This is what it means to be exemplary and kind. That young boy will carry it with him for the rest of his years.
Many people questioned the candidness of the act, but too many seem to miss the point. Whether it's staged is irrelevant, the message doesn't change. Dimwits really concentrate on trivialities without catching on the crucial insight. Typical.
The man is laying down the groundwork for his son, and it's evident: he's following in his father's footsteps, and he's eager. Every father feels great satisfaction from seeing his children share in his righteousness, and then propagating it.
Yes, women love a cunning man, and to some extent, it signals status, because to tread the line between permissiveness, and tyranny, you must not only be clever, restrained, and stable, but you need to be a little cagey, to dodge bullets and pierce her soul.
I’d say a man who’s got his shit together, who’s got a little attitude, and knows his place, is almost always cunning in his own distinct fashion, and the harder it is to discern, the more clever the man. Subtlety is difficulty where passion is concerned.
A man who, for instance, brushes off provocations, tunnels under his woman’s ego, flips the script on her, beats around the bush to get her to confess, is exceptionally alluring to women; signals an aura of nonchalant charm, especially theough humour.
I’ve been on either side, and what I can tell you for certain is that no matter how hard you try to rectify things, how solid your presence, some women will simply do as they please, no matter how restrictive you get, if she wants to, she will.
And this is just as relevant to seemingly good girls, and seemingly bad girls, because you can no longer tell them apart. If you want to love, you have to gamble with the devil. If you don’t want to gamble, you can exit the game, but you’ll still be played.
These guys who are apparently enjoying life on the sidelines are lying to you. The rapture of love is too strong dismiss, but at the same time, the risks involved could be so tragic that men live in perpetual angst over their manifestation. Tricky..
I’ve said it many times and I’ll say it again, it doesn’t matter anymore if a woman appears gracious, classy or upright, I’ve seen devils concealed as the purest angels. Most unruly women want to downplay their immorality and ‘get away with it’.
That’s why love has become a riskier gamble than ever today, and with cruel consequences. Most prospects have more choice than ever, more validation to spare, and less considerstion for ‘goodness’ in man, and less care for morality in general.
One way to gauge a man’s character is to see how he behaves around beautiful women, one of the most compelling baits known to man. If his composure speaks for itself and his internal dialogue preserves its integrity, you can be sure he’s worth something.
Men have lost empires over women, even the most towering. There is no dismissing the fact that a woman’s influence has steered and unsettled even the most vigorous of natures, which tells us that mere strengrh of character doesn’t avert this weakness.
Often, not only does it fail to avert it, but it also magnifies it. Strong men tend to be exceptionally possessive, both of their aims and their women, which often adds to the gravity of their allure. Every man struggles with this, some can just control it.
If women didn't care about their bodycount, they wouldn't have any reason to lie about it by deflating it, but that's what they do, which only tells you that they're secretly ashamed of their past. Those who need to lie about their past can't stomach it.
Think about it, they're always parading the idea that one shouldn't judge a person's sexual past, that it shouldn't be a defining factor, but then anxiously make an effort to bullshit their way into making others believe they haven't loosened their morals.
If you weren't even partially disgraced by your own actions, you wouldn't feel the necessity to justify that you're someone other than who you are. But you see, excessive hedonism makes you shallow and counterfeit, your word can seldom be taken serious.
To mistake my kindness for weakness is an erroneous judgement from your end, not mine. If your sense of morality is such that a good deed appears to be a demonstration of cowardice or inadequacy, you're simply of a weak and degrading spirit. That's all.
And know this: the kindest of people could be the most brutal of humans, for there is a shared tenet among the deceitful; the easiest way to deceive a man is by helping him. How many people have come to lend a hand, only to spill their dirt over your back?
If you can't separate sincerity from fraud, you're simply going to assume that the kindness of the predatory is the same as that of the earnest, which is dangerous, because the predatory are inscrutable, and the earnest are often, paradoxically, suspicious.