Club#2002_membership_controversy" target="_blank">forced their way into male-only spaces via the judicial system</a> under the guide of gender equality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While that seems like a virtuous outcome, it robs men of the one place they were free to actually share their emotions - <i>among their male tribe members</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Men have just as much range and potential for emotional expression as women, we're just taught to suppress those emotions when conditions warrant. Since expressing emotion in the presence of women reduces the male's attractiveness, we're more or less relegated to male-only environments. That's the same reason males can't just share their emotions with their wives and girlfriends... it makes them appear weak and unattractive. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The obvious solution - <i>create a renaissance of male-only spaces so we have an emotional outlet</i>. This is a major goal of my <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp</a> project. While it's still in the planning stages and exists only as a Facebook group, the goal is to make an actual live group that will meet weekly here in Southern California. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This man-space issue is so very critical because, as most beta males would agree, many modern males are completely isolated from other males. I addressed part of this problem in No Bone Zone; both men and women today have the soul mate "you complete me" mentality. We believe our wives and girlfriends should be our best friends, so we let most of our male friendships fall by the wayside. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This has certainly been the case with me. The number of close friends I have has steadily dwindled over the years. I have quite a few casual male acquaintances, many of which I would consider friends. But good friends that I can share emotions with? That's a very, very small number. I want that to change.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Historically, we taught boys to avoid crying in the midst of the enemy to avoid appearing weak. We taught boys to avoid crying in front of girls because it made us less attractive. Boys were taught to control their emotions and remain stoic until an opportunity arose for them to release the emotions in the presence of other men of their tribe. That is the reason male-only spaces are critically important. That's the primary reason I'm motivated to create my own male-only space.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-72499021104986203612015-04-20T11:03:00.001-07:002015-04-20T11:41:54.288-07:00Why Feminists Want to Kill Masculinity<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<i>“If men can’t figure out what kind
of future they want, there are plenty of people who are ready to
determine what kind of future they’ll get.<br />They’ll get a decorated cage.<br />They’ll get a Fleshlight®, a laptop,
a gaming console, a cubicle and a prescription drip.<br />They’ll get some exciting new
gadgets.<br />They’ll get something that feels a
little bit like being a man.<br />Women will continue to mock them, and
they’ll deserve it.”</i><br />
- Jack Donovan, <i>The Way of Men</i></blockquote>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Fun title, huh? My recent foray into exploring gender roles has led to some interesting places. None has been more interesting that attempting to answer the question of "<i>why do feminists hate masculinity?</i>" along with the logical follow-up of "<i>Why are feminists trying to kill masculinity?</i>" </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
For a long time, I've held the belief
that our modern world driven by feminism isn't so much a linear
progression from oppressive misogyny to gender-equal androgyny, but
rather part of a natural cycle of peaceful civilization and chaotic
anarchy that has ebbed and flowed throughout our history. The more
"civilized" we become, the less need there is for
masculinity to protect the tribe. In times of war, famine, drought,
disease, natural disasters, or any other condition that threatens the
tribe's safety or access to required resources, men were expected to
sacrifice their lives for the tribe. When men talk about “manning
up” or “taking responsibility”, they're really saying “be
willing to die to protect the tribe.”<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCXZ8vrZxKcPvoIYC8JjWJfXxskeeFD7NsQNF8Shm64Pz-aCjpUk0LEEMeN2sA4xf5YD1618210smTBGkRwLPHQHVIc2BUkgu54Ku7ykKu_gipOi5u7f2kenzTF-FX8gEXrBBiDgnIH1Q/s1600/masulinity+danger+resources.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCXZ8vrZxKcPvoIYC8JjWJfXxskeeFD7NsQNF8Shm64Pz-aCjpUk0LEEMeN2sA4xf5YD1618210smTBGkRwLPHQHVIc2BUkgu54Ku7ykKu_gipOi5u7f2kenzTF-FX8gEXrBBiDgnIH1Q/s1600/masulinity+danger+resources.jpg" height="271" width="400" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Since masculinity, at it's heart (and
contrary to what modern society says), is about violence and
aggression, it's <i>dangerous</i> to civilization in times of peace
and prosperity. When masculinity is no longer needed, it fades as the
dominant gender role and is replaced by a blurring of gender roles
into a feminine-directed androgyny. Given we live in the most
resource-rich era in the history of humanity, this is precisely what
is happening today. With women passing men in education and the
professional world, women don't even need men to <i>provide</i>
today.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
It's important to accept that this
“destruction” of masculinity isn't done for nefarious reasons.
It's not a secretive conspiracy orchestrated by a committee of
man-hating women in a deep underground bunker under the Macy's
headquarters. The move to extinguish masculinity is the exact same
mechanism women will use when they attempt to “tame” a bad boy.
The goal is to eliminate the bad characteristics that cause the bad
boy to be a shitty partner and co-parent and reinforce that behaviors
that lead to successful relationships (and family units.) Our species
requires this process to happen to survive from generation to
generation.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
It's futile to try to exert that
masculinity in the absence of a real threat, which presents a problem
for the modern male. We probably don't have to force the issue,
though. If we accept the <a href="http://www.artofmanliness.com/2012/07/12/the-generations-of-men-how-the-cycles-of-history-have-shaped-your-values-your-place-in-the-world-and-your-idea-of-manhood/" target="_blank">Strauss-Howe generational theory</a>, we've
recently passed the peak in feminine-directed androgyny and and
slowly advancing to males and females embracing gender roles to a
greater degree than we have since the 1950's. The last few
generations of women (and many men) placed the blame for female
oppression squarely on masculinity.
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwN7q-YtcrSaPl0d4dLjJsFGv-vJPBMiU1sIqfkv8AThM0mI05_dJlAmAg22u08b_E0_hQk3-i0_9q2W77nQtUms2wGfe9Thsv2Z9M5BR0XWRWjLgpRm1r90gL_z9Z9gGWyB2JlV7vz-k/s1600/turnings-chart1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwN7q-YtcrSaPl0d4dLjJsFGv-vJPBMiU1sIqfkv8AThM0mI05_dJlAmAg22u08b_E0_hQk3-i0_9q2W77nQtUms2wGfe9Thsv2Z9M5BR0XWRWjLgpRm1r90gL_z9Z9gGWyB2JlV7vz-k/s1600/turnings-chart1.png" height="268" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Top of wave = focus on feminine imperative<br />
Bottom of wave = focus on masculine imperative</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
That attribution has resulted in an
aggressive vilification of all things “manly”, including drugging
boys with ADHD stimulants, imprisoning a ridiculously high ratio of
males, eliminating male-only spaces, presenting males as bumbling, incompetent idiots in popular media, and so on. The last few
generations haven't been too good at understanding social dynamics or
the fundamentals of human behavior. The millenials could be our
level-headed saviors. They've fully embraced the concept of gender
equality <i>and</i> also realized they can explore masculine and
feminine gender roles without endangering that equality.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
It's probably a moot point, though. I
would contend masculinity also doesn't need “rescuing” because
it's hard-wired in almost every male in the world. When the shit hits
the fan, most males have little or no problem protecting their loved
ones or doing what is necessary to secure necessary resources. If we
were to experience a natural disaster, financial meltdown, or other
such threat to our peace and security, masculinity will be there. It
might be a little rusty, but we adapt quickly.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Because of these two dynamics, I
resoundingly reject a few of the more common “solutions” people
propose. Some want to keep doing what we're doing by forcing
androgyny and eliminating masculinity as if it were an infectious
disease. This is what the majority of us do today, which has resulted in <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">my previous posts about the plight of the modern beta male</a>. This will never work for one simple reason – women are
really aroused by masculine behaviors. No matter how much we try to
“metrosexual-up” men, the manly men will continue to attract the
most (and best) women.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Others want to return to the “good
'ole days”, most commonly the 1950's. First, that's not possible
because we have a radically-different society today, and rolling back
the clock would mean we give up many of the social freedoms we've
achieved. For men in particular, this means abandoning a lot of the
freedom of self-determination we've earned. I'm pretty much a
stay-at-home dad. I love that I have that option and it's more or
less accepted by society. While I don't necessarily need society's
approval, there are plenty of men out there that thoroughly enjoy the
freedom <i>from</i> masculinity but would not be able to do so if
they were socially rejected.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Finally, some people want to force
masculinity into our modern world. Since masculinity peaks with chaos
and danger, this route basically champions the “Fight Club”
approach of destroying our modern world to return to conditions where
masculinity is not only celebrated but <i>required</i>. While this
approach seems appealing, I do not want to sacrifice our modern
world. I like social media too much.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
So what do men do in the meantime while
we wait for the ebb and flow to return masculinity to equal status
with femininity?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
We <i>prepare</i>.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Men still have the drive to seek out
risk and adventure. At some point, for some of us, TV, video games,
and cheering for our favorite hockey team just doesn't provide enough
stimulation. Ultrarunning gave me a taste of that and mma fighting
clinched it. We have a deep, instinctual need to express our
masculinity. I've learned very few if any women really understand (or
even try to understand) this deep, primal drive. The more we express
it in authentic experiences, the more alive we feel. Stepping into
that cage was an experience like no other. If you've ever experienced
a flow state while doing something you love, imagine that paired with
having kinky monkey sex with an enthusiastic Kate Upton after doing a
few lines of coke while listening to Rage Against the Machine live.
It was <i>that</i> amazing. It was the actualization of that
masculinity that had been locked away for my entire life.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
The problem - society really does not
want us to express or indulge in those pursuits. However, that's kind
of the great thing about masculinity... we don't need permission. We
don't need to appease gatekeepers by watering down our experiences.
We DO, however, have to understand that masculinity is repressed in
times of peace and prosperity because it's inherently dangerous.
Masculinity, in it's raw form, is all about creating groups of “us”
(the tribe) and “them” (everyone that's not part of the tribe.)
Before a man can protect, he has to define the enemy.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
This in-group/ out-group bias is a
fundamental element of the “ism” concepts (like racism.) This
tends to destabilize “civilized” society because anyone unknown
becomes an enemy (think conservative Christians hatin' on gays) to be
protected against. In our modern world, this is even more problematic
because we have so many multinational corporations with a global
capitalist agenda. In-fighting between groups means people are not
buying consumer goods, which means less profits. In other words,
corporations like GM, Monsanto, Microsoft, Walmart, BP, Samsung, and
Apple have a vested interest in peace, and masculinity can be a
threat to that peace.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
So how do we overcome these issues?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
The secret that I figured out, which is
confirmed by observing adoring ladies fawning over alpha males, is
that as much as society puts up a facade of hating masculinity,
society secretly *loves* masculinity. No matter how civilized we
become, there's always that scary unknown lurking at the periphery of
our cushy lives. Society NEEDS men more than men need society, and
the power in every relationship resides in the person that needs the
other the least. Once we really internalize that belief, we break
free of society's attempts to shackle our masculinity. Society can
tell us masculinity is bad, outdated, or a tool of female oppression,
but society's actions speak louder than society's words.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
We may not need society's permission to
indulge our masculine side, but we do have to either follow society's
rules or fly under society's radar. With that in mind, we have to
figure out exactly what behaviors we're missing and would like to
reintroduce into our lives. We also have to figure out what masculine
values or beliefs (like a code of honor, rites of passage from
boyhood to manhood, the development of male-only places, etc.) we'll
adopt. For example, being driven to be the best version of yourself
you can possibly be is an excellent masculine trait that's entirely
applicable to our modern society. Getting pissed and killing a random
dude because he didn't use his turn signal... not so adaptive today.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
Once we figure out what we want to
believe and do, we need to make an actionable plan. This is what I've
been working on doing for the last few weeks. Part of this involves getting an accurate "lay of the land" <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-one.html" target="_blank">by understanding what really motivates women</a>. As of right now, I'm
still researching and holding discussions in the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank">San Diego Man Camp Facebook group </a>(join if interested.) I have a great deal of hope for
this group, mostly because I've managed to identify many of the
variables that our society loves and hates about masculinity, tagged
the major gatekeepers that will ruthlessly attack any expression of
masculine traits, and found enough like-minded men that are sick and
tired of feeling completely lost. As it turns out, most men do not
like their role in life and desperately want to find a way to free
that buried masculinity. On a primal, instinctual level, we <i>know</i>
this is what we're missing in our lives. We just need a road map. I'm
making that road map.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
It seems appropriate to end with
another Jack Donovan quote:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>“Men cannot be men—much less good
or heroic men—unless their actions have meaningful consequences to
people they truly care about. Strength requires an opposing force,
courage requires risk, mastery requires hard work, honor requires
accountability to other men. Without these things, we are little more
than boys playing at being men, and there is no weekend retreat or
mantra or half-assed rite of passage that can change that. A rite of
passage must reflect a real change in status and responsibility for
it to be anything more than theater. No reimagined manhood of
convenience can hold its head high so long as the earth remains the
tomb of our ancestors”</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
- Jack Donovan, <i>The Way of Men</i></div>
</blockquote>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3598902902672685977.post-64901044020292003462015-04-17T12:11:00.000-07:002015-04-17T12:11:08.856-07:00Hacking Ovulation: Make Aunt Flow Your Ally, Men<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdhiTqg2oZnizUf5WV5ihTUyUTMDfrDWLXyOTRLfxa1mu_ba5cpwHefKLqQeSzFdfNtvd3wiWjdF8THk_JMVWTFHrj2rvhtUDygqvz43IljfjiJNCWYKNSGD8ggGY1_8FcLuNAhya-yeM/s1600/3972834_orig.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdhiTqg2oZnizUf5WV5ihTUyUTMDfrDWLXyOTRLfxa1mu_ba5cpwHefKLqQeSzFdfNtvd3wiWjdF8THk_JMVWTFHrj2rvhtUDygqvz43IljfjiJNCWYKNSGD8ggGY1_8FcLuNAhya-yeM/s1600/3972834_orig.jpg" height="400" width="343" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pretty much every dude is familiar with the female menstural cycle. Most men know women have periods about once every month or so. That's about as far as most of us get in understanding female fertility. That's too bad, because learning to hack your wife or girlfriend's (or random women you're trying to pick up) menstrual cycle can dramatically improve your relationship. Before we get to that...</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Very Brief Explanation of Ovulation</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For our purposes, all you really need to know about ovulation is the timing. Women ovulate (when an unfertilized egg is released from one of her ovaries) about fourteen days before they begin their period. If a woman has sex a few days before to a few days after ovulation, she can get pregnant. The actual window when the egg is viable is actually less than a day, but sperm can be viable inside a woman for days. If you want a much more detailed explanation,<a href="http://www.babycentre.co.uk/how-your-menstrual-cycle-works" target="_blank"> check this out</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Charting Ovulation</h3>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So how do you know when a woman is ovulating? I recommend doing this in secret, though open-minded women would probably be on board with this project. Anyway, here are a few methods:</div>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Use a calendar.</b> Start marking the first day of her period on a calendar. After a few months, add up the days between each mark and average them. This is the average length of her menstrual cycle. Once you have an average, calculate when her next period will start. She will ovulate about 14 days before that future date. This is the easiest method. If she has a regular cycle, use this method.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Basal body temperature.</b> When a woman ovulates, her body temperature increases about a half of a degree. Couples that are having trouble conceiving routinely chart the woman's body temperate to maximize the return on sex. To use this method, I recommend buying an <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00837ZGRY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00837ZGRY&linkCode=as2&tag=theultrstor-20&linkId=QPPHCFANNY2JVBUQ" target="_blank">infrared no-touch thermometer</a>, then take her temperature on the same body part at the same time every morning. If you want to ramp up the creepy factor, do this while she's sleeping. Chart this temperature. I recommend using the same calendar from above; the data can be used to increase the reliability of the estimate.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Cervical mucus.</b> A woman's cervix generates mucus that changes based on how close she is to ovulation. I highly doubt you have to go to this length, but it's useful nonetheless. About a week after her period, her cervix will start producing a thick white mucus. As ovulation nears, the mucus becomes clear and a little sticky... sort of like egg whites. That change in color and consistency is a relaibale indicator of ovulation.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Watch her behaviors.</b> Women that are ovulating tend to exhibit observable behaviors which are motivated by hormones. The purpose of the behaviors are to attract sex because, well, that's kinda the point of ovulation. When women are fertile, they generally act more feminine. This inclused more revealing clothing (interestingly, this appears to allow them to out-compete other women, not necessarily attract men), walking with more of a sexy sway, talks with a slightly higher voice, exhibits more flirty behaviors, has a greater interest in social activities, and she releases pheromones that release testosterone in men (makes us horny.)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Watch your own behaviors.</b> Us men actually have a sophisticated response system to female ovulation, it just occurs unconsciously. If our woman is ovulating, we engage in "mate guarding" behaviors like holding hands, adopting protective body language, staying closer in public, staring down other males, etc. If we're really self-aware, we can usually detect these very subtle urges in ourselves. </li>
</ul>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Sociobiology</h3>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you read through my entire "<a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-one.html" target="_blank">Women, Explained</a>" series, you're familiar with the role of sociobiology in dictating our mating behaviors. If not, here's a brief primer. Women have a dual sexual strategy I describe in the <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-two-hypergamy.html" target="_blank">hypergamy post</a>. They want an attractive, dominant alpha male for his sperm contribution (produces healthy kids) and they want a committed, supportive beta male for security and provisioning. Ideally, they find this combo in one guy. That doesn't happen often, though.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Because of that, nature has a funny way of making sure our species survives. When she's fertile, women crave masculine "manly" men (alphas) for their sperm. When she's not, she prefers the company of a beta male to help her and her children survive. Based on the <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-five-understanding.html" target="_blank">nature of female desire</a>, this sets up a situation where women's sex drive fluctuates with her menstrural cycle. She gets horny (usually on par with what us dudes experience 24/7) around ovulation, especially in the presence of alphas. This is when she's most likely to have <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-nine-advertising.html" target="_blank">advertising sex</a>. The rest of the month she's significantly less aroused and far more likely to have <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-nine-advertising.html" target="_blank">maintenance sex</a>. </div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In our not so distant past (or sometimes even today), this meant women were committing to the best provider they could attract based on their <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/women-explained-part-three-your-value.html" target="_blank">sexual market value</a>, but also having sex with the most attractive male they could attract based on their SMV. If these were different men, she'd likely give birth to the alpha's kid and the beta male would raise it (believing it's his own.)</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
How to Hack Ovulation to Improve Your Relationship</h3>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Okay, so how can this weird feature of ovulation be used to improve your relationship? It's pretty easy - just <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2015/04/beta-males-explained-part-one-defining.html" target="_blank">display strong alpha traits</a> in the days leading up to ovulation, then kick back and beta it up the rest of the time. </div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The more convincing you can play the alpha role, the more pronounced her arousal should be. I would recommend starting four or five days before ovulation, be an alpha whenever you're in her presence, and keep it up for about four or five days afterward. </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
The Alpha Test</h3>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A lot of guys have asked me "how do I know if I'm an alpha or a beta?" There's a fun little test that can tell you exactly where you stand, at least in the eyes of your significant other. If she initiates sex enthusiastically around the time of ovulation, odds are good she sees you as her alpha. If you initiate and she responds enthusiastically, you're still in pretty good standing. However, if she avoids you when she's ovulating, you're in trouble. It means a) she does not see you as her alpha and is not sexually aroused by you (meaning you<a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/sdmancamp/" target="_blank"> probably need to change</a>), and b) odds are good she'll be prone to being seduced (or seducing herself) other alpha males. If she's dressing in that slinky dress with matching bra and panties for the "girls' night out dancing", that's a really, really bad sign.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
The Pill</h3>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Birth control pills deserve special mention here. If your woman is on the pill, this entire post is <i>probably </i>invalid. We don't fully understand this effect yet, but women on the pill do not always follow this same set of rules because women typically do not ovulate. The pill, regardless of the brand and composition, more or less mimics pregnancy. In the absence of hormones that cause her to crave alphas when ovulating, women probably prefer betas all the time. </div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This could explain the rise of the beta male since the development of oral contraceptives. Us men are nothing if not efficient. The sexual marketplace, post-oral contraceptives, demands more betas. We adjust our behaviors to make up for this demand by becoming more beta.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of course, the problem with this is women are not really aroused by betas and that tends to deep-six relationships after a few years. I like flirting with this hypothesis because we typically blame the explosion of betas on our society on all kinds of social factors from feminism to capitalism. The fact that a tiny pill could throw our entire mating strategy off kilter amuses me. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Conclusion</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Understanding and hacking female ovulation is a very simple method to ramp up the passion in your relationship. In fact, mastering this technique is probably the easiest way to <a href="http://www.sexpressionists.com/2014/05/the-paradox-of-intimacy-and-passion.html" target="_blank">alternate between passion and intimacy</a>. Ovulation can also be used to assess your own "alphaness." Finally, the development of oral contraceptives may have been at least partly responsible for our current "excess beta male" problem.<br /><br />What do you think? If you're a dude, would you use this methodology? If you're female, what do you think? Do you notice this effect, or is it like "mate guarding" and occur unconsciously? Leave a comment!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
###</div>
<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0