Tag Archives: battle of the sexes

1834. Sex Difference Redux—Part 82: Conquering Men III


Theme: How to neutralize a man’s natural urge to conquer sexually attractive females that he’s not yet conquered!

Regarding sexual fidelity, the sexes are quite different. The female nature can’t accept being less than a man’s first and most obvious love; she defines his love mostly from his words and her biases about his actions. Her man’s sexual infidelity doesn’t necessarily end their relationship. Hope remains that he’s ‘recoverable’ for the sake of relationship longevity. She bases relationship decisions on the intensity of his emotional connection with someone else compared to her. If his emotional connection with another woman exceeds his bonds with her, then she’s lost out to a competitive sister female for the most promising regard and affection of her man. Their relationship becomes terminal, but women are blessed with an immense capability of rationalizing a man’s love to favor her. Consequently, if he cheats, she wants to talk.

If she cheats, he wants to walk. A man can’t or won’t tolerate cheating by a woman to whom he’s committed much less devoted. Her cheating overwhelms him as a man. It does unacceptable and irreparable-by-her damage to his sense of significance. Any admiration she previously claimed or showed him vaporizes and she loses value as a woman and all the promise she earned for both his present and future.

Women have a deeply embedded natural urge. They expect to be conquered by one man and have it symbolize ritual passage to lifetime bonding with him as father for their children. However, in testing the waters of reality, women fall prey to several conquerors, because men don’t see conquest as ritual passage and bonding. Rather, men have a deeply embedded natural urge to conquer sexually attractive females they haven’t previously conquered.

——

Consequently, the real battle of the sexes shapes up like this. Men are continually exposed to sexually attractive females who deliberately heighten their appearance as sex objects. Men can imagine sex, yes, but it doesn’t result in emotional connections—aka bonding. Women to a fault that undermines their interest think that men are like women. Not so, and women often provoke rather than discourage sexual escapades by their man.

At sight of sexually attractive females, boys and immature men imagine their studly performance and pass on (or stop to hit). Mature men entertain thoughts of having sex. Thoughts about sex may enter husband’s mind but usually pass on because of superior obligations. Husbands appreciate female beauty and pay far less attention particularly when their marriage rests on solid ground. Moreover and more important for women, such exposure to female attractiveness doesn’t have bonding effects on men. Women can see an attractive man and start the bonding process imaginatively; they can imagine love at first sight (although actually it’s not). At first sight, men don’t start bonding through their imagination, although they start the bonding process when they fall in love at first sight. (First sight’s another story at #1760.)

What women can do at first sight, it takes extended time for men to duplicate. Here’s the real threat to wives. Husband is repeatedly exposed for lengthy periods to a woman—sex or no sex involved—that makes his wife appear wanting. Competitively the wife loses in the battle of attractiveness as physical, mental, and compatible companion. She loses in the magnetic attractions of sex, likeability, mutual respect, mutual trust, admiration of him, as object of his curiosity, as stimulant (and not demander) of his imagination to accomplish things, and as admirer of who he is in life and what he is to her.

He feels better about himself around her than around his wife. Given that we all do what makes us feel good about ourselves, he finds more time and opportunity to spend time away from wife. Such exposure causes him to—much as women do—bond through his imagination until he conquers her. After that, deeper bonding fades and his interest broadens once again, perhaps even to primarily favor wife.

The starting theme at top is this: How to neutralize a man’s natural urge to conquer sexually attractive females that he’s not yet conquered! I suggest three steps:

  • Disregard and forget his wandering eyes. Hunter-conquerors are naturally attracted to moving objects. Be offended for courtesy purposes only when his eyes linger longer than a glance. His thoughts may be sexual, but they take nothing away from you. Express that you’re offended but don’t make a sexual matter of it. For example, “What does she have that I don’t? What do I lack that she doesn’t?” and do it smilingly, friendly, and purposely avoid anger and revenge. He will likely feel forced to explain something that he can’t describe well without offending you, so after a few such incidents he will gently and slowly change his habit away from staring (but not glancing at moving objects).
  • Even if married for 25 years, you remain in competition with sister females. If you don’t worry about keeping husband’s emotional connection, you’re a fool. If you do worry, you need a makeover in physical attractiveness at least and conscientious review of these things: your success in bed, your likeability as steady companion, mutual respect and trust*, your admiration of him, you as object of his curiosity, you as deserver of his pleasing you, and you as stimulant of his imagination to accomplish things to earn female admiration. (If there is another woman, forget her. Work on yourself.)
  • Trust, trust, and trust that he knows what’s best for him and your relationship. If he has nothing of you to live up to, he’ll too easily fall for your competitor. If he has an opportunity to cheat, only disappointing you or himself will make him retreat from it.

The sexes are vastly different regarding explosive issues that surround sex and fidelity. Wives especially benefit by allowing for natural inclinations in husband and taking advantage of principles that tend to discourage unfaithfulness. No one can do it perfectly, but odds favor success when she has a plan to prevent rather than a plan for how she will recover or immediately toss him down the drain.

——

*Depicted beautifully in Victorian stories, such as Masterpiece’s current Downton Abbey and the earlier Upstairs Downstairs. Notice that the characters demonstrate this back and forth cause and effect between people: Trust earns respect, which returns as trust, which amplifies further respect, which builds greater trust. The result is less offense, antipathy, and unlikeable people and more respectable and likeable characters. Of course its fiction, but the playwrights copy beneficial principles of the well-civilized life.

16 Comments

Filed under sex differences

1542. Friendly Reminders — #23


  • One’s attitude reflects what’s in their heart. In the battle of the sexes, rejection by an assertive lady merely means no score. Ridicule does not flow from it, so she gains value. Rejection aggressively expressed with a feminist flavor transmits ridicule. This ranks next to insignificance as a man’s greatest fear with a woman. It shifts him into fight mode to restore his dignity. Her value plummets.
  • She decides when to yield. He hopes sooner, but the greater his investment of Self—shared emotions, time, effort, money—the greater her value to him.
  • Hunks, jocks, and dreamy guys tend to be like this: Unconditional respect for the female gender is low or non-existent. He wasn’t expected in the teens to treat females respectfully, and so it’s not embedded in his psyche. Consequently, her personal qualities mean little other than her likeability for companionship. He tires of her easily, however, because the next hottie appears more exciting and companionable.
  • As Emerson said: The world turns on hope. Her relationships always spin, plunge, and soar on hope. Virtual virginity shifts a man’s life from hope for sex to hope for her.
  • A woman’s personal strategy of virtual virginity should not be disclosed to those that know her. It works much better as private commitment to Self and potential conquerors one-on-one.

2 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1357. Three Strikes and He’s Out — Batter Up!


I encounter a very impressive person, attractive woman, and happy wife. She complains of the worsening of family life. She claims that men act irresponsibly, abandon wife and kids, and generally pursue all manner of masculine habits except those that provide and protect their families. I agreed until she blamed men. Women have been doing that for decades. It doesn’t make women right, it just keeps them from understanding what actually happens in the battle of the sexes.

I disagreed with the lady about blaming men. We only chatted briefly and I responded inadequately. For over three years I’ve been describing female malpractice that causes such unmanly behavior. I stick by my guns. This is what I should have said.

Family turmoil and separation are more the result of wives driving husbands away than husbands acting unreasonably. Wives put pressures on husbands that make them rebel. Wives become different women than the girlfriends their husbands married. Men figure they can do better with someone else. But then, later with another woman, they find themselves under the same pressures. So, the practice spreads of men abandoning their familes.

For example, a man marries with at least these three expectations: She’ll always be attractive in my eyes. She’ll always be likeable in my eyes. She’ll be great at harmonizing our home and life together. His expectations are based on her girlfriend/fiancé/early bride persona. After romantic love fades in a year or two, if not sooner, she changes into another person, someone he would not have married.

What he expects out of their marriage, she delivers in another form and not necessarily a form that he can accept. Tomorrow’s post 1358 describes him as the batter, her as pitcher, and their marriage summarized in husband’s final at-bat.

11 Comments

Filed under How she loses

1046. Sisterhood’s Wrong-headed Philosophy


Although different by sex, humans have compatible natures for living as mates. However, our beliefs and emotions interfere, and harmony for couples easily sours when women ignore what’s best for them. 

Even though men always appear as dominant, American society operates under this general, overarching principle in the sex arena: Females act, males react. Women govern circumstances that determine whether men approach females as highly respected near-goddesses or as tramps, live as permanent husbands or temporary lovers, and stay or depart after romantic love fades.

Relationships fail today, because females generically act in ways that profit males directly instead of supporting the institutions that indirectly benefit women and children. In just a few decades Feminism-inspired females invoked a macro self-fulfilling prophecy. They called the male sex inadequate to meet the expectations of women, and, behold, men became exactly that.

Relationships don’t fall apart just because of the man. A couple’s break up and the ensuing female aloneness, unhappiness, and depression are largely self-inflicted by women turning men and their man into what women cannot live with. It’s a philosophical shortcoming to make men what they ain’t.

Among other things, the Sisterhood fails to take advantage of principles made workable through the courtesy of our unique Judeo-Christian culture, for example:

  • When most women compete with women for men, more individual women lose. When men compete with men for women, more individual women win.
  • When women don’t use strong patience in the process of capturing a man, more individual women lose than win. When men are forced to show unreasonable patience in the process of conquering a woman, more individual women win than lose.
  • When most women follow their female nature and hormones to capture one man, more individual women win than lose. When most women follow peer examples to attract men, more individual women lose than win.

Women determine how society operates. Whether females win or lose in the battle of the sexes depends largely on the Sisterhood’s current philosophy.

4 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Uncategorized

635. She’s Interested, He’s Not—Part 1 of 3


Modern guys are infamous for dealing poorly with women that show an interest in a man. Passivity, reluctance, or disinterest dealing with a woman can originate with many emotions and preferences. The first half-dozen reasons follow.

♦       Men can’t love what they don’t respect. Lack of immediate respect caused by her appearance means that she has little or nothing to offer him. She’s probably okay for sex, he thinks, so let her make the first moves.

♦       Sex is so cheap elsewhere that he sees little need to show interest.  Anyway, men score better by playing vague and unavailable, because modern women don’t play the female counter-strategy their foremothers developed long ago: HardToGet.

♦       He’s picky, non-adventurous, or too uncomfortable away from his hi-tech toys.

♦       If her interest is obvious, it turns him off except for sex. If she’s that interested in his undeserving Self even before he ‘launches’ his full-self into romancing her, what will she do with other men who do nothing?

♦       More fear: Is she really interested in me? Can I trust what I think I perceive from her? Her appearance and actions don’t match. He presumes she has standards. He’s unsure how to discover what they are, so he fears offending her or showing his own lack of ‘smooth’.

♦       Commitment to another woman won’t prevent a show of interest but will come out if and when his conscience kicks in. This can take seconds, minutes, hours, or days, if he has a conscience about loyalty, devotion, personal responsibility.

Part 2 day after tomorrow.

3 Comments

Filed under sex differences

603. Prettier is as Feminine Does #1


Her Highness Laura commented at 596 that women are more critical than men about ‘pretty’. She’s right, because prettiness is a theme around which women compete—and they should. (Post 602 presented groundwork on ‘pretty’.)

‘Feminine’ is whatever females have, do, and use that is unique to their sex and nature. To the extent they appear different than what men have, do, and use, they are feminine.

·        Consequently, females are basically pretty even before they improve on what they have for appearance.

·        The more feminine she is, the easier to be pretty. After all, she’s the best judge of what’s both feminine and pretty for her.

‘Pretty’ is how she looks to herself. She’s done her best to attire and groom herself. Her physical attributes shine and physical weaknesses go unnoticed to her.

·        If she can overlook her physical weaknesses, no one else will pay attention to them. (Again, hang a picture and three days later you don’t notice it.)

·        Modesty hides skin and suggests independence, mystery, moral intentions (if not strength), and person-comes-before-sex.   

·        She should shape male opinions, not bow to them. ‘Pretty’ beats ‘sex object’ for turning male opinion toward female hopes and dreams. Her Highness Easybreezy describes it magnificently at post 550, “I have turned heads but I really want to turn hearts….”

·        When she looks pretty to herself, she feels good about herself. This brings forth her best, which maximizes her advantages dealing with men or man.

On the macro scale, women compete to look prettier than sister females. If they don’t, men do less chasing. If women aren’t pretty enough to pull men away from fun with their buds, men watch and wait.

They tend to pursue fun, sex, and little else. This pressures individual females to earn masculine attentions. It leads to more women chasing men in macro, which is toxic for fulfilling female hopes and dreams in micro.

12 Comments

Filed under boobs

602. Response to Viewer—Item 14: Pretty is as Pretty Does


I dedicate this article to Her Prettiness Laura. She asked how men see ‘pretty’ differently than women.

Answer: It doesn’t matter and best if women don’t think about it. Reasons follow, but consider everything one level below her sexual attractiveness and his conquering mode. This means ‘pretty’ in the non-sexual sense. Even though that’s an impossible viewpoint, assume it anyway.

Females think of ‘pretty’ in terms of attire, grooming, and individual techniques used to enhance their appearance. They focus on details that show off their physical attributes as best practicable. It makes them feel good. It bloats self-image, enhances self-esteem, and stabilizes self-interest. Pretty serves females. For males it’s serendipitous.

  • Females define ‘pretty’, because they suit themselves. They know intuitively that men identify ‘pretty’ by personal taste but biased by sexual interests.
  • Thus, women see ‘pretty’ in two shades: To make herself attractive sexually, or to make men focus on her person rather than sex.
  • Two shades polarize Womanhood and confuse women, which creates doubt in mothers. They let daughters generate prettiness standards that generate popularity and capture temporary boyfriends. Consequently, increasing with each new generation, confused Womanhood leads to sexual exploitation of females.         

Men primarily skip appearance to focus on exposed skin or other sex symbols. Women made the invitation customary, and so men do it more assertively than our forefathers.

  • When not so energized to focus on sex, however, men see ‘pretty’ as everything all wrapped up in one person. ‘Pretty’ means her best features shine pleasantly. Her individual techniques, grooming treatments, and special efforts don’t impress men, so they focus on the whole. Her overall appearance pleases manly viewing. 
  • But when asked what creates prettiness, men spotlight favorite features. This points out that men don’t care how she got pretty, they’re just glad that she is. This frees up females to determine and establish their own standards for prettiness. 
  • When men ask men what makes women pretty, they cite face, shape, boobs, buns, legs, or a mix. Modern women pay attention to that and not what men would say to women.
  • If they bother to ask, women get different answers. Unfortunately, several decades ago feminists convinced women not to listen to what men have to say about females.
  • When sincere, men answer women this way: They attribute prettiness to less sex-oriented features, especially the basics of attire and grooming. Men intuitively know that women pay attention to the obvious. In this way men go along with what women determine is ‘pretty’ or not. Men only confirm and appreciate ‘pretty’, they don’t define it.

Pay attention, Ladies. Men don’t know how pretty an individual female can be until they see it. Females make themselves pretty to please themselves and no one else. They judge ‘pretty’ by what becomes successful and standardized at entertaining masculine eyeballs. Popular standards guide and prevent radical appearances.

  • To be sure, the male gender benefits when females prettify themselves. If individuals let that influence them to not be at their prettiest, men don’t know the difference. But such women torpedo their own self-image, self-esteem, and self-interest—which costs them self-confidence dealing with men.
  • Boiled down even further: She should not prettify herself to please particular men (unless at husband’s request, of course). But manly feedback is essential to measure her success and guide her prettifying efforts.
  • Success of Womanhood appealing to the male gender also standardizes female appearance, which determines ‘pretty’ when made popular, and which she needs to guide her efforts at making herself different but not too different or radical.

Consequently, ‘pretty’ is a one-sided battle of the sexes. It succeeds with female coaching, planning, playing, and officiating. Men are for feedback more than to be pleased.

NOTE: The title at top paraphrases Forrest Gump’s mom, and I credit Winston Groom, the author of Forrest Gump.

6 Comments

Filed under boobs

598. Hits on the Job — Groundwork


This is second of a three-parter that describes how female employees can handle unwanted sexual advances and thereby shape workplace standards for men. Check out 597 before proceeding, because background shown there includes her mission statement and strategy. Post 599 tomorrow provides the remaining half of the list shown here.

Don’t take what follows as gospel. Take it as examples of defining her persona with a team. She draws lines up to which everyone else must step. To do so, she takes firm stands and announce them clearly. This makes men turn on their polite and respectful side for work instead of impolitely suggesting something else. She should deal assertively with many kinds of offenses until they stop:

·        She receives a suggestive compliment on her appearance. Smile, and say “That’s none of your business during business hours.” Dismissed with business terminology strengthens her stand. She draws a professional line in the sand.

·        She receives an unwanted sexual advance. She first takes control: Use shock if he’s good looking, less if he’s not, but firm friendliness if he’s creepy.  Smile swiftly, then drop the smile, scornfully say “That’s once” and return to her work or walk away undisturbed. She draws a sexual line in the sand.

·        She receives a sexual advance from a man to whom she’s attracted. Firmly say, “Stop that on the job” and walk away or return to work. If she responds invitingly or nicely to keep from offending him, other men expect the same. When they don’t receive it, she loses respect, regard, and maybe affection as co-worker. She crowned the ‘offender’ as exceptional, other men lost out, and she loses control of shaping the work environment to her expectations. It weakens her personal, sexual, and professional lines in the sand.

Continued in post 599 tomorrow.

2 Comments

Filed under How she wins