The paradox of women is most are inherently manipulative despite being easily manipulated. Most young men aren't cunning, but are easily manipulated by women. Cunning doesn't come to men as naturally as it does women, but it's more dangerous on them because they're more logical.
It's very important for men to hone their cunning, because to be a good leader that can maintain order requires it. Otherwise you end up getting puppeteered by your subordinates, also known colloquially as "backseat driving" and "topping from the bottom".
Women are cunning, but easily led by their emotions. So you can herd them in whatever direction you need so long as you can speak to their feelings and make them feel heard. They find it hard to ignore their emotions and do the most efficient thing, hence are easily manipulated.
Poetically, only time women are usually cold and efficient is when they feel disgust induced apathy. In these scenarios, they can become quite mechanical - usually in dismantling a man and leaving him. But on a regular day, this is not the case.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Never apologise to people who don't respect you, because they see your guilt as an opportunity for exploitation. They'll just parse your apology as a vulnerability signal and leverage it to make even crazier demands because you're not feared enough for them to appreciate it.
Nobody sees a weak guy apologise and goes, oh well I appreciate you saying that and feel much better now, thank you very much.
No. It's never good enough. They get horny and smell blood in the water. You trigger their predatoriness because they think they have you on the ropes.
So what's the point in delivering an apology to someone who will not appreciate it?
There is zero point. There is nothing to be gained, only something to be lost. So you don't do it.
You only apologise to those you think will appreciate your kindness rather than exploit it.
The wind on your face, the ability to go anywhere, freedom only remains freedom for as long as you can handle it - for once all semblance of order breaks down it becomes chaos, and chaos can be fun at first, but when it becomes your prison, you become disordered, stagnant, stuck.
Freedom, like money, is an easy sell - everybody wants lots of it, but few would be able to handle too much without destroying themselves.
Blinded by ignorance they see only the benefits, not the costs.
They do not equate freedom with self-discipline and accountability.
If I ask a woman "Miss, would you like total freedom?"
She will almost assuredly say yes
Yet if I asked her if she was willing to make all the tough decisions, lead, punish herself, and act as if everything that goes wrong in her life is always her fault, almost all will say no
Most women ignore good advice communicated harshly, but take bad advice communicated softly because like their genitals, their mind is not penetrative - they only see the surface and judge it based on how it makes them feel, instead of ignoring that and analysing what was said.
This, rather annoyingly, makes them easy to mislead, but difficult to teach.
Because when you try to teach them, they constantly offer resistance to the stream of uncomfortable truths that come their way, yet try to deceive them, and they eat up the flattery like a hungry dog.
It appears, at least to me, that women aren't really built for a lot of truth. Only a limited amount, just enough to make them functional within society, and pass on some useful tactics to their offspring. But otherwise, they prefer to be ignorant and let men handle the ugliness.
Soft men and generally destructive overcompensating men are like arrogant women - both are the result of weak fathers or single mothers.
I don't have to meet your parents to know what they're like, because their failings are evident in you regardless of how you feel about them.
The person who is well put together and had bad parents, or who is a mess but had great parents is the exception, not the rule.
Most people are almost always a reflection of the parental investment (or lack thereof) they received even well into adulthood.
When I talk to a woman who is reserved, polite, sophisticated, modest and thoughtful, she brings honour to her father and I assume he is a strong and competent man due to her elegance of soul.
When I talk to a woman who is arrogant, combative, immodest - I assume the opposite.
The idea of a man needing a woman is actively repulsive to her.
This is why the idea "men and women need each other" is nonsense.
Women need men, men want women - in the same way parents want children, but children need parents.
That statement's always bothered me, because it implies a false equivalence where there is none.
No man's desperate to commit to a woman, though he may like the idea of family, but single women are oft desperate to be taken care of, though in their pride they may deny it.
Sometimes teenagers resent the parents they depend on due to negative experiences, and claim they don't need them and can do everything themselves, but this is frustration speaking and not indicative of true psychological need.