Stop letting woman use you

[Sugarcoat]

Intellectualized.org

[KosmicGeng]

2 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

remarkable how similar the growth process you describe is, to my own. Jesus. 

I think I am heavy Te - but it's all expressed in construction and my work. I tend to flirt with it less so in cognitive realms like philosophy, metaphysics or forum dialogue. It may not be manifesting here because it is spent in real life? But also, I am a woman, and socialised to prioritise feelings and group cohesion. So I have had certain other functions beaten in to me, so to speak. 

I don't mind being wrong really. But for me, the stupid Ni can shift frames to mean so many things can be looked at as right/wrong! Not all. The forum is low stakes, so being wrong here is okay.

Being wrong on my takeoff for a hebel cladding estimate could fold my business though.... So it's fair to say that risk assessment may be happening subconsciously. Lucky I am decisive as fuck. Which is also why I am okay being wrong too - I make decisions based on what limited information I have. If it's wrong I am all good taking responsibility. 

If you are anything like me with emotions though, sometimes I just get charged up and dig my heels in. Which is out of alignment to my normal rational self. Which is all humans really 😁 and also why I try to not explain someone's psychology or pathologise them with my elaborate internal mechanistic explanations. Maybe they were just having a bad day! 

Maybe I should try break my Ni with Si for a bit, instead of going meta meta into recursive nightmares (which is incidentally why I think you and I zoom all over the shop with conversation, it's in an infinite recursion happening in real time). 

Enjoyed the chats I think I understand you better, rather than just explain behaviour ⚡

You can extract these whole socionic lines already to archetypal roles and subtle elements with the wu-xing, I am heavy NI users, which is the mystic or IR for me Yang Earth, and my officer TE is overabundant with strong Yin-Fire energy as stabilizer, but to me there is nothing stable about fire, besides it's spiritual nature, which can also have a saturnian type of maturity, so I seem older then my age shows or tells, but still have plenty of youthful energy, but my perspective might be a bit to advanced, if ppl did not read a religion of tomorrow by ken wilber etc. 

I find people who use MBTI are fundamentally stuck at orange/green levels of thinking and calculus also at this level mathematically it's odd, imo this theory does not let one grow if jungs perspective and wilbers perspective or even Leo's take partially are not unified, the enneagram imo is also more powerful. 

For e.g I am abundant in TI,TE,NI,FI

People who use MBTI fundamentally are stuck in TIER I cognition imo, it stopped making sense to me after I attended a university, and imo the theory and model is not very complete without interconnecting. 

It makes the model more subtel energy aware and not only forces a mechnical western lense for e.g

Function BaZi archetype

Ni偏印 Indirect Resource

Ne正印 Direct Resource

Ti七杀 Seven Killings

Te正官 Direct Officer

Fi食神 Eating God

Fe伤官 Hurting Officer

Si偏财 Indirect Wealth

Se正财 Direct Wealth

There have been scholars etc. I was recently hanging-out with mostly INFJ's as an INFJ, but I interconnect, this gave me more insight into my strong energy expression, as am an INFJ with a 7k structure, and having different types of combinations in my chart shows me the issue of subtel energy and why the western focuses on a causal type of view anyhow, my 2 cents to all of this, this helped me grow more in character and finding strengths, as people project and see different stuff, the big 5 is also good, but I had to figure out that my dominante NI is recommended to use the strong more masculine forces of Yang-Fire TI 7k which to many would be "main character energy" but I face a lot of jealousy generally fire energy tends to generate that, any how this is mostly work I've done myself.

It's quite exhausting to find sources, I found them in the past as my systems sort of been destroyed and there is enough character devlopment looking at the system alone, but here is some source pointing to the scholar that unified it, it's relatively intuitive, but I struggle if people are overdominant in TI or TE, especially TE makes little sense to TI views of constructs and construction, anyhow I have to do some stuff. 

https://www.guoyitang.com.cn/geju/1620.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@KosmicGeng mbti is a bit pseudosciencey to me. A useful frame on occasion. A curious lens.

I view MBTI as how we process information and make decisions.

Enneagram more what we are psychologically trying to avoid, secure, or protect. Deeper.

[KosmicGeng]

4 hours ago, Emerald said:

100%

The main problem-dynamics that I see on this section of the forum tend to come from trying to analyze women rather than understand the individual woman as a person.

And this analysis tends to come mostly from fear and trying to get a very specific validating outcome by gaining more knowledge. That way, there's the ability to control for maximum emotional protection.

Contrast that with a man who feels comfortable with himself, detached from outcomes, and truly present with the reality and not his logical understanding of what a man 'should' do.... and the difference is night and day.

The man this describes will come across with much more safe, stable, and centered energy. And this level of maturity allows a woman to relax more.

And this is where the subtle Masculine/Feminine attraction polarities that are being aimed at can actually play out.

This is all very subtle, of course.

It whispers... and it doesn't shout. And it doesn't fit neatly in boxes.

But it's difficult to understand what "leadership" means when it's subtle and understated.

And it's perhaps difficult for heterosexual men to recognize what makes men come across as an attractive man who can be safely relied upon and trusted with leadership.

So, there's a tendency to gild the lily of Masculinity... like putting a hat on a hat. 

Instead, it's better to simply become centered and grounded in one's self, such that the opinions of other people don't sway their opinions of themselves.

And with that, the analysis projection and tactics can drop away... and a real connection can be established.

What I experienced being a man who was constantly complimented from women feeling safe, centered and stable mostly coming from physical health and stability and possibility to create a lot of abundance in the tech field with a.i, is the core issue of feminim politics and a.i partially and the whole frame of evolution, it's all fine if a man is that masculine and leads with presence instead of with words and actions, but I had my fair share abusive experiences with this, most leadership imo is practiced among men with men, but as it turned into this cat show of autonomey, it's often the one who holds more autonemous power, but then is also feared as if he/she is an arbiter, it's odd currently, even if you run no tactics, justs systems and drop the systems to be authentic, there is a huge risk to loosing stability and centered energy itself, as you'd require someone conscious enough to be comfortable in the unknown and lead that field, like your a pioneer in a field, and I worked and been with several now in the cs/a.i space, I also find women amon each other analyze men a lot, it's a polarity not really a dynamic. 

The whole risk I see with being centered and grounded, is the provider and reproductive frame of society, women & men steadily focusing on people, and not the more transcendent quality of life, that exactly creates the stability, safe and centered energy, it's a huge issue of equanimity, for e.g. I can feel more centered and stabilized going about high-pace activities or music, where others would go crazy and feel threatend by lethargic types of people and women, who want to solve everything by moving slow, while my entire system screams DANGER TO SLOW go away! I saw this recently at a blood donation, the person was not really up to dealing with someone who is trained in efficiency daily, and my entire system revolted, it's odd how different people experience patience, and depth of groundedness depending on a survival and spiritual and transendence sense, there should be a distinction and interconnection, I did this with the Keith Witt course, but leading a young women into spirituality just yearning to manifest money and wealth, is not really something I was trained in, was very disappointed as I was loved for the material quality and the groundedness, safety and centered energy of survival and not the spiritual qualities, and I just craved music or other sources of yin, as I had nothing of her, it was very odd to experience that for simplicities sake it was an INFJ (me) and her ENFJ type of relationship, so it was very interesting to see how the secondary position of NI can't possibly keep up with the issues an NI dominante person faces in terms of complexity, I did not even introduce her to my INFJ friends as they all had relationship problems, with the issue of materalism and idealisticness, and I am the most realistic one, hence attracting more "baddies" for being more realistic, anyhow conflating it with BaZi & subtle energies made more sense to figure out what type of person I am, instead of only crunching my intuition I can outsource more intelligently to different roles, while I am fortunate it's recommended to use NI to mitigate all of it, but I am very deep now into this imo beyond integral, as there are to many "normis" feeding the statistic basis of the bell curve, anyhow I find it odd as the original sources often open the doors to more complexity to integrate into the character and simplify, but I am just learning more about Tarot currently and human design, I studied enough of the enneagram, and mbti is something I enjoy any time generally also the ennea 2 etc.

[KosmicGeng]

7 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

mbti is a bit pseudosciencey to me. A useful frame on occasion. A curious lens.

I view MBTI as how we process information and make decisions.

Enneagram more what we are psychologically trying to avoid, secure, or protect. Deeper.

Y, I interconnect them all since 1-2 years mentally, statistics etc. is mostly just a tracker for what occures in human realm not true causality of wonder etc. but my perspective here is more philosophical, there is some scientific evidence with eegs to it, also with the enneagram, I find these tools useful, but I expanded them, as they provided to little use without the perspective of subtle energy completely dismissing the psychological/energetic developments of the east, the enneagram is a bit deeper, but fundamentally shows vices, gifts, and core behavioural dynamics and has a bit more history, but as it's an oral tradition it's a bit of a mystery to track it from where it originated IIRC it was nomadic cultures even. 

Enneagram just seeing as SX/SO/SP drives is very simplistic I did the original courses from Helen Palmer over at integral there is way more depth in the enneagram, most are just not at the point of development where the discussion is worth it, imo but this is my opinion, survival just takes over business, money success and fun. 

In the west we call it just vibes, but there are entire traditions and practices rooted in subtel energy, I find it odd and quite conformist, so I actually studied a bit more intutively what to do about subtel energy, instead of just going about it in a super technical way with meridians or just vibe & have fun, both are fine, but I enjoy how there have been intersecting attempts, and I can use my strengths better, for e.g especially as NI leadership is often called for or IR leadership in the age of A.I and the archetype is recommended to be in that, the history is very interesting but super dense beyond what you could get from academics imo. 

I share your perspective even if it seems otherwise, I am integrating a lot of things, if something seems messy, please just dismiss it, I've meet a lot of f*ed people and these frameworks help me to become a better human, not just go about survival or spirituality, but to actually have a bridge, or just feel free to condem me, I am most likely on some death lists after what I experienced recently. 

Edited 20 hours ago by KosmicGeng

[Miguel1]

12 hours ago, LordFall said:

Being competitive for the sake of masculinity is a road to becoming a pseudo alpha male

Another word for this is called insecurity.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 hours ago, Emerald said:

I think he perceived me to be insulting the OP, by saying the tactic in the original post came across as 'try-hard'.

So, he was just giving the same insult back because he got defensive.

Definitely could explain it.

It could also be the thing being critiqued - men using mechanisms to explain dynamics or analyse women, is the exact thing being done in reverse - in your post you analysed and applied a mechanism to the explain behaviour of men. Maybe the resistance to your view wasn't the accuracy of it, but the method engaged. Psychoanalysis of others tends to turn them against me when I do it - the truth of the message gets lost.

[something_else]

12 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Psychoanalysis of others tends to turn them against me when I do it - the truth of the message gets lost.

I have a bad habit of doing this, and you’re completely right. It’s not productive

[Zenterus]

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

This passage is interesting to me. 

If expressing yourself in this way is "authentic" expression, but it causes offense and runs up against a value (in this case harmony, unintended alienation) was it really authentic expression? 

If our authenticity is violating a value, it seems to me something may NOT be authentic and expressed as truth. Maybe it points to something unintegrated that is yet to be revealed (IE on our unconscious awareness). And once we find that truth within us, connect to it, our authentic expression won't contradict one of our values. 

Authenticy is a complex topic - and it relates to values. When we feel like expression is totally in the moment we often label it as authentic - but is it really if it runs up against a core value?

Being authentic only works when you already have an attractive personality.

Social skills are called a skill for a reason. Your personality is not a fixed thing. You can be the same exact person with a less or more attractive personality, meaning that you're conveying the same information about yourself from a less or more attractive lens.

I can be authentic when out socializing because of all the years of brutal personality molding I've gone through in the field, but someone who hasnt gone through that -- and assuming that they're not naturally attractive internally -- would completely bomb by being themselves cause all they would be conveying is low value traits.

@Olaf has to go through this phase, its part of the process. I've also gone through phases in my journey where I was hardcore into dominance, power games and boundaries, until I eventually integrated those into a more chill way of being.

Edited 18 hours ago by Zenterus

[Rafael Thundercat]

13 hours ago, KosmicGeng said:

being spotaneous the whole time did not work out entirely, as they craved this planning type of leadership, or how I call it now more of this "ahriman consciousness in christ principle" service properly oriented towards the "God-Likeness" or transpersonal experience socialization can bring, if done properly, but at times "Ahriman" ( I am still learning about this) coagulated and this just causes a massive spike in materalistic types of expression and interests

I am interested i  knowing more abour this perspective 

[KosmicGeng]

35 minutes ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

I am interested i  knowing more abour this perspective 

I just legit came back from a 30 minute meditation and was considering if it's even worth it to put all of the effort I put into consciousness practices in my 20's into perspective, especially learning more about daoism and subtle energy, but prefering a more "zen-type" approach etc. the whole "zen-type" shikentaza approach of "I am already enlightend, so I just sit and let that conscious spontaneity or zen bounce come to me", that is what I meant in contrast to the planning leadership, steadily being in the mind, being strategic about events, and places where is fun, where is spontaneity, and where I can even be more spotaneity knowing, I might become a little rigid etc. just the whole planning and leading in advance, even when the ex-gf liked it, as soon, as I focused more on a zen-type of approach, was more in being meditated more, we somehow compensate with "mindful & conscious sex", as she said she never been touched like this before, I read books on touching errogenous zones, from women who know their stuff, and it was recommended in some games group for getting to know women. The whole spontaneity pushes this coagulation of being the "ahrimanic" force where materalism and emotions completely coagulate, and your practically similar to a stone, but act out materalistic pleasures, and there is not a sense of stoic masculinity of overcoming the challenge of the relationship itself, it's like your a robot just spending billions, on women, while coagulating inside. 

I am also still learning about this, but this ahrimanic force or materalism not expressed in this luciferianic performative overdrive, is something completely different, as the "god-likeness" of service and devotion and depth and intimacy in a relationship is replaced with materalism, that can also be very subtle things, especially if there was a connection, but imo most of these things require a spiritual relationship of mutual compatibility of practices and knowing the differences etc. 

It's quiet complicated, it's easier to be grounded, and steady as a leader and more in a man of 0 and being a man of superior quality, but including sexual practices spiritualy or even spiritualy flavoured offers a different can of worms, and pandoras box, I can't write more, I am still contemplating I hope this clears up or show some insight into my perspective, it's mostly a relationship that is based on materalistic expressions where your soul coagulates at one point, there is a lack of openness, trust and groundedness that would be more ahrimanic from what I learned recently. 

[Olaf]

@Zenterus yes I think you can explain it better then I can do. That is what I was talking about.

[Rafael Thundercat]

18 hours ago, Olaf said:

Okay so one of the biggest mistakes you can make as a men is letting women use you. It doesn´t mean to never be generous or just give nothing at all to her.This is all about frame, are you sucking up to her frame or is she sucking up to your frame. Even when it is like `I want you to be my boyfriend` just say no, NO. Why? Because you shouldn't go for any handouts: you decide when you are going to be in a relationship, you decide when you are gonna buy something for her, you decide when you are gonna do something or change something for her. Surprise her instead of following her and letting her take the lead. This is about being a leader and the number one thing of being a leader is to not be a FOLLOWER. Don't follow orders, as soon as you follow her orders, you are into her frame and you are being used. EVEN if you have sex with her, you would STILL have 0 power in the relationship, you are basically getting used. So whatever she suggests, just say no, "lets do this!!!" No. "Lets go there!!" NO. "Lets kiss!!" NO. NO NO NO!! The only guy that has control is the one who can say no and only does things on his terms.  

There's a real insight buried in here, but I think you've pushed it into something that will backfire.

What's actually true: A man without an internal locus of control — who only ever reacts, complies, and seeks approval — is exhausting to be around and easy to walk over. Having your own values, timeline, and standards that don't bend to pressure is real and worth teaching. That part lands.

Where it breaks down: Turning "no" into a reflex is just a different kind of losing your frame — you've swapped following her lead for following a rule. That's not leadership, that's a script running you. A man who says "no" to "let's kiss" when he wants to kiss her isn't in his frame, he's performing power for an audience that isn't even there. Real frame is being able to say yes freely because you want to — not needing to prove you could say no.

The "0 power even with sex" framing also treats intimacy as a transaction with a scoreboard, which is the same win/lose logic you're claiming to escape — it's just wearing different clothes. And "surprise her instead of following her lead" as a blanket rule kills something that's actually valuable: two people building things together, where sometimes she leads and it's good.

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Rafael Thundercat

[Rafael Thundercat]

18 hours ago, Olaf said:

This is all about frame, are you sucking up to her frame or is she sucking up to your frame

 This "frame" discourse shows up constantly in men's forums.

Where this language comes from?

"Frame," "leading," "not being used" — this is downstream of pickup-artist and Red Pill forums from the 2000s-2010s (Mystery Method, then RSD, then a wave of "high value man" content). It got laundered into more mainstream "masculinity coaching" language over the last decade, often stripped of its origin but keeping the same bones: relationships as status competitions, women as a frame to be resisted rather than a person to be met.

The psychological pattern underneath it

Reflexive "no" as a leadership strategy is a hypervigilance response dressed up as strength. It's built on an assumption that giving = losing, that being influenced = being controlled. Guys who organize their behavior around never looking like they're complying usually aren't secure — they're braced. Actual secure men (the ones who've done real work, not performance) can say yes without anxiety and no without guilt, because their sense of worth isn't riding on the outcome of every micro-interaction.

Why it's popular anyway

It gives men who feel like they've been burned or used a legible enemy (her "frame") and a simple lever to pull (say no more). That's genuinely appealing when you're hurting or confused about dating — clear rules feel like relief. The forum dynamic reinforces it too: agreement gets upvoted, and "just say no to everything" is a satisfying, quotable absolute in a way that "develop genuine internal stability" isn't.

What it costs

It can't actually produce intimacy — vulnerability requires letting someone in, which this framework codes as a loss of power.

It teaches men to monitor the relationship instead of being in it.

It's brittle: the first time reality doesn't fit the rule (she suggests something he genuinely wants), he either breaks the rule and feels like he "lost," or follows the rule and resents his own life.

It scales badly as content — it's easy to teach as a slogan, hard to teach as actual discernment, so forums tend to flatten toward the slogan version over time.

The more useful frame (if you want to offer men a counter to this without dismissing what's real in it) is probably: the opposite of being used isn't refusal, it's discernment — knowing your own yes and your own no, and having both be genuinely available.

[Olaf]

@Rafael Thundercat have you ever had a relationship? And in that relationship have you ever let the woman take the lead? Because if you did, you would know it leads to disaster for both yourself and her. Imagine being in a forest, a bear comes towards you, will you go to the girl and ask her "what should we do?"

I am not talking about autistically repeating a script without discernment, I am talking about leading and not being a suck up nice guy.

Edited 13 hours ago by Olaf

[Emerald]

11 hours ago, Ulax said:

Its a fairytale that that is better

I meant "better" from the female 'maximum attraction' perspective... and the 'becoming an admirable mature man' perspective.

A man who is authentic and grounded in himself gives off very good energy. And he comes across as the most attractive version of himself... which is inherently polarizing. And he earns a lot of respect in many areas of his life.

But it's polarizing in that, it will repel incompatible women... and attract compatible women.

The same is true in friendships... as authentic people are polarizing. They will repel most and attract only compatible people.

And in the case of the grounded man, compatible women will find him to be 10/10 attractive. And incompatible women simply won't be attracted.

Contrast that with a man who uses tactics...

He isn't as attractive and doesn't come across as an admirable man. And his life circumstances will reflect that.

But he also is NOT as polarizing. So, women who aren't as discerning will respond to the tactics.

And he will get more volume because he's not polarizing.

So, women who are willing to sleep with a guy who they're only 5/10 attracted to will be who the tactics work better with.

But as a woman who can sense when someone is grounded and authentic who requires 9/10 attraction to even think about connecting romantically with a man, tactics just feel like they're doing too much. And it makes me wonder about his level of sincerity.

 

Edit: I just came up with a good metaphor. Imagine that there are two brands of beer.

And one brand of beer is very very cheap and a bit watered down. And the other brand of beer is like a specialty IPA and it's more expensive.

Of course, the cheap and watered down beer is going to sell A LOT more than the specialty IPA.

But the specialty IPA is much better and better crafted. And people who really appreciate the taste of beer will seek it out.

Edited 13 hours ago by Emerald

[Emerald]

@Rafael Thundercat I agree with your previous post.

I think that challenge is that the elements that make a man attractive are subtle and require a lot of (non-dating-related) general personal development to embody. And the effects of that are subtle but profound in his overall vibe.

And it's easier to try out tactics to cut past all that inner work and to simply larp as a the admirable Masculine man.

That's especially true when there is a sizable minority of women who aren't very discerning about who they'll get involved with. A lot of this is because of an attempt to avoid loneliness. Or maybe she feels unworthy, and any kind of male validation fills in the void. Or she's got a messy life in general and lacks discernment in many areas of life.

So, when a man who uses tactics gets a lot of success with women in this group, he may think... "Awesome! I've become an attractive Masculine man!"

But the real work was never done.

And most high-discernment women who have a really sensitive relationship with her sense of disgust will notice that the tactics are just hiding deeper vulnerabilities. And she'll avoid that guy.

Think of women that embody the quality of the princess in the story of the Princess and the Pea. She senses the pea underneath 9 mattresses, simply because she's so sensitive. And that's what proves that she's the true princess.

But the issue is that that guy doesn't know how often he's avoided by princesses, because he's getting a bunch of success with women who have not yet developed a keen sense of discernment.

Edited 12 hours ago by Emerald

[something_else]

1 hour ago, Olaf said:

@Rafael Thundercat have you ever had a relationship? And in that relationship have you ever let the woman take the lead? Because if you did, you would know it leads to disaster for both yourself and her. Imagine being in a forest, a bear comes towards you, will you go to the girl and ask her "what should we do?"

If the girl was a forest ranger, I’d sure as shit be asking her what to do. In fact, funnily enough I have almost been in that situation. There was no bear right in our face, but we thought we could hear one nearby and she knew exactly what to do. She did not lose respect for me because I let her lead, if anything she gained respect because I didn’t “try to be the man” and deal with it when she was clearly the expert. She had experienced men doing that a lot in the past and it annoyed her.

Point being these blanket rules are kind of silly. I agree you should not be a pushover, but don’t be obsessed with the idea of leading all of the time. As everybody is saying, if you’re truly secure it shouldn’t hurt your ego to not be the one in control sometimes.

Edited 12 hours ago by something_else

[Emerald]

7 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Definitely could explain it.

It could also be the thing being critiqued - men using mechanisms to explain dynamics or analyse women, is the exact thing being done in reverse - in your post you analysed and applied a mechanism to the explain behaviour of men. Maybe the resistance to your view wasn't the accuracy of it, but the method engaged. Psychoanalysis of others tends to turn them against me when I do it - the truth of the message gets lost.

I think it's more about an introspective woman coming in and saying, "Actually, the thing you're doing doesn't work the way you think it works.... and that paradigm will eventually backfire."

Consider that there's a lot of comfort in logical analysis and having all of these frameworks about women, where a man can read a book about female psychology and feel assured that they understand everything they need to know.

And if a man who feels a bit insecure about dating learning such a framework can make him feel, "I now understand women better than they understand themselves. Therefore, I'll always have the upper hand."... then that cuts away some of the insecurity.

But the comfort shakes a bit when a woman comes on and says.... "Your framework is incorrect. Here's my 37 years of experience with what makes a man truly attractive that I've contemplated deeply on... and it's something that can't truly be faked with tactics."

Then, when that framework shakes, it create a lot of cognitive dissonance between opening up to greater truths about female attraction and holding tight to his comforting but backfiring framework.

And to quell that cognitive dissonance, he'll try different tactics to reset his certainty in the frameworks that comfort him, like...

• But (Emerald/Natasha/etc.) you're not like other women. You're special and different and highly developed. (And this tactic is a double-whammy as it redefines any reflections from women who intelligently challenge the framework as perspectives that don't really count because "they aren't actually women". And it also seeks to disarm the woman in question through flattery... and getting her to reframe her perspective as "Well, that is a good point. I'm not like other women. So, maybe my perspective doesn't count.")
• But Emerald, you're bi-sexual. So, you're not like other women. (Leo tried this one once. This basically has the same function as the first tactic of trying to set me into a different category that makes me and my perspective a special exception that can be disregarded... when I'm attracted to men 99 times out of 100.)
• You're just a woman. So, don't ask a fish how to catch it. (My paradigm is safe because no woman can validly challenge it.)
• Women are just too scared to see the truth of what they're actually attracted to. (This one creates an explanation for women pushing back that further reinforces the paradigm.)
• Well, at least he's trying. (Shifting focus away from the effectiveness of the tactic to the effort put into the tactic, which is completely different conversation)
• But I had success using these tactics before. (My point that I always try to make is, "Just because the tactics work for getting sex, doesn't mean you're actually becoming an attractive man." And seeing the successes can genuinely cause a man to lose sight that those topics are apples and oranges. But it can also be used as a strategy for quelling cognitive dissonance.
• Just plain being disrespectful to try to clown on the woman pushing back on his framework. (Being a clown in an attempt to make the woman get on his level... so that she discredits herself. This is the silliest one.)
• Ad hominem attacks to discredit the perspective of the woman (ie. "You're the biggest try-hard on this forum, so...")
• Etc.

But the main thing with each of these perspectives is that they're not very well thought through. And they're just ad hoc defenses used to try to maintain the comforting paradigm.

The most important thing is to recognize them for what they are and not take the content very seriously, as the content isn't the point. The point is to protect their paradigm.

So, regardless of whether someone says... "But you're so much more developed than other women." or "You're the biggest try-hard on the forum"... the meaning is the exact same...

"Please don't disturb my comforting paradigm. I don't want to see beyond it."

Edited 11 hours ago by Emerald

[Joshe]

44 minutes ago, Emerald said:

But (Emerald/Natasha/etc.) you're not like other women. You're special and different and highly developed. (And this tactic is a double-whammy as it redefines any reflections from women who intelligently challenge the framework as perspectives that don't really count because "they aren't actually women". And it also seeks to disarm the woman in question through flattery... and getting her to reframe her perspective as "Well, that is a good point. I'm not like other women. So, maybe my perspective doesn't count.")

lol, true. It's so funny when you lay it out like that. I've seen this one used on you and Natasha and am just like 🤦‍♂️

Like, what kind of logic even is that? As if you don't have access to what it's like to be an actual woman just because your cognition is different. 

Just flip the scenario: a cognitively sophisticated man goes to a woman's dating forum and tells them they're theorizing too much or whatever, and the women say "but you're not like most men". It's like, "Yeah, ok, but I'm still a fucking man and I've been around men my whole life. I have direct, high quality access and the ability to understand the nature of a man, because I am one." And the women tell you you don't know wtf you're talking about and dismiss you because you're "different". The logic is absurd, unless I'm missing something.

Edited 11 hours ago by Joshe