Archive for the ‘feminine psychology’ Category

September 23, 2009

The ego epidemic: How more and more of us women have an inflated sense of our own fabulousness

Us women are more egocentric and narcissistic than we ever used to be, according to extensive research by two leading psychologists.

More of us have huge expectations of ourselves, our lives and everyone in them. We think the universe resolves around us, with a deluded sense of our own fabulousness, and believe we are cleverer, more talented and more attractive than we actually are.

We have trouble accepting criticism and extending empathy because we are so preoccupied with ourselves.

Addicted to shopping: Half of women admit they can’t go a day without buying something

More than 15million British women are addicted to shopping, a study revealed today.

Researchers found over half of the entire female population shop because it gives them a high and a third can’t help spending money – even when they can’t afford it.

Six out of ten said they ‘have to’ spend money every single day – even if it just meant buying bread or milk.

Why I loathe feminism… and believe it will ultimately destroy the family By Erin Pizzey

ERIN PIZZEY set up the world’s first refuge for battered women in 1971 – and went on to establish an international movement for victims of domestic violence. But what she has never made public before is that her own childhood was scarred by the shocking cruelty of both her parents.

My father was ordered to Beirut by the diplomatic service, and we were left as refugees in Kokstad, South Africa. From living in an enormous house with a fleet of servants and a nanny, my twin sister Rosaleen and I were suddenly at the mercy of my mother Pat’s temper. And it was ferocious. Having escaped the brutality of the war, we were introduced to a new brand domestic cruelty.

Indeed, my mother’s explosive temper and abusive behaviour shaped the person I later became like no other event in my life.
Thirty years later, when feminism exploded onto the scene, I was often mistaken for a supporter of the movement. But I have never been a feminist, because, having experienced my mother’s violence, I always knew that women can be as vicious and irresponsible as men.

Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the movement, which proclaimed that all men are potential rapists and batterers, was based on a lie that, if allowed to flourish, would result in the complete destruction of family life….

Indeed, when I later opened my refuge for battered women, 62 of the first 100 to come through the door were as abusive as the men they had left….

Needless to say, my mother went berserk. She took me upstairs and beat me with an ironing cord until the blood ran down my legs. I showed my injuries to my teacher the next morning – but she just stared back impassively and did nothing….

Feminism, I realised, was a lie. Women and men are both capable of extraordinary cruelty. Indeed, the only thing a child really needs – two biological parents under one roof – was being undermined by the very ideology which claimed to speak up for women’s rights.

This country is now on the brink of serious moral collapse. We must stop demonising men and start healing the rift that feminism has created between men and women.
Harriet Harman’s insidious and manipulative philosophy that women are always victims and men always oppressors can only continue this unspeakable cycle of violence. And it’s our children who will suffer.

Advertisements

Female Bloggers

September 14, 2009

More on the subject of female bloggers. There don’t seem to be very many female bloggers on any topic that interests me. Most of the female bloggers I’ve seen focus on feminism. When I was in my teens and 20’s I read feminist books by the ton, which is why I feel so bewildered when these dimbos accuse me of being “ignorant” of the glorious revelation that women are equal to men; the fact is, I’ve probably read more feminist works than they have! When I attack feminism, I know my enemy intimately. But my point is, I don’t need to read more feminist propaganda; I have already steeped myself in it, so there’s no reason for me to subscribe to the rants of these harpies while they repeat what Greer and de Beauvoir were saying before they were born. Oh, they come up with new little twists now and then, but it’s still the same basic hooey.

So I’m not going to waste my time on bloggers whose subject is “feminism”. That probably eliminates about 90% of female bloggers. What else do they blog about?

I used to be a more mainstream conservative, and there’s quite a handful of female bloggers in that area. I read a few of them before I became more traditionalist. The mainstream conservative blogs, whether by men or women, are in the category of things I only needed to read for a while. After a couple of years, I understood the theoretical basis and had acquired plenty of facts, so I don’t need to keep reading Michelle Malkin or Mark Steyn every day. But if any of you want to read worthwhile female bloggers, that’s where you’ll find them.

Being irrational creatures, women are more likely than men to be liberals, and I don’t waste much time on reading liberal blogs. Why should I? I can’t read a newspaper, watch a non-classic movie, or even drive past a billboard without hearing their ludicrous ideas; why should I seek out more of them? I do read liberal essays or blogs from time to time, in an attempt to understand the enemy, but the lack of logic and the bald-faced lies are too frustrating to keep at it for long. It’s too depressing to see human beings degrade themselves in that fashion.

I haven’t seen many female science bloggers. The few I have seen rarely talked about science, just raved hysterically about how evil and sexist men are. One, whose blog name I can’t recall, would also occasionally post about chemistry instead of feminism, but if she applies the same kind of logic to chemicals that she does to politics, I don’t want to be in the same county as her when she gets her hands on some beakers.

When the financial crisis started, I looked for economics blogs to better understand what was going on and what I ought to do about it. I don’t recall even seeing any female economics bloggers, not even lame ones that I didn’t consider worth my time.

Another depressing insight into female psychology

July 25, 2009

When are highly-anxious women most anxious? When you least expect it

The researchers could find no significant differences in behavior between the HSA and LSA women or their partners when the results were averaged across all participants in a group. But when each group was divided into subgroups of high- and low-satisfaction with their relationships, a significant difference was observed. Among high-satisfaction women, HSA women showed significantly more negative behavior than LSA women.

The researchers speculate that women who are satisfied with their relationships may fell more secure expressing their emotions when they are nervous or anxious. Since the LSA women probably weren’t as anxious about the speech, they had no reason to show any signs of discomfort, but HSA women did. HSA women who were unsatisfied with their relationships, on the other hand, were not comfortable sharing their anxiety with their partners.

And what about when the boyfriends behaved negatively? Again unexpectedly, HSA women behaved more negatively when their boyfriends behaved more positively to them. Among low-social anxiety women, there was no difference in behavior regardless of how their boyfriends behaved. Why did the highly-anxious women behave worse when their boyfriends were being nice?

Beck’s team believes that these women are more comfortable behaving negatively because they know their boyfriends are supportive. The women with unsupportive boyfriends don’t respond in kind because they feel they will only get more negative responses back from them.

Pick-Up Artists and Feminism

April 16, 2008

I don’t know how many of you are reading books or websites about how to be a pick-up artist (PUA), but more of you need to be. There’s two essays from those sites linked in my sidebar: The Truth About Women and Women Explained.

Not necessarily for the official purpose. Though if you’re so inclined, I say more power to you. As a dyke I’ve experienced how women treat those who love them, and I think anything men can do to level the ground a bit is fair game. They’ll take anything they can get from you, let you lavish them with gifts and fancy dinners, all in the hope of getting some sex, which they probably won’t give you. Most men would like to get married and commit for life, but feminists have made this a reckless proposition with their no-fault divorce and vicious alimony customs. (There is no reason a man should continue supporting a woman who has left him, but as the law stands, that’s the price for a few months of sex.) Women will break your heart just for the rush of power it gives them. I am completely in favor of men strategizing to get some of their own back. If women are going to be faithless sluts, men should take advantage of them.

But there’s other value to PUA writings. I read this stuff and even though I’m a lesbian, I’ve never attempted to use any of this to pick up girls. I’m a Dyke Going My Own Way. I’ve been celibate for several years, ever since the last time I was dumb enough to let a woman get her hands on my heart. I suppose I could learn these techniques to get laid, but then what? I’m not a one-night-stand kind of gal, and these techniques don’t protect you from fickle women who abandon you the instant something shinier comes along. Aside from heartbreak, even though gay marriage still isn’t legal in most places, these days a smart lawyer could probably come up with a way for my ex-girlfriend to take half my shit™. The only bright spot is that I can’t be hit with a paternity suit.

But the practical nature of pick-up means that PUAs can’t bullshit themselves about human nature, particularly female human nature. People who want to fantasize about creating A Better World can afford to kid themselves that when they change “society”, women will turn into independent, hardworking, innovating equals to men. People who live in the dream world of the “positive attitude” can kid themselves that women want men who are equals who will be nice to them and respect them (and that people are basically good and peaceful and nonviolent). But PUAs have to get real-world results. If they don’t get laid, they know their theories are wrong and need adjustment.

Pick-up works because PUAs understand that women want strong, confident, dominant men. It’s pretty funny to see most women’s reactions when they read an article or see a talk show about this. “Oh noes! This is so demeaning! And it wouldn’t work, either! Women aren’t that dumb or superficial!” The hell they’re not.

The qualities I’m about to discuss are biologically based, but they’re not completely inescapable. A patriarchal culture, in which women are guarded by parents, husbands, the law and religion from too much folly; in which women are indoctrinated by religion and fiction that such unnatural qualities as chastity and fidelity are good things; in which people are subject to constant discipline, as never happens in a matriarchy, and hence are trained to fight their base impulses – in such societies, women can overcome a great deal of this. Not all. This is why there are still some decent women among devout churchgoers; despite the dissolution of society as a whole, these women are shielded by the subcultures in which they live. When the Muslims start invading, it is Christian housewives who will prefer to die rather than yield their virtue to the invaders, while the feminists who are currently bragging about how independent and liberated they are will meekly spread their legs for their conquerors, and soon will be talking about how wonderful chadors are.

Not all PUAs are male chauvinists, by the way. It’s hard to be a realist about women without becoming an MCP, but some of them manage it. But they still subscribe to a lot of very unfeminist principles. One of the cardinal rules is, Lead the men and the women will follow. In a mixed group of people, the PUA will focus on winning the men over, getting them to like him or accept him as alpha. The women in the group, hardwired to want the men who have status in the tribe, want to sleep with whichever man the men respect. Women don’t choose their mates themselves, they let all the men around them choose them!

Rob Fedders has recently posted about another of their principles: that of feminine hypergamy. In the absence of legal and social pressures for monogamy and premarital chastity (that is to say, civilization), the natural human social group is the harem. 95% of the women sleep with 5% of the men. (“Now that women are “liberated” (and thus at the mercy of their own emotions and baser instincts) this is mostly no longer possible in today’s society.“) Even a low-ranking, minimally attractive woman can sometimes get an alpha male to sleep with her; men are designed to want lots of sex partners. The PUA relies on this, making sure that he is part of that 5% of men.

In addition, over and over again on the sites and in the books, PUAs remind each other that men must take control of the situation at all times. “Mystery” explains that in addition to taking the responsibility of making the first move, initiating kissing or necking, men also have to take the responsibility of holding back; if a girl impulsively goes further than she’s really ready to, she feels cheap and doesn’t see you again. As long as the man takes responsibility for making the conversation interesting, as long as she doesn’t have to feel responsible when they have sex, she’s fine with it. Women are allergic to responsibility. I know that all of you who have seen feminist editorials defending women who murder their children or husbands can see how this is relevant.

PUAs have a rule: Never call her on her shit. Women subconsciously know that they’re controlled by their emotions and they need men to be able to deal with that. When I read this stuff, I realize just how wrongly I was dealing with my girlfriends and platonic female friends. I made the same mistake Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, also lesbians, made: I assumed other women were like me. Except for maybe half of my fellow dykes, they’re not. When some dame was tearing my heart to shreds, I used to, if you can believe my stupidity, try to reason with her, to point out that her behavior was illogical and unethical. Naturally, that ruined any chance of reconciliation. Calling a woman on her shit forces her into unpleasant self-awareness and saddles her with responsibility women aren’t designed to handle.

PUAs have a concept they call a “shit test”. Basically it means that when a woman starts to take an interest in a man, she starts giving him shit to see if he’ll past the test of not putting up with it.

I think feminism is just one big shit test. Women as a group decided, “Let’s see how much men will let us get away with!” Unfortunately, the answer was, “A lot.” Every unreasonable demand they make – the vote, default custody, alimony, admission to male colleges, enlistment to the military, sex discrimination lawsuits, abortion – has been handed over. Small wonder they have resorted to proposing such things as a tax on being male and books claiming that “all intercourse is rape” and whining about “the male gaze”. They keep getting more and more ludicrous in the subconscious hope that men will put down their feet.

Unfortunately, once women were allowed to vote, male politicians were only too willing to sacrifice the male prerogatives upon which civilization rests in order to get elected. This is why the naturally dominant sex has been unable to prevent feminism.

Come to think of it, the instinctive verbal attacks women launch whenever they encounter MRA arguments could be seen as another “shit test”. They recite whatever bullshit their professors told them about “the patriarchy” to see if the MRA is just another beta male who’ll crumble on encountering female resistance, or if he’s a real man who can withstand the arguments of a weak and silly woman. They don’t do this consciously, of course. But millions of years of evolution have guaranteed that they do indeed do it.

Testing Boundaries

March 10, 2008

Adults are fond of claiming that children constantly “test boundaries” to see how much they can “get away with” before the adults stop them. This is untrue. Children do what they feel like doing unless some adult stops them. The boundaries are a side issue, not the goal.

Part of the reason adults say this is that it feeds their egos to imagine that they are so important to children that every action of the child’s is calculated to elicit a reaction from the adults. In fact, however, usually all adults are to children is annoyances that get in the way of their fun.

Another reason is that it is mostly women who say this. Women naturally assume that others “test boundaries” because they themselves do it constantly, mostly with men, but to a lesser extent with all humans – including, ironically, their children. Women are designed to do this to test males – prospective mates – for their fitness. A man who can’t stand up to them and their antics will not be able to protect them from saber-toothed tigers or the Neanderthals across the river.

Indeed, feminism might be said to be nothing more than an elaborate testing of men by women, and with the exception of the lesbians in the feminist movement, every feminist is deeply disappointed that men did not set boundaries for them decades ago. If you want to know why Western women today are so unhappy, it is because men stopped saying no to them decades ago.

Women test limits

January 17, 2008

“Women want their men to be cops, to be their fathers… to tell them what the limits are …. When they push, what they’re waiting for you to say is, ‘This is Checkpoint Charlie, don’t go any further’ …. Men in America have fallen apart. The country is gasping for breath …. And the women are angry because there are no real men anymore.”
~Mort Sahl