588. Dominance Prevails: His or Hers?

Reorganized, clarified, and reissued as #1781.

578. Sex: Reward or Incentive?

About choices: Women don’t use their sexual assets very well. Why? God empowers them to do so, each woman has free will to choose, but do wives know husbands well enough?   

About wives: The female nature continually seeks a brighter future. This usually requires that one man help a woman fulfill her hopes and dreams. Men don’t eagerly devote and continue doing such things without compensation for husbanding and fathering. It calls for both incentives and rewards, but women have trouble with the difference. Wives often think sex provides compensation enough, but female thinking easily subverts it.

About husbands: Being competitive producers, providers, protectors, and problem solvers by nature, men don’t appreciate unearned gifts. They appreciate the results of effort and achievement and new challenges.

• Without being shown respect and appreciation by one woman, men act out their resentments in pursuit of their own interests. They don’t care that much about female opinions, interests, hopes, or dreams unless one woman above all others keeps herself interesting and worthwhile.
• Rewards satisfy, but incentives challenge. Rewards imply yesterday, but incentives imply today. Being present oriented, men favor challenges far above thank yous.  

About differences:  Men are more strongly motivated with many incentives and a few intermittent rewards than with plenty of rewards. Women are the opposite; they value rewards over incentives. Consequently, wives play the incentive and reward cards wrongly, if at all, and it weakens compensation for husband.

About marriage: A couple’s minds, both conscious and subconscious, are divided about sex.

• Wife thinks of providing sex as rewarding him, and for which he is expected to show gratitude. When he doesn’t, she’s unhappy. She can’t be grateful either, because her ‘reward model’ doesn’t work. Making this simple but poor choice haunts her into making other mistakes.
• Husband thinks of frequent and convenient sex as his reward for having married. He’s long since shown his gratitude for it, which means he’s not likely to show much now.
• Incentivize is a better model for her. Her presence, attractiveness, and willingness make her a daily invitation for sex aka incentive aka challenge. He’s satisfied, because he’s grateful that she reliably confirms marital commitment as he understood it. He can cherish the challenge that she continually presents to his presence.  
• His reward for giving up his independence is long past and virtually forgotten. To the male mind, married sex means marital duty, which makes gratitude okay but not essential. Hence, whatever gratefulness for sex he shows will likely never be enough for wife.
• Her presence is an invitation for sex, and her willingness confirms the original reward of marriage.

Husbands and wives sense their sexual sides quite differently. He sees a land of plenty, and she sees a gratitude famine. When wife compensates mate for husbanding and fathering, let her think of incentives rather than rewards, present rather than past, and inviting rather than careless appearance. His male-limited supply of gratitude normally crystallizes around her availability and cooperative willingness for sex rather than sex per se.

Caution: Don’t take the above as more than a description of how their respective minds work and interact. I neither condemn nor advise. Readers can do that.  

577. Killer Angels

Readers probably aren’t old enough to sense this: Over the past five decades, society shifted from female-centered to male-centered. It made male aggression more active, violent, and disrespectful of female hopes and dreams.

Hindsight reveals some root causes. They were not guardian angels of the female gender who preached and taught Americans to:

♦       Dishonor the custom of using ‘Miss’ to identify certain females as presumed virtuous, when virtue is so attractive to men.

♦       Kill the glory of ‘Mrs.’ to drive men from the driver’s seat of marriage and satisfy female ego.

♦       Disdain the unique fortitude of lady-like behavior, which led to the death of gentlemanly behavior.

♦       Shame marriage and female dignity with masculine-style sexual freedom.

♦       Kill the glory of child-rearing with impossible promises about single-parenting.

♦       Divorce fatherly leadership from child-rearing by discrediting their essential role.

♦       Sanctify their ego by disclaiming the use of possessive titles such as ‘his woman’ or ‘her man’.

♦       Dishonor the need for father by believing: ‘I can do it all’.

♦       Short-circuit personal responsibility of men by luring husbands with unmarried sex.

♦       Kill masculine intimacy with cheap and easy sex.

♦       Devalue character traits so beneficial for females by uplifting sexual adventurism.

♦       Promote immediate over deferred gratification, trade virtue for experience, and swap discretion for full disclosure.

♦       Demote men for doing manly and masculine things, while uplifting females that copy the attire, sexual values, and behavior of guys.

♦       Stop manly compliments flowing to women by distorting claims of sexual harassment.

♦       Kill housekeeping as honorable by promoting impossible-to-achieve equality and anti-male politics in the home.

The end result: Greater male aggression and dominance means that respect between the genders fades instead of builds. Women don’t value men enough to depend on one. Men don’t value one woman’s hopes and dreams enough to devote to helping her.

Even more surprising and worse: Women don’t care enough about their personal selves, and neither do men—especially relative to each other.

576. Why Harassment? — Egregious 3

This post follows 574 and 575 and cites tactics for women to use against unwanted sexual advances. If those primary tactics don’t work, these advanced tactics may.

Dealing with egregious advances, these behavior rules work best:

♦       Don’t act angry, don’t complain, don’t explain, and don’t answer questions he may express in surprised innocence. Especially show no empathy or sympathy for him, because you think your words hurt his feelings. 

♦       Don’t stare him down if you work with or for him—he loses too much face to continue working well with you. Otherwise stare-down helps.  

♦       Make him interpret your reaction all by himself. He can’t stand confusion and mystery, because it triggers both his producing nature and problem-solving spirit. Consequently, his behavior should change but not necessarily for the better.

When “Stop that” doesn’t work, other tactics may. Guilt, shame, and ridicule work, and the greatest of these is ridicule. These ideas penetrate the male psyche in ways that help her.

♦       Men are not vulnerable to female accusations about manhood etcetera. They retaliate as with any competitor. Men favor directness and have trouble with indirectness, which is the female forte. They are particularly vulnerable to female hints that indirectly claim they lack finesse and charm. For example: “You act underage, so I need father’s permission.” (Call him underage regardless of his age, and don’t clarify whose father.) Say nothing more.

♦       Threats can work but shock helps: “I’ll ask your wife.” Or, “My last knee-to-the-crotch was a real zinger.” Or, “You once again made my daily journal that I let others read.” For max effectiveness, create doubts, fears, and questions that make him deviate from his standard game plan. Make him face some unknowns simply because you act different than what he already knows how to handle. Shock and awe works for military conquest, and he may be trying it on you. However, it also works to prevent egregious attempts to conquer. 

♦       Strike the guilt chord: “Does Jesus approve your adulterous thoughts?” Or, “Does your wife/girlfriend approve?”

♦       Strike the shame chord: Slap should work with most men. Or, if in public angrily shout “Stop that” or “No.” Stare him down but only if you don’t work with or for him—such as your professor.  

♦       Many things can reduce men to little boys, virtual parenting as it were. For example: Ask a mature and impressive male friend older than the offender to intervene for you. It sends numerous messages. You have a big brother or father figure to protect you. It tells the offender he loses the respect of respectable men, his universal competitors. The older your friend relative to offender, the stronger it indirectly signals his behavior as childish. It changes you from his target for sex to him as offender of female dignity.  

You ladies know better than I how to make these general ideas work at the individual level or even if they will. I offer them merely as insight to how the male mind would likely respond.

Many women are reluctant to so aggressively challenge offending males. I understand, but they should consider this: God made men hard-hearted. To deal with that masculine shortcoming, he made females hardheaded. Use it or lose it.

574. Why Harassment? — Egregious 1

I dedicate this series to Her Highness Sharon. She has a young friend whose professor makes unwanted sexual advances—and in seminary yet. To grapple with this problem, we need a baseline. So, I start with these assumptions:

• Hits fall into five categories that women immediately decide. Welcome, acceptable, tolerable, offensive, and so egregious that she’s inspired to take immediate action to restore her dignity, prevent recurrence, take revenge, or all three.
• This series deals with only the egregious, which means hits made by unwanted men or those unqualified or unworthy for her by sight. Women know how to handle other hits.
• As with all hits, the easy short route maximizes the female’s advantage. Handle it herself unless she seeks revenge.
• Call it harassment only if impossible to stop the offender or she seeks revenge. (Harassment claims serve the people processing them more than even a vengeful victim. The process does nothing to change the natural habits of uninvolved men except make them distrust females, suspicious of female motivations, and afraid to compliment women.)
• Excepting violence, females have the intrinsic talent and capability to make any man stop. Perhaps not the first instance, but the repeat performances remain in her hands unless she hollers harassment.

If one man offends egregiously, she can find a way to stop him. How to gain the tactical advantage starts tomorrow with post, 575.

573. The Male Glance — Part III

Part I (570) describes men observing females. Part II (572) describes females preparing to be observed. Female mushy thinking highlights the following.  

Some women dress down to prevent unwanted sexual advances aka hits. They rationalize careless, sloppy, and even manly appearance. Others use ‘hit prevention’ as rationale for dressing down out of laziness, carelessness, poor self-image, low self-esteem, or lack of interest in men.

They disregard this fact of life: By trying to prevent rather than handle the unwanted, they adopt a self-defeating mindset and attitude that reflects discredit on females and males.   

It’s self-defeating, because it drives a wedge between them and natural behavior of men. They resent men doing what men do best and will never stop—eyeballing the lovely. However, many of these women hypocritically respond favorably when hits come from good looking guys. (Not hypocritical for being selective, but for trying to prevent hits in the first place. It adds phoniness to a woman’s attitude, and she will pay later for being phony.)  

Such women reflect discredit on females. Their ‘hit prevention’ appearance discourages men from routinely affirming females as important to the social scene. This transmutes into pursuit of such women for conquest only. The women signal disrespect for themselves and men kind of isolate them into a third gender: ‘Good for sex only’ (if I don’t have to work hard to get it).

‘Hit prevention’ reflects discredit on males. Perhaps unwanted, but hits express a males’ view of a female’s value. Admittedly, he may also be testing for sexual availability. That’s what men do. They initiate sex, which calls for determining availability. How else should men do it? Wait for women to initiate? Hints are socially acceptable starters. Why should these women penalize men when they give women the choice? Like a knock on the door, she doesn’t have to say ‘come in’ or even answer.

A better way than hit avoidance exists for a woman to announce her standards to be above unwanted advances. Ignoring, smiling, and even chastising teach both females and males how to act. It shapes society to be more female friendly. If not then women aren’t doing it correctly. Correcting males about female values and standards also teaches men to help fulfill womanly expectations.

568. He’s Wary to Marry — Section 5

Men see or hear about:

• Some women base their satisfaction with their man by how well he lives by her rules and expectations. For example, to affirm her co-dependency, she insists he check in with her often when he is away, including frequent check-ins daily from his workplace.
• Some women challenge and antagonize their man into an opponent with anal retentive maintenance of their home and relationship. She expects that he change to meet her expectations.
• Some women let or enable moral values to deteriorate. She helps de-civilize and de-domesticate males, as relative or weaker morality favors the stronger sex. This hardens family life, because wife loses influence.
• Some women dress erotically to capture the first acceptable man. Mistaking the role of sex in a man’s life, she lays no groundwork to keep his interest focused on her person.
• Some women loudly accuse or get in their man’s face to win some or every disagreement. She disregards the permanent damage—regardless of who wins—to his sense of significance as her mate and her value as his.
• Some women reject on principle to fill the biblical role of wife and husband. She can’t distinguish nor appreciate a submissive spirit in exchange for devotion versus submission in exchange for dominance.

564. Mirror Time II

In the previous post (563) we saw the role of the color black for suppressing thoughts about sex. This post explores the feminine disadvantages caused by ‘dressing down’ so that only sex has appeal.

Females dress down for variety of reasons: through laziness or carelessness about personal appearance; soft-headedness about personal grooming; to attract men with suggestiveness; to act more like men; to use unsightliness to prevent hits; or to hide fat bulges, folds, and wrinkles. Thus, they rationalize away their strengths for dealing with men and holding onto one.

• Suggestive clothing invites conquest, nothing more. Put a man’s mind on that target, and she’ll have difficulty shifting his focus to whatever else she has to offer. Start with sex, and she’ll end up with little else.
• All-black emulates guy-wear. Guys know how to treat other guys, including fakes trying to win favor or just think and dress like men. 
• Black camouflages fat and weight. If women didn’t hide behind it, would as many be overweight?
• Tight black clothing usually bulges. It doesn’t take much to suggest her desperation for a man, reflect lack of self-respect, and display lack of self-discipline at snacks and table.
• Tight black signals some willingness to abandon standard feminine behavior, and the obvious alternative is masculine-style sexual freedom. Men sense it that way, although it may just be sensed in background mode.
• Particularly unfeminine are black tank tops, tight tees, and similar upper wear with hip-hugger jeans or more suggestive bottoms.

It boils down to this: If women seek greater respect from men, shape up. More mirror time prompts women to think more feminine. More feminine translates to dressing up instead of down.