“When a woman marries again, it is because she detested her first husband. When a man marries again, it is because he adored his first wife. Women try their luck; men risk theirs.” – Oscar Wilde
Contents:
1.) Introduction
2.) Irreconcilable Love
3.) The Caveat
4.) Woman’s Love Defined
5.) Love & Female Self-Deception
6.) In Closing
7.) Relevant Reading
1.) Introduction:
“Women don’t love, they only care for themselves.” This is a comment from a gentleman I came across recently that made me stop to give pause. After some pondering, I came up with the essay you are about to read. I must conclude that I disagree with the statement that inspired this particular piece of literature. I do suspect that the gentleman who said what he said felt it to be true with every inch of his fiber, but I do not believe the assertion to be right. Nevertheless, I am sympathetic to his sentiment, for although he is wrong, he is not entirely. It is, at least among the old guard of the red pill community, an established truth that women do not love men in the way that man wants to be loved.
2.) Irreconcilable Love:
The problem is contingent on not only the way in which man craves to be loved, but likewise the way in which woman is capable of loving. Man desires a sacrificial love, sacrifice implies loyalty and connection. What men want from love, and what woman’s love amounts to is fundamentally irreconcilable.
In matters of love (and not simply lust,) man is an optimistic egalitarian. He loves as he wishes to be loved. In matters of love, when man is young and oblivious to the ways of women, he is a true adherent of the golden rule.
The folly of man’s nature lies in the belief that the loyalty quintessential to woman’s maternal instinct will be available within a romantic context. He believes rather foolishly, that as his mother loved him, the idealised girlfriend could. He sees how women love their children, and upon making such an observation concludes that women are capable of great love. This is true, they are. Only sadly, this great love is a love reserved solely for children, it extends not to man. As such, man has an idealisation of woman’s love, not a realisation.
Man desires that which is unattainable to him, unaware the love he desires is maternal in nature, unable to be felt for him. Nature plays a cruel trick on the psychology of man. It gives him a very pure, high quality love in his childhood. It gives him a template for woman’s love that he comes to expect as standard of all women. He is taught by his mother’s love that unconditional loyalty, noble character, gentleness, sacrifice and trust are intrinsic of the feminine essence. And so as he grows from a boy into a man he comes to the rather logical conclusion that if he is “a good man,” he can expect to be loved by his lover in much the same way. His mother, well-meant but quite incorrectly likewise affirms this notion to him. This is a wicked lie, but a man whose heart is yet to be broken does not realise this. He thinks woman’s love is immutable. He knows not that her love for child is different from that of her love for him.
And so man longs to be loved like a child, not realising such a love is reserved for children. Believing that the love he covets is romantic love, when truly it is maternal love. Such a man of course lacks the experience or nuance of mind to make this distinction. And so the tragedy for this man is learning that women do not love men like they love children. The unconditional loyalty inherent to the maternal bond is all but absent from the mating bond. Most men do not realise this. They love wholesomely right up until they are emotionally blind-sided by a woman in the most violable of ways, forced to re-evaluate their opinion of female nature. This is not a hypothetical so much as it is an eventuality. If lucky, post-breakup they end up on this blog or elsewhere similar.
From there on, man can learn to re-evaluate his notion of woman’s capacity to love. He will come to learn woman’s love for her mate is of vastly reduced moral and psychological quality than that of her love for her child. How he responds to such powerful knowledge will ultimately shape what kind of man he decides to become. Be it a man going his own way, a disillusioned bachelor looking to use women for nothing but sex, or a patriarch who runs his house like a business, aware of the risk, but acting in all his power to mitigate it.
However cruel as it may seem, women are incapable of reciprocating man’s love. They love differently. There is a hierarchy of love that trickles down. Man sacrifices for woman, and woman, for child. Rarely does the river flow upward. As such, if man is to believe that women can love to the same extent as he, then he is doomed to disappointment and misery when she invariably acts within accordance of her nature rather than his idealisation.
3.) The Caveat:
Most of you have been with me up until this point; some of you aren’t. Earlier I made a point of saying that “he believes rather foolishly that as his mother loved him, the idealised girlfriend could.” This has a double-meaning that very few would have the range of experience or nuance of mind to pick up on should I not be pointing it out. Essentially when read, those of you who had a good mother would have, if not now, at least at some point thought “I hope I can find a girl that’s as sweet and caring as mom.” Then, there are those who had narcissistic, detached, unloving mothers. The mothers who always put on a good public face of being nothing other than wonderful, but due to an affliction of personal defect did not share the love intrinsic to the maternal bond with their son.
I am shocked by the sheer number of men I have spoken to who have had mothers that never really loved them (ergo, my mother was very loving,) but I can’t say knowing what I know now that I am surprised. Men who had mothers that never endowed them with the maternal bond find it easier to swallow the red pill and understand female behaviour as adults. It is a recurring observation of mine that men deprived of maternal love are better adapted for dealing with women as mates in adulthood. The man who grew up as a neglected boy never foolishly believed that a girlfriend would love him as his mother would, he believed she would love him exactly as his mother did; with extreme conditionality.
This is to say, the man who never experienced maternal love as the typical man in boyhood did would not come to idealise female love as a man. Rather perversely, the standard of which such a man holds women to romantically is more in line with their true nature. Unlike most men, he was not taught to expect a sacrificial love from women because he never experienced this love to begin with. His mother didn’t love him like a mother, but like a partner, ergo, he was loved for his utility rather than his essence. And so it stands to reason that man’s frame of reference for the quality of woman’s love is based upon how his mother loved him. A man whose mother did not love him like a child when he was a child is therefore, in adulthood, at a perverse advantage. He has no idealisation to shatter, because his expectations of women in relationships are realistic.
4.) Woman’s Love Defined:
The epitome of a woman’s love is infatuation. To define it, this is a lust for your power and an obsession with how your character makes her feel, secondary to your power. It is put crudely: opportunism and emotional self-appeasement alchemised with lust.
Man oft forgets that love does not flow upward in the sacrificial sense. He makes the mistake of thinking that because he can love a woman without lusting for her, that a woman can do the same. She cannot, because her love is not based on sacrifice, it is based on the appreciation of man’s sacrifice met with lust. The more man sacrifices for a woman, the more likely he is to fall in love with his investment. The more a woman sacrifices for man absent of animal lust, the more repulsion she feels for him, interpreting her need for investment as a shortcoming on his part. And so there it is, unspoken in word but detected in sentiment; woman expects man to love her more than she loves him, reinforcing the hierarchy of love. Female sacrifice is predicated on lust and mental entrapment. Male sacrifice is expected, and freely given.
5.) Love & Female Self-Deception:
A woman who does not lust for you cannot love you as you wish to be loved. Lust is the basis for her love, absent of lust you have “like” rather than “love.” Such a woman can do naught but use you and lie to you both that she is in love when she isn’t. If it is convenient for a woman to be in love, she will convince herself she is in love so that she may convince you of it. Women are masters of self-deception, so one must be extremely cautious in assigning any substance to their convictions. Treat such earnest emotional conviction as sophistry.
Women are generally speaking, emotionally neurotic. Women who become too self-aware can end up hating themselves because they cannot overcome their animal elements. They can’t make themselves love you in the way you want them to, even if they tried to. To do so would ravage them with immeasurable misery. So as unfair as you may think it is that your girlfriend can never love you the same way your mother did, it is likewise unfair to expect her to do so if you wish her happiness. I am of the belief that this is why society has collectively lied to itself for generations. The truth threatens the nuclear family, you only have to look at the “men going their own way” movement to see that. Many men would struggle with the idea of family upon discovering the whole host of red pill truths that are to be found. Ignorance is bliss for a great many, as such the knowledge on this blog is as much powerful as it is dangerous.
6.) In Closing:
Women are what they are; your perception of women no matter what that might be is powerless to change their fundamental nature. You can, with the knowledge you have acquired, learn to accept them, or you may, reject them out of unappeasable disappointment predicated on the idea that “woman’s love just isn’t worth it.” We can argue about what is right for society, what is right for your personal situation and all the rest, as many of you like to do, but ultimately this is a personal choice. It is your choice to make, not mine, not anybody else’s. Once you have this information, that choice cannot be taken from you. The answer will be different for every man depending on where he is at in his life’s journey.
Learning red pill truths exerts incredible impetus on a man to mentally mature and decide what he wants out of women, as well as life. What you want will change with age. A 20-year-old is prone to naively think he’s going to be a bachelor forever. An old divorced man may have resigned himself from what he deems folly. A guy that’s been slaying in bars for the past decade might be worn out and want something with more depth. Thus, as men are prone to do, he returns to the question of how women love, and how he can act on his need to love without effectively destroying himself. The men who do not see a way to love without losing who they are, and what they have gained materially, are the men who reject love.
7.) Relevant Reading:
The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer had some great insight on women, which you can sample here.
If anybody knows of a condensed work, as in, a publication which has compiled the entirety of Nietzsche’s views on women, then let me know and I’ll add it here. To my knowledge, Nietzsche’s views on women are sprinkled across numerous works, and as such there is no one single work I could recommend.
Buy “Essays & Aphorisms by Arthur Schopenhauer” in the USA
Buy “Essays & Aphorisms by Arthur Schopenhauer” in the UK
Buy “Essays & Aphorisms by Arthur Schopenhaeur” in Canada
Buy “The Art of Seduction” in the USA
Buy “The Art of Seduction” in the UK
Buy “The Art of Seduction” in Canada
A great thing to ponder on. Hey thank you for writing so well and clear.
Thanks. Been refining my prose for awhile now.
wow. just found you this past week, you are dead on correct. impressive writing style.
you are describing the xx perfectly. I thought that impossible, well they being woman like to have us think that.
“” It is put crudely: opportunism and emotional self-appeasement alchemised with lust.””
wow. LOL. amazing;.
So essentially they are the cunts we know them to be.
No surprises here.
As the old saying goes there is no pillow harder than a womans breast
So, is it possible to have a woman to continue to “lust” and appreciate you long term? If so, how?
Until a man who is more alpha than you wants to have a relationship with her.
But this guy’s virtually no threat to you if you run your relationship right.
Why? Because of the level of effort involved in constantly changing partners.
We’ve looked at the effort on here as it applies to attraction in The Law of Least Effort. But effort isn’t only an important component of attraction – it’s important in all things in the universe.
Air molecules head toward lower pressure zones where they can move about with the least amount of effort (causing wind).
Continents slide in the direction they encounter the least amount of resistance (causing continental drift).
And human beings select the best quality mate they can reliably get with the least amount of additional expended effort.
The terms “alpha” and “beta” are fundamental misunderstandings of both wolf and human behavior. Different women have very different preferences.
https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-everything-you-know-about-wolf-packs-is-wrong-1664301968
Continuously make her feel like she still has to chase after you. Keep yourself well groomed ALWAYS, and make yourself desirable to other women. Women want what other women want. I am not saying go and cheat on a woman, but her seeing you make eye contact and smiling and somewhat flirting with other women will keep her on her toes and keen of your affection. When women invest themselves, or better yet, convince themselves they have to invest something in order to keep you, they subconsciously become or remain infatuated with you. And nobody wants to lose something they have invested into…but once they stop investing, they no longer care.
Excellent Comment.
So true!
That’s exactly why women don’t love men like they love their son : she knows her son will ALWAYS be there for her and love her above anyone else. Seeing a man looking at other women etc… puts in her mind : I can’t trust him, he will cheat with anyone he can. So there is no trust anymore, she stays with him but it will never be unconditionnal love if there is no unconditionnal trust. That’s why we love our father so much, we know we mean the world to him and that he will ALWAYS be there for us. But a man looking at other women will not, that’s the difference so bad advice from you if you want this kind of love.
If she is 100% sur in her head that even in a room full of prostitutes free for you to have sex with, she is sure that you will NEVER even kiss any of them, that it would not even cross your mind then she will be very loyal to you. At least, that’s how I feel about men.
P.s : excuse me if bad english, it’s not my first language 🙂
You have to retain your value such that you are her best reasonable option at all times. If you slip, some women will give you some time to recover, while others won’t, but if the slip goes on and on, almost all will leave. It’s how they are made — they are wired to see danger in such situations and to seek a mate who is better and provides them with what they are wired to want. So always remain at the top of your game.
Retaining your value can be assisted in the long term by identifying those issues that your partner struggles with, and becoming adept with shouldering such. Those born of narcissistic trait mothers will easily recognise the advantage that the art of flattery confers on a male in a long term relationship. Measured verbal affection is an indispensable tool of garnering compliance.
Yes it is possible and your ‘how?’ is answered by a single word – GAME
I think this is an elegant explanation of female love as i have seen. Much of the Manosphere’s pain regarding women is tied up with this fundamental delusion of expectation from the opposite sex. Wanting reality to be different will always cause suffering as there is no acceptance of life’s true nature.
I think as a group Men need to reduce the importance they see in a love bond with a women due to the facts presented above. A fatherly caring towards a women is a more suitable type of emotion as it does not elevate the exchange towards the romantic vision that men have.
From The Caveat:
“Men who had mothers that never endowed them with the maternal bond find it easier to swallow the red pill and understand female behaviour as adults. It is a recurring observation of mine that men deprived of maternal love are better adapted for dealing with women as mates in adulthood.”
-My friend, you just answered one of the deepest questions I’ve had since I was around 5 years old and can rememeber when my stepmom came into my dad’s life and mine because my maternal mom decided to split as soon as I was born, almost giving me up for adoption before my father found me…
I always wondered “WHY” I found the red pill, religously asking everyday why I was shown these harsh truths (that made perfect sense to my psych) and without a doubt accepting them as truths. I didn’t fight against the RP. I fully acknowledged that this was for me. I found the RP after a traumatizing break up about 18 months ago and felt inspired. The nature’s of women were finally laid out into words that I could never describe myself, and were in and of itself spine chilling. I believed them nonetheless and just knew Rollo Tomassi was right.
“The man who grew up as a neglected boy never foolishly believed that a girlfriend would love him as his mother would, he believed she would love him exactly as his mother did; with extreme conditionality.”
-Since I lost my virginity in my teens I knew this and was how I saw my girlfriends and is still how it is for me. I would always question them when they would say “I love you, Apostle!” because I DID not believe them in the early stages, eventually I was blindsided everytime by my investment as you mention, though.
“This is to say, the man who never experienced maternal love as the typical man in boyhood did would not come to idealise female love as a man. Rather perversely, the standard of which such a man holds women to romantically is more in line with their true nature. Unlike most men, he was not taught to expect a sacrificial love from women because he never experienced this love to begin with. His mother didn’t love him like a mother, but like a partner, ergo, he was loved for his utility rather than his essence. And so it stands to reason that man’s frame of reference for the quality of woman’s love is based upon how his mother loved him. A man whose mother did not love him like a child when he was a child is therefore, in adulthood, at a perverse advantage. He has no idealisation to shatter, because his expectations of women in relationships are realistic.”
-Now that you explained this in a logical way, I get it. You have unveiled what I always knew, but could not put my finger on. I never experienced that maternal love. Don’t know what it is.
-Now, I can accept that the maternal love I longed for all my life is never going to happen. I don’t know if that’s a healthy thing, but up until being 25 years old, I don’t see what else to do but accept.
-I love women so much, every thing about them and their nature is heavenly. That’s why we’re all here isn’t it? I’ve always had girls 8+ and this whole article cleared a lot of confusion I had.
Thank you!
The caveat though is that if you never knew maternal love and that tie of loyalty in early life, then it is something you may LONG for if you have not stoically accepted the reality of things as they are. Plenty of us who grew up experiencing our ties to our mothers as utilitarian, conditionally based approval given what we could contribute materially, which was then taken for granted upon receipt, while we were otherwise routinely and coldly neglected and otherwise shown disdain, well, you appear to refer to that as a partnered rather than a maternal frame, which I would agree with.
I would also add that the negative view of men being portrayed throughout the media is one of men, whom women do not view as lust objects, being the subject of laughter, disdain and ridicule, based on the men’s psychological propensities, basically, their caring and naïve nature exposes a weak frame in a struggle for dominance. This is the realm of caring and cooperative men vs. competitive and calculating women.
This applies directly to my situation. Suffering heartache is unnecessary when you understand not only how the dynamic works, but why.
The mystery of love is greater than the mystery of death. Oscar Wilde
“with extreme conditionality.”
Red pill gold
“A man whose mother did not love him like a child when he was a child is therefore, in adulthood, at a perverse advantage. He has no idealisation to shatter, because his expectations of women in relationships are realistic.”
That explains a good deal about me as well.
“Suffering heartache is unnecessary when you understand not only how the dynamic works, but why.”
That’s peace brother that’s true peace.
One thing I used to do was escape into books I didn’t learn why but I did find it helpful. I used to breath the words of truth from story’s of the passed I used to admire books instead of people because I lacked the emotional development that the red pill is talking about. I used to do a great deal of things that I do not want nor have a willingness to be a part of ever again. I learned to let go by being my mothers leading man. I learned to forgive her for asking me to be the man of the house and hurting me greatly with emotional rage. I learned to love my mom by witness her destroy everything I have ever built And reminded me that as a child mother was the word of God. I remember falling for her words but not her actions. I remember my mother I remember her lips. All women are lips…
A very enlightening post all together. Thank you so much.
Reminds me of Harry Browne’s notion that you must treat things as they are – it’s a mistake to expect that things/people will do something that is out of their nature. I.e. a rock is a rock, and it won’t act out of it’s capacity to be a rock, regardless of what you do or want.
This phrase stuck out the most for me: “or a patriarch who runs his house like a business, aware of the risk, but acting in all his power to mitigate it.” Clearly, one can’t have a cohesive family without a serious dose of pragmatism in regards to dealing with/expecting things from your woman.
This post showed how a lot of heartache that I had in my relationships was primarily caused by me, not because a woman acted outside her character. As usual, the mountain of responsibility falls on the man. However, it seems a completely natural order of life and thus should be embraced, and not viewed as a burden to carry.
Muchas gracias.
That was an interesting insight to ponder on. My mother was no June Cleaver. She was a martial arts instructor who specialized in teaching women how to rupture testicles.
I’ve been with my wife since 1991. A woman’s love is all about the tingles, and I still induce tingles in her after all these years.
I never considered how these two facts are quite likely related. I have a pretty fucked up idea of what women are, growing up with Mom. Without that, I’d probably be divorced by now. Weird.
Thanks for the nice article. I hope someday women also understand this.
Thank you for good article, now i can be at peace. If women arent capable of equal love, why should i invest into relationship? Now i can live on without any doųbt about female nature.
Very good read, but I have problems with too large generalizations and simplifications – but I must confess it urges my brain.
1) One should state, when one talks about “man” and “woman” this are hypothetical models in an idealized world. I, for example, am a man who has rather feminin aspects and tends to love for conditionally than most man i encounterd in the past.
2) It is no unconditional love if love is for one human being only, because it depends, at least on existence – I would rather say “less conditional”.
3) I think you underestimate the influence of primal psychological parents on the ability to love. Let’s assume a man with a distant mother – as you pointed out, he has obvious advantages because he knows that he has to “deliver something” and nobody cares who he is. But growing up in such an environment establishes an inherent emotional void and the same goes for woman! Such void needs to be filled somehow and there is often the deep hope that someday a woman/man kann fill the void and recompense the missing childhood love. So to speak, the loved boy has a rational route to walk and the unloved boy an emotional, which is, in my opinion harder to achive.
I grew up around mommy’s boys and my mother left before I was out of diapers. I can agree with your statement until the red pill gets involved. Through red pill awareness a male can quickly and easily get past the emotional aspect using abstract thinking.
The hardest part is deprogramming years of blue pill indoctrination, since once you realize they are unable to love equally, your expectations of women drastically drop.
A clarification. Sure some women are narcissist who are totally incapable of loving any other apart from themselves. However, a lot of women tend to show their young sons motherly love and care, but become sterner taskmasters as their sons start to grow up. I think the only woman who has the right to nag and prod and push a man to reach his potential and make the most of himself is his mother, while he is still living under her roof and authority. Sure, I wish I could be a more loving mom to my 15 year old boy, but I much much rather he hated my guts but survivied and thrived, than to wallow in my motherly love while dying in a ditch somewhere.
You describe my own experience here. I believe that as I reached the age capable of conversation, it opened the floodgates for a form of intellectual and emotional abuse that woman was incapable or unwilling to visit upon her dissapointing chosen partner. When I was 17, that woman pinned me to the floor and struck me about the face for half an hour. The right of a stern taskmaster?
I think Philip Larkin’s poem had it right.
“Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can, don’t have any kids yourself.”
The connection between the unrealistic expectation men have of a women’s love based on what they assume they will get because of motherly love was brilliant.
So essentially, if one wishes to experience the closest thing to unconditional maternal love from a woman, he must inspire maximal lust in her.
In short: yes.
Dear sir, can you please confirm this for me: I have read that if a woman treat a man as his mother treated him, as in ultra care and extra nurture and love, that he is likely to cheat on her. If this is true in your view, why is that?
I don’t believe that is true.
IM,
Could you analize this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uPOGxUtZvk
This woman…
Both Rollo Tomassi at Rational Male and Roger F. Devlin have made similar observations. For readers here, you might want to read “Women in Love” and the relevantly linked articles to it written by Rollo.
IM – good to see you writing on this too. The word needs to spread especially since it is one of the harshest pills to swallow for men (regardless of what kind of mother as I found it tough and my mother is one of the most solipsistic women I’ve ever met…and I spend a lot of social time around college women). I’ve had a hard time dealing with this as a Christian, because this dynamic described above has played out all through my dating life. No matter how good the woman appears due to social cues (Pastor’s daughter, high religious observance, anti-abortion and premarital sex, etc.) the game requires reving her engine and very soon the clothes come off of her and the “I love you’s” come forth from her…many a time within the first few dates. And if that doesn’t happen, she’s clearly not into you and it shows. Highly frustrating if one wants to find a good woman in this culture and to also adhere to your moral ideals.
Maybe Brendan/Nova can comment on this from his experience. Anyway, thanks again IM and keep up the good work.
Many interesting insights in this post, but I have to question the discussion about motherly love. Some people have already commented that being loved is essential for a child, and lack of love early on leaves a “hole” in your soul.
It turns out to be systematic that women dole out less “maternal love” to sons than to daughters. They wane them hastily, are unforgiving of mistakes, punish them more harshly, including beating. The main (unconscious) idea is that a boy should not experience security and childish irresponsibility.
This process has been systematic for the whole of female dominance in history. Ancient Sparta is a prime example, where boys were subjected to abuse early on in order to become expendable warriors. The main idea is the same today, though the means have changed. I suspect the bulk of “beta” men, i.e. the large majority of men, have been through a process of what is practically child abuse.
So in essence, women are fighting their first battle in support of hypergamy against their own sons. Each generation of women produces the next generation of “betas”, that their female sisters will get to use. An amazing case of social engineering. (For the fuller picture, I note that it is a three-strike process: mothers first, young female peers second, wives third).
Now, what about “alphas”? Men that exhibit alpha traits fall into two classes, in my opinion.
First, those that had a loving mother, who gave them an initial steady ground to build upon (and also managed to stay afloat the relentless sexual war during their adolescence).
Second, those that IM refers to. Those that had a typical, or worse-than-typical, unloving mother. Their exhibition of alpha traits is, in a way, coincidental. They have such a pressing agenta to fill the void, that any particular woman is indeed not that important to them, they are emotionally unavailable, etc. These traits, in the short-term mating scene of today, pass for high-quality traits to women.
Yours is a helpful post with illustrations that aids my thoughts. There’s a nuance in the conflict between early memories of motherly affection and the later pattern of emotional abuse that I have been slow to realise. But which has perversely helped in life. That push and pull of the alpha and beta traits.
The more man sacrifices for a woman, the more likely he is to fall in love with his investment. The more a woman sacrifices for man absent of animal lust, the more repulsion she feels for him, interpreting her need for investment as a shortcoming on his part.
Can someone elaborate please on “animal lust.” And how it’s being used here? V
Amazing post IM. Slowly I’m getting through all your material. Much appreciated sir
That’s why i thank heaven for my mother be a borderline. Plus she always told me that the world is a cruel place with selfish people, exaggerated like all borderline, but it was worth it.
Little advice that she gave me about women / dating are very realistic, like marriage in the beginning is good but falls apart fast, women are more cunning than men take care, love doesn’t exist.
She wants me to marry and defines a woman’s profile, she is racist, but at least not sold me illusion.
Ecclesiastes 7:28: Solomon searched through 1,000 people. He found one good man and no good women.
I see that most people have difficiencies when it comes to love and long term commitments. Of course, many of these difficiencies are gender specific. I agree that there is a natural and necessary hierarchy. Woman needs man. Child needs woman. The cycle of dependency, however, does not qualify one love to be better or more than another. One major factor unmentioned in this article is the natural/ biblical order/ cycle. Woman came from man’s rib. Women are inadequate without man and God. Wouldn’t a creator have a different love for his creation than his creation’s love for him? It is natural, but not at all a negative. Simply put, men and women have different, but equally weighed intentions and capacities to love their spouse.
about the caveat: IM, in some cases the men that had not a loving mother, he can deceives looking for a love that had not as child.
The end for man is enlightenment, for the female must reincarnate as a male to get any crumb of absolute truth.
MGTOW, GAME, choose either path and you sell yourself short from the supreme self. Discard what I am saying, and you will be here again with the same problem if not worse, in another lifetime.
Destroy your delusions, actualise your potential, end the cycle of suffering.
Thank you, illimitable men.
I feel so sorry for what you must have gone through to write such a sad though eloquent treatise on female love. I’m a woman, and I respectfully disagree with your blanket characterization of women.
All I can do is flip the argument: What if I said that a father’s sacrificial love sets up a young girl for unrealistic expectations of unconditional love from a man. If a woman doesn’t inspire maximum lust in a man (i.e. she gets old & fat), then he will trade her in for a trophy wife.
Hey, doesn’t that happen often enough to lend credence to this assertion? Would you then tell me that not all men are like that?
Well, I’d say the same to you. Are there specimens from both genders that fit this description? Absolutely. Does their existence justify the creation of this cardinal rule? I would say no because it would be a matter of inductive rather than deductive reasoning.
Listen, as a woman I always look for a man who treats his mother well because there’s a very good chance that he’ll treat me in the same fashion. Likewise I avoid men who don’t have good relationships with their mothers because I know their view of love is skewed – possibly jaded, embittered or abusive. Frankly I don’t have time for that kind of drama.
The problem for men is that they need to find a woman who has a fantastic loving relationship with her father. Unfortunately many men abandon their children so many kids grow up without a father. So that cuts down the number of these “father’s little girl” type women.
Furthermore, you most likely want an attractive woman which translates as non-fat. That’s also harder to find in the US where 2/3 of the population is overweight or obese. The remaining thin women are so much in demand that the world is their oyster and they can be more demanding and selective. But what’s more troubling is this: these women are more frequently harassed on the street, making them quite averse to any innocent overture by men out of desire for self-protection.
Incidentally, if you want to increase the number of quality women, urge your fellow men to stop harassing women, stop being deadbeat dads, and protest against genetically modified and engineered foods that are fattening the American populace.
Obesity might indeed be a consequence of feminism. Most men can’t cook, and women consider it downgrading. And no one can’t find time to cook with the kind of work pressures we are under without tremendous discipline. The field is ripe for an explosion of unhealthy eating habits and all modern diseases. Add to this that the modern woman isn’t as strong or as tough as their ancestors due to the comforts of modern living. Gymming alone is really ineffective without healthy eating.
I might even go on to say that feminism is one of the factors inflating modern diseases and the kind of medical costs one has to face later in life, not to mention the strain on the national healthcare budget.
Therefore, cooking shall now be as essential a part of the modern man’s repertory of skills as exercise.
Add to this extremely gigantic servings at restaurants. I am not from the US and when I went there I was shocked at the sheer size of the servings of empty calorie foods. 2 generations ago we had our grandparents walking between towns miles apart and eating huge servings without getting in the least fat. Not any more.
For the other point, as men find it disillusioning to realize that their relationship with their mother was different from all others, so do women spoiled by their fathers when they realize that their husbands or boyfriends aren’t daddy or that the outside world isn’t their parent’s house.
Nevertheless the sacrifical and provisional nature of a man’s love remains and is expected despite the change of relationship from father to boyfriend or husband for the woman, whereas for a man, it is his first taste of his world being turned upside down.
The change from boy to man is drastic for a man and cannot happen without a virtual war against his past conditioning. Again women are as ignorant of this need for battles that forge manliness as a man is of labour pain.
Men with seemingly very close and healthy relationships with their mothers are in for a real shock when they realise they’ve been eating bluepill since birth. This is doubly so if the father is absent or passive and the boy has been shouldering the supportive role that is actually his father’s job.
Even sons close to their mothers wake up to the Machevilian nature of women when another woman enters their life and this rarely, if ever happens to a woman. Hence the overwhelming proportion of MIL-DIL issues as opposed to SIL-FIL issues.
Dissertation requires precision and clarity, and the precise term for it is when the mental umbilical cord hasn’t been cut.
“Even sons close to their mothers wake up to the Machevilian nature of women when another woman enters their life and this rarely, if ever happens to a woman.”
I don’t agree, we are loved by our fathers, we think the first man we’ll be with will treat us good like him, love us, protect us and in reality they lie to you and just want to use you, have sex and dump you, when you treat them nicely they take you for granted and leave you for a girl who will treat them like dogs and they will be crazy about her. We see it everyday so it’s a big shock for women because they realize love doesn’t exist in a man’s heart… It’s devastating for girls.
One more thing: Americans tend to be somewhat colder, not that affectionate.
I’m Hispanic, and I grew up coddled with Spanish terms of endearment like “princessita,” “linda” (beautiful), and “preciosa.” I take it for granted now because other families are not so loving and expressive. Boys in Latino culture are especially spoiled. Not everyone is born with loving parents – but love is a verb. You can break the cycle by giving the love that you never received. Just be wise and discerning about whom you pick as your partner. Sometimes overlook great beauty in favor of a sweet disposition, cheerful smile, and kind laugh.
Illimitable Man, even the nature of a mother’s unconditional love has it’s limits and it becomes very clear as you grow older and get into relationships with other women.
When the mental umbilical cord isn’t cut, it comes as a shock to men when their mothers reveal their Machievilian nature as soon as a wife or a girlfriend is involved and it becomes a bitter taste of red pill. Suddenly your unconditionally giving mother manifests everything from guilt tripping to passive aggressive cold war hostility, if not outright control and interference.
Furthermore when the blue pill man brought up to serve the feminine imperative becomes assertive to seize control over the power he never realized till then should have, it can result in extreme backlash from the women in his life.
The worst situation for a man is to find himself in a place where both mother and wife are competing as centres of control and power in the house, both taking away the power that is rightfully his and then resenting him for not having it, and making his life difficult when he does try to seize it.
Power is a ball once dropped into the hands of another, cannot be recovered without rewriting your relationships with those who have your power. Those relationships will never be the same again. In some cases, relationships where you have lost your power can never survive when you take it back and the only recourse is to seek new relationships respecting your power and boundaries.
regarding a mother’s unconditonal love, i was born to a sick, ugly psychopath, who ended up destroying her family, she watched and went to office while my father was suffering from a heart attack and she did the same with my brother when he had one. She was more in love with her brother in an incestuous sense. She made me averse to the very word “Mother”Very few males are red pill, and most others are betas and simps who worship at the altar of women. Invariably mama’s boys turn out to be such whiteknights.
yeah…..very interesting article not sure what to say about was it cretinism for the guys unrealistic expectations or self-serving: women can’t give us what we want: A BLIND SACRIFICE. not sure this is want i want to give to a man. Do you know what this mean? It mean if they got what they are wishing for , they do not need to grow up, can do what ever they want (check on your teens) and you still making them food, cleaning, “lust” ( do they pay for a “lady of the night”, but expect have it from you for free?). Sorry, I’m not sorry, I do not want to be with a never grow up Boy or a Daddy I want a man who can take responsibility of raising children he fathered. Then, yes I will adore such guy, lie to him daily of how much i love him (even if he pissed me off that day), do little sacrifices for him because my children are save and nurtured and i am not the only one who does the job. On the end, thus guy does gets a maternity love from his wife because she respects the man he is and doesn’t feel like she is “sacrificing”, she just love the man she respects and thankful for.
this post gives a lot of insight to female nature and the way they love. and it also exposes why women often try to shame men by calling them, “a mama’s boy.”
they say that so that YOU fully understand that they won’t even try to love you on that level, i.e., they’re doing you a favor. i typically respond by saying, “i am my mother’s boy… until the day i die, and my love for her (and to her) can’t be duplicated.”
that’s my way of saying, “don’t expect to be put on a pedestal. EVER.”
“If it is convenient for a woman to be in love, she will convince herself she is in love so that she may convince you of it. Women are masters of self-deception, so one must be extremely cautious in assigning any substance to their convictions. Treat such earnest emotional conviction as sophistry.”
This is a very strange idea for me, is it really self deception when the person truly believes they are in love? How do you even observe something as self deception? Is it just because a third party doesn’t believe it it automatically means the person is lying to themselves? I think it’s important to understand that women don’t value sex as highly as men and don’t always give it the same romantic connotations that men tend to give it.
“I think it’s important to understand that women don’t value sex as highly as men and don’t always give it the same romantic connotations that men tend to give it.”
It’s funny because I feel it’s the contrary, men can have sex without emotions, they just don’t care about the girls feelings.
An exemple : the best friend of my sister is 26 years old is very timid, lost her virginity, he dumped her the next day, told everyone and laugh at her when he sees her in the street, he used her just to make his ex jealous and 2 weeks later is in love with a girl who talks really harshly to him. But he used the nice and gentle girl because he thought it’s dumb for women to be naive. I don’t see where in this story men give romantic connotations to sex. And it’s sadely not the only exemple. It’s the norm now it seems and it’s very sad.
I found this fascinating. I don’t agree with all of it, but I’m here to ask you questions and learn, not so much to argue. One point in particular stands out to me –
“A woman who does not lust for you cannot love you as you wish to be loved. Lust is the basis for her love, absent of lust you have “like” rather than “love.””
I hold the assumption than men couldn’t love women they didn’t lust after. Am I wrong?
bro!! I can’t stop reading your articles. your like a damn monk with all this biological men/women knowledge. everything happens for a reason, I found you at the right time my friend!!!
Man oft forgets that love does not flow upward in the sacrificial sense. He makes the mistake of thinking that because he can love a woman without lusting for her, that a woman can do the same. She cannot, because her love is not based on sacrifice, it is based on the appreciation of man’s sacrifice met with lust. The more man sacrifices for a woman, the more likely he is to fall in love with his investment. The more a woman sacrifices for man absent of animal lust, the more repulsion she feels for him, interpreting her need for investment as a shortcoming on his part. And so there it is, unspoken in word but detected in sentiment; woman expects man to love her more than she loves him, reinforcing the hierarchy of love. Female sacrifice is predicated on lust and mental entrapment. Male sacrifice is expected, and freely given.
This is what I have observed from most stories or interactions I have had with the ‘fairer” sex.
This is the real reason men & women cannot be friends.
Man. You are breaking my heart but strengthening it at the same time. Your writing should be in a book and it should be read by every single male that exists. I realize this is over the top but I come from a long life of reading and watching films and studying and your presentation is absolutely flawless. You even have an uncanny knack for prose with your metaphors.
I am utterly impressed in all ways.