Tag Archives: competition

2750. Essentials of Successful Marriage — 03 Her Battle of the Sexes


At post 2749 I described the War of the Sexes as each woman individually and independently up against all men, competing to see who gets their way. They are blessed by nature to succeed in that arrangement. Men go where the women are, so it’s up to each woman to play her cards independently to her own advantage.

Perhaps contrary to popular thought, the Battle of the Sexes is not about male gender versus female gender, dominance vs. submissive, equality vs. fairness, husband vs. wife, responsibility vs. irresponsibility. It’s easy to believe those competitive connections to be normal. However, God didn’t design us, Nature and genetics don’t endow us, and hormones don’t energize us that way.*

The Battle of the Sexes is one on one, begins with first encounter, and she commands the battleground. One woman willing to yield her independence under the right conditions versus one man willing to suppress his dominant nature long enough to conquer her. She inherits the burden to convince him that she’s much more endearing to him personally and more valuable for his life than are his hopes of conquest.

Both are born to get their way with the other, eternal competition that only a relationship expert can manage well. He’s a conqueror seeking conquest without obligation. She’s a conqueror seeking marriage before conquest. It’s the only way she can be sure of what he is truly after, either sex or her.

With a lasso made of her beauty, mystery, modesty, monogamous spirit, and his desire to conquer, he places it around his neck. One woman cuts out that man from the herd; leads him into her corral; breaks him of bucking; and does it with vim, vigor, and vitality. Before he can get her into bed the first time, she coaches and persuades him to learn how it pleases him to be both tamed and harnessed with her as good woman. By committing to how she trains him, he finally achieves conquest and enjoys the frequent and convenient sex won by pulling her buggy through life together.

The Battle of the Sexes expands with them as a couple. They court until both are convinced they are made for each other. He makes his move with a proposal of marriage, if and when he’s convinced living with her will satisfy him more than the way he presently lives.

With all his warts and sins, she is more the challenge than he. Example: As soon as she blames him for being like all men, she hardens his resistence to her influence, which means she weakens her ability to win the battle of capturing him. It’s a contradiction she has to work out successfully in the corral of their life together, and she has more than enough ability. The time and way to start is the tough part. (Discussed more deeply in future articles.)

The Battle of the Sexes is continuous in time, daily in events, and one woman pitted against whatever man she currently faces in whatever role he fills—first encounter, friend, foe, husband, boyfriend, business associate, FWB, or whatever. It’s each woman’s personal battle, and she has no one but herself to win it. IOW, yes, it’s all up to her how well she does in both the war and her battles to get her way in life with one man.

She has to rely on herself alone. As soon as she seeks help through the aegis and protection of other women banding together or blaming all men for her man’s faults, the man she faces assumes the aura of dominance in her eyes, which weakens her position. She then takes the easy road, allows for the expected dominant pressures, and yields sex or other matters without a battle of wits. In the process, he more easily refuses to cooperate or help her win their one-on-one battle.

By disregarding dominance as having a role in her relationships, each individual female more easily cuts out one horse to put in her corral. The battle then is that one female tames one male to be civilized up to female expectations to facilitate the raising of children. Each individual woman does that to her man, and she leaves other men and women out of her life to do the same for themselves.

Tomorrow: His Battle of the Sexes

——

* It appears that way because modern culture says we can’t live with the sexes being different. The political class for reasons hidden from the public for over half a century ridicule men and criticize male traits and behaviors. They blame men for female problems, which makes enemies of men, which makes women desperate to have a man, which encourages them to act more like men in order to have one of their own. IOW, if women can’t make men stand up to feminist exaggerations, copy their ambitions and lie down with them.

The professed political object centralizes power to weaken patriarchy, but the result is political makeover of America. Once, our Judeo-Christian culture was primarily female friendly. Nowadays, it’s male friendlier and getting more so.

 

 

14 Comments

Filed under boobs, courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, How she wins, marriage, sex differences

2256. Interface of Natural Love: Compatibility and Mutual-interest


To describe a couple’s love requires that it be examined in three stages: foundation, two personalities, and individual self-interests.

  1. The foundation is how they are born differently and then come together. That natural interface is described in the previous article (2255).
  2. Rising above that foundation, two personalities must be compatible at the start or made so as their relationship develops. “Made so” implies that someone has to change in order to adjust enough to mix masculine competition and feminine cooperation into a workable solution. Men will change before conquest in order to capture a woman if she is more important to him than just for sex.

After conquest, however, instinctive male nature prevents conquerors from changing to please the conquered. So, each woman faces the frustrations of managing her sexual assets in such a way that enables her to integrate two diverse personalities into compatibility.

Moreover, women are blessed with sufficient ability. At birth they inherit an adjustable ability that enables them to achieve what they are after. Management traits of patience and flexibility that men lack (for dealing with women, that is) enable decisions wiser than his when she’s choosing a mate.

Simply by managing how competition about conquest morphs into cooperation without conquest, women can bring forth the blossoms of love in relationship development. The only requirement is that he pursues her for sex and she refuses until he meets her expectations for sufficient devotion to her above others. Without her love of him and his devotion to her, there’s not enough meat to share on the compatibility platter.

If she doesn’t ensure before conquest that he obligates himself to fulfill her expectations, then he assumes no responsibility toward or for her well-being. It torpedoes her ship, because the character, strength, and dependability of men is founded on personal obligation to fulfill whatever they consider their responsibility. IOW, making herself his responsibility is the essence of marital love, compatibility, and—up next—mutual-interest.

  1. Self-interest motivates everyone. Unless forced, people don’t violate it. Unless charmed by a good woman, men don’t yield their self-interest to hers. Unless passionate about marrying a particular man, women don’t yield theirs either.

Integrating two very diverse self-interests into mutual-interest is the work of woman. Only she has the interest, traits, and ability to merge such opposing and tremendously personal ‘belongings’. The ingredients that drive self-interest—e.g., tightwad, promiscuous, responsible, fearful, integrity, passionate, ungrateful, selfish, courageous, stubborn, irresponsible—are owned and difficult to part with in order to accommodate someone else’s ingredients that might destroy or infringe on yours.

Integrating two individual self-interests into one synergistic mutual-interest requires monumental and continuous effort. It’s a—and perhaps the—major reason women are so well prepared for it. And men are not.

God designs, Nature endows, and hormones energize man and women differently and they face love at the interface described at 2255. After they meet, just about everything else that has to be done is accomplished by the woman. She integrates their personalities into compatibility and self-interests into mutual-interest. Thus, she earns her man’s respect by achieving marital success, which solidifies his love because respect is the foundation of it.

1 Comment

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, How she wins, 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.

 

45 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, sex differences

2045. Submission #03 — A Brighter Future Awaits


As shown earlier, logic and reason so favored by men actually turns the dark days of “You shall submit” into a greater day of “If it pleases me I will.” The real world takes on quite a different hue when wives are freer to harmonize their relationships. The numbered situations described below provide a deeper understanding of the problems wives may encounter trying to figure out how to make their submissive nature work to brighten their husband’s submission-expected future.

Remember that this entire series is framed within the primal nature of men and women without considering their personal situation or connections. Women have to figure out their situation from principles they can use.

The situations that follow make women aware of the multitude of challenges that can develop. Each requires her attention. No condition ever stands alone in a relationship. However minutely, each spouse has an interest in what the other thinks and does. For every right decision, there is another person who can and might judge it differently. Mistakes are ubiquitous because someone does something and the other calls it wrong, often without thinking. Therefore, in most of the following situations, recovery is possible for women and not an issue for management by men. Locked narrow-mindedly into the concept of ‘submission’, men philosophically have little or no talent for relationship management. Women, however, have the in-born adaptability to bond multiple home voices and conduct them harmoniously.

And you say, ‘but a good alpha male knows how to provide the leadership that leads to harmony’. And I say, don’t believe it. Alpha-determined leadership does not make harmony with the leader’s spouse involved. It just slows her except when he accedes to her silent, unobtrusive, unchallenging, indirect, but respectful leadership. OTOH, it can stop her breathing harmony into their home.

Women shine when they are fully aware of their situation. It keeps them focused on doing a harmonizing job and works best when their husband has been conditioned to listen.

  1. Major differences exist between these two terms. Submission is energized by competitive intent, the man’s staked-out side of life. “I’m the boss.” Submissiveness is energized by her cooperative spirit. “Us comes before you and me” is part of a woman’s life until she is driven away from it or learned otherwise earlier in life.
  2. Men expect female submission, but the female nature dodges it. Women expect to employ their natural submissive spirit to do what they think is best. When disagreements turn into competition, husband intends to dominate. When wife smoothes competition into cooperation that doesn’t offend his masculine prerogatives, husband goes along to get along. It takes awhile for men to learn it, but if they want their castle to resound with harmony, they must pay more attention to her. Otherwise harmony among multiple personalities will not prevail under the males’ hard-hearted leadership.
  3. Women live by and foster submissiveness, when they like themselves as female, their man as a mate, and their relationship for permanency. It helps capture a man, hold him, and prove that women don’t play the male game of competition but are very willing to play the far more harmonizing female game of cooperation.

Can you use some more wife-promoting situational awareness? Come back tomorrow.

 

5 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics

2044. Submission #2 — Wife’s Choice


Most of us have heard this. Ephesians 5:22 (KJV) says, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”

Now, understand that I’m neither questioning nor contradicting God’s intent or the Bible. Pastors clear it up theoretically but lacking in satisfaction for women; it always seems to lopsidedly favor men. Also, submission seems symbolic, but men take it literally and many autocratically consider it absolute. Women can’t believe men intend them to be so literally unequal in marriage, but they have so little evidence to argue to the contrary. From what they hear in church, many women resent men, the marital wheels squeak louder, and wives seem helpless to find lubrication to stop the squeaking. Everyone seems to ignore the rest of the biblical story, which for men is easy and preferred.

Wives face an undeserved burden. It weakens their marital role, seems to allege a subservient condition, reduces self-confidence, encourages masculine dominance, and fosters dispute rather than negotiated settlement. They are victimized because men interpret and impose the biblical spirit to their own advantage. In fact, men need to be taught the following, although those that feel threatened may even reject the logic.

We need only two questions answered. Men have long ignored or forgotten the answers although they too come from the Bible.

  • Do men have free will? The answer of course is yes.
  • Do women have free will? The answer is yes, since all God’s children are equal in His eyes.

Men have the obligation to submit unto the Lord but, since they have free will, they can choose not to do so. With their free will, women can also choose not to submit unto the Lord. Ephesians 5:22 advises women to submit unto both husbands and the Lord. Since they can choose on the latter, they can choose on the former. Women are thus free to submit at their discretion, which makes questions about total obedience illogical. Such wifely freedom taken literally and equally, however, doesn’t fit the marriage covenant, but it completes the religious logic of the subject.

Marriage is a formal contract founded on mutual agreement, which is based on the nature of one man and one woman merging their beliefs, emotions, values, standards, and expectations into combined effort for living together. As the direct consequence of their God-given equality and free will, compatibility arises from their mutual ability to match up and make the following natural motivations work successfully for them. And for the relationship expert to make it all fit together in a harmonious whole:

  • He is motivated to compete and she is motivated to get around marital competition if she can, to avoid the potential for conflict.
  • She is motivated to cooperate and he expects it as normal benefit of yielding his independence at the altar.
  • He is more a producer and she is more a processor. He looks for results. She looks to smooth out bumps in the marital road.
  • He is strong on commanding and ordering. She prefers to be asked and expects to negotiate opposite expectations and to help settle disputes.
  • He is strongly dominant, easily assumes responsibility, and expects those for whom he’s responsible to submit to his leadership. Without submission by followers, he’s handicapped to achieve his desired results—until spouse convinces him of a better way.
  • Both are born hardheaded. The permanence of having a husband energizes her naturally submissive spirit that is available within her natural soft-heartedness. However, wise husbands invariably learn that she also has a hardheadedness that needs to be frequently accommodated or courted.
  • For his intended accomplishments, at the surface her submission seems more important than her cooperation. OTOH, she is submissive and cooperative by nature as long as prospects for the future look at least favorable. So, her submission comes more easily when their future looks more promising. She shines when her submissiveness morphs into submission, but it arises more out of what she sees than what she hears about a brighter future.
  • He is primarily concerned with present-day matters. Her main concerns are for keeping their future good or making it better. She sees it in their interest to be submissive in the present if she can more directly shape their lives in the future. Without that tradeoff, however, she tends to resent, resist, and can easily encourage herself to retaliate.

Relationship experts, the wives, just naturally move to the front of trying to achieve harmony when sour notes invade their marriage. Neither spouse is obligated to submit to the other and whoever gets their way depends on their compatibility and desire to work things out to mutual advantage. Whatever their solution, it’s unique for every couple.

Consequently, there is no universal solution. Men continue to expect women to submit. Women can influence and persuade their man provided they can focus on their future rather than being honked off at the thought of submitting actually or even theoretically. For serendipitous effects, women should ignore the subject. Each has to find her own way to induce harmony within her nest, and one potentially disruptive term should be left out.

When this series continues, a brighter future beckons. Women can benefit by ignoring the subject of submission. By refusing to think of, stir their anger, and follow it with guilt whenever the subject comes up directly or indirectly. Let husbands rant about submission with each other. Women are quite capable of breathing harmony into their home by fixing their thoughts on specific interactions. Dozens of pointers, pearls of wisdom will follow.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Her glory

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.

 

10 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

342. Ties that bind, or not! — Their needs


Self-interest motivates everyone to do what they do, but it also conflicts with what a spouse expects.

 

She needs a brighter future for her family. Mature women exploit their relationship expertise. They work for stable security and promote family development, closeness, and harmony. Immature women seek materialistic brighteners—more money, continuous shopping, unaffordable housing.

 

Those things are not that important to men. Their male nature focuses more on the present than the future. Wife expects husband to respond favorably to her wishes about their future. However, it takes skill so as not to interfere with his near-term thinking, interests, and plans.

 

Mature wives focus and coach husband on building and sustaining their marriage. Immature wives pressure husband for greater effort, for more and better of whatever he does. (When he never measures up, it sends loud messages that he’s inadequate and may even be insignificant.)

 

His needs are far simpler than hers. He only needs a place to flop, eat, throw his things, and prepare for tomorrow’s ‘battles’.

 

Such a place is easy to come by elsewhere. Consequently, in marriage he expects fun and comfort to compensate for loss of independence.

 

It’s her home to build and dominate. When she does it well, it’s a castle to him.

 

Tradeoffs leads to cooperation—good! Disrespect for their opposing natures leads to competition—ungood!

Leave a comment

Filed under sex differences, Uncategorized