Category Archives: Sociology 101

2684. Answers That Women Look For — 03


Previous Q&A for easy reference.

  1. Why do men avoid marriage? [See 2676]
  2. What makes a husband dissatisfied with himself? [See 2676]
  3. Do men consider the wife to be responsible to keep their marriage together? [See 2676]
  4. Why do husbands cheat? [See 2677]

 Q. If the sexes are so different at birth, how are they alike? [2684]

A. The deeper I go into male/female subject matter, the more it makes sense that the sexes differ in so many ways. The subject here is a spot we’ve not visited previously, how the sexes are alike.

Responsibility. Being individuals, we inherit the responsibility for our self-development and how we turn out. We can’t take care and develop ourselves unless we start by taking responsibility for every facet of life that we can control or influence. How we decide to carry, share, revitalize, or dispose of responsibility is the most awesome and challenging function we call living. (By aborting self-responsibility, some people cripple their lives—e.g., wives won’t stand up for themselves for fear of losing their man.)

Motivation. Self-interest drives the motivation bus. Everyone is primarily motivated to pursue their self-interest. It develops subconsciously and operates in background to keep individuals up to date as life progresses. It shapes who they are and what they are after.

Free will. Each individual is blessed with free will to pursue self-interest. It helps get their way in life’s decisions. Until, that is, most individuals decide to somewhat amend free will in order to adjust and improve their way of life with others, especially individuals; e.g., a wife yields to hubby on present-day matters, so she can shape the future to match her expectations. Yielding free will in certain instances, however, does not make one less responsible for their life. It’s just a trade off to enhance whatever life a person seeks to develop for the situation, aka modifying self-interest.

Get their way. Individuals are driven to get their way as evidenced early by infants seeking comfort and toddlers battling competitors. It makes competition the most fundamental law of interacting individually. Except as we defer by choice or force, we are always in competition with others of both sexes. We learn as a small child the need to either fight to get our way, negotiate agreement, yield to someone else by choice, or be forced to yield to someone else (mom’s rule, big brother, and a girl says ‘no’ come to mind). Exception: Girls learn early in life they can get their way more effectively by cooperating rather than competing, which teaches and enables women to get their way with men much more easily than with other females.

Self-development. We each are born with an unconscious motivation to develop ourselves as unique individuals. It’s visible as early as toddlerhood and continues throughout life. Consequently, we get what we motivate ourselves to get out of life, and the best results—especially by tweens and teens—come from accepting and fulfilling the responsibility of mature adults. To the extent people ignore or dodge responsibility for themselves, they cripple and possibly shorten their lives. Once children pass puberty, they absorb an attitude of being close enough to adulthood to act like adults. Their maturity level, however, is proportional to the sense of adult responsibility tweens developed before puberty and teens exhibit in the adolescent years.

Satisfaction. Both sexes use internal signals that whatever they have been doing is completed, and they are free to move on to something else. Self-satisfaction triggers some new motivation to keep us busy at satisfying ourselves. The sexes begin to differ here. Men work in spurts and find satisfaction in accomplishments. Women work continuously, and find satisfaction in continued dedication to their self-importance and self-defined missions in life. Consequently, men pay more specific attention to satisfaction than do women; in fact satisfaction governs a man’s life much as love governs a woman’s.

Compatible. Both sexes are born to be compatible with the opposite sex. Its more ability than guarantee for individuals, and it thus requires mutual effort and dedication.

If the sexes were only alike except for reproductive systems, humans would have made themselves extinct long ago. They wouldn’t be able to stand an opposite sex someone so much like them; too much likeness uncovers both excess boredom and keener competition. It’s our gender differences that make our lives compatible, enjoyable, successful, and worthy of replication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, old school, sex differences, Sociology 101, The mind

2669. Superior and Dominant Genders — 02


Women are victims of conventional wisdom. It actually sucks the life out of a solid marriage.

Domestic issues keep women frustrated, relationships in turmoil, and men dissatisfied with women. Those issues burst out as toxic attitudes that pit men and women as enemies. The following attitudes, for example.

The expectation but impossibility of equal sharing of homecare, childcare, etc. Sooner or later men make themselves unworthy. Blame that men are somehow at fault for women’s problems. Distrust of men because they don’t believe or act as women do. Failure to earn a man’s respect but still expect his love. Wifely conviction that husband has to be told about everything she considers wrong. Feminist-endowed excuse that she is always right. Female willingness to accept political correctness as legitimate. Wifely expectation that hubby causes their problems and is responsible to improve their relationship. Female rationalizing that makes someone else responsible for her problems.  Women listen only to women about men. Wives forego being the heart and neck of the home with intention to  become the head. Wife complains endlessly.

Plus, too little respect and gratitude for who a man is and little or no dependence on what he does. Men object but women pay little attention because of the blame, and so men learn to resent, resist, and retaliate. Payback saves face.

Female attitudes and expectations cause women to act so different from their nature that they lose their position in life as the superior gender. They lose to the dominant gender by their inability and unwillingness to earn a man’s respect. (Funny thing about respect, the only way to earn it is to first demo either trust or respect.)

Each woman has a different set of complaints, and except for sex it quickly makes her obsolete to her man. If not before marriage, then afterward if she changes to become a persona different than he married.

In short, conventional wisdom implants false hope that women can find happiness by ignoring their design, abandoning their nature, foregoing their inborn endowments, and short-circuiting their hormonal energies. Copying manly habits makes them less attractive, needed, and desirable to men as candidates for marriage. Men seek to marry a virtuous woman; feminine attractiveness, modesty, and cooperation (rather than competition) are virtues common to most men.

Conventional wisdom is that women focus on independence, sexual freedom, and using men. In the process, women ignore their natural and inborn ability, unique female blessing, and personal strength. It weakens feminine superiority and strengthens masculine dominance; that seems of little concern to women which is another part of their captivation by conventional wisdom.

Men devalued by women find ways to win in the end. Men do not lose to the weaker sex, and modern female tactics make women weaker and men more determined to win than ever before.

5 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, Fickle female, How she loses, marriage, Sociology 101

2659. Strategy for Courtship—06: How Women Do Better—V


I’ve heard it argued that the purpose of courtship is to 1) get to know one another, 2) become friends, and 3) to link up to confirm sexual compatibility. I’ve heard women rationalize all three, but I disagree as contrary to female interest.

Courtship should be much more directed and purposeful and with those objectives left alone to develop in the background. Why? Because they work against a gal’s interest even though she is in charge of courtship.

1) Getting to know one another adds self-pressure that leads her directly or indirectly into full disclosure; it’s not good. To a man, he knows her well enough or he doesn’t. If he doesn’t and it’s his call, then he likely seeks to find out more or else he drops her. If he does know her, he doesn’t want to hear her described differently. He appreciates what he figure out more than what he’s told.

2) Trying to become friends adds pressure to her to talk and sell herself; it’s even worse. He’s uncomfortable discussing the subject of being friends. What does that mean to her? What does she expect? If she wants to be friends, he doesn’t care; he wants her in bed. If it’s for friend with benefits, it’s okay. He loses any interest in marriage that may have arisen, however. How many more FOBs are around to show up later?

3) She weakens herself by allowing the subject of sex to be opened. By allowing him to talk about and promote thoughts of sexual compatibility, he talks up the benefits of her yielding until she feels bad as the seller who denies yielding even though he pays her supplicant price. She far too easily can be talked over time to abandon promises to herself built on standards and principles that aid women to get their way with men.

Further, for her to test compatibility is to yield to his conquest; he no longer needs to sell himself to her. He bought her cheaply by paying her price, which means he sold her into buying into him without his buying into her.

Men, however, respect more the woman who protects herself better by refusing to provide sex, and his love is based on respect. What else does she have that he wants, if she so easily and cheaply sold her most prized possession? If he can cheapen her so easily, so can other guys. If he marries her, how and when will FOBs or other supplicants appear and …?

7 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, Hook up and..., How she loses, Sociology 101

2645. Strategy for Courtship — 01: Introduction


Dating and courtship can be defined and described many ways. The battle of the sexes revolves around both sexes being born to get their way with the other. I write about the version that empowers and enables girls and women to get their way and make guys appreciate the feminine way.

This is the major battle. Whoever gets their way—the guy to achieve conquest without future obligation, or the gal to achieve marriage without yielding—wins. When the guy wins, the gal may or may not win depending on his decision before conquest. She can end up as keeper, booty, or disposable.

I write about courtship without sharing sex. If you find no interest in dating and courting that way, you may still uncover in what follows some insight into why gals should not relinquish courtship governance to guys. Example: Feminine qualities are admired by men as virtues. Her greatest virtue is possession without use of sexual assets. The more and better she withholds them, the more and better a man respects and admires her. A man’s love is founded on respect of a woman, and so keeping her legs crossed earns a guy’s respect, admiration, and whatever love he develops associating with her. With legs crossed, women can get their way. With legs apart, guys don’t bond as women expect, and gals lose their courtship supremacy.

Men are motivated two ways. When they can’t conquer a gal, they can get serious and even dedicate themselves to chasing her until she yields. The longer he pursues her, the more he invests himself with actions that program his heart in her favor, and men don’t easily walk away from lengthy investments.

When gals yield the first time, that guy is free to chase others. It’s not her or her fault, it’s his nature to conquer every attractive female that will have him.

A woman is best served by this courtship strategy: He chases and wins her without access to her sexual assets until they marry. It may not always play out that way, given the pressures of passion and pleasures of sex. The longer it plays out that way, however, the greater his investment of himself in her interests. By far, it’s the superior strategy by which the superior gender can handle the dominant gender and promote the female’s  self-interest.

Why is that? Because a man changes dramatically as the result of conquest. It’s not her fault but his two sex-drive nature. All she did was yield out of love, wish to satisfy him, and hope he would bond. He doesn’t bond, he admires and satisfies himself with accomplishment, and her risk skyrockets of doing without him.

Hardwired this way from birth, conquest releases him from chasing her, and he becomes free to chase another. He may dispose of her as inadequate for him. Or, he might choose to stay with her, if she has earned enough of his respect and interest for proceeding together as either booty or for long-range mating.

While not a popular strategy today, the one I propose above flooded the social marketplace back in the day when most men sought to marry and settle down with a good woman. We can’t turn back the clock, but the foundation of men seeking to marry a good woman is founded on the respect a woman earns by possessing a great virtue and withholding it until a man invests himself sufficiently to step up and meet her expectations.

If a woman can’t learn to get her way in courtship, she’s short of what it takes to get her way in marriage, where men want little to do with managing the domestic side of living together.

While not nearly as impressive as crossed legs for shaping manly attitudes, women are blessed with characteristics that generate attractive and feminine attitudes for men. It’s next.

3 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, How she wins, Jr., old school, sex differences, Sociology 101

Blog 2616 — Hero Day


A family should have as many hero days as members. So, I propose that women add this to their annual calendars.

Six months to the date after everyone’s birthday is their own personal Hero Day.

I suggest that the family recognize it as official. Recognition and celebration to include a family get together. Everyone present must present a reason to the celebrant why they are viewed as heroic or hero to the presenter.

No gifts to be exchanged. Also, gifts cannot be used to substitute for declaration about the celebrant. Only words are acceptable and hopefully amid smiles of affection.

I will be accused of watering down the definition of hero, but I suggest that uplifting of mates, siblings, and parents is worth it. We all want to be a hero of some sort. So why shouldn’t we have it shown to us from friendly faces capable of showering us with love, respect, approval, appreciation, or an honorable and genteel expression of the celebrant’s importance in the lives of those nearby?

6 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, Home CEO, marriage, nurturing, Sociology 101

Blog 2587 — Happy Birthday, USMC


November 10 is the anniversary of the birth of the United States Marine Corps, now at 241 years of uncommon valor, innovation, and combat excellence.

Once a marine always a marine. If you don’t know a marine or two, then you should. They are different, classic, and traditional Americans smothered with pride and humility. An irresistible combination for women. Not all are the personification of a gentlemen but usually the embodiment of personal responsibility, dependability, and admiration.

I was once blessed to have two marines on my staff in one of my naval commands. Their devotion to and performance of duty stood out as exceptional. They were both marvelous credits to my command, the U.S. Navy, the USMC, and exceptional reflections of the Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis (Latin for Always Faithful and usually known verbally as Semper Fi) .

If I could start over at age 17, it would be as a marine.

3 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter, old school, Sociology 101

2586. An Election for the Ages


 

Election over, the best man won. We are in for many more surprises, so I look forward to confusion and exciting disputes during the opposed and embittered transition of power that precedes the larger war.

Surprises and battles continue as the ideological war recommences with new arguments about old perspectives: power vs. principle, left vs. right, communism vs. Americanism, elitism vs. populism, losers vs. winners, globalists vs. nationalists, Marxism vs. Conservatism/Libertarianism, Constitution-wreckers vs. Constitution-preservers,  Clintonism vs. Trumpism.

In the name of election fraud, the losers harass those chosen by the people and states. Claiming supposed legitimacy for the nationwide popular vote, losers attack the Electoral College, which is the constitutional principle that enables states to elect the president. It is the constitutional principle that prevents big states from overpowering smaller states, and prevents tyranny of the majority that inevitably develops when 51% of the people can rule the other 49%. That is, when the big city and coastline folks rule over those in flyover country.

The losers focus on preserving what they can of the Obama legacy and shaping the future for them to win in 2020. Don’t blame them for doing it, just for doing it so lacking in mutual respect.

Let the games begin. I know I will be p***ed off many times during the lame duck period from now to January 20, 2017. So, to recover before I need it, I took yesterday off.

12 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, Sociology 101