Category Archives: Dear daughter

1974. Compatibility Axioms #391-400


 391. Having many sex partners hardens a woman’s emotions, which softens her thinking about the opposite sex. She doesn’t learn enough positive and affirming things about men that are so vital for keeping one as her own. [138]
392. Natural female beauty attracts sex partners, but it fades for each conqueror as romantic love inevitably fades. The cheaper his conquest, the sooner the fading. Beauty earned at higher price lasts longer. [138]
393. Older women used to pass down lessons learned. Modern girls ignore their elders, their immaturity expands, and boys and men exploit female immaturity for sex only. Seeds of marital incompatibility are thus planted.[138]
394. Over time, delaying a man’s conquest pushes him to expose his real character, reveal her true role in his life, and correct whatever of his faults that displease her. Round heels relieve those pressures on him. [138]
395. Female adoption of masculine-style sexual freedom generates cheap sex for men. It arouses, encourages, and lures the male conquering spirit to venture outside the home. Wives suffer the unintended (or sometimes intended?) consequences. [138]
396. The popularity of masculine-style sexual freedom seduces women into playing the man’s game. It devalues the woman’s game of marriage and weakens or destroys husbandly responsibility and fatherly help in the raising of children. [138]
397. Promiscuous behavior hardens a woman’s heart, softens her natural hard-headedness, and makes her easy prey for selfish or manipulative men. With girls, the damage is both worse and imprints immaturity for life. [138]
398. The promiscuous woman experiences too few tough decisions that mold the character required to promote her self-interest to the fullest with one man. [138]
399. The promiscuous woman eventually learns that uninvolved sex leaves her empty. [138]
400. Our Judeo-Christian culture over several centuries has taught this: Two separate and distinct roles provide the greatest insurance for family harmony and success. He’s the head and she’s the heart. [139]

6 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1971. Compatibility Axioms #381-390


381. People highly value the unavailable or unattainable. The ultimate result of male pursuing female boils down to one question. What’s her ‘price’ to be sexually available to him? The higher her price, the greater her perceived value, and the greater his effort must be to discover her price, earn her acceptance, and decide whether or not to pay it. (It’s a major reason her sexual history should be none of anyone else’s business.) [136]

382. Repeated refusals for first-time sex together make her appear unattainable. Relative, of course, to how determined she defends herself. Each refusal escalates her value, keeps him guessing, and pushes him to try harder. If she holds out long enough, her continually rising price makes him consider whether she’s worth her ultimate price—most likely marriage. [136]

383. Men feast with their eyes. The higher her price, the more attractiveness she adds to whatever he already perceives of her. Strengthened desire works much like a few martinis with these exceptions: Attractiveness enhanced by martinis doesn’t last. Attractiveness loses its captivating appeal after conquest. Conquerors view the conquered in a much different light.[136]

384. Expectant conquerors wonder: What’s her price to be sexually accessible to other men? Virtual virginity signals she’s not active. If he can’t penetrate her defenses, other men can’t either. After all, he’s First Stud in his eyes. [136]

385. Before conquest, if she’s unwilling or unable to match wits and wills to hold him off, his dominance will always prevail in their relationship. Before conquest is both her testing and proving ground for what their relationship future looks like. [136]

386. Wives cheat on their husband and expect him to respond as women do. It doesn’t work. When he cheats, she wants to know. When she cheats, he wants to go.  [137]

387. Women should be but don’t seem to be haunted by these questions: Do younger women attract husbands away from their wives? Or do wives lose their ability to hold their man? Or, do wives drive husbands away? Women automatically blame husband or his new attraction. Wives proclaim themselves to be innocent and victimized. Flooding the wife with peer empathy and sympathy, friends and family help restore emotional letdown or breakdown. The rest of the story isn’t explored, because feminists inspired women to not listen to men about man things. (IMHO, this sums it up. Husbands wander away from wives because the wife is no longer the woman they married.) [137]

388. Conquered women lack the allure of attractive unconquered ones. She may be a good lay or good wife or both, but the attractive and unconquered still attract men. To hold a man’s devotion, a woman must compensate for his giving up his independence, reward him for husbanding and fathering. Instead, modern women view as unfair this inequality of Nature. Thus, they ignore, demean, or lose focus on their natural abilities to capture and hold onto one man. [137]

389. Successful marriage requires relationship management. Women qualify as experts, but men don’t. Men are too easily seen as culprit, plus they lack the soft relationship skills to restore marital peace. It’s much simpler and easier for husbands to let masculinity steer them away from one woman. Consequently, it takes an expert’s best efforts to overcome his hormonal urges. Once again, life ain’t fair, but women want a permanent mate more than the reverse. [137]

390. The female gender has made itself politically, morally, and socially entitled to masculine-style sexual freedom. It’s a major cause of so much trouble trying to keep a man’s devotion. When many women act sexually unattached, wives too easily become suspect in the eyes of their husband. He knows what other men are after. Can he remain positive that she’s different from other women? Consequently, casual sexual practices within the sisterhood poison faithful marriages. [137]

 

3 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1969. Anger and His Significance


At post 1968 Her Highness Cinnamon inquires if female anger undermines a man’s sense of significance. The natural principle first: Yes, if he has conquered her. No, if he has not.

Yes, because her anger challenges him. It puts them in instant competition. Men avoid competing with their woman and conquest confirms to the male nature that she is his. Conquest earns the natural male right to dominate, which means that expressions of anger at him—even though deserved—are inappropriate.

The male nature recognizes the superior competitive influence—“arguing power”—of females. It is worth the risk of losing arguments in order to conquer a woman, but after conquest it is not. So, competing with a conquered woman, the male nature tells men they will likely lose. That brings up their greatest fear, losing significance in their woman’s eyes, which means their ability is questionable for fulfilling manly missions of responsibility to her. Therefore, competing with their woman is too risky and should be at least avoided and preferably prevented.

The following bullets can be answered in the same way. Yes, if he has already conquered her. It opens the floodgate to competition and likelihood of reducing his sense of significance. No, if they have never had sex together. Competition protects her and he may lose sleep but not significance over a woman defending her ‘un-owned’ self.

  • Refusing sex?
  • Extreme silence, pulling away, refusing to communicate?
  • Continuing to argue after he declares a final decision?
  • Refusing to do as he says after he has demonstrated that he expects his dominant role to prevail?
  • Blaming him? However, add this caveat. If he senses he is wrong, he is still pressured by the male nature to defend himself and prove her wrong. In which case, she is the mother of fault-finding, he is the father of rationalized self-defense, and the competition continues. (For a man to admit wrongdoing to a conquered woman comes from lessons learned in life long after his birth.)

In short, whatever DIRECTLY challenges a husband’s authority and decision-making dominance tampers with his sense of significance. In his mind, he gave up his independence for the responsibility of ruling the relationship. Outside of marriage and without conquest, however, directness serves women better because men are amenable to letting women have their way.

Moreover, lessons learned living inside different cultural value systems make men more or less willing to compete with wives and conquered females, e.g., more within our Judeo-Christian value system and less within non-Western societies.

Women can learn to get more of what they want by trial and error. Before conquest, they compete diligently with men to prevent conquest except under female terms. After conquest, they compete drastically if necessary to preserve their dignity within female standards and expectations. After marriage they cooperate and avoid direct competition with their husband. Competition calls for directness. Cooperation calls for indirectness. Wise women know how to exploit the differences that arise in life.

 

7 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1968. Sex Confirms His Significance


Her Highness Magnolia inspired this post. At 1482 she described an Army man prior to deployment who did not marry the woman he loved; he could not trust her. Instead, he married one he did not love but felt he could trust. I describe some reasons behind such manly thinking.

When away from home, suspicion or knowledge of his woman cheating disturbs everything else in a man’s life. Misery follows even discomfort with loss of confidence in her physical fidelity.

A man depends greatly on his woman’s faithfulness to help maintain his sense of significance. His suspicions threaten and one cheating incident destroys his sense of significance with her. If he is not worthy of her fidelity, she is not worthy of his presence. When she cheats he wants to walk.

One instance of unfaithfulness instantly transforms his significance into insignificance. Loss of face—and having fooled himself for trusting her—prevent her recovering his commitment or devotion. He can never trust her again. A man won’t live with a woman who—in the worst possible way—destroys his sense of significance with her.

Hardwired before birth, the foundation of male significance primarily confirms his role in life. It is built and confirmed regularly with thrusting sexually, energetically, and deeply into a woman to prove himself to himself. Use of his hardness and determination-to-satisfy himself rule the event. Nothing else in a couple’s relationship compares much less matches that primal urge. The quality of orgasm proportionally confirms both his magnificent significance and her worth as partner. Yes, even though she may have had little more to do than serve as a receptacle. The determination and energy expressed in thrusting serve as foundation to his whole sense of significance. Undermine or destroy his confidence or faith in himself and he has to couple with another woman to rebuild his sexual significance first and the rest to follow.

Beyond the hard wiring from birth, all else is learned behavior, e.g., other than minimal foreplay, trying to please his partner, pledging exclusive loyalty. In the eyes of what women expect, men are born sexually uneducated. They hunt and conquer, pursue diligently and thrust energetically, display their sexual worth in a woman’s life and thereby prove their significance. That women expect men to be different does not alter the natural and hormonal drive to prove himself to himself first. Men must be taught what women expect. The greater he perceives his significance with a woman, the more willing and able he is to try harder to fulfill her needs both in and out of bed.

Once a man’s determination rises up to ‘do his duty’ in bed, his sex partner’s reactions add to or detract little from his primary effort. Internally proving himself to himself first is the preeminent truth of his significance as a man.

If his sex partner just enjoys or even has orgasm too, his significance is further heightened. However, anything and everything negative about his ‘expertise’ sends loud messages about his insignificance, which of course is his greatest fear especially coming from his mate to whom he has devoted himself.

Now, let us return to the soldier who married out of trust rather than love. Deployment may not be good but it will not be misery either. He may worry about many things of concern to his wife. But, he spends no time imagining other men—his natural competitors—using his wife to confirm their significance at his expense, using his wife to thrust, twist, turn, and otherwise interrupt the imagined scene of his wife’s nakedness as he remembers her. By trusting her, he spends no time speculating if he will be betrayed. Consequently, she is worth what he paid for her—his independence.

 

14 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1966. Compatibility Axioms #361-370


361. Men delight in easy conquest. It adds temporary value to her, but devalues her as keeper. [132]
362. Few things expose a man’s character more readily than being repeatedly denied sex by a woman on whom he has set his sights for conquest. [132]
363. Boys raised with little affection before puberty neither provide nor respond well to affection later in life. [132]
364. Hunter-conquerors can be grateful and possess good intentions, but their drive to conquer another woman never completely dies. It’s the male nature, and only devotion earned by one woman discourages it. [132]
365. A woman’s refusal for unmarried sex builds virtue. It earns a man’s admiration and respect, which energizes his imagination and convinces him that she will probably be faithful to him. (“If she won’t yield to my talent and charm, she won’t yield to anyone else either,” or so he thinks and if her other signs don’t cause questions.) [132]
366. Courtship without sexual relations teaches boys and men to suppress their aggression and honor a female’s standards and expectations. The process also exposes males to her non-sexual qualities that earn admiration and are seen as virtues. [132]
367. Easily available, unobligated, and unmarried sex aids the conquerors’ pursuit. On the other hand, men must work harder to impress and ‘sell’ themselves as guardians of female interests when women abstain outside marriage. [132]
368. Fathers may acquiesce, but they don’t take kindly to mothers accepting and supporting the inevitability of a daughter’s unmarried sexual activity. [132]
369. Failure of a man to honor a woman’s standards and expectations—e.g., claiming her sexual history to be none of his business—means more failures will follow after conquest regardless of what he says before that monumental event. [132]
370. A man’s initial love of a woman is based on respect earned about her virtue, self-respect, and likeability as mate. His enduring love is overwhelmingly sustained by her respect and gratitude for who he is and what he does. (Very different from women, so see the next article, 1967, to be published tomorrow.) [132]

6 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1962. Compatibility Axioms #341-350


341. A single female’s denial of first-sex with every male holds male dominance in check and increases her influence. Yielding weakens and depletes her advantages and weakens or kills each conqueror’s respect for her. [130]
342. If she’s hunkette to him, he drives up his dedication to conquer; his eagerness rises. Her continued denial expands his eagerness. Eager men make phone calls. [130]
343. So, her repeated denials guarantee his calls, if he’s truly interested in her. That’s how she knows his intentions. Her over-eagerness guarantees no call. Submitting to conquest leaves the next call and booty question open. [130]
344. The longer she delays their first-time sex, the more she enhances herself as a prized and valuable return on his investment. [130]
345. When she gives up her advantages by yielding, she forfeits the most dynamic period of gaining his respect for her. Respect will not guarantee a call, but his earning it is essential if she expects that he will grow to love her. [130]
346. After conquest he dominates, and the conqueror’s first right is to dominate their sexual agenda. That can too easily mean, move on to the next gal; there’s no future with this one. [130]
347. She looked good enough to chase last night, but after hook up she … well, you know. [130]
348. Men are more teachable before conquest than after, so platonic courtship shapes her future. Especially about her expectations, those thoughtful things that will prevent her being taken for granted. Flowers when? Remember what? Affection when, how often, what form? Picking up what and after who? Help with what, where, and when? What works and doesn’t work for parents and other examples? And especially and unforgettably for him, what she dislikes and can’t stand. [131]
349. Solved—her commode seat problem. With just a little coaching, she can prevent his being inconsiderate, her being disappointed, and both being argumentative. Rule established before conquest: Her commode remains closed except when in use. It is just the way she lives, take it or leave her. Every user as appropriate lowers both seat and lid. It makes toilet obligations equal, responsibility unarguable, and commode appearance more in tune with her female sensibilities. [131]
350. What she sees in him is what she gets. He is born with the capability to do good. He becomes as good a person as he does good. If he does not do a lot of good, he cannot be very good for her. Only she can judge whether his efforts are good or not. Later rather than sooner, she will learn that doing good for her exclusively does not make him a good man or person.

3 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1961. Compatibility Axioms #331-340


331. Women have to negotiate, trade off, and even ‘train’ men and their man to help pursue female interests. For example, she can rule the rooster, if she empowers him to rule the roost. [126]
332. Women for decades have proclaimed publicly that men are only after sex. For personal and political reasons, females rationalize that they deserve and can enjoy without penalty the benefits of the male nature. Those assumptions mislead women. They adopt masculine traits and habits and expect men to copy feminine traits, but the process breeds incompatibility. Men don’t change their nature. They fake what they have to in order to achieve frequent and convenient access to sex. [126]
333. When women don’t take advantage of their female nature, men respond unfavorably. When women don’t appreciate their femaleness to the fullest, men don’t either. For example, when women act like guys, men treat them like guys. If men marry guy-women, they don’t stay married very long. It’s very feminine females that make men take advantage of their male nature and shift responsibly into domestic compatibility. [126]
334. It happens after one-night stands or several dates. Women hook up only to wonder why his promised call never comes! The best odds for getting a call, for getting him to come back, is this: Refuse to hook up in the first place. [130]
335. Her mindset largely governs the ringing of her phone. It starts with the presence or absence of an attitude of gratitude about herself and her potential value for a man. If she doesn’t value herself highly, men won’t either.  [130]
336. If she’s ungrateful for herself and sees sex as her potential, she should expect booty calls. If she’s grateful for herself and sees denying sex as the tool for expanding her potential, she can expect calls to explore her other interests. [130]
337. Sex does not bond a man. It captures him until conquest and maybe a few more times. So, even when he does call after hook up, she may be viewed as potential duty slut. [130]
338. A woman holds a man by making him grateful for her in ways other than sex. This takes time and the delay of his conquest. [130]
339. To men after conquest, sex just happens, their relationship just is, and taking her for granted comes easily. Those are natural conqueror’s rights initiated by her yielding. So, her strategy and tactics before his conquest govern her life with each man. [130]
340. She may not know how or want to use it, but she holds the dominant position with a man until she yields. Use it or lose it. Lose it and she can’t use it. [130]

8 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

1955. Virtues, Promise, and Mating


  • As women go, so goes society. When men do not admire feminine qualities, they see less promise in women as mates, they pay less attention to female values, standards, hopes, and dreams. In response, they dominate women and children more disrespectfully and aggressively.
  • Men appreciate but do not admire a woman’s display of her sexual attributes. Sizes and shapes may vary but every woman is equipped with the ultimate target for hunters. It does not make a trophy. Why should men admire what is so common? Consequently, her virtuous qualities far outweigh her sexual assets for both getting and staying married.
  • A woman’s need of romance is not a virtue; men appreciate but do not admire her need. Fulfilling romantic notions is more of what he has to do. It is seed planting, prelude, and foreplay and usually in that order unless a woman yields easily.
  • A woman needs both the warm mood and symbolic importance that romance provides; good results greatly please her. A man first needs the mood to initiate romance; it’s a way to achieve something else—please her, prove his interest, win her favor, enjoy her company, relax in her closeness, recover from his mistakes.
  • When she harshly expects her man to react to her or pressures him to get her way, she stifles his initiative. His resistance and the backpressure of masculinity uncover this truth. Her will to prepare (e.g., seed planting and indirectness) is more important than her will to succeed (e.g., competing and insisting too much). That is, if she hopes to succeed getting more attention, affection, admiration, and even romance,
  • Men may not admire neatness and uniquely feminine appearance at the degree that women expect. Men have different tastes, compete among themselves, and thus differ over what they admire. They definitely do not admire carelessness, sloppiness, or the lack of feminine traits.
  • Women tend to dislike this part of the male nature. To admire something is to want to possess it. In man-think, marriage enables a man to possess a woman, which enables him to take her virtues for granted. The more effectively she uses the qualities that he admired in courtship as her promise for a life together, the less attention she appears to need beyond the altar. He paid her price and now she is trouble-free for him. (Equal? Apparently not. Fair? Only if she finds balance in her gratitude for all else that he represents for her. Disruptive? Yes, if she is unable to find enough gratefulness to satisfy her mind and reprogram her heart. In his mind, he is not taking her for granted. He is merely trying harder to make himself more effective pursuing his various missions in life that include her well-being. If she expects him NOT to take her for granted, she should find a pre-conquest way to motivate him accordingly. Lengthy courtships provide the time to encourage changes in his expectations and for him to form new habits.)

14 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter