Category Archives: sex differences

2161. Dating in Mid-life — Part B5: Conquest and Marriage Matrix


At 2159 Her Highness Emma wondered if “higher urges of sex drive or need for admiration” dismisses the urge for a long term union. I’m not sure alpha-ness, testosterone, or any other single feature is the ‘determinator’ of either a man’s drive to specialize at conquering women or his preference for a short or long term marriage.

A dating man can never completely know you. Conquest convinces that he knows you quite well enough to deal with you as he desires. On the other hand, the better you know men and learn to know one without having to yield, the greater your advantage. I know women are better readers of men than the other way around. While the table below may seem too abstract, it may well help you along.

The table presents the dating arena as three dimensional: conquest, marriage, and time, presuming that both sexes will appear slightly different at different times. It reflects the combination of mental ingredients and psychic determinations that I think contribute the most motivational force in each direction of the dating arena.

 HOW MEN PURSUE CONQUEST AND MARRIAGE  Self-esteem: How well he likes (high), regrettably dislikes (low), or even loathes himself (lowest) as a person.  Self-image: Picture he has of himself as an effective and easily satisfied man or, perhaps, the opposite, or somewhere in between.

 

Self-interest: His personal intentions and goals that urge him to action and inaction; the same way self- interest motivates everyone.
High interest in conquering many women. Low or lowest self-esteem; he can’t highly esteem others until they prove themselves highly worthy of respect and maybe not even then.

 

Dominant self-image; uses it to prove himself superior to women and men he can dominate or outcompete. Uses sexual excitement and achievement to earn self-admiration, personal satisfaction, and significance.
Low interest in conquering many women. High self-esteem; shares it by readily respecting others; has special esteem and even respect for the weaker sex. Self-assured self-image; satisfied with who he is and what he does; needs little from women because he can be easily satisfied by one.

 

Has other challenges than frequent conquests; other goals have better return on investment for his time and effort.
Not interested in long-term marriage; thinks more of not closing off options. Low or lowest self-esteem; has very limited ability to like others for very long time; tires easily of familiar personalities; seeks excitement.

 

Poorly defined self-image; easily frustrated and keeps options open to escape easily at his discretion. Has broad rather than deep interest in marriage; keeps options open to easily shift from tiring to fresh challenges.
Interested in long-term marriage; willing to commit with expectations for life. High self-esteem; likes himself so well he readily and enjoyably shares his likeability. Self-energizing picture of himself; eager to step up to greater responsibility. Envisions pleasurable life in companionship and challenge of greater responsibility especially for others.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under courtship, sex differences, Uncategorized

2155 — Compatibility Axioms #691-700


691. Whatever embarrasses a woman reveals her heart-felt and unchanging modest nature. When she tries to overcome or ignore it for a man, she misses earning his respect, which enlarges his dominion over her.  [237]

692. Female modesty rigidly enforced is the strongest natural counterbalance to male domination. She wins as a person entitled to equal respect by defending her modest nature competitively with other persons also due respect even with their immodesty. [237]

693. The second strongest counterbalance is a woman’s self-respect and determination to stand up for herself, her dignity, her claims for the proper alignment of things in her life. She wins a man’s respect by defending her values, standards, and expectations competitively as a woman standing up for herself and making him take the back seat to her character.

694. The third strongest counterbalance is a woman’s actions that prove her loyalty to, respect of, and dependence on a man. All displayed with an attitude of gratitude for who he is and what he does. Thus, she wins indirect influence by not competing over who has the dominant role. [237]

695. Her lack of values, standards, and expectations means that she follows her man’s. The lower his are, the more that testosterone and male dominance direct his life. It makes their life together ever harder for her to upgrade. [237]

696. She comes across as respectable, courageous, and strong—and maybe and unfortunately disposable—when she repeatedly has the strength to say ‘No’ to conquest. [237]

697. (This is one of my favorites.) As one woman claimed, Femininity adds color to a man’s black and white world. (Alison A. Armstrong, Keys to the Kingdom, 2003, PAX Programs, Inc. Sherman Oaks, CA , p.151) [244]

698. She makes her single self worthy of a man and thus becomes seller instead of buyer. This clicks her for the recycle bin, although he may not dump her until later.  [244]

699. By conqueror’s right he takes control of their sexual agenda. She needs to own it until marriage, because it lays firm groundwork for counterbalancing his dominance after marriage. [244]

700. Men separate sex from the gal. It’s natural because the urge to conquer obscures the person behind the sex target. She only has to be known well enough to convince her into bed. Women let men get by with it by not requiring a well-developed and deeper relationship before yielding. [244]

P.S. The series on dating in mid-life is still in preparation. Coming soon to a screen near you.

 

5 Comments

Filed under courtship, feminine, sex differences

2151. Politics of Sex


Her Highness Krysie at 2149 wondered why the interpersonal results from fellatio were different from those from cunnilingus. I tackle the issue from both the political and sex difference viewpoints.

Love and passion are not the only soul mates in the bedroom. As the Marxists used to say, Everything is political except politics, and that’s personal. Ditto for the bed. His dominant gender vs. her superior gender makes it political. Who’s the boss of two equals? Who gets the other to do what he or she wants? Of course, love and passion add flavor and determine some of the outcome, but the underwritten truth is they are in competition regarding sex and memories carry forward. Who gets their way, when one seeks to take their togetherness into a new arena? Who is the most sensitive about where they are expected to go, and who is most likely to have to go against their sensibilities?

We have to look to their natures, how they are born differently both in heart and mind. The bed does not make their natures more alike. Women, guided by their hearts, don’t by nature see sexual relations as men do, although lessons learned in life can change all that. But here I describe their natures as likely to interact in the bedroom.

Before marriage they compete as she justifiably refuses to yield and it’s acceptable to the male nature; it’s not too surprising and usually expected as men seek to marry a virtuous woman. After marriage, she can’t morally refuse sex, because he traded his independence for frequent and convenient access to sex. She’s pushed into the position of having to cooperate in bed. The instant a proposed or required sex act goes against female sensibility, however, they compete because he expects her to do as he wishes. Submission and all that, you know, even if against her will.

He pressures her, nicely or not, or talks her into it. Either way it becomes political; he against her competitively. Oh, not the normal everyday politics as we think of it. But the kind that costs the loser the respect of the winner, and the winner’s expectations for the loser to live according to the winner’s favor. Once obligates her for another event. Their next encounter goes according to the wishes of the previous winner. Conqueror’s right, you know.

Actually, fellatio is another form of conquest. In the absence of you ladies objecting and calling me wrong, I stand by these claims. 1) It goes against the female nature; she questions the rightness of it. 2) She’d rather not. But she’s conflicted because her man wants or expects it. 3) She questions if she can uphold her self-respect if she does it. 4) She fears it will change how her man views regular sex with her. 5) And the proverbial, will he love me in the morning? 6) After she does it, guilt sets in and re-emerges with each request for BJ. 7) It takes many experiences before she feels comfortable enough to initiate it on her own, and even then new doubts and guilt set in for a while. 8) And this question returns, will he love me in the morning? Please feel free to add, subtract, agree, or contradict. Clarity and truth remain my objectives. If I’m wrong here, all else in this article is inadmissible for relationship experts to judge.

He’s the dominant one. If she goes down on him, his dominance increases. If he can get her to do that, he can get her to do anything. How does it serve a woman that she makes herself more vulnerable to his dominant attitude? Where does his sexual adventurism end? Can she go along when he wants to experiment with other ways? Can she accept her inferior position in his mind for having yielded to his tastes, his experiments, his choosing of the unusual if not the abnormal as she may see it? How does she keep from ‘going too far’ for her sensibilities, once she has violated her sense of rightness? And finally and most important, how will it affect their relationship outside the bedroom? Will his affection taper off? Will his love be affected?

In bed she’s not looking for greater dominance but for intimacy with an equal. If he goes down on her, he yields some dominance. She loves to be pleased, and so he pleases her. It adds to her sense of importance and directly displays his love. While she’s not a winner in the purest sense of reducing his dominance, she’s not the loser either. He does love her, and so all else is minor.

The paradox lies here. Cunnilingus displays a man’s love; he pleases himself with action that pleases her. Fellatio does not display a woman’s love; it doesn’t express her dependence on him nor her gratitude and respect for who he is and what he does. She just pleasures him for the sake of pleasure; love is neither required nor displayed. Thus, cunnilingus has meaning for women that fellatio doesn’t have for men.

Of course, men will take issue with all of the above. It’s never in their interest to have anyone interfere with how they regard sexual relations. Their sense of dominance requires them to contest any amplifying of sex with politics, any tampering with the domain over which they rule by instinct. They think sex is their turf, everybody defends his turf, and politics has no role in the bedroom.

In the end, all of the above is part of the endless competition between men and women. Whoever wins the last battle owns their sexual agenda and will likely win their next encounter.

And now comes the fire from masculine ire to which I aspire to make it expire.

 

33 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, sex differences

2149. Uniqueness: They are Very Different


The sexes differ another way too, and you ladies won’t care much for the surprise.

Women equate their own uniqueness with what they do extra mostly to please men or a man; unique by being different and out-competing other women. Men equate female uniqueness with other-than-strictly-sex qualities they admire, which become virtues, which tend to attract a man as if magnetically.

Men equate their own uniqueness with their sexual performance. Women equate masculine uniqueness with a man’s ability and propensity to treat women kindly, affectionately, and respectfully.

Misled by not understanding the male nature, women try to be unique in the bedroom only to find in the long run that it’s wasted effort. Her bedroom talent and skills just do not hold a man close to her. She plays up her sex appeal, yes. But virtues a man discovers outside the bedroom have the magnetic appeal that morphs eventually from romantic into enduring love.

It means her bedroom qualities are not what keeps him; they help but they’re not key. I don’t say her love-making abilities are not admired. She is just not unique during intercourse; his dynamic focus drowns it. She comes in second to his achievement and she doesn’t rank nearly as high after orgasm. That’s why post-coital intimacy is not part of his habits. His being spent demotes her importance.

Women are not unique in bed unless they gain that vaunted status beforehand; gained out of bed and upright rather than horizontal. Even then it passes unnoticed in bed, because men focus on exactly what is familiar and similar with other women.

A woman’s uniqueness is the product of a man’s eyes, curiosity, and imagination. All of which fade with erectile penetration, and with it for a short time goes her qualities unrelated to sex. IOW, all women can fornicate so none is unique once the monster with two backs appears.

A man’s sense of his own uniqueness comes out in bed with a woman—in his mind, that is. Consequently, when he’s unique, she’s not, and it begs the question.

Q. What is the value of her uniqueness for him?

A. Sex bonds a woman but not a man. Sex may capture him temporarily, but it won’t keep him. She needs something else outside the bed. Men want to marry a virtuous woman. Her virtues arise out of her qualities that he admires. Fed by his admiration, her qualities morph into virtues, which compound into fascination, which makes her appear promising as future mate, which makes her truly unique among other women. Thus, her promise as potential mate makes her uniqueness bloom and confirm that his actions to win her are not wasted.

The lure of her uniqueness pulls him along right through courtship and on to the altar. IOW, if she is not unique, not having earned it outside the bed, she has little promise to meet him in front of the parson.

Trying to be unique in bed is thus wasted effort for her. Oh, not trying to be pretty and attractive but that’s not unique. He ignores all but her body anyway, while he focuses on being his own loveable and loving self trying to earn the laurels of ‘best lover’ from her. He knows he deserves that title, and her confirmation afterward triggers his imagination in her favor for the future. She may be of sufficient interest to warrant the label of unique. But she should bet her chips on being unique outside of bed, if she hopes to keep him for more than a few years.

 

18 Comments

Filed under courtship, sex differences

2137. RANDOM THOUGHTS—Group 97


  • Modern women betray their best interests. They abandon their greatest strengths dealing with males: mystery, modesty, morality, manners, meekness, marriage, monogamy, mothering, and a self-imposed and unique majesty that commands respect from males. The fallout spreads across society and men assume greater dominion over women and their home together.
  • Feminism encourages men to spread their seed. Femininity rewards men for hoarding it.
  • Confused but ever alert for another conquest, men watch as females of all ages deal unsuccessfully with their mates. As relationships crumble, men exploit the females dumped into the pool of those so desperate to recover they are easy to conquer.
  • If a man is to compete energetically for one woman to keep for a lifetime, women must have something of greater value than just genitalia.
    Since all women have that in common, he’s lured by other rewards than just sex for husbanding and fathering.
  • Feminism expects men to suppress their masculine instincts and still please women. Femininity expects men to use their masculine instincts to prove themselves worthy of women, children, and family life.
  • Women seek to change their world but do not listen to men. They learn by listening only to women. Consequently, what women know about men is often wrong.
  • Men see things like this. Things don’t change satisfactorily unless men change them or have them changed.
  • Men don’t look for flaws in the woman they marry. Her qualities outweigh her shortcomings, so that’s good enough. Women are opposite. His flaws are both correctable and his being good enough depends on his qualities enabling her to work on his flaws. Consequently, men marry a good woman and expect her to remain good for him. Therefore, he’s blameless if she changes. Women marry a man with flaws correctable by her and expecting to make him better for her. She earns the blame if he turns out different than she expects. Out of that arises the foreigner in their relationship, undeserved blame for the other. Blame and compatibility are already mutually exclusive, and undeserved blame makes it toxic.

 

14 Comments

Filed under sex differences

2130. Male Bonding


Sir Eric’s clear and worthy questions at 2127 inspire this post.

Two conquerors face off. He seeks conquest; she seeks marriage. The female nature is willing to change to conquer. But the male nature resists, resents, and even retaliates against changing to please anyone else and especially a woman. (We observe it in toddlers.)

Bonding arises out of the male nature only when tied to something of significant interest. A prospective conquest is of prime significance. Males thus face an internal conflict. To conquer they have to change to please a woman if she won’t easily part with her favors.

Women love and partially bond before conquest, and sex finalizes the process for them. Bonding is not necessary for conquest but mutual bonding is for marriage. Thus, another conflict. Lifetime obligations don’t emerge unless the man changes sufficiently well that mutual bonding occurs.

A man will change provided he has the proper incentive. His self-interest to conquer makes him willing to pay that price. He will change over time to conquer a resisting woman. He will teach himself to please her in order to please himself and vice versa. It starts as desire to conquer but morphs away from sex to her when her fascination and promise for his future outshine his desire to conquer. His pleasing actions become new habits over time and reprogram his heart into believing she’s worth it.

All done in hope of convincing her into bed sooner rather than later. His conquering motivations provide the glue, his actions clamp two self-interests together in mutual bond. Thus, it appears that he changes to please a woman but he doesn’t. He changes to please himself, to facilitate conquering her. Both are beneficiaries of the process that works in two steps when women hold out for marriage.

1) Frustration being the father of invention, men denied first sex together find words of commitment. Further denials of sex bring out greater effort including his conscience to honor his words and thus deepen his commitment. Such commitment, however, doesn’t hold nearly as much adhesive as does the second part of the bonding process which happens over more time.

2) Devotion emerges out of his continued actions that please him for pleasing her, and those actions program his heart with emotions that bond. (The deeper his devotion becomes, however, the more it shifts her toward the alpha role in marriage, which invites her to do wrong things and thus makes it easier for her to screw up their marriage).

Thus, if change is a trap, he’s self-seduced by desire to conquer. By withholding sex, a woman provides the incentive that drives him to change and become capable of bonding well with her.

When her actions work contrary to his intentions, his frustration for first sex turns into the pursuit of sex only and less interest in her. Consequently, her job is to keep him in pursuit, which calls primarily for no sexual relations. Remove that incentive and a man’s bonding is far less likely to solidify into permanent obligation.

I realize the real world doesn’t work like that today. But, I describe the nature of men and women that closes the gap between her natural inheritance to be compatible with a mate and his natural resistance to mate up permanently with only one.

 

6 Comments

Filed under sex differences

2113. An Enigma of Nature


Here’s something I wrote more than a year before the blog.

Early in a marriage a man sees himself as indispensable and expects his wife’s behavior to reflect it. He doesn’t pay attention to whether she is essential or not, until their first baby awakens him to the subject. After that, she gains slowly. Not because she is not deserving, but because he is not thinking about it. He takes marital obligations as satisfied by him and maybe takes her for granted. But after a man spends many pleasant years with a woman, he fully recognizes her essentiality and that it existed all along.

Provided, that is, she plays her cards right. Marital success requires this tradeoff be honored by the relationship expert. She makes him appear as the essential one in the early years. Then, hope and certainty of her importance brighten her future until finally he becomes Mr. Right and she becomes his well-honored queen, mate, and dearest friend.

Instant gratification as the most important person in the relationship—as sought by modern women—defeats the marital process and wifely hopes and dreams. It’s just the way men and women are made.

 

21 Comments

Filed under sex differences