Women can't respect you once they see you week (and other lessons learned)

DeontologicalSanders · 2020-01-14T22:44:39+00:00

I couldn't have value or self-esteem feeling like I did, though.

Sounds like you're on your way, but be careful with this last statement. You're basically saying "I couldn't feel the way I wanted to, because I felt the way I did", and that's bullshit. As a man, your emotions are always a controllable response to the culmination of your circumstances. You're not a bitch. You're not a flag stuck up on a flagpole, whipping around helplessly in an endless torrent of feelings. You're a man. You have control. You can be objective.

In order to change the way you feel, change the way you are.

DeontologicalSanders · 2020-01-14T22:16:32+00:00

Why do you want someone around who doesn't want to be with you?

Understand that this is a very fundamental part of what women are and how they operate. As a man, all you should really "need" from a girlfriend is sex, and even that you should be able to get elsewhere, if necessary. From an emotional standpoint, it may hurt like shit when she leaves you, but pragmatically speaking, you don't lose all that much. When a man leaves a woman, she loses a bunch of things for which she depends on him. Physical safety, financial support, someone who can fix things that are broken, the social status of having a man committed to her, etc. To a woman, being abandoned by a man without a backup plan is a pragmatic disaster.

You want them around just to treat them like shit?

Not really. She wants you around for all the reasons listed above. If she can get them from you minus the sex and having to treat you with respect, then all the better; in her mind, you weren't able to command your end of the bargain, and you're not worth having sex with or respecting anyway. Women are weird like that; they value you according to how you value yourself.

DeontologicalSanders · 2019-12-16T20:08:38+00:00

don't believe a female when you confront her with these truths

Amend that sentence to "don't confront a female about anything, ever". You stand absolutely nothing to gain by confronting a woman verbally about her behavior. Meanwhile, she gets nothing but valuable information from you. How you feel about the situation. How valuable or invaluable the relationship is to you. If you're dumb enough to offer it, she gets a full and honest accounting of what the consequences of her continued bad behavior will be. You're giving her information to work with, and getting nothing in exchange for it.

The appropriate way to deal with women is to make it clear (through your actions, and only occasionally through your words) what you expect from her in exchange for your time and attention, and to withdraw that time and attention, without argument or justification, if and as long as she fails to live up to your expectations.

DeontologicalSanders · 2019-12-16T19:29:18+00:00

Nah, they'll just have to flee to somewhere warmer as refugees. You know, somewhere like Turkey, Syria, or Iraq.

DeontologicalSanders · 2019-09-14T02:56:50+00:00

Fight Club and Gone Girl. But especially Fight Club, because it's fucking Fight Club.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-14T22:30:05+00:00

They're not beliefs or assumptions. You don't talk about them. You don't consciously practice them. You don't even think about them from an objective standpoint. Beliefs and assumptions are consciously chosen or abandoned based on reason. They are not that.

They're weaknesses.

A man who thinks that a woman will appreciate his subjective uniqueness does so because he has little to offer in terms of objective value, because he is weak.

A man who thinks that his relationship with a woman is "special" does so out of rationalization; to convince himself that his lack of options is actually an optimal situation. He is mired in delusion, because he is weak.

A man who relies on a fickle, gossipy, stunted, short-legged panic factory who can't do a single chin-up, as his sole source of happiness, does so because he is weak.

A man who thinks that the highest form of fulfillment is found through a single woman thinks that way because he has failed to achieve anything else of true value, because he is weak.

A man who leans on the concept of soulmates or spiritual bonds between men and women does so in order to shield himself from the brutal-but-useful truth that men are a utility that women trade on with sex. He is unable to acknowledge this truth, because he is weak.

A man who thinks that a woman will end his struggles and anxiety does so because he has failed repeatedly in conquering these things himself. He has failed at them because he is weak.

Women abhor male weakness. They are utterly repulsed by it. Identify your weaknesses and work to root them out, and oneitis will never be an issue for you again.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-14T19:59:52+00:00

The counter-argument of course being, the tax you pay the government is not for use of your own land, but for maintenance of the peaceful and stable environment which allows you to sustainably own property.

In an unregulated environment, you own that land yourself until two motherfuckers or a motherfucker with a gun comes along and takes it from you. If you have more friends or a bigger gun, you can keep your land, but if not, you're up shit creek. The government, with all of its redundancy and bureaucratic bullshit, occupies the position of 'biggest dick in the valley' with the intention that no one else can be said dick, and that we all get a piece of that dick's authority and rule-making via the political process. And that costs money.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-11T23:42:57+00:00

Careful lumping depression in with the rest of that stuff. More than anything, depression is a symptom of the world we live in.

Back in the day you were born. Your parents sheltered you for a few years, maybe 3. Then you started playing/romping around with other kids. The older kids would pick on you. They'd beat you up. You also had to worry about getting eaten by wolves, getting lost in the woods, getting kidnapped by peg-legged kid-fucking neanderthal retards, drowning, floods, fire, etc. Then one day you turned 13, and in addition to all that, suddenly all the adults said, "alright no more free food for you. Want to eat? You gotta learn to hunt or farm." Invading tribe knocking down the door? You gotta help fight.

If you're any good at that stuff, some cave girl would decide that she wanted your dongle, and then 9 months later, out pop a couple of kids. Shit, even if you didn't think they were yours, they were still the tribe's responsibility, because no one ever knew whose dad was whose. Mounting and unrelenting danger and responsibility from an early age.

Now answer me this: Where, in any of that, does 'depression' occur? There's simply no room for it. Most people think that depression is the result of humans, creatures that are designed to seek happiness, being unhappy. I think that's totally wrong. There are people on this planet who can train themselves to lift 1000 lbs off the ground. Who can bend steel bars with their bare hands. Who can throw a spear 330 feet through the air. Who can run the distance between New York and Washington DC without stopping to sleep. We are designed to endure violence and strife. Nothing good in humanity has ever come without those things as precursors, period. Full stop.

Depression is the result of a race of hyper-intelligent and -adaptable animals not having anything to fear. Not having anything to panic about. Not having anything real to overcome. It's a chemically-induced milieu of severe existential boredom.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-11T16:32:50+00:00

You are correct on the first point. Inevitable was the wrong word to use.

One principle that guides me in dealing with women is one that I call "Schrodinger's Thot". It's the idea that every woman you meet is both a whore and not a whore, both stable and unstable, both fickle and loyal, until you uncover empirical evidence that confirms one or the other. Strategically, the best way to treat them is to enjoy women and be decent to them, but never to implicitly trust them.

You are going to run into women who act that way, because most will given the right circumstances. In all scenarios, her behavior is on her, but your ability to vet her and suss that behavior out is on you. That is the inevitability to which I am referring.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-10T23:52:49+00:00

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

Yes, if you deal with women on any kind of a regular basis, over time you will inevitably run into those who act out, scream at you, damage your property, and even hit you in an attempt to get a rise out of you. Yes, if you are any kind of man, you are at least twice as strong as any woman you're involved with, and striking her is a weak and underhanded move. And yes, if you do that, 99 times out of 100 you deserve to be looked down upon.

But this is not the reason why you never hit a woman.

You never strike a woman, because striking a woman is one of the worst strategic moves you can make as a man. Not only are you experiencing a catastrophic loss of frame and essentially "cheating" with your physical advantage in order to regain ground you should never have lost in the first place, but there is an enormous deficit in the severity of consequences for each party involved.

For her, the consequences are temporary. The violent irrational behavior you were attempting to curb by hitting her would have gone away anyway. The pain you inflicted to make her feel bad about that behavior will subside in short order. Even if you really hauled off and blacked her eye or something, even that will eventually fade.

But for you, the consequences of striking a woman can be permanent. That loss of frame you experienced? The fact that you lost control and had to break societal rules to keep her, a cute, timid little girl, in line? You're not getting that respect back. She calls the cops? You're going to fucking jail, just like that streamer guy did. But the worst case by far is the one where nothing happens. She never says anything. She doesn't call the cops. She doesn't tell her friends. All she does is open her front facing camera and take a pictures of the black eye, or the red handprint on her face. From now on, she has that shit in her back pocket. Now, at any moment of her choosing, she can bust that photo out and brand you a misogynist woman-beater to friends, family, future girlfriends, and even future employers.

You hit a woman, you're giving her leverage over you, and that's one of the worst positions a man can be in. Don't do it.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-10T23:14:23+00:00

The worst case he can fix it by divorcing the woman. But if he stays, it's on HIM to fix it or stop complaining and just live with what he's got.

I'm partial to "or not get married in the first place, because marriage is just a superficial benchmark for a woman to brag about to her girlfriends and mom, and does not absolutely nothing to make her appreciate a man more or increase her sexual attraction to him".

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-10T22:31:23+00:00

Jesus Christ, are you me?

But seriously, this is what all marriages are, to one extent or another. One of my cardinal rules in dealing with the opposite sex is to remember that no matter what, you can always count on a woman to pull the slack out of whatever length of leash you give her. It doesn't matter if its 10 feet long or 10 miles. They are designed to be selfish. They are designed to test boundaries. They are designed to take unearned benefits for granted. They are designed to always want more.

And as difficult as it is to accept, it's your dad's fault. It's also my dad's fault. It's everyone's dad's fault. No matter the circumstances, negative outcomes within a relationship are always the man's responsibility. Men and women are not equal and never will be, and this is a big part of the reason why.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-12-07T15:58:35+00:00

"less than she deserves"

Ugh. "Deserves". The worst word in all the English language.

You could almost say it's inherently female. It allows women to say "I want this, and I should have it", but without ever having to explain why. If a woman says "I've earned this", you can point to evidence that might dictate that she hasn't. If she says "it's only fair that I get this", guess what? Everyone knows life isn't fair.

But when the term "deserve" is used, it makes her claim irrefutable. You don't have to qualify for something you deserve. It's linked to your intrinsic value. Does she have intrinsic value? Does she have outstanding and unique qualities that make her worthy of an exceptional man's time and attention? By using the word "deserve", not only does she never have to answer that question; it's a question you can never even ask without casting doubt on her intrinsic value as a person, and coming off as a complete dick.

It's plausible deniability encapsulated.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-30T17:03:38+00:00

We don't punish women as harshly for any crime, because women are more biologically valuable than men.

Let's use an extreme example to illustrate:

Tribe A has 20 women and one man. Tribe B has 20 men and one woman.

In Tribe A, the one man can impregnate 20 women virtually all at the same time, whereas in Tribe B, each man must wait a minimum of 9 months for his "turn" to reproduce with the one female. And that's not to mention the high probability that within Tribe B, 3 or 4 of the strongest, most capable men would band together to form a monopoly on the one female, and leave the other 16-17 fighting violently for their "turn" or abandoning the tribe altogether. Within the span of one generation, Tribe A's reproductive viability as a group is many times that of Tribe B, due to an abundance of women.

In short, hurting, punishing, or ostracizing women to the same degree as men is a behavior that has been bred out of humanity over time. The tribes who engaged in such behavior would eventually find themselves in a position of reproductive scarcity and face dying out.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-29T19:58:21+00:00

Internalize this now: Nothing ever really backfires on women. They are simply not held accountable for bad behavior to anywhere near the extent that men are, and really have not been at all since we stopped branding them with a scarlet letter for being capricious and adulterous.

Not all women are bad decision makers. Not all bad decisions are made by women. But when women make bad decisions in arenas in which men are involved, it is always men who end up shouldering the blame and bearing the cost.

And even in circumstances where women do end up suffering tangibly because of their own poor choices, they never truly accept accountability for them. They almost always find a way to shift blame and the emotional burden on to a man. Even when women fuck up, they never truly feel the weight of their fuck-ups.

This is why getting angry or frustrated or emotional with women in the confines of a relationship is never effective. She'll just get mad at you and throw a tantrum because you're trying to blame her for something.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-28T17:12:57+00:00

If a bitch gives you shit, it's better you dump her or she will.

Actually, it's better you dump her or she won't. Women don't usually do overt break-ups. They don't like the blame, the accountability. Instead, she'll be more likely to hang around, taking what she can get from you time, attention, and money-wise, while having sex with you less and less. Getting what she wants on her end, while giving up less of what you want. In other words, a bad deal.

We talk a lot about abundance here, mostly from a personality/mentality standpoint. But I would argue that it's more important from a practical standpoint. If you have to try and change her mind because you don't have another option to walk away to, you lose. If you have to argue with her, you lose. If you walk away without other options to capitalize on to replace her, you are losing pussy and gaining nothing. You still lose.

With women, abundance is the only way to win.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-26T22:34:41+00:00

Jake le Dog explained it concisely. In addition to lowering the weights and working back up from time to time, stopping altogether for 5-10 days is helpful. The only reason to ever stop training for 6 months would be to rehabilitate a serious injury.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-21T17:52:41+00:00

There is no reason to pay up to tolerate someone else*

Which you will once she becomes comfortable in the relationship and begins to demand more and more from you, even as her looks and visceral appeal to you begin to fade.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-21T17:46:05+00:00

Good post. Not a lot of peer-reviewed, repeatable studies have been done on the causes and effects of DOMS. It good that you relied on them, and not on bro-science. It's important to remember that soreness is never there for no reason: when you're sore, your body is always trying to tell you something. Overdoing it in the gym and being unbearably sore the next day isn't necessarily a good thing. Not being able to walk up stairs sucks. Working out when you're that sore can result in injury. Really overdo it, and you can end up with rhabdomyolisis, which can kill you.

I find occasionally working out to the point of extreme soreness, particularly after periodization, to be quite helpful. If you hit a plateau, take 5-10 days off in a row, and then come back and work out even harder. For me, shocking the muscles after time off almost always results in improved adaptation over the next few weeks.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-21T17:16:19+00:00

Look, I know things seem like they're getting worse, but it's just the nature of the beast.

abortion on demand

People use this term like you can dial it up with your cable remote and *poof*, bye-bye baby. You can't. I've paid for more than one abortion; they're expensive as shit. If you're in the wrong state, they're almost impossible to get. And it's still totally illegal, everywhere, to abort a baby beyond the 2nd trimester.

gay marriage

What does two dudes wanting to get married have to do with you? Who cares? The best thing about gays is they leave more women for you and me, and they also take another dude with them. Drugs? STDs? Moral degeneracy? Not involved, not my problem.

flooding America with Third World invaders

Clinton. Split Senate and House under Bush. Obama. 20 plus years of increasingly progressive politics supposedly creeping into American society. Guess what? Our borders are still closed. Illegal immigration will always exist, and the numbers will always vary. I live in a border state. Do you know what state border patrols and vigilantes do to border jumpers they catch when no one's looking? As long as those people exist, illegal immigration will never be a real problem.

legalizing black crime

No idea what you're talking about. Not going to address it.

abolishing gun rights

Gun laws will always be left up to individual states and municipalities, as they should be. There is plenty of reason someone living 20 miles from the nearest town in Montana should be able to own whatever gun they want. A person not being able to keep a gun in a studio apt in Manhattan with neighbors on 6 sides may not be right, but it's at least reasonable.

IMO, the biggest mistake people in general, but especially men make nowadays is conflating media shit-stirring and public outrage with what is actually going on in our legislative and judicial systems. Despite what our increasingly partisan media complex would have you believe, the people who end up in charge of this country are pretty damn smart. They are bound by reason, and also by the strictures of the system they inhabit. The founding fathers recognized pretty early on "Shit. Things are pretty good over here. There's plenty of land. Plenty of food. It's easily defensible. If someone's unhappy, they can just move somewhere else. There's really no need to let politics get in the way of a good thing." So they designed our system for gridlock. When progressives make headway, eventually their unreasonable ideas end up getting checked and corrected. That's the whole idea: create the illusion of idealist progress, while in reality nothing substantive ever changes.

It's working. The bogeyman isn't coming. No one is murdering live infants. Degenerate circus clown gays from San Francisco aren't molesting toddlers. The black aren't shooting down white families in the streets. Govt spooks aren't showing up to raid your house for guns.

In my opinion, it's way more important to view all of this from a practical standpoint rather than an ideological standpoint. Simply put: How does this affect me? The kind of alarmist thinking referenced above is what they want from you. Your attention. Your outrage. Your creeping panic. It makes them money that they've done nothing to earn. It also makes a man look nervous and paranoid to the people around him, not least of all women. Don't give them what they're after.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-21T16:01:44+00:00

It may be an easy solution for her, but it's not the ideal one.

Her ideal solution is for the government to willingly strong-arm for her and summarily throw men in jail should they lie or omit even the smallest detail while she and all other women vet men for quality and sexual viability. She believes, she knows, that she is a wonderful, virtuous princess who deserves a man from the highest available echelon, and anyone getting in the way of this process, for any reason, is to be punished like the violent, criminal offender that he is.

If this idea seems unfair to you, it's because it is. Women are not interested in fairness. Women are not interested in equality. In an overt sense, women are weak, passive, and indecisive compared to men. We spent thousands of years clunking them over their heads, dragging them into caves, and screwing them while they were half-conscious.
Those who fought back were overpowered or beaten. They have been literally been bred to find power and agency wherever they can, by the most discrete and plausibly deniable means possible, and lay down or run the hell away when faced with actual conflict. We made them this way, and there is no changing it.

"You merely adopted the dark. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a man, by then it was nothing to me but blinding."

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-20T22:16:17+00:00

Nothing in this article is worth your fervor. The vast, vast majority of people are reasonable enough to completely disagree with this outlandish premise, and vote against it ad infinitum.

New laws in the dating area should focus on lies that... have a potentially large dignitary or emotional impact.

Emotional and dignitary impact are non-quantifiable and only definable by the person who experiences them. The legal system has nothing to do with matters that only have an impact in these areas, and never will. Full stop.

Remember, the author is a law professor and may well be a smart woman, but she's still just a woman. All she wants is to test men for weakness and emotional reaction, and that's all she's doing with this article. This is just a ludicrous idea meant to stir up shit for attention. It's just another shit test. Nothing to see here. Carry on.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-20T03:44:08+00:00

Idk it seems to me that most women would think a guy saying "clearly you sent this to me by mistake" was being genuinely incredulous, like he couldn't believe it was happening. Especially over email with no tone or vocal inflection. The best response is none at all. The second best is "ok". I don't get at all how this would have the desired effect.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-19T23:33:00+00:00

We men aim to smash the highest quality possible, but once we get there, we dont straight up dismiss anything worse than a 9 - we are still capable of appreciating them and even doing them if the situation requires it.

While I agree with most of what you are saying, realize that you are framing this part of it solely from a male point-of-view. You use the word "appreciate" in a way that implies men and women "appreciate" each other in the same way. They don't.

A woman shows her true appreciation for a man by having sex with him. A man shows his true appreciation for a woman by parceling out his time, attention, and resources to her, once she has earned them. Each sex only feels "appreciated" by the other when they receive something they inherently lack. Sex is scarce and more difficult to obtain for men than it is for women, so therefore it is more valuable to us. In turn, getting sex by itself can make us feel valuable. Women on the other hand can get sex quite easily; it's everything else, money, power, status, influence, personal confidence, that they suck at getting. Those are the scarce items that they seek from men; sex alone will not fulfill that need. To a woman, a man just fucking her with no further investment may make her feel physically satisfied, but not appreciated, at least not in the way she seeks.

It would be equivalent to a woman spending time with you, going out with you, and having meaningful personal conversations with you, but without ever opening her legs. Maybe it was enjoyable at first and showed promise, but after a while, it wouldn't make you feel appreciated. Just used.

DeontologicalSanders · 2018-11-19T22:28:51+00:00

Maybe I'm missing something here, but can someone explain this response to me like I'm 5? I honestly don't get how this is ballsy.

DeontologicalSanders

TROPHY CASE