How Women Argue

How Women Argue

“No sensible man ever engages, unprepared, in a fencing match of words with a woman.”Wilkie Collins

The fundamental difference in what women say they want, and what they actually want is a product of the notion that women tend to exercise rationalisation, not reason in and of itself. Most women have extremely weak reasoning, you’ll notice in arguments with them that they will try to attack the credibility of your logic to try to make themselves look better, this is the classic “I can’t beat the competition so I’ll try to make the competition less effective” strategy that women employ on a grand scale with ideas like fat acceptance, but applied on a micro-scale in their interactions on a one-to-one basis.

Questioning a man’s logic and credibility is a way a woman essentially “brings a man down to her level of absurdity.” There comes a line of questioning so invasive, so interrogative and so unreasonable, that a man, feeling like he is on the defence, will yield his logic to his sense of frustration, and then the woman who deliberately and calculatingly imposed this form of mental tyranny in her sense of outrage will then use this frustration as a weapon against the man to further reduce his credibility by pointing out quite proudly that he is in fact no more logical than she!

Women will hold you to your logic as it forces you to take responsibility for things they do not wish to, but they are bound by no such logic themselves because they have no prevailing internal dialogue that is actually based on logic, at best they tend to have segmented ideas based on emotional thought layered with rationalisation that works to present a veneer of intellectual credibility, which is later necessary for the purpose of saving face. What women are doing here is exploiting the nature of logic and the sense of duty to the truth which is inherent within it, they make you feel bad by making you feel like you violate your own sense of duty to the truth whilst simultaneously feeling no such duty themselves. This gives them an edge in verbal combat as once you are emotionally compromised within your own frame of reference, questioning your own sense of logic due to your emotionally provoked slip-up, they can then exploit this momentary weakness to dominate the agenda.

They do whatever they do and then worry about making themselves look good later on, unemotional reason does not permeate the thought process beforehand. Satiating the “need” caused by the desires of their current emotional state is of the utmost importance to them; essentially they care more about feeding their emotional state more than they care about the tenets of objective logic. Emotional preference beats rational preference for them almost every time, as much as they hate the fact this makes them seem less credible than men, and thus to some extent inferior, this is practically a universal truth that not even government imposed “equality” has managed to rectify, women are not held any more accountable for their actions now than they were pre-feminism, you only need to look at sentences handed out by the judiciary for confirmation of this.

When you’re inherently unreasonable you are prone to making mistakes, making mistakes makes you look bad – looking bad is bad for your status. This is why women are good at saving face and maintaining a reputation whilst simultaneously practicing poor reasoning ability. This is where manipulation comes into play; you’ll find that, women are very good at spinning things, far more so than your average man is. They’ll talk to you, they’ll hold you to your words and get you on the defence, constantly questioning you, but they’ll ignore any criticisms directed at them as if to say with the unspoken word that your concerns or notice of their irrationalism is unworthy of validation. Then they use your own words against you, using underhanded and subtle spin, to make you look like an idiot. The more you put into an argument with a woman the more likely you are to lose with her because she will act most deviously in sabotaging your reputation whilst she layers hers.

To a woman, an argument is not usually an exchange of information between one person and another where despite opposition, ideas can be exchanged and information learnt. To a woman, an argument is a battleground for pushing an agenda, and reputation maintenance always comprises part of that agenda, there’s nothing more and nothing less to the nature of their argumentation. This is why typically, they cannot be held as accountable and thus even remotely equal to men due to an absence of credibility, they demonstrate repeatedly that their mental faculty is averse to claiming responsibility via honest, transparent discourse. Even when they are in positions of power which require by nature of the job description that they be held completely and utterly accountable, they still demonstrate reluctance to give up plausible deniability and be forced into a position, analyse any female bosses in the workplace you’ve had to draw a personal inference if you need so.

This desire for plausible deniability is what creates their blame-shifting nature and makes them, happily to themselves, not only unaccountable, but to their simultaneous dismay, incredible (not credible as a group of people.) Women will always move the fixation of the analytical microscope from themselves onto the opponent in their defiant acts of emotion-fuelled verbal sparring. This is how they defend themselves. They are wholly incapable of standing up to scrutiny on a logical level (due to the lack of faculty previously explained) and this is thus why they do everything in their power to remain out of the spotlight, shaming and scapegoating others in place of being a target of scrutiny themselves. As long as “it’s not my fault” and “I don’t look bad” she doesn’t care.

Despite the common woman’s indignation at being deemed illogical or, at least in terms of mental faculty, far less capable of logical reasoning than man himself, women in all their self-honesty beyond their hubris and ego maintenance do in fact realise that men are the more logical party. How is this you ask? Something I have observed in my arguments with women over time is a tendency for them to say that “you claim women are illogical, but you’ve just been illogical yourself!” again as mentioned earlier, this is a device used to try to bring you down whilst they bring themselves up, it’s the credibility game of “making you seem less credible by destroying the appearance of your advantage (your logic) to onlookers” however, the irony here is that such statements are often made after the woman in question has been incredibly irrational herself.

However, if you as a man are to make one wrong step, to make one statement that isn’t totally sound in logic, you are immediately held at gunpoint and this one faux-pas in comparison to her long list of logical mistakes is held up as an example of just how illogical you as a man are. How is this women admitting that they believe men to be more logical than themselves I hear you ask? Well as usual, they’re communicating it via the subtext, not with words. They’re holding men to a standard where even one sentence or idea uttered illogically is immediately picked up on and condemned, thus they have the ability to identify irrationalism, yet ironically they perpetuate their own irrationalism as gospel. They’re holding themselves to a lower standard of logical accountability than they do the male party. Gotcha there, ladies.

A man is condemned for being illogical and immediately compared to a woman for being so, yet the same woman who draws this comparison is the same woman who will try to condemn you to save face using all the most argumentatively illogical Machiavellian tactics in the book. Women KNOW they are illogical, they know they are not fair to you in discourse, they push all your buttons and drive you crazy with their irrationalism, and quite simply, they don’t care as long as it fulfils their agenda. They are undeniably selfish and hold commitment to their personal needs higher among their list of personal priorities than the diction of intellectualism. The only thing they care about is feeling like they’re right and getting their ego stroked, not actually discovering that little known thing we value called “the truth.” Solipsism does not need truth, equally accountable standards of logic applied to both genders however does need truth as the truth is objective. The truth has the potency to be harmful to solipsism and the female sense of well-being, and therefore, typically, the truth is an adversary of the female, only an ally when she needs it to make someone else appear weak.

What they’re doing despite their lack of intellectual integrity is making themselves look more credible than the straight-talking logical party, which is typically the man, so that when it comes to saving face they win the game of “appearing more sophisticated.” As sophistication carries a grace of validity and credibility to it, this is what they are mostly concerned with in the perpetuation of their thoughts. Women care about winning arguments, not about being right per se. To a woman, being right is using whatever underhanded tactic is required to get her own way and come out of the conflict favourably, being right is not obeying the laws of logical objectivism but spinning other people’s logic to make her look better than them whilst offering up some weak arguments herself just to get the ball rolling.

There are a few ways that they can put spin on the argumentation at hand, one of them is to shame you. By shaming you they can make you react emotionally, once you react emotionally you have lost – they will then make a theatrical example out of your show of emotion and use it to condemn you. Another way they put spin on things, one they favour greatly, is to play the victim. All of a sudden all the verbosity of being equal turns into “I’m just a girl and you’re being mean!”, water tears get worked and everyone looks at you like you’re the asshole. The fucked up thing is you will probably even feel like an asshole too, even though you’re in the right. Voila, she gets her own way and that’s all she wanted to begin with. There is no low too low for womankind to steep to if it means she gets her own way and secures her interests.

Women are very egotistical, because ego, like everything, is composed of emotions, and emotions are that much more de facto dominant in women than they are in men. Next time you argue with a woman, remember the agenda at hand is to appear the most credible and maintain a superior reputation in juxtaposition to your own. If she tries to bait you into reacting emotionally (and she will, she is dependent on your anger to have a chance at beating you to a pulp with your own words) do not take her seriously and just laugh off her words, because really, they are nothing more than baseless Machiavellian nonsense that will drive you to insanity should you take such words seriously and attempt to engage them at face value.

I’ll end this post on a high, and allow Bill Burr to reiterate what I’ve said in a more comical format:

37 comments

  1. Again I have to disagree with some of your statements on Women. I have observed, after a long time spent in thought and honest consideration of the situations I find myself in, where I’m told it is a mans world, and my goal was to effectively do my job and get along peacefully and nothing more, I found that many of the statements you attribute to women, are better attributed to less intelligent people, or whose reasoning or logic is flawed by excess emotions and hormones, and that gender is not as relevant as you imply.

    That is my experience of course, from the pool of 99% men at work, about 30% are very poor communicators, and 90% of this don’t have a girlfriend, or the respect of their peers.
    I reintroduce women to the mix by doing a different job and I find that I can make a better categorization that the emotional people are the ones bad at arguing.
    This allows me to consider that in that case where I was the only woman, it is not that men seem to be all about winning a conversation rather than exchanging ideas and information as I am, but that insecure people who are advancing their status do this.
    There may be I think some small advantage in culture or hormones and brain development that leaves men with one default set of skills, and women with another but I think its only a 60-40 split.

    Similarly your experience of women will mostly be in the dating area, and you wont necessarily have had a job situation where there are less than 10% men to compare your findings with.
    Because your situations may be more about games and power plays, you interpret the responses within that framework of limited experience.

    Have you considered spending time with a rational intelligent woman who does a mans job and refining your theories so that they read well? (This is not sarcasm) I truly believe you could benefit from that and it would make your mission of BS free self improvement more effective. You would not have to write a blog entry defending the anti-feminists stance as not being anti-female, because your statements on females would not require defending.

    In summary: people who are emotional and not getting what they want, will turn a disagreement into an argument to win, rather than exchanging and correcting information. I see this often in the workplace regarding status, and am but one example of a person who is assumed automatically to be lower status, and subject to irrational arguments that don’t deal with the facts at hand.

    You’ve also missed out a few common complaints I hear from men at work about their wives’ argument tactics, this is why I think on this occasion, your post is below your usual standards of quality, and contains a certain amount of projection, perhaps even in your efforts to see where we are all the same,you have shown that irrational arguments are to be found from all types of people.

    Feel free to edit this down and post which parts of this you like as my comment, but the lack of any comments appearing on this blogpost implies you’ve received only negative ones so far and does indicate you are not as open minded as you claim,since some of us know you only allow through the ones that contain a complement.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I admire your attack on my credibility to provoke me into doing what you want, it’s very underhanded, albeit, transparent. Nevertheless, I admire it, it shows you are very much emotionally invested in my writings, which I can only take as an unintended compliment. Regardless, you have persevered, and your post is laced with elements which bear merit, so I shall reward your dedication with acknowledgement.

      This piece is by far from my best prose, and I would never claim as such. Like many of my older pieces, this needs a revision. The article is by no means complete or definitive, if you have any suggestions for improvement, feel free to leave them. If merit can be discerned from your suggestions, said suggestions may be taken on board.

      I love intellectual women, they think they’re different from the bimbos, but respond in the exact same way as their bimbo compatriots in matters of the lizard brain. You wouldn’t know that unless you’d had intimate relations, as a man, with both stupid and intelligent women. Most men, naive, inexperienced men think “ah, she’s a smart woman, she’s not like those dumb “immature” women, she’ll be loyal, she’ll be more trustworthy etc.” They mistake your capacity to logic when you exert yourself out of necessity as a sign of masculine virtue that overrides your feminine flaws – as a sign of lower emotional volatility, that perhaps you have the necessary masculine elements in your character to be endurable, enjoyable even.

      But they’re wrong if you’re not an autist, or otherwise cognitively impaired to the extent that for all intents and purposes, you are psychologically a man. Otherwise, you’re still a woman, you can’t escape your nature no matter how smart you think you are, no matter how hard you try to emulate and reject your own femininity, you are a woman. A smart woman and a dumb woman share the same instincts. They will both love how you’re taller than them, will both feel your biceps, will both wrap their legs around you and will love to feel you wrap your arms around them. At the fundamental level, you are the same, your education or higher IQ doesn’t make you as different as you’d like to think you are from the conventional women.

      You will play the same head games and “fitness test men” in the same way, but perhaps the “smart” woman knows a few bigger words to deliver the same underlying premise that her contemporary two standard deviations beneath her would not. Your instincts are the same. Your difference is you can at least try to logic some of the time, the dumb girl can’t. You can at least control your emotions some of the time, the dumb girl can’t. You have more self-restraint, you’re not different. You hate responsibility as much as the dumb girl, you don’t want to be in the drivers seat, especially in relationships with men. You don’t respect men who answer to you, you see them as inferior, you have hypergamy. You will write whatever you say here to save face, but then go and contradict that in the real world just like the dumb girl would. To be diplomatic, at best, you will be less neurotic, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be neurotic, dramatic, emotional or irrational in a way quintessential to the feminine expression.

      I dated a “rational,” intelligent, high-achieving woman for 2 years. 160 IQ. Fairly beautiful (7.5 – 8.5.) Could logic. Wasn’t an autist. Still argued, emoted and head-gamed like a typical woman, although I did admire her capacity to logic. Although, when push came to shove, her emotions would win the majority of the time. In fact it was such a high quality woman being so utterly flawed in her mental faculty that drove me to seek out TRP to begin with all those years ago. If I’d been stuck with dumb women all my life I could have chalked it down to intelligence. It isn’t, it’s a matter of biological gender differences and I believe that most profusely due to my experiences. I don’t believe a comment on the internet can surpass that experience in educational merit.

      And to be honest, if you truly were different from all the other women (not that I believe that for a millisecond,) then your thoughts wouldn’t really represent women. You are not the first woman to be drawn in by my intellectualism, challenge me, and attempt to convince me she’s not like the other women. In fact, quite hilariously, this is something a bunch of women who consider themselves to “not be like other women” have done prior to you. So indeed, by attempting this, you exhibit behaviour that I have encountered repeatedly before. Fascinating really, it’s almost as if it’s a part of female programming. I’m hoping I can learn something from it. Perhaps it’s a subconscious manifestation of female sexual strategy, this definitely needs more investigation. I digress. All the best.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Jaded is structuring her argument in the workplace scenario. Whether you like to believe it or not, the fact is that a woman’s ability in the workplace was first tolerated by men, now in mass numbers it shows nothing unusual. The fact alone that gave women restriction or opportunity by men until this contemporary time shows that this has been and still is a man’s world. I know now that it doesn’t take any talent to fill in a job slot, why wouldn’t there be an agenda for equality? There are many roles needed to be filled and for people who have time invested in significant amounts of money, why would they deny the easier obedience of a woman? Judging by the centuries of zero tolerance for women’s rights, it makes sense how easy it would be to trust the obedience of a woman with the understanding that they have always known their place. Men have greater potential to fight back and try to create resolve. This is where i try go more subjective based on my personal experiences. In the working environment, I have seen women add a sector of unprofessionalism that men have shown little to none of. The irrational distaste of other co-workers based on insecurities, as I’ve felt that insecurities are what navigate the ultimatum of any woman’s irrationality. In a biological sense, that insecurity comes from a decline of prospects due to competition of other females, and for a woman to respond to that it comes strictly from the depth of their inabilities Females are locked to the resource of how they look, their levels of fertility. As if men don’t feel insecurity? The insecurity men have come closer to something more rational. They don’t feel hatred from the depths like women because they can’t do anything about it, they feel insecurity that they themselves aren’t doing anything about it. It is easier for men to count dollars then try to determine a count of how good they look, thus that is something a bit more logical to express versus aesthetic competition. Imagine the obesity rate in America combined with equal opportunity employment. Now you have a fat unhealthy unattractive prospectless woman whose actions are deeply synchronized to all of that, with the pretense that she is being objective and giving orders.

        “In summary: people who are emotional and not getting what they want, will turn a disagreement into an argument to win, rather than exchanging and correcting information. I see this often in the workplace regarding status, and am but one example of a person who is assumed automatically to be lower status, and subject to irrational arguments that don’t deal with the facts at hand.”

        You proved my point about how a woman’s irrationality spawns from something they have no control over ( not including all the cosmetics and plastic ). The real attribute which they care most for deep down in their hearts only deals with emotion and not getting what they want, and every decision coming from that spectrum of things for women shows it all has zero objective value.

        Like

      2. Honestly I couldn’t even tell what Jaded was trying to say the first time I tried to read her comment. Before I read your reply, the only thing I got out of her long post was “NAWALT!” mixed in with a lot of nonsense which I couldn’t make sense of. Thank you for explaining all these Machiavellian things on your website for us dissimulation-impaired men.

        Like

      3. Or what!
        Last LTR a crazy nurse she was smart enough to get an AA but then hit an academic wall, no street smarts either a total country girl.
        LTR before her was also crazy her literally the smartest person I’ve ever met. Genius level intelligence, decided she wanted another BA easy no problem, art historian, cultured, over educated, had street smarts, managed a huge retail store.
        Spent 8 years with each one separated by weeks. With all the differences in experience & intellect they were strangely similar. Like twin instant anger crazy ladies roiled just beneath the surface. When melt downs happened & they often did it was like dealing with the same monster. Usually what set them off was not getting their way. Or even getting their way but then as it happens didn’t like it.
        Logical evaluation & reasonable agreements caused allergic reactions. Conflict resolution never happened. Compromise … no way. Of course it was me not them that made them act that way.

        Like

    2. You just proved everything he said was right with your comment. I almost thought IllimitableMan wrote it pretending to be someone else to prove a point. Bravo.

      Like

    3. You proved his point lol. I will give you credit for jamming a boat load of FALLACIES into a single response. Would make a good test question for pre-law class.

      Like

    4. Not allowing angry disagreeing comments to stick doesn’t mean he’s not open minded.
      We already know these idiots exist, they are everywhere. What’s the point in allowing them to be heard through his medium, when they are the source of negativity that motivated him to write this to begin with?
      There’s nothing those fools can say to make us understand. There’s no secret to their behavior that will be noticed when intelligent people read over their comments in Mass, that will allow them to be helped. They don’t want to be helped, they want to feel right.
      The absolute ONLY helpful thing about letting those types of people express themselves is so I can point at them and tell a child, don’t be like that, be honest with yourself, and with the people you claim to love. Swallow foolish pride!
      When I saw you suggest that he talk to a rational woman, I thought, where are they?! My mother, my sisters, 90% of the women I’ve EVER conversed with, and to be honest, most men I know too, all make me tight in the jaw, and switch on fight or flight out of desperation to be free of them.
      I myself am sick, and uncomfortably full of these types of minds.
      They’re just weak. The Why doesn’t matter, it needs to stop. People should be humiliated at every corner for behaving in the way, which this writer put so sophisticatedly.
      But alas, this ain’t that kind of party. Those types will always be the majority, and I hope I’m wrong in saying that.

      When I do find a group of people who are emotional strong, rational, honest, and intelligent, I will cherish every moment with them.
      I want to be with people I would die to protect, not people who make me think about suicide because they won’t go away.
      💪❤

      Like

  2. IllimitableMan,

    I really enjoyed the exchange between you and ‘Jaded’. Not that you need the validation, but I think you nailed it in your response. I think that her comments were a subconscious challenge to you, calling out to be dominated, which you affectively did. I’m willing to bet that if she read your response to her comments, which I’m sure she did, she was aroused by it.

    I appreciate what you’re doing here on your site. Very legitimate stuff, for sure.

    Like

  3. I figured this out a few years ago. The moment someone I was debating with responded with an insult or any of the many shaming tactics feminists use I just declare victory and leave the discussion.

    If your position can’t be advanced without insult or violence then your argument is sh!t.

    These days I just respond by pointing out that my words stand unopposed. Insults are not a cogent argument and their inability to field a reasoned response is their admission that I’m right.

    End of discussion.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I’ll also add that women are fully capable of adopting logic and making it a vocation even if they aren’t innately equipped the way men are.

    But women cannot advance their self-interest using logic. Emotion then, serves their interests better and thanks to 100,000 years of female control of mate selection men are more susceptible to this method.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. “I’ll end this post on a high, and allow Bill Burr to reiterate what I’ve said in a more comical format:..”

    Or could read the comment left by Jaded.
    That read like the parent who claims “my child would never do that” getting shown the video.

    Like

  6. Looking back at the hundreds of arguments I had with my ex wife (every single one of them being chalked up as a loss, of course!), I have to admire my determination. I mean, I knew my efforts were completely futile, but I was so determined to “win” JUST ONCE. Just one time, I was going to stick to the point, be calm and rational the whole way through, and not let her use her underhanded tactics that she use every single time.

    And you know what? There actually was one time. There was one time I had her dead to rights – she was wrong. 100% wrong and I was right and there was no getting out of it. You know what she said?

    “Just get out!”

    But can’t you just admit that you’re wrong? Just this once?

    “JUST GET OUT!!!”

    So, I still lost. And in the end she told me I was the asshole because I ignored her demands to get out.

    You can’t make this shit up.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. You can’t, and you don’t need to. This mirrors my experiences exactly. A fight with a woman ends in one of two ways 99% of the time: tears from the female or an apology on the part of the male (regardless of WHO started the fight or why). Usually both.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. You can only win emotional arguments with a female partner using dominance or indifference, preferably both. With this you can make women submit and apologise even if you’re in the wrong.

      The trick is consequences. Specifically: consequences she cares about and will respond to.

      So… most importantly: ALWAYS be prepared to walk away. Without this, you are “trying to win” and just as bad: “trying to make this relationship work”. With that in her pocket, she can just keep emotionally and psychologically attacking every way she wants, she’ll sense that you’re “trying to make it work”, and eventually she’ll find an underhanded sly way to win, resorting to tears eventually, or as you found out “just get out!”. She’s trying to win at all costs (especially your costs), while you’re trying to make things work at some level. The ending is decided before it begins. (This happens worse to guys from stable families who have an expectation of a continued relationship and are less likely to appear willing to walk).

      Conversely… if you laugh at her illogic, tell her off for being a brat, apply a smattering of emotional shit stirring yourself, and walk away the second she starts to give you shit – she’ll back down out of fear of losing you.

      (Do not do what I did and mistake this for her being a reasonably decent human being – this all changed the second I moved in with a girl and she knew it would be a hassle for me to move out again).

      DDD: Dominance, dread, (in)difference.

      My intention is to help you. Any indignant feminazi “oppressing our feelz you patriarchal shitlord” responses are just a bonus.

      Like

    3. You sound like Charlie Brown in a Peanuts cartoon, the one in which Lucy swears that she will not remove the football just before Charlie has a chance to kick it, and of course she always does. The only way to win that game is simply not play; ask Lucy to set the ball in place, let her anticipate the moment she is going to withdraw the ball, then tell her to wait a minute, and walk the F away.

      Like

    4. My dad told me about a time when he and my mom first got married over 30 years ago. He said she would say things only to deny later saying them. So he got an idea to record her on a tape recorder. Well one day they had an argument and once again she denied saying something she must have said in the past. Well he produced the recording of her saying what he claimed she said.

      Instead of admitting wrongdoing, she takes the tape recorder and throws it against the wall, breaking it. This is something I noticed about women my entire life. The inability to admit any wrong even when caught. And also their need to base their opinions solely on how they feel rather than follow any logical process to arrive at an appropriate conclusion.

      I had a girlfriend who would drive me mad the way she would do that. So I got a poster with a list of logical fallacies. Inevitably, she would always resort to several. So instead of arguing my point, I’d simply listen to her babble and point to the chart to inform her of the latest fallacy she just resorted to. Needless to say this annoyed the hell out of her. I told her that I felt the same way when she just makes a point based on her feelings rather than sound logic. She responded
      by saying I was too logical all the time. I could only shake my head at that point.

      On the plus side, we had great sex.

      Like

      1. Absolutely spot on! Women can never admit to being wrong about anything. What a strange infantile world their minds are. It’s no wonder they are not allowed to fly passenger aircraft…

        Like

      2. • “Instead of admitting wrongdoing, she takes the tape recorder and throws it against the wall, breaking it. This is something I noticed about women my entire life. The inability to admit any wrong even when caught. And also their need to base their opinions solely on how they feel rather than follow any logical process to arrive at an appropriate conclusion.”

        My own mother, in a nutshell. Boy, you hit it square on the head.

        • “She responded by saying I was too logical all the time. I could only shake my head at that point.”

        The irony when many women very commonly say that, but then often claim they want a man with a mind.

        • “On the plus side, we had great sex.”

        Sex is just about all that most women are useful for, frankly. Though, I’d kill for a woman who can talk sports. (Can you imagine fucking a woman who loves watching sports as much as you do? Bliss.)

        They don’t like to hear it, but beyond sexual interest, men otherwise just don’t need (nor particularly desire) their company. Their interests are vastly different from ours. They typically love clothes shops, we typically love workshops. They love yakking for hours, we typically love watching sports for hours. Their conversation is typically about relationships and feelings, and their arguments are little different. Not particularly our cup of tea.

        We’d generally rather just enjoy a woman for what aspects of femininity we do enjoy–sexually. I honestly think the reason why women were obviously built so sexually desirable is because we otherwise wouldn’t want them. Sexual nature of women is necessary for human continuance, and pretty much the glue of most heterosexual relationships.

        Like

        1. “She responded by saying I was too logical all the time”.

          Took my gf to a live music concert. An amateur band was featured amidst the professionals. They were terrible, especially the lead singer. I made a comment about how terrible I think they are. To summarise the 2hr argument that followed between my gf and I, with respect to my comment, she wanted me to accept the statement that ” the band isn’t bad, they just can’t perform well” .

          Still trying to get the logic of her argument

          Like

  7. two thoughts, neither particularly well-formed or defensible and i don’t care so:

    replace ‘women’ with ‘democrats’ in the post and over 90% is spot-on
    some women do the victim thing full time, not even just in arguments. if you’re on your heels all the time, you don’t even get to the point of arguing your point, you’re just treading water all the time. my gf would get right under foot or stand super close when i’m turning around and act all surprised “oh!” and jump back or act like i elbowed her or something. i started giving her like two steps space at all times and of course then she took that as an attack as well, it was all so stupid and so transparent

    Like

    1. Replace “women” with “conservatives” in the post and over 90% is spot-on, as well.

      Sorry, but you conservative types aren’t much different than democrats, in terms of the rate of fallacy you use.

      As apolitical but politically-aware, I can observe you both without bias, and I’ve observed that you’re commonly two sides of the same coin.

      Like

  8. I never thought the women in my life would be right about or agree with something I read on a red-pilled site. Not that they know or would admit it. Only when arguing would they let demand exasperatedly, “Stop being logical!” or they would project, “You’re making everything personal to try to win the argument”. I’m paraphrasing but those’re the gist of what they’d say. I would be totally bemused. How can someone not be logical? How can you stand there with a straight face and accuse me of what you’re doing? At least I understand now.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Was posting on RM about an incident I just went through last week (requoting): Went to see this chic I was banging but now want to next. So, I tell her about this Newsweek article that basically supports fat/obese acceptance (See here: http://www.newsweek.com/full-beauty-photo-project-big-women-bare-all-636) – and went on to tell her that it wasn’t right that the media was doing this, and, that fat/obese isn’t beautiful….

    Wow! Solipsism S.O.P…she skipped any logical scrutiny of my points (duh!), jumped straight into ad homs and stupid hypotheticals (“what if your sister was fat?” “what if I was fat?”) beset by skewed, self-righteous, christo-fascist condescension to shaming me for my weight loss (Yup…believe it!), calling me unattractive (Ha!), all the way into more shaming and character assassination…naturally, it escalated with me not supplicating and calling her out on her mental back-peddling.

    So, I was morally defunct for ‘judging’ fat people, and that saying that ‘fat isn’t beautiful’ showed me as a bastard, I was a cold, heartless person, blah, blah…知るか?! (Jap for ‘fucks not given’)

    I was just like….

    Walked away, opened the door for myself as she had a meltdown…

    I realised, especially post RP, how it is ALL about killing your SMV (reversing the cardinal rule, power shifts in other words); solipsism goes into overdrive trying to compensate for defeat, loss of face, lack of intelligence, or the fact that you will not defer to her point of origin, that is, bullshit…

    Either way, I took the red pill…and I really can’t be mistaken for someone who gives a fuck!”

    So yeah, always err on the side of irrational self confidence and never supplicate….

    In other news…I came across this gem…

    And I was laughing my head off, it wasn’t so funny….when are men going to understand that less is more? Too many of us were raised as betas and now now we have sky-rocketing inflation of pussy….Spending all that money and no sex?

    but of course it’s men’s ‘immaturity’…open hypergamy continues to be conspicuous and unabated…this is a good thing…

    Like

    1. One can scarcely take seriously someone who uses memes in their reply. Put away the puerile use of memes, man. Use words and proper grammar like a grown man.

      Like

  10. “By shaming you they can make you react emotionally, once you react emotionally you have lost – they will then make a theatrical example out of your show of emotion and use it to condemn you. Another way they put spin on things, one they favour greatly, is to play the victim. All of a sudden all the verbosity of being equal turns into “I’m just a girl and you’re being mean!”, water tears get worked and everyone looks at you like you’re the asshole.”

    Hehehe…there’s an interesting saying I read once…

    “A woman is wrong…then she cries….then she’s right!”

    Like

  11. @Jaded: “That is my experience of course, from the pool of 99% men at work, about 30% are very poor communicators…”

    Haha…another I always hear women lament about, ‘communication’….I’ve realised ever since I was a kid and now as a man that the immutable truth about this is, women are not better communicators than men….men communicate, women talk. We’re definitely better listeners too….thing is, real men know that you have to keep women on a need to know basis, all that feminine-side-explore-your-emotions-express your fears-etc-bullshit is a recipe for a Kafkaesque nightmarish existence when dealing with our opposites…the simple fact of the matter is there are things women say and things women do….understand the difference.

    Like

  12. @Roko: ““Stop being logical!”

    Haha…ain’t that the fucking truth! This ditsy broad I was talking about above actually told me to stop “confusing myself by being too informed about the media, feminism, history….be simple.”

    Yes…in other words “stop being more intelligent than me so that I can make you bow to my will”….

    Exit, stage left….

    Like

  13. It is funny how women will try to hold you to your word, rather, expect you to keep to your word, in spite of the fact that they have demonstrated that they will not honor any commitment made to you under the same agreement. Basically, they try to get away with what they can and what you will allow, and the more wiggle room you permit them, the more they will try to screw you. It is better to view women as children in adult bodies, and to treat them accordingly.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. this is profound and extraordinary and has shone a light for me. not so much the fact of the matter because i’ve encountered this on so many occasions but it being put into words so succinctly

    feminism has further compounded the matter being making them default blameless in matters of law and state as well

    Like

  15. • “Women will always move the fixation of the analytical microscope from themselves onto the opponent in their defiant acts of emotion-fuelled verbal sparring.”

    You just described the majority of male politicians, quite honestly.

    • “They are wholly incapable of standing up to scrutiny on a logical level (due to the lack of faculty previously explained) and this is thus why they do everything in their power to remain out of the spotlight, shaming and scapegoating others in place of being a target of scrutiny themselves.”

    You just described the majority of male religious leaders, quite honestly.

    • “Women are very egotistical, because ego, like everything, is composed of emotions, and emotions are that much more de facto dominant in women than they are in men. Next time you argue with a woman, remember the agenda at hand is to appear the most credible and maintain a superior reputation in juxtaposition to your own.”

    You just described the majority of men who engage in philosophical debate, quite honestly.

    • “Women care about winning arguments, not about being right per se. To a woman, being right is using whatever underhanded tactic is required to get her own way and come out of the conflict favourably, being right is not obeying the laws of logical objectivism but spinning other people’s logic to make her look better than them whilst offering up some weak arguments herself just to get the ball rolling.”

    You just described the majority of snotty sorts, rampant among general academia, who are so educated, they no longer think or seek truth, but instead search our for tactics to engage against another’s readied tactics, only to regard it all as “intellectualism.”

    No offense, but you fail to be honest about your analysis. I myself am certainly no fan of Feminism™ or the many tactics that many women do commonly exhibit. You aren’t wholly wrong about everything here.

    But you do pretend like there aren’t just as many different kind of men out there–even some of high regard–who don’t also fit what description you seem to apply pretty exclusively to women. I know this personally, because I encounter such inferiority on a daily basis. Men who exhibit a false masculinity, in much the same way many women resort to pussy tactics.

    When I analyze women, I regard that what women tend to exhibit are tendencies, but that they’re not all exclusive to them, nor are many men out there exempt of these behaviors. If you want to analyze women, stake yourself capable of wrongdoing. Point out your own tendencies along the way. There is only one motive with debate, and that is ego. The superior ego is one that leaves no truth untruth, even with itself, and is still able to come out on top.

    I know there are indeed many things to address concerning women in society (most particularly, modern women, who are their own disease). But don’t put men solely on a pedestal, as if you don’t commonly find men who are complete and utter morons out there, likewise rushing to fragile egos and emotion as their defense, rather than reason.

    Because you undoubtedly see that sort of bullheaded asshole everyday while driving on the road, or among some (well, many) who contend in public debates on matters of science, religion, philosophy, economics, etc. Such sort of individuals who make everything a shouting match of sorts. Heck, you might even just be such the individual yourself–after all, bad drivers rarely recognize themselves, and few “thinkers” like to see his own folly.

    By the way, there’s very little “logical objectivism” in life. All spoken comes from subjective motivation, with intention of promoting some subjective. While there’s such thing as reasoning about a matter objectively, there’s no such thing as “logical objectivism.”

    By its very nature, human logic is a subjective experience, existing through personal motivation. We don’t reason unless we want to, and want to convince others to do so. Reasoning is a personal affair, and reason is a personal effort. There is no form of “reason” that exists without subjective aim. Even honesty is a mode of personal agenda.

    Reason is the length of one’s will. How well you reason shows how honest and willing you are. But fail to acknowledge truth in a wholesome manner, and your use of truth is dishonest. Many, many men out there fail at it, just as well as women commonly do. Just remember to point out the flaws found with any side, before laying it thick towards just one side.

    Otherwise, as much as it pains me to use this word, it makes you look, well, sexist. (And trust me–I have grown to hate that word, as well as “misogynistic,” but sometimes their meaning do aptly apply.) That is, not willing to see that some things are not merely a matter of sex, but personal honesty. A dishonest person, male or female, will reason dishonestly. Women just tend to do it more overtly emotionally. Men tend to be slier about it. Well, until we blow a gasket.

    Like

  16. I have worked in a female dominated profession for 17 years. I have tried so hard and put so much effort into getting along with them, you really do need to get along with you colleagues.

    For years I could not understand their behaviours, it simply made no sense to me. So I watched how they interacted with each other and learnt from that. The result, massive confusion, no self confidence and a feeling that anything I have to offer is useless because I “lost” every single disagreement. And every other women somehow found out about this loss.

    Many women have no interest at all in debating to improve professional practices, they merely want to maintain their status as “matriarch” of the group. They will disagree just to piss me off to make themselves look better. They will use any underhanded method to maintain their status. They really don’t care if they appear totally emotional and irrational. They really do not care.

    They will backstab, manipulate, degrade you in front of others, spread rumour, spread gossip, deliberately belittle you just to make you look stupid. This in turn marginilises you (the threat) therefore they keep their status.

    You really do need to keep distance from these type of women. Keep any comment strictly on topic and if they try to deviate even a little from a focussed work related issue, then stay on track. As soon as they try to turn the topic personal, make some irrational statement or start going on about “she said this, she said that” type of stuff then that is the end of it and I get on with my job.

    The result: a happier, more productive, more confident male employee who is actually getting along with colleagues better because many women actually enjoy the absence of emotional outbursts in the workplace. A logical, practical outlook actually calms their emotions making many women very appreciative of having me around.

    Shakespeare wrote “A jealous woman spreads more poison than a rabid dog”. And women can be very jealous indeed.

    Like

  17. Hello, I am a woman, and I read a lot the manosphere, in order to better understand the psychology of women. Most Women hate me, and I hate them reciprocally. They are, wicked, manipulative, denigrating, selfish, hypocritical, psychologically abusives, and so on. Your text is 100% true. I have not counted the number of times I had arguments with women who turned to hell, and my head wanting to explode. It always start the same way: I post a comment in the page of a newpapers on Facebook. My comment is not so offensive, and is usually banal, but they overreact. Usually 3-4 girls do not agree with what I say and attack me in gang. And they use the strategies you describe in your text. And they strive for several days, because they want to win the discussion. I have never seen men harassing me for 3 days under my comment, but women do not let go. I would compare them with dogs. All they do is yapping and when they bite, they do not let the piece go. I must admit that I also amuse myself a little too much to deliberately provoking them, mainly in the subjects on feminism. I dissect the illogical assertions of feminism and this makes them crazy. I am anti-feminist because women are evil, and much more violents than men against me and most feminist ideology is dumb and illogical. Feminism is for lesbians. So they set out to “educate me” and force me to think the “right way”. They try to force my opinions on me and muzzle me. But I’m a free thinker and a truth seeker about everything and I don’t accept to be censored.

    I also sometimes have terrible discussions with low I.Q. men douchebags and trash of the society, but they are never as psychologically violent and manipulatives as women. And they never harass me during 3-4 days non stop.

    I like the intellectual challenge of the discussions, and I have a hard time stopping, but I know I should.

    Maybe, I’m myself the kind of annoying bitch I dislike so much. I find pathetical when women say: “I think like a man. I get along better with men”. So I will not tell you that, because most of the time, women who say that don’t act like men at all. They juste are typical women bitches. I’m still a woman, with a woman brain.

    But my I.Q. is higher than most women and I have germanic genetic, so I am endowed with a pragmatic brain and high moral values and integrity. It is not easy to be a logical and intelligent Germanic woman, among a majority of stupids irrationals and emotionals little animals. Life is not easy for me, because as a woman, I always have to deal with others women, and I feel alone. I can’t go to a club for men, to escape my terrible condition. To be a smart woman is the worse thing on earth.

    Like

  18. Women are different than men, that’s just the way it is. One can either embrace it or deny it. It is rare to find one who will actually admit to inherent shortcomings. Ironically, I believe that one can apply Machiavellian principles to combat their inferior qualities, but it does take acknowledgement and practice. To be fair, I always tell my husband to leave me the hell alone when I know I’m about to go off on a rant, but he hasn’t quite grasped that concept yet.

    So…where do transgenders fall in all this? HAHA

    Like

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s