How do you cope with man-children?

[Alexop]

2 hours ago, Salvijus said:

@Alexop if you are able to identify unconicousness in someone, the masculine to do would be to help them see that, not to judge, criticize and demean them. Real masculinity is about brotherhood, not dick measuring contest to prove yourself better than others. By being a dick you'll think you're being masculine, but it's just insecurity. 

I am a mean person, I should be kicked out of Sweden. Sweden should introduce a non-hippie detector to check every visa applicant 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Alexop said:

why the hell are you even here?

I think this conversation has value. 

59 minutes ago, Alexop said:

I am a mean person. 

Do you want to remain mean? 

Edited Friday at 12:35 PM by Salvijus

[Alexop]

@Salvijus yes. How can we cook omelettes without people who are open to break some eggs?

 

Edited Friday at 12:39 PM by Alexop

[Salvijus]

9 minutes ago, Alexop said:

Salvijus yes. 

Okay. 

[Emerald]

17 hours ago, Alexop said:

Yes there has to be intelectual fodder, otherwise we don't know how to relate to each other.

This right here can bring down the happiness in a nation. This is the rhetoric Swedish people get all day and look at them. Women are ok but 95% of men are wimps. This message doesn't work. Brainwashing people to believe man and woman roles are just a fuzzy thing and only the looks makes us different is one of the most dangerous intellectual mistakes we have right now in society. My ex Swedish GF told me most women just cope with their partners because they have no other alternative. Just imagine how sad this sounds, to live a life of quiet desperation. Even the feminist activist I dated was stunned to see that there is an alternative to the nice guy wimp or the macho jerk, she didn't meet someone like that before.

I talk with so much courage about this subject because in the last 3 years I researched and contemplated it exclusively. And it completely changed my life.

Leo's statement about treating women like children changed my life. I opposed it at first because, as I said, personal experience bias. But in a normal world this is more or less true. 

I would expand it also to treat most men like children until they prove you wrong. Of course, this would be an insult to children as children are spontaneous, fun and daring but you get the idea. The thing is that women being treated like children is cute, they really love it when a competent man takes care of the harsh survival tasks while she relaxes in her feminine side. Shell and pearl dynamics as Teal says.

The issue is that these kinds of "be more masculine" types of advice and alarmist "society is going to hell in a hand-basket because men aren't men anymore!" narratives, tend to add to men's difficulty with adjusting socially... as it is a bunch of neurotic guys trying to intellectualize what it is to be Masculine... as opposed to simply operating from their own sense of sovereignty.

It's like so many men are trying to compete to be the same exact guy as opposed to just being themselves.

And it scares women away because a lot of these guys start adopting narratives that over-emphasize the gender difference in their own minds and treating women like mysterious aliens from another planet.... which adds more to the neuroticism.

I notice over the past 10 years since all these narratives have gone online is that young women generally have soured more and more on men because of the proliferation of all the Manosphere nonsense. And interacting with a guy who isn't brainwashed by it is refreshing.

Even I, as a woman in my mid-thirties, can feel a bit put off... despite having tons of friendships with plenty of normal guys and having had relationships with guys who are normal with regard to their relationship to their Masculinity.

Like honestly, what kind of woman do you think would be interested in a guy who believes he should "treat her like a child?" And whether that is spoken or not, there are always tells. And they betray the immaturity of the guy in question.

If I look at the most socially adjusted guys who have the healthiest relationships with women, it's men who don't over-focus on trying to be Masculine.

But the loneliest and least socially well-adjusted guys tend to over-focus on it.

And you'd be wise to avoid taking advice from men who don't have the type of relationship with women that you want to have. 

Like, Leo has learned a lot about the attraction phase to get over the challenges of being a late bloomer (which makes him relatable to men who struggle with initiating attraction with women)...  but he doesn't have much relationship experience and doesn't have many insights about how to interact with woman on a human-to-human level.

And the frameworks he operates off of will likely prevent him from being able to sustain a longterm relationship because of how he views the relationship between men and women.

[Raze]

54 minutes ago, Emerald said:

The issue is that these kinds of "be more masculine" types of advice and alarmist "society is going to hell in a hand-basket because men aren't men anymore!" narratives, tend to add to men's difficulty with adjusting socially... as it is a bunch of neurotic guys trying to intellectualize what it is to be Masculine... as opposed to simply operating from their own sense of sovereignty.

It's like so many men are trying to compete to be the same exact guy as opposed to just being themselves.

And it scares women away because a lot of these guys start adopting narratives that over-emphasize the gender difference in their own minds and treating women like mysterious aliens from another planet.... which adds more to the neuroticism.

I notice over the past 10 years since all these narratives have gone online is that young women generally have soured more and more on men because of the proliferation of all the Manosphere nonsense. And interacting with a guy who isn't brainwashed by it is refreshing.

Even I, as a woman in my mid-thirties, can feel a bit put off... despite having tons of friendships with plenty of normal guys and having had relationships with guys who are normal with regard to their relationship to their Masculinity.

Like honestly, what kind of woman do you think would be interested in a guy who believes he should "treat her like a child?" And whether that is spoken or not, there are always tells. And they betray the immaturity of the guy in question.

If I look at the most socially adjusted guys who have the healthiest relationships with women, it's men who don't over-focus on trying to be Masculine.

But the loneliest and least socially well-adjusted guys tend to over-focus on it.

And you'd be wise to avoid taking advice from men who don't have the type of relationship with women that you want to have. 

Like, Leo has learned a lot about the attraction phase to get over the challenges of being a late bloomer (which makes him relatable to men who struggle with initiating attraction with women)...  but he doesn't have much relationship experience and doesn't have many insights about how to interact with woman on a human-to-human level.

And the frameworks he operates off of will likely prevent him from being able to sustain a longterm relationship because of how he views the relationship between men and women.

- you’re assuming the narrative is what makes men not adjust socially, rather than the reality that the male role was deconstructed and they are socially flailing, causing a rise in underground masculinity ideologies as a symptom of it

- By this logic women should be less frustrated with guys, men are much less traditionally masculine and more feminine and liberal in western countries than ever before, the manosphere stuff is recent and a small minority. We should be seeing sensitive feminine egalitarian men having women throw themselves at them. But they don’t, and women just become more and more frustrated, because the reality is they want masculinity, not the sensitive gender neutral male ideology you promote even if they claim that’s what they want.

- the reason why their is emphasis on male and female differences and “treat her like a child”, is because if men go into interactions as though she is man he is platonically interacting with, he will be flat and logical and it will go nowhere. On the other hand if he goes in with the perspective of himself as a male and her as a female, he will naturally create a polarity through things like teasing and flirting. Treating her as a child relates to not taking the interaction seriously and leading. An example of this would be how women purposefully try to test and provoke men to see how reactive they are, when if he doesn’t react to it or views it like a joke as though it’s a child doing it to him he passes the test. Men are also expected by women to lead and move things forward in basically every level, this wouldn’t be understood from a default perspective of viewing her the same way he’d view a platonic interaction with an adult man.

- the reality is what you promote is actually the dominant ideology in secular mainstream western cultures, men are feminized, have an egalitarian perspective, and view what women say as vitally important. They weren’t learning manosphere stuff in schools or on tv. And it’s a disaster for them dating wise, they can’t create polarity, they don’t take the lead, they fall for false advice women give or become overly reactive when she tries to provoke them, then they end up watching themselves be used economically and emotionally while the “toxic guys” who do the opposite of what they were told is right get all the attention. Then they try to bring back masculinity through their neurotic perspective now informed by bitterness. Your analysis ignores this entire movement and acts as though the manosphere stuff is the source for all the issues, as opposed to what it actually is, a reaction to the mainstream failure and a fringe group at that. I doubt more than 5% of men take manosphere stuff seriously.

. 

Edited Saturday at 12:53 AM by Raze

[Alexop]

@Raze word!

@Emerald what people like me an Leo are promoting is not manosphere. Manosphere is Stage Orange, which is under the soft egalitarian narrative which overwhelmingly dominates in Scandinavia. We promote something that si above the egalitarian madness of Green. I totally get why you are put off by the children advice. I was also.

But after a while I got it. With most women this will work well. In the case of a very mature woman like you, another, more nuanced approach is needed. With you I won't bother applying that technique. I would rather have in mind the feminine-masculine polarity. If you would go into your feminine side, then I would just joke and have fun and lead you or whatever polarity stuff. If you would go into you masculine side, then we would have a more serious, logical conversation like I do with men. But that should to be avoided as much as possible in the attraction phase as I noticed it can lead to disagreement and loss of attraction. For example, I don't think this conversation we have right now will make you very attracted to me. After sex, you will get away with a lot more nonsense and mistakes done. Not that you should make mistakes but some masculine to masculine horn bashing won't end the relationship I mean.

Actually my biggest opposition to this treat women like children was that I long for a woman who is mature enough to be able to appreciate my advanced ideas because this is my biggest value. I don't have lots of money or an amazing social circle, the only great value I can offer is my knowledge and advanced teasing/humour which req maturity to be appreciated.

The thing is that the Green narrative is NOT working. I don't care how well it sounds, I am a witness of it not working. Come to Sweden and convince yourself. If we do not give clear instructions about what exactly is the difference between men and women, nothing good will come out. 

If some men misapply what we teach, that is not my problem. I won't give up my smartphone just because some fool misuses smartphones.

Edited Saturday at 12:34 PM by Alexop

[Alexop]

18 hours ago, AION said:

What most guys don’t get because nobody told them about it; there is a social hierarchy. And women are very aware of this. If you hang out with losers you are one of them. I do hang out with them but they are not my equals and they know it. The only reason I do is because I want to give back, and when I teach another I grow myself too. To get girls in a nut shell is that you have to frame or position yourself and socially higher than her. But these nice guys put girls on a pedestal and they immediately get disqualified. They need to work on themselves and build their self esteem by transmuting jealousy, fear and other emotions they have into productivity. 

Yup, women just tell you to be kind and be yourself or whatever, then you see the same women sleeping with the ones who don't follow their advice. It is like a test: do you come to me for advice on how to get women? Then you are not good enough to get them.

 

This be kind shit works when she does not have other options. When 100 guys are kind and nice to her, she will choose the one that is kind but also confident, careless, masculine, high status etc.

 

[Alexop]

19 hours ago, AION said:

If you hang out with losers you are one of them. I do hang out with them but they are not my equals and they know it. The only reason I do is because I want to give back, and when I teach another I grow myself too. 

The problem is when you are forced to interact with such guys and they don't accept that you are higher status than them. "We are are equals man"

In some sense it is not surprising that so many people have enough with wokies. Their worldview is so out of this world. After you figure out how Stuff really works, you see them as you see flat-earthers.

The problem is that the  woke alternative people find is the Orange red pill 

[Aaron p]

On 21/05/2025 at 1:42 PM, Alexop said:

Due to this madness, they were not properly forged into men and my experience was the women were actually more mature to some extent. 

Lol

Yeah honestly, I feel like political correctness can eat a dick. Where are the vikings 

[Emerald]

7 hours ago, Aaron p said:

Lol

Yeah honestly, I feel like political correctness can eat a dick. Where are the vikings 

You have TERRIBLE gaydar!

These guys probably are "the vikings" on every other day but Halloween. They're just secure enough in their Masculinity to have a good laugh.

Clearly, this is two men being funny and dressing up like Red Hat Ladies. And I would bet money that they're probably straight guys.

If you didn't know, Red Hat Ladies are groups of older ladies that galavant around the town together in groups wearing purple outfits and red hats (or red outfits with purple hats).

If I had to guess, they're just a couple guys dressing up like that to be funny.

I can't imagine that ACTUAL drag queens would dress up like a bunch of old Red Hat Ladies... especially noting the lack of cosmetics.

Here's some pictures of what these two are dressed up as...

[Alexop]

@Aaron p I can put on Grandmas dress right now and mackup on my face and still be a man.

Gender is about behaviour not looks, this is what wokies have to understand. Even their gender studies Godess Judith Butler tells them that: you perform the gender. 

@Emerald the Vikings are gone. They said:"fuck it, if we stay here longer we will grow pussies."

Edited Monday at 04:35 AM by Alexop

[Aaron p]

On 21/05/2025 at 1:42 PM, Alexop said:

I personally treat everyone like children unless proven wrong.

I use people's foolishness against them...it entertains me. (Not all the time just whenever they're being particularly vocal or foolish... Projectile vomiting their foolishness unto me or other innocent bystanders). I love riling them lol. They flip their lid.

Edited Monday at 07:47 AM by Aaron p

[Alexop]

@Aaron p too many times I made myself vulnerable in front of strangers just to be hurt and misunderstood by their foolishness. My statement in the beginning sounds cynical, but it is actually a great survival strategy in today's broken world.

The wokies made me feel the most excluded, I never felt more excluded than in Stage Green groups. Everything that is not inclusive enough is excluded. If you ar naturally more masculine: disagreeable, dettached from emotions, passionate about exclusive ideas, if your raise above them in any way, they get jealous/offended and you are tacitly avoided. All that while they shout for inclusivity. I don't like to call them Green because Green  means and integrated Orange(masculine). It is more like a broken Blue/Green

Edited Monday at 09:46 AM by Alexop

[BlueOak]

It's interesting and a reflection of our current society, where mean is now equated to masculine and nice to feminine. Seems arbitrary.

Yet for hundreds of years, people practiced decorum, discipline and manners while remaining masculine.

[Alexop]

23 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

It's interesting and a reflection of our current society, where mean is now equated to masculine and nice to feminine. Seems arbitrary.

Yet for hundreds of years, people practiced decorum, discipline and manners while remaining masculine.

They see everything through the empathy lens, of course masculinity is bad if seen through that lens. If all you have is a hammer, all you see is nails.

If everyhing you have is femininity, all logic, hierarchical systems, dettachment, exclusivity, individualism, and disagreement is evil.

Edited Monday at 09:47 AM by Alexop

[BlueOak]

1 hour ago, Alexop said:

They see everything through the empathy lens, of course masculinity is bad if seen through that lens. If all you have is a hammer, all you see is nails.

If everyhing you have is femininity, all logic, hierarchical systems, dettachment, exclusivity, individualism, and disagreement is evil.

Who is they? Its good to define this. do you mean feminine men?

Not really, I mean it'd help your argument to separate out feminine men from unstable men, you'd get a lot further with a lot less push back also. Because rather than attacking identity, provoking an egoic response to defend it, you'd be highlighting the instability inherent in many men who rely on emotion over logic. One reason to start us off is that they are quite dangerous; they have the physical capacity of a man while possessing less of the stable restraint.

But this also goes to my above points. Mean is an emotion, or at least its a characterisation of an act from an emotional point of view. Being mean for mean's sake makes little logical sense. You can be decisive, protective, embody leadership qualities, logical, strong, emobody endurance, discipline, focus etc and be entirely neutral in your emotions.

Its the same way defining someone is nice is an emotional observation, because logic doesn't really care about tone, only the equation and result.

*I will add that if masculinity is to mean anything lasting, it has to rest on internal order, not just outward expression. This is a big lesson the world is going through in many aspects on the meta level too.

**I am also reminded that stability from a masculine perspective is about integrated emotions governed by principles not reaction. Neutrality is perhaps a flaw when I approach things with a high reliance on logic alone.

Edited Monday at 11:41 AM by BlueOak

[Alexop]

20 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Who is they? Its good to define this. do you mean feminine men?

Not really, I mean it'd help your argument to separate out feminine men from unstable men, you'd get a lot further with a lot less push back also. Because rather than attacking identity, provoking an egoic response to defend it, you'd be highlighting the instability inherent in many men who rely on emotion over logic. One reason to start us off is that they are quite dangerous; they have the physical capacity of a man while possessing less of the stable restraint.

But this also goes to my above points. Mean is an emotion, or at least its a characterisation of an act from an emotional point of view. Being mean for mean's sake makes little logical sense. You can be decisive, protective, embody leadership qualities, logical, strong, emobody endurance, discipline, focus etc and be entirely neutral in your emotions.

Its the same way defining someone is nice is an emotional observation, because logic doesn't really care about tone, only the equation and result.

*I will add that if masculinity is mean anything lasting, it has to rest on internal order, not just outward expression. This is a big lesson the world is going through in many aspects on the meta level too.

**I am also reminded that stability from a masculine perspective is about integrated emotions governed by principles rather than expression.

I was referring to immature postmodern people in general.  Nice guys are not feminine, they are unstable and underdeveloped. Men need challenges in order to grow and they don't get it. They try to ape femininity in order to get the pussy and love they need from those around. Feminine people are fun, spontaneous, alive, even if averse to masculinity.

Also important to notice that when I mean "woke" I mean those immature, relatively young and inexperienced people who were indoctrinated with Green values they cannot handle. I don't mean stage Green in general. Healthy Green people are nowhere near as dysfunctional.

Edited Monday at 11:49 AM by Alexop

[BlueOak]

33 minutes ago, Alexop said:

I was referring to immature postmodern people in general.  Nice guys are not feminine, they are unstable and underdeveloped. Men need challenges in order to grow and they don't get it. 

Also important to notice that when I mean "woke" I mean those immature, relatively young and inexperienced people who were indoctrinated with Green values they cannot handle. I don't mean stage Green in general. Healthy Green people are nowhere near as dysfunctional.

Thank you for sharing that. I agree with much of it; it's helpful to establish. It goes to the problem you are facing in dealing with people, at least in part.

For me nice means:

Helpful, sincere, and polite. If i were to boil it down.

So the problem comes when you communicate that nice people are bad; inevitably, there is conflict on the meaning of a label. This also comes about in nonverbal interaction.

Edited Monday at 12:15 PM by BlueOak

[SwiftQuill]

5 hours ago, Alexop said:

 

The wokies made me feel the most excluded, I never felt more excluded than in Stage Green groups. Everything that is not inclusive enough is excluded. If you ar naturally more masculine: disagreeable, dettached from emotions, passionate about exclusive ideas, if your raise above them in any way, they get jealous/offended and you are tacitly avoided. All that while they shout for inclusivity. I don't like to call them Green because Green  means and integrated Orange(masculine). It is more like a broken Blue/Green

Relatable af.

Because this is the way they operate:

"Gender equality" = exclusion of any form of masculinity

"LGBTQ inclusion" = hatred of straight people 

"Safe space" = freedom to say anything you want within their religion, but outside it, anything remotely politically incorrect deserves 1984 censorship

I will say, stage Green people are masters of marketing. That's what creates so much frustration and confusion when talking about them. Like when they say "we support trans rights" what they really mean is "we support males to beat the crap out of women in their sports".

Really, really effective marketing. Their usage of words such as "inclusivity", "equality", "tolerance", "X rights" is their biggest weapon.