Can a woman be the head of the house?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by SnooFnoo
Simply not true.
Your mental issues warp your view of both sexes and how each other are viewed.
Your mental issues warp your view of both sexes and how each other are viewed.
Are you sure? Can you elaborate? Are you male or female, straight or LGBT?
Here comes a bold statement:
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
In a situation where a man and woman are on paper.equal a woman will.**** test the hell out of a man to check he is not now her inferior. See above
Original post by iAmanze
Here comes a bold statement:
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
You are not very smart, are you? Its pathetic to stereotype all women like that. Many are able to take the pressure eg. A demanding job, responsibilities. The ability to make correct decisions concerning peoples well being does not differ between men and women. For example, many men are weak and pathetic, plenty women are strong and ambitious. You are a fine example of the former.
a woman yes, has maternal instincts. Surely this makes her better suited to being charge of a household, though, as she will choose what's best for the family, regardless of her conscience.Original post by Flozzie543
What? Equality is something to be embraced, not challenged. Why is that so hard to comprehend.
essentially if a woman cannot find something about a guy which makes her feel like she's the one with less options (higher value), she will move on to a guy who without a shadow of a doubt has more options, with higher status. (Hypergamy is not just, indeed rarely about money) The process is very subtle, not even noticed or acknowledged by women, it can take a few months even a year, however inevitably it always ends in breakup, divorce etc. The outcome can range from unashamed cheating to wishy-washy excuses such as 'just not feeling it anymore' 'want some time alone' 'need to find myself' etc.
In such a situation where a man has less options obvious or not, the woman begins to act like his mum and treat him like a boy. If they're close he gets mollycoddled, if not she tends to feel this odd mixture of pity, contempt and apathy which due to emotional discomfort is rationalised as indifference. Regardless if they're not close she will keep her distance, he is a 'loser' now. (Men often do this too). Sex goes out of the window if in an reship, it's the 'friend zone' if he was seeing her. Note that there are cute/hot guy friends and kid brother guy friends, you get sent to the kid brother zone.
The problem with the liberalised welfare state of the first world is that men having freedom to be emotionally open has made them publicly share vulnerabilities with women that shatters the illusion of high value they were projecting. It takes a very high value a man confiding privately with an established partner for a woman to sympathise, or a very liberal woman (not always a feminist).
Spoiler
The answer to your comment to iAmanze explains the problems about equality. It's not women's right to equality which is being challenged. As I say here, 'women want to lead alongside men, feminism is not a call for men to abandon their post'. When combined with hypergamy and a massive disparity between an attractive man and the disenfranchised rabble being churned out by the current situation, you get women's expectations in men constantly increasing.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Flozzie543
You are not very smart, are you? Its pathetic to stereotype all women like that. Many are able to take the pressure eg. A demanding job, responsibilities. The ability to make correct decisions concerning peoples well being does not differ between men and women. For example, many men are weak and pathetic, plenty women are strong and ambitious. You are a fine example of the former. a woman yes, has maternal instincts. Surely this makes her better suited to being charge of a household, though, as she will choose what's best for the family, regardless of her conscience.
a woman yes, has maternal instincts. Surely this makes her better suited to being charge of a household, though, as she will choose what's best for the family, regardless of her conscience.you see, this is where the problem lies. You yourself hate weakness and being 'pathetic' in a man, i.e. men of perceived considerably lower value. Now let's tone this down a notch so it is just that you…don't quite respect him the way you thought you would and can't quite pinpoint why?…and now you feel like you're settling. Time to move on? Eyes wandering? Hypergamy 101. It's not being a bitch it's just…chemistry. Biology. :/
I am willing to bet that you feel that lots of men including a few you have encountered fail to live up to the role of 'real man' etc. etc. once again the emasculation of man in the first world, see my response on the other thread.
FYI hetero men are innately polygamous so I'm not just bashing women here, we have also had to train ourselves to seek and maintain monogamy (hence the contempt for porn addicts for example). It's just a disadvantage that polygamy is considered fairly standard knowledge whereas hypergamy is one of those things you learn through experience.
Out of curiosity, why do you guys feel such a strong need to control your wife?
You do realise that in ordinary relationships, people usually share the decision-making and work things out as they go along. Sometimes one compromises for the other, and sometimes vice versa. I don't really know any couples who even use this "head of the household" title, or feel the need to command their partner.
Most normal, undamaged adults feel comfortable that they and their partner can deal with situations as they arise
I suspect once you begin to have real relationships, you will not feel so anxious about this subject and you'll look back in the future and cringe at some of the silly things you were saying
You do realise that in ordinary relationships, people usually share the decision-making and work things out as they go along. Sometimes one compromises for the other, and sometimes vice versa. I don't really know any couples who even use this "head of the household" title, or feel the need to command their partner.
Most normal, undamaged adults feel comfortable that they and their partner can deal with situations as they arise
I suspect once you begin to have real relationships, you will not feel so anxious about this subject and you'll look back in the future and cringe at some of the silly things you were saying
Original post by iAmanze
Here comes a bold statement:
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
Women cannot handle huge responsibility well, however you are good at doing what is delegated to you.
How many times do you see women complaining about their day/ their life/ everything. Compare than to how many times men complain. Men do not need to, we take what we have and try to make the best we can out of it. Women feel fit to allow emotions to control what they do thus not creating very efficient results and then complain about it. That is not leadership qualities and that's why you see things like the disparity of women in major leadership roles in huge companies as opposed to men.
Masculine energy is to penetrate, strive forwards, break barriers.
Feminine energy is to soften, to yield, to accept, to nurture.
Yes, woman CAN lead but only when they step out of their feminine and into their masculine. Why that when you can have a male who has that masculine energy inbuilt and genetically wired through years of human evolution (except for the soft 'nice guys' of the world who get nowhere because of their feminine energy - who are to be honest a disgrace to masculinity).
Strong red pill and/or internalised 'man up' *******s/hetero-normativity
Original post by young_guns
Out of curiosity, why do you guys feel such a strong need to control your wife?
You do realise that in ordinary relationships, people usually share the decision-making and work things out as they go along. Sometimes one compromises for the other, and sometimes vice versa. I don't really know any couples who even use this "head of the household" title, or feel the need to command their partner.
Most normal, undamaged adults feel comfortable that they and their partner can deal with situations as they arise
I suspect once you begin to have real relationships, you will not feel so anxious about this subject and you'll look back in the future and cringe at some of the silly things you were saying
You do realise that in ordinary relationships, people usually share the decision-making and work things out as they go along. Sometimes one compromises for the other, and sometimes vice versa. I don't really know any couples who even use this "head of the household" title, or feel the need to command their partner.
Most normal, undamaged adults feel comfortable that they and their partner can deal with situations as they arise
I suspect once you begin to have real relationships, you will not feel so anxious about this subject and you'll look back in the future and cringe at some of the silly things you were saying
nah trust me, if you don't step up once they start making decisions you get KBed pretty quickly. I have put a much more serious well thought out post regarding this above and on th'other thread
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
nah trust me, if you don't step up once they start making decisions you get KBed pretty quickly. I have put a much more serious well thought out post regarding this above and on th'other thread
So does the need for a head of the house / dominant partner apply to gay couples too? Or do you think that women have a particular characteristic that requires their being controlled?
Original post by young_guns
So does the need for a head of the house / dominant partner apply to gay couples too? Or do you think that women have a particular characteristic that requires their being controlled?
rules are slightly different re: LGBT, we would need more studies on the behaviour of LGBT animals in the wild. For heterosexual animals it is as follows the majority of the time. The principle of hypergamy for women, but you misunderstand, it's not about controlling them, merely maintaining aura of leadership. Women can also lead, perhaps all men need to step up their game
You guys worry too much about this ****. (You especially Riku but since you're suffering from mental health issues you at least have a vague excuse for your views)
I'm a confident outgoing guy, I'm a leader. But if my partner wanted to be "the head" of the house, she could be. Why do I give a ****?
Anyway we don't have a "head" of our household, since it's a house, not a corporation. Jeez
I'm a confident outgoing guy, I'm a leader. But if my partner wanted to be "the head" of the house, she could be. Why do I give a ****?
Anyway we don't have a "head" of our household, since it's a house, not a corporation. Jeez
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
rules are slightly different re: LGBT, we would need more studies on the behaviour of LGBT animals in the wild. For heterosexual animals it is as follows the majority of the time. The principle of hypergamy for women, but you misunderstand, it's not about controlling them, merely maintaining aura of leadership. Women can also lead, perhaps all men need to step up their game
I can vaguely sympathise re this aura of leadership concept, I appreciate the aesthetic of the pater familias (despite being gay, I would like to marry and have kids, and I do like the idea of being the head of the family in the ancient Roman sense). But I do think in this day and age, it really is a matter of aesthetic and personal choice
I mean... for what reason are you saying that mean need to exhibit this aura of leadership? What mischief are we seeking to remedy (to use a legal turn of phrase)? As far as heterosexual couples go, I don't really see that at present there's any great crisis or similar that's calling for this solution
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by young_guns
I can vaguely sympathise re this aura of leadership concept, I appreciate the aesthetic of the pater familias (despite being gay, I would like to marry and have kids, and I do like the idea of being the head of the family). But I do think in this day and age, it really is a matter of aesthetic and personal choice
I mean... for what reason are you saying that mean need to exhibit this aura of leadership? What mischief are we seeking to remedy (to use a legal turn of phrase)? As far as heterosexual couples go, I don't really see that at present there's any great crisis or similar that's calling for this solution
I mean... for what reason are you saying that mean need to exhibit this aura of leadership? What mischief are we seeking to remedy (to use a legal turn of phrase)? As far as heterosexual couples go, I don't really see that at present there's any great crisis or similar that's calling for this solution
Perhaps not for all, but I believe that with the rise of strong women in positions of power and the professional sphere via feminism, men are in decline or are perceived as in decline. It is…murky territory, but
as my quote above
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
essentially if a woman cannot find something about a guy which makes her feel like she's the one with less options (higher value), she will move on to a guy who without a shadow of a doubt has more options, with higher status. (Hypergamy is not just, indeed rarely about money) The process is very subtle, does not always occur, not even noticed or acknowledged by women, or men, it can take a few months even a year, however inevitably it always ends in breakup, divorce etc. The outcome can range from unashamed cheating to wishy-washy excuses such as 'just not feeling it anymore' 'want some time alone' 'need to find myself' etc.
In such a situation where a man has less options obvious or not, the woman begins to act like his mum and treat him like a boy. If they're close he gets mollycoddled, if not she tends to feel this odd mixture of pity, contempt and apathy which due to emotional discomfort is rationalised as indifference. Regardless if they're not close she will keep her distance, he is a 'loser' now. (Men often do this too). Sex goes out of the window if in an reship, it's the 'friend zone' if he was seeing her. Note that there are cute/hot guy friends and kid brother guy friends, you get sent to the kid brother zone.
The problem with the liberalised welfare state of the first world is that men having freedom to be emotionally open has made them publicly share vulnerabilities with women that shatters the illusion of high value they were projecting. It takes a very high value man (or perceived as high e.g. husband) confiding privately with an established partner for a woman to sympathise, or a very liberal woman (not always a feminist).
The answer to your comment to iAmanze explains the problems about equality. It's not women's right to equality which is being challenged. As I say here, 'women want to lead alongside men, feminism is not a call for men to abandon their post'. When combined with hypergamy and a massive disparity between an attractive man and the disenfranchised rabble of men being churned out by the current situation, you get women's expectations in men constantly increasing.
In such a situation where a man has less options obvious or not, the woman begins to act like his mum and treat him like a boy. If they're close he gets mollycoddled, if not she tends to feel this odd mixture of pity, contempt and apathy which due to emotional discomfort is rationalised as indifference. Regardless if they're not close she will keep her distance, he is a 'loser' now. (Men often do this too). Sex goes out of the window if in an reship, it's the 'friend zone' if he was seeing her. Note that there are cute/hot guy friends and kid brother guy friends, you get sent to the kid brother zone.
The problem with the liberalised welfare state of the first world is that men having freedom to be emotionally open has made them publicly share vulnerabilities with women that shatters the illusion of high value they were projecting. It takes a very high value man (or perceived as high e.g. husband) confiding privately with an established partner for a woman to sympathise, or a very liberal woman (not always a feminist).
Spoiler
The answer to your comment to iAmanze explains the problems about equality. It's not women's right to equality which is being challenged. As I say here, 'women want to lead alongside men, feminism is not a call for men to abandon their post'. When combined with hypergamy and a massive disparity between an attractive man and the disenfranchised rabble of men being churned out by the current situation, you get women's expectations in men constantly increasing.
Redpill 101 is that gender roles may be a social construct but sexuality is biological. If we deny this then we have to also say that people 'choose' to be gay, or trans, etc. We all have a part of the brain that is incredibly primitive, hypersensitive to threats, and emotional, some of us control it better than others. There is some (controversial) evidence to say that women's brains are a larger portion this ancient aspect as an evolutionary adaptation than men's. There is evidence all around us that neither gender has full mastery of it and it is best demonstrated in a romantic/sexual relationship. As such we are all to some extent, slaves (especially in relationships) to our emotions and libido and need to work around this. One could say that the pater familias acknowledged this
It is difficult to say because it's not as simple as a misogynist statement such as 'women are over emotional'. Nonetheless they to this day have various instinctive imperatives which dominate at least part of their reasoning in an reship
Original post by e aí rapaz
You guys worry too much about this ****. (You especially Riku but since you're suffering from mental health issues you at least have a vague excuse for your views)
I'm a confident outgoing guy, I'm a leader. But if my partner wanted to be "the head" of the house, she could be. Why do I give a ****?
Anyway we don't have a "head" of our household, since it's a house, not a corporation. Jeez
I'm a confident outgoing guy, I'm a leader. But if my partner wanted to be "the head" of the house, she could be. Why do I give a ****?
Anyway we don't have a "head" of our household, since it's a house, not a corporation. Jeez
yeah but does anyone else think that my mental health would improve greatly if I got over this? [srs]
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
yeah but does anyone else think that my mental health would improve greatly if I got over this? [srs]
I think a good start would be refraining from reading redpill and femdomme/male humiliation erotica.
Original post by SnooFnoo
I think a good start would be refraining from reading redpill and femdomme/male humiliation erotica.
you read my other thread?
Also waiting for earlier comment response from you
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
Are you sure? Can you elaborate? Are you male or female, straight or LGBT?
My sexual orientation and gender are irrelevant.
You see yourself as inferior but instead of accepting the way you perceive yourself, you blame everyone else. Eg women only want a certain kind of man, men like foo.mo3 are more worthy of female attention as they hold a higher value.
You cannot generalise an entire population of people (eg females) because of your perceptions of yourself.
No I did not read your other thread.
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
Perhaps not for all, but I believe that with the rise of strong women in positions of power and the professional sphere via feminism, men are in decline or are perceived as in decline. It is…murky territory, but
as my quote above
as my quote above
What concerns me about that statement is that it pushes this idea that society should be organised around increasing the sexual chances of a particular group of men, and reducing the degree to which women feel they have choices.
It's concerning in that you appear to resent the welfare state because it means women don't feel trapped in relationships they otherwise would. And it concerns me because most men find meaningful, satisfying relationships in our current societal model.
I encounter a fair few guys on the internet who seem to bemoan modernity and womens' rights because of their perception that it has reduced their (these men) access to sex. There is something a bit creepy about it. It is also my experience that sometimes the people who bemoan that women are not slutty enough with them tend to also be quite harsh and judgmental about womens' sexuality in general.
It's also my experience that these men after suffer from particular flaws that are ones that can be remedied by effort and work. For example, excess weight, non-psychopathological social ineptitude (by that, I don't mean people who have a genuine and disabling mental health issue, but simply guys who are shy and don't seem willing to make an effort to put themselves in those kinds of situations to get more practice), or unpleasant personalities.
My view is that if these guys were in normal relationships with women they would not be resorting to these kind of regressive views
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
you see, this is where the problem lies. You yourself hate weakness and being 'pathetic' in a man, i.e. men of perceived considerably lower value. Now let's tone this down a notch so it is just that you…don't quite respect him the way you thought you would and can't quite pinpoint why?…and now you feel like you're settling. Time to move on? Eyes wandering? Hypergamy 101. It's not being a bitch it's just…chemistry. Biology. :/
I am willing to bet that you feel that lots of men including a few you have encountered fail to live up to the role of 'real man' etc. etc. once again the emasculation of man in the first world, see my response on the other thread.
FYI hetero men are innately polygamous so I'm not just bashing women here, we have also had to train ourselves to seek and maintain monogamy (hence the contempt for porn addicts for example). It's just a disadvantage that polygamy is considered fairly standard knowledge whereas hypergamy is one of those things you learn through experience.
I am willing to bet that you feel that lots of men including a few you have encountered fail to live up to the role of 'real man' etc. etc. once again the emasculation of man in the first world, see my response on the other thread.
FYI hetero men are innately polygamous so I'm not just bashing women here, we have also had to train ourselves to seek and maintain monogamy (hence the contempt for porn addicts for example). It's just a disadvantage that polygamy is considered fairly standard knowledge whereas hypergamy is one of those things you learn through experience.
I would find a man pathetic if he felt the constant need to assert his dominance all the time just to ensure I respect him. If its a decent relationship, mutual respect will come naturally and neither party will feel the need the be leader in the relationship. A 'real' man would have confidence in his masculinity already. He wouldn't need to be a leader in a relationship in order to not feel emasculated.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
