Inspired by: Why do some women “get it” quicker than men? by Catreece Macleod
And: Race Is a Social Construct, So I’m a Poor Black Orphan by Jim Goad
Take a good look at my photo:
It is amazing what modern surgical techniques and behavioral conditioning can do these days.
In person I am even more convincing. I can even summon up a post-menopausal “hot flash”. I even have cellulite, body dimorphism, and guilt for my privilege. I am a very convincing WASP female. Of course, my sheer size, muscularity, bone structure, big butt, and head for STEM give away my true origins.
OK. I lied.
However, I do not today have a nice, neat description of my upbringing, where I am from, and which demographic boxes to check even if I have two X chromosomes (and no Y). Since I attended nine different school systems as a child and we moved every two to three years, I don’t have a particular “culture” to draw on albeit it would seem that the majority of my childhood cultural influences were Ashkenazi or African American. Meanwhile, I was never allowed to forget that I was an “other” even in my own biological family, while being subjected to various physical, sexual, and psychological abuses mostly from my female peers but also from family members. Over time, I found that I felt “safer” in the company of men who were not family members doing whatever it was that they were doing. I still feel that way.
Once upon a time, in my thirties, I seriously considered a sex change, from female to male. I discussed this possibility with a therapist who was friendly to the concept (not so difficult to do in Southern California). I think that we all have “the right” to capitalize on our strengths and minimize our weaknesses and since my background and conditioning is so far out of all norms I didn’t do so well in the feminine/feminist swamp. Feminists and Social Marxists insist that “woman are all the same” barring obvious class-differences (which are constantly rubbed in one’s face but we’re not supposed to notice) and other power-plays. Since I am obviously not like other women in so many obvious ways, I was ordered to keep my mouth shut and otherwise be excluded from any possibility of leadership. However, given my history and particular childhood traumas, the notion that I would submit to female social leadership was out of the question.
Here is what the feminist and feminine social order have told me about myself:
- I am too tall/large/muscular.
- I am too physically strong.
- I am too capable of shouldering risk.
- I am too mathematically and logically inclined.
- I am not afraid of large men of different races.
- I don’t care about fashion and fingernails.
- I don’t have a desire to reproduce and otherwise perpetuate the pathology of my family tree.
- I don’t think children are superior to adult men, morally, psychologically, socially, creatively, artistically, or any other way.
Furthermore, I don’t think that femininity is superior to masculinity but rather they both have value on different scales and at different times. Nowadays, however, since femininity is in abundance and masculinity is under siege by pure economic cause and effect, masculinity is today more valuable on all socioeconomic levels. This phenomenon is known as “supply and demand.”
However, at the time—in my thirties—I believed that since I had been so unsuccessful in achieving the traditional feminine ideal of matrimony in terms of The American Dream and yet I was successful as a technical writer in the computer software, hardware, and finance industries (at the time, technical writing was still largely male-dominated and even as that changed, the industries in which I worked were still largely male-dominated), I thought that I would have a better shot at “social success” as a man. After all, I had an advantage over most men in that I knew what women wanted. I was confident that I could find myself an attractive, intelligent woman who would look to me as a leader and provider and who I could satisfy sexually—even if my own sexuality would unlikely be satisfied that way.
Sacrifices might be necessary, I thought. Since my sexuality hadn’t yet led me toward happiness despite my considerable record in terms of variety and sheer quantity of partners, I thought I should attempt to place it in subordination to other forms of satisfaction as a measure of self control and character.
My therapist instructed me to start making lists of the pros and cons of being a man as a way of deciding whether I wanted to start “living as a man”, which would, professionally, have meant contacting all of my professional references in order to inform them of my new identity. After “living as a man” for a year, I would more likely be able to find a surgeon willing to assist me in the final transition.
I believe that my lists looked something like this:
Pros:
- I know how to lead a woman on the dance floor.
- I am tall, strong, and intelligent.
- I have a broad-shouldered, strong presence.
- I am good with service-people, arrangements, business meetings, and systems.
- I will make an excellent Product Manager/Systems Analyst as the Technical Writing field becomes more “feminized”.
- I will be socially in-demand by hostesses as “an extra man”.
- I know how to compliment a lady.
- I will be handsome.
- I enjoy the company of men in professional settings.
- I enjoy political debates.
- I enjoy hunting and am good with firearms.
- I enjoy weightlifting and the atmosphere of a man’s gym.
- I enjoy cigar clubs.
- I prefer not to socialize in the kitchen with a whole bunch of hens more than necessary however, I do enjoy helping open jars, reaching things on the high shelf, carving meat, and opening wine and champagne bottles.
- My breasts are so small I won’t miss them even though they are sort of “perfect”.
- My feet are men’s size 8.5 regular—really easy to find shoes.
- I’ll be able to wear men’s clothes “off the rack”. That will be a nice change.
Cons:
- I’m not interested in discussing spectator sports.
- I’m not good at fistfights but I’m likely to get myself in hot water given my strong opinions on everything so I had better learn— testosterone shots might help there.
- It’s going to take some doing to disguise my broad hips and big butt.
- I’ll never again be swept off my feet, grabbed by the hair, a strong arm slipped around my waist, and sexually-dominated by the smell of testosterone. Oh I am going to miss that. Can I do this? Can I let that dream go?
OK, I thought. I’m going to have to write a personal ad one last time to see if there is a man for me out there somewhere. In those days, “personal ads” were still being printed in the back pages of tabloid newspapers.
Here is how that ad went:
Statuesque blonde F, hourglass figure, 36, seeks dominant, world citizen M. You be short, tall, aubergine or chartreuse but don’t be Western religious, bigoted, or closed-minded.
In less than six months I was engaged to a handsome, retired (and disgraced) Chinese American orthopedic surgeon with a brilliant plan. He was to brainwash, gaslight, torment, expatriate, kidnap, and rob me of my life savings.
I escaped. Soon thereafter, I met the most amazing man who was, oddly enough in terms of my own experiences, genetically similar to me and at least geographically similar to one set of my grandparents. He is also 1/4 Navajo which I believe has made all the difference.
He made me—for the first time—glad and proud to be female to the point of actually learning a few “feminine skills” for the purpose of enhancing his life. In return, I try to be the best for him that I can be. We have defined our relationship for ourselves and it would appear to be an unusual dynamic without the possibility of marriage or monogamy with no social-stamp-of-approval of any kind. Whereas I am an ardent anti-feminist, his attitude toward feminism is detached indifference although he supports my exploration of all subjects that interest me. Women (including transwomen) frankly throw themselves at him and he graciously entertains them. As for me, I still haven’t figured out who I am except in relationship to him and for now that is all that I need to be.
I love him. He loves me. That’s all that matters. Nothing and nobody can change that. Not even death.
caprizchka 
Well written and strangely off-center, actually quite moving. This will not mean much coming from a stranger, but you have my sympathetic thoughts regarding your abuse and previous experiences of suffering.
Maybe I’m just an old-fashioned guy but I always thought that teaching a woman “feminine skills” was the kind of thing that was its own reward for a guy, not something for which he got a return favor. But hell, don’t listen to me. What do I know? You clearly know your own mind. And you have more emotional strength than most men.
Just one thing, dear. That cigar in your photo does nothing to remind me of the Freudian observation, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” But tell me it’s a Cuban and I’ll be satisfied that someone, somewhere, is having a good time.
And avoid the black dog, kid.
Thank you so much for your comment.
For what it is worth, I had to teach myself “feminine skills” because I wanted to. We all personify reactions to the desires of our loved ones even if to hate and to love are not always distinct. In my case, I prefer to be the one doing the reacting more than the directing when it comes to him–and most men who I have loved. He needed to be fed and cared for, and I needed to and need to do that. It isn’t crystal clear what the sequence of events were but I believe that my action and his were temporaneous.
As for being “old-fashioned”, well, I love old things; however, the exact point of time that starts “old-fashioned” appears to be highly subjective. I feel sometimes that I was born too late and am otherwise out of synch with time.
I love listening even if the best lesson is usually the lesson without words.
The cigar was hand-rolled in New Jersey by an outfit called, Cortez Handmade Cigars. It was a gift and was exquisite. I love receiving fine cigars as gifts even if sometimes the giver imagines something other than what I imagine when I smoke it. It is a riddle, by the way, and there is more than one answer to it.
Reminds me of this story: http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/grouchocigar.asp
Thank you for clarifying “black dog”. I Google sayings that I don’t understand but it would seem that Google is not always correct. Language is a very interesting thing as it often reveals so much about a person but only if the message is received.
Thank you so much for calling me, “kid”. I would love one day to smoke a cigar with you even if it is a virtual meeting or just in the heart.
It occurs to me that my last sentence could be interpreted as a cryptic reference to a racist attitude. The “black dog” was the simply the way Winston Churchill referred to depression, that’s all.
Too bad that cigars are a sensual and not an emotional pleasure. Otherwise we could have that heartfelt cigar meeting. But just exchanging information about them is enough for me to make friends. I enjoy a range of them, from Dominican to Puerto Rican, Jamaican, maduros and cafe wrappers. Try a Casa Blanca some time. You’ll thank me. I live in the worldwide hub of cigar traffic so I get to try all manner of exotic handiwork whenever the mood strikes.
A riddle? I’ll have to reread the post to locate it.
And yes, you really are a kid. When I was your age I believe I was still recovering from a dissolute and misspent youth. Cigars were not my only vice, though possibly the least expensive.
Hmmm. “Only if the message is received”? That sentence seems to have much more to it than its surface meaning. Are we talking about words unspoken between family members? Yes, it happened to me for a while. But my family life was much healthier than the one you have described. I am not prying. Some pain need never be disclosed.
If you are a “reactor” rather than an “initiator” then you seem decidedly female to me. That is the one aspect of heterosexuality that is so universal that I wonder why anyone ever bothers to study the phenomenon. And don’t forget that some guys have the same ruminations about gender that you have, mirror-imaged. I had a friend barge into my dorm room when I was a college freshman and announce that if he were a girl he would be an absolute slut. We both had a good, long laugh.
If those male cigar-providers suggest something impertinent, just them that you appreciate the gift but they shouldn’t get any ideas, not even symbolically. Most guys these days are pretty well behaved. They’ll take the hint. Did you know that a lot of women enjoy good cigars now? Sharon Stone even made the cover of Cigar Afficianado(sp?) magazine?
You now have my permission to return to your private life. It sounds like a happy one. Enjoy it. Everyone needs to stop and smell the flowers.
W
You live in the worldwide hub of cigar traffic? Amsterdam? Costa Rica? Aruba? Well gee. What can I do to earn your favor? 😉
I have to admit that I enjoy them all. I’m not a snob about it although do appreciate quality. Here’s a story you might like: https://caprizchka.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/the-endangered-arts-of-smoking-and-conversation-in-southern-california/
The riddle is my photo. It is a visual riddle. The answer is in my *other* forum. However, I believe that you already know the answer.
I effectively started my adulthood 40 years ago. I was a teenaged runaway. I’ll dive into any exploit bragging contest. 🙂 I usually win.
“only if the message is received” refers to the limits of language–especially English. I thought I spoke English until I went to India and Hong Kong. Even in the U.S., language and rhetoric is not universal. By the way, there are not a whole lot of secrets in my blog. If you want to know more, you will. If you’d like a more private conversation that can also be arranged such as through my *other* forum which you shouldn’t have too much trouble figuring out if you’re genuinely curious.
Regarding, “If you are a “reactor” rather than an “initiator” then you seem decidedly female to me.” Actually, I believe that is a stereotype that after a century of Behaviorism no longer universally applies (which is terribly ironic and sad really however probably inevitable in a state of overpopulation respective to resources and opportunity).
Today it would seem that at least in the “alt” community, submissive men are the majority. Feminism taught them that all they have to do is “behave” and finally women will start taking the sexual initiative with them. It was a lie. Meanwhile, Dominant women are far more likely than submissive ones to get on a soapbox because they are less likely to get torn apart by the feminist media. Of course, many of such women have a secret life. Meanwhile, I get tons of hate mail for daring to be myself–mostly on my *other* forum.
“I had a friend barge into my dorm room when I was a college freshman and announce that if he were a girl he would be an absolute slut.”
LOL. I am the “woman” that a whole lot of MtFs want to be. However, I don’t actually recommend it even if–finally–I am in a relationship that many people admire. Hence, the genesis of my book for which this blog is named.
“If those male cigar-providers suggest something impertinent, just them that you appreciate the gift but they shouldn’t get any ideas, not even symbolically.”
What fun would that be?
Thank you for the “permission.” Speaking of words, that one just happens to provoke a certain Pavlovian response which I shall leave to your imagination.
I think you are wrong that there is femininity in abundance and masculinity is in decline. Both are in decline actually. It seems that modernism pushes for androgyny rather than for sexual dimorphism. Women for example are encouraged to be masculine and men to be feminine.
I think I see your point however allow me to rebut. In my view, the traditional “value” of femininity has largely been reduced to baby-making and beauty. Put a machine gun in her hand and induce her to commit violence and she thinks that she is “masculine”. I’ve known a few FtM’s and perhaps they are on the rise; however, in my experience which has my own cognitive dissonance, time, place, etc. there are more MtF’s than *effective* FtM’s who don’t expect a gold star for effort. However, if you can demonstrate an elevated level of testosterone in the water supply, I might change my tune.
Gentleness ,quietness and kindness are all likewise traits of femininity. The fact that the modern conception is reduced to beauty and babymaking demonstrates my point. This machinegun girl who thinks she is masculine is merely apeing masculinity.
If a man were to act like she does he be shortly on a trip to the hospital or the morgue.
Testosterone in abundance is a characteristic of the hunter. He is patient, watchful, and loaded with serenity and quietude right up until the prey takes the bait. Just then, like lightning he moves, quickly, assuredly, with perfect grace.
He returns home with a smile and gratitude, admiration, and appreciation in all its forms awaits. He puts down his catch and gently and kindly touches his infant, and then he grabs his woman and drags her into the cave. Poor dear.
Hysteria and lack of self control on the other hand is evidence of a lack of testosterone, along with of course, arrested character development.
I rest my case.
Hello caprizchka. That’s quite a story; you’ve led an interesting life. I find that I sympathize with your sense that masculinity is undervalued, and with your evident difficulty in just being yourself. But your claims about testosterone make me think you’re resting your case prematurely.
From:
“Personality and testosterone in men from a high-fertility population,” by Alvergnea, Jokelac,
Fauried, and Lummaaa (2010):
“At a proximate level, individual differences in extraversion are likely to be mediated through testosterone, a strong hormonal correlate of men’s reproductive effort… extraversion, a personality dimension predicting men’s mating behavior in this population, is associated with inter-individual differences in testosterone profiles, with men in the top quartile of extraversion distribution having 29% higher testosterone levels.”
From “Neural Mechanisms of the Testosterone–Aggression Relation: The Role of Orbitofrontal Cortex,” by Pranjal H. Mehta and Jennifer Beer (2010):
“[F]indings suggest that testosterone increases the propensity toward aggression because of reduced activation of the neural circuitry of impulse control and self-regulation.”
From “Differences in finger length ratio between males with autism, pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified, ADHD, and anxiety disorders,” by de Bruin, Verheij, Wiegman and Ferdinand (2006):
“Males with autism/Asperger syndrome and ADHD/ODD had significantly lower ratios than males with an anxiety disorder, and males with autism/Asperger syndrome had lower ratios than those in the comparison group. These results indicated that higher fetal testosterone levels may play a role, not only in the origin of autism, but also in the aetiology of PDD–NOS and of ADHD/ODD.”
There is something romantic about the idea of a manly hunter as you describe, and Robert E Howard would probably have approved. Still, high-T individuals are not patient, watchful, serene, or quiet; nor do they have less self control than low-T individuals. There could be a link between a lack of *estrogens* and the controlled personality traits you are talking about, but if so, I haven’t seen the research to establish it.
As far as I can tell there is no end to the agendas of testosterone research funds and then there are the different types and conversions of testosterone.
However, I make it a practice not to have anonymous scientific debates on matters of health. Everyone already knows everything anyway.
The debate on whether testosterone contributes to “aggression” (that sounds bad) isn’t about to end any time soon.
As for the value of testosterone, I believe you misunderstood me. While laws and civic life might be going after testosterone like there is a war on it, on a personal and individual basis the disappearance of “men” is noticeable. Privately, men have lots of value even if women are cheapskates.
“He is also 1/4 Navajo which I believe has made all the difference.”
Why does that matter?
It is a personal chemistry that transcends the “we are all the same” nonsense. We aren’t.
Perhaps he’s asking: What’s the lure of the Navajo quarter for you?
That’s a very diplomatic interpretation but I think that he reveals his motivations in his subsequent comment.
However, I’m always pleased to get emotive comments regardless of their motivation because they generally either make me laugh or inspire me (https://caprizchka.wordpress.com/2014/08/20/personal-sexual-preferences-are-not-shame-worthy/).
It still means that you’re saying that being 1/4th Navajo is better than 4/4th white, apparently in all cases as far as you’re concerned. That’s called bigotry so it’s pretty ironic that you expected the men to not be bigoted if they wanted to reply to your personal ad.
No. That’s not what I said. The word, “better” is your word. Apparently you think I believe that my preferences are “better” than yours. However, until you responded in that tone, I didn’t hold that opinion. But now I do.
Attraction and chemistry don’t obey the Thought-Police. Sorry about that, officer. You’re likely to be rejected yourself for any reason at all or none. That’s called reality. Now turn in your badge.
Heh. You complain about the thought police after requiring responders to your ad to not be bigots. Such typical hypocrisy.
Just admit that you are a bigot and don’t expect other people to not be. Saying that something makes all the difference naturally infers that you view that something as better than other things.
And the last poster is correct that I was wondering what the lure of the navajo quarter is although I think it’s ridiculous to think something like would have any kind of predictable result. I have native American ancestry myself. Your response earned my 2nd response, although I don’t even remember why I bothered to reply in the first place except that section I quoted didn’t really put me in a good mood when I got to there despite knowing something like that it was coming.
How funny… my husband is some-part Native American (we don’t know exactly what, we really need to find out though), and I’ve found myself thinking that same thought, even in the first year of marriage! That it somehow made a difference… I’m not even sure why – he’s so sweet and gentle, and back then I think I could really relate to him being Native American for some odd… strange… imperceptible reason lol.
I can’t believe these commenters were giving you such a hard time about that one comment! As if you can’t have sexual preferences (I read that other post, too)…. Yuck!
OK. I admit that I’m a bigot or anything else in order to avoid having sex with you. I’m also ferociously repulsive and have cooties. No wonder you can’t resist me.
Please learn how to use the word, “infer” because your current usage *implies* that you’re an idiot. As for predictable result, I predict that you will be compelled to return here to leave yet another insipid comment and perhaps yet another one and another one after that. It doesn’t actually make a difference to me whether you believe that I’ve “earned” it. Yes. I have. I have earned at least twenty more comments from you so get cracking.
I don’t remember why you bothered to attempt to write that last sentence of yours either but suggest that you attempt to avoid further mangling of the English language if your intention is to actually make a salient point. However, if you’d like for me to admit to being hugely entertained, I will. Write back soon. XOX
I don’t know what people are arguing about here. Caprizchka is interesting. I’m not in direct communication with my unconscious demons and angels, so I can’t say why. Nonetheless (and it probably is) I like reading her responses to people (all male?) who get riled up by what she says. I’m still learning about the female of the species, and she gives me a chance to see behind the veil, as it were (and it probably isn’t). I’ve signed up for future posts. Maybe one will stimulate me to make an argumentative comment?
Welcome, stranger. Care to rile me up? I love to be studied. However, it is unfortunate that those who actually make a living in studying the female animal–in particular the unconscious and all factors which make up consumer buying decisions (Western women make more consumer buying decisions than men and are therefore the primary demographic of all advertising, marketing, and propaganda), tend to get bogged down in cooperative conversations with iconoclasts, who are hardly representative. While, “do you have a sister?” practically produces a Pavlovian response in me, I haven’t actually met her yet. The accusation, “you’re not a real woman!” does have some merit albeit I can prove it, scientifically, if not purely by rhetoric, which of course limits the internet as a medium. Meanwhile, it would seem that I am a magnet for the absolute worst sort of woman (along with quite a few confidential, tearful requests to give out my “secrets”). Are these women representative of womankind or are they just my confirmation bias? I couldn’t say.
I appreciate your reply, and nice ta’ meetcha.
This sentence confuses me: ‘The accusation, “you’re not a real woman!” does have some merit albeit I can prove it, scientifically, if not purely by rhetoric, which of course limits the internet as a medium.’
If I read this correctly, you are not ‘a real woman’ and ‘can prove it scientifically’? Before I respond further, something inside me needs to know if you have previously been assigned or identified with another sexual designation.
Thanks.
It was a dreadful sentence. I apologize. There. I must really be a woman. Where do I send my blood sample? Certified statements from my abortion providers, my tubal ligationist? An ultra sound of my ovaries? Real female tears?
Well, thank you ma”am. No need to offer all those potential evidences. I certainly will take you at your word. I agree it was an awkward sentence. There! We agree on something already.
I would like to establish that we might also agree that there are significant differences between female and male humans (and likewise in all other life forms which Nature has decreed should reproduce sexually). People intimately known to me, including my wife, tend to minimize and dismiss the differences, while I see them as vital, interesting, and confounding.
Have you read “The Red Queen” by Matt Ridley? If so, I would like to start with his observations in this conversation, if it pleases you.
Best wishes,
Ron
It is my observation, belief, and understanding that the Bell Curves of various forms of intelligence, income, social status, etc. are different for men than women. The Bell Curves for men are very broad whereas for women are very narrow. However, women like me responding to surveys tend to get tossed out as outliers so we really don’t know a whole lot about women like me. As for me, I only know that portion that I can see in myself and can understand from others who I trust (which already limits that sample) with a whole vast unknown which is unaccounted for.
I have not read the book but am pleased to discuss it under that limitation.
There is a detailed summary here: http://www.mcgoodwin.net/pages/otherbooks/mr_redqueen.html
The part I remember vividly (and I hope correctly) is about the role of the limbic portion of our brain (an ancient structure). It is important in the sexual impulse. I don’t remember the details, but the bottom line is that men are hardwired to get as many sperm on as many eggs (or into as many vaginal canals) as possible; women are hardwired to get the RIGHT sperm on the currently available egg, + hardwired to find a mate to help support the outcome of the union of egg and sperm. The sperm donor and the mate are not necessarily the same, and ideally are not. The sperm donor needs to create the strong and sexually successful progeny (best “fit”, in Darwinian terms–i.e., in “fitness”); the mate need to be more docile. Rarely are the two male types found in one individual. Or, one gets more docile as one grows older (from observing my own behavior over 77 years). I take this further into behavior. This hardwiredness is always present in some degree, depending on all the factors you can imagine. A more lengthy conversation might reveal that women are naturally conflicted, thus more variable in their behavior because of their two needs; men are simple–get that thing in there NOW!
That sounds very much like what I’ve read as well. The blog, therationalmale.com would agree. His meme is “Alpha fucks; beta bucks”, which of course also corresponds to “Whore/Madonna” (indeed we all have “game”.) Clearly we are all hardwired to make as many of ourselves as possible–by hook or by crook–and to survive.
To *not* be overwhelmingly hardwired for both survival and replication is quite the paradox, but, in my view, quite a bit more *evolved* than an insect. Meanwhile, it has become more and more obvious to me why women like me have generally been consigned to be burned at the pyre or thrown into the volcano–it is simply not in the best interests of survival of the premier pyramid scheme for women like me to exist–whether one is talking matriarchy or patriarchy–but it is definitely all about power and maintaining one’s class position.
This is the reason, in my view, why incest is in fact a robbery of the future property of the child in the dominant surviving cultures. It pretty well guarantees marginalization of some sort down the line, piteous victim-mongering notwithstanding. In my view, feminism and child abuse go together like red beans and rice that is both are manifestations of “rats in a cage” syndrome, that is, too many people for too little resources, in the *minds* of the “rats”.
Most adult female child sexual abuse survivors become lesbians, prostitutes, or both–most who come forward–because their primary abusers were male so they join the feminist camp and are thereby empowered to reproduce their own pathology–through mechanisms even more involved than just mere human genes. They’re OK to live now and garner resources thanks to feminism even if they are in fact anti-evolutionary or devolutionary. Adult female (and male) sexual abuse survivors of women on the other hand, tend to be cagier. Me, I’m from both camps, so, I’ve decided to live the paradox of simply existing. It gets a whole lot of insects really really angry! That’s fun for me. They demonstrate just how evolved they really are. It’s an Idiocracy to reference the comedic film by that name.
Meanwhile, I find love and knowledge to be more interesting nowadays than mere survival. How much of that has to do with menopause? I don’t know and no one else seems to know much about it either but there’s tons of money and power at stake in the equation.
I get lost in your discourse when you take off from the point “women like me”. I’m going to have to read more of your posts to discern what this might mean. Certainly you are more than one standard deviation from the mean in your intelligence, but I’ve known a lot of very (IQ) intelligent women so aren’t unusual in my experience–in this realm. You mention somewhere about being masochistic. Assuming I’ve got this right, this doesn’t seem unusual to me, although I am not an expert in any way in this realm. There has been much written and accepted, or at least hypothesized, that in submitting one controls the dominant party, etc. Am I walking on the right avenue here? Or is this a more likely avenue to travel with you: http://wordsafew.com/2010/07/15/the-holy-zygote/
Why don’t we just start over because this isn’t working. Yes, I agree that men and women are fundamentally different, but that there is overlap. But no I don’t think that my being a masochist is pertinent nor my IQ to your study in the way you think it is nor are your notions of masochists or female masochists universal. I also find the alpha/beta notions of gender dynamics to be overly simplistic and they assume that human beings–unlike every other species–have no concept of the mathematics of population dynamics or mechanisms to keep it under control. Rather, modern sociologists are trapped in their own models. I think that Aristotle and Malthus were both deluded but Maslow was on to something albeit largely misunderstood. So, why don’t you get right to the point that you apparently desire to confirm and I’ll either play along or steal your marbles to similar effect? In any case, I’m unlikely to settle your disagreement with your wife, but will rather likely merely cement the divide. There’s a good reason for that divide and I’ve just told you what it is.
I have no point I’m trying to confirm. I’m making inquiry–I hope to learn something. Perhaps I’ve been too polite in dancing around trying to understand why you are (or perceive yourself to be) different from (most?) other women.
I do agree with most of the points you make in this latest response. Sociologists and other measurers of mostly unmeasurable things, have made simplistic models of human behavior. All I can remember of Maslov is his ‘hierarchy of needs’; this, also, is simplistic, but potentially useful as a starting point for a more dynamic understanding. Aristotle, and the western world which followed his teachings/assertions, was locked into a false perception of how the physical universe was constructed, which the Enlightenment eventually overcame–continues to overcome (?). But, we have become too scientificated, substituting ‘science’ for ‘God’, or the gods. Science is not an entity or a thing; it’s a process.
You seem impatient with me. I have nothing to settle with my wife. We are comfortable in having different viewpoints. I’m not looking for advice.
Just why are you different from (most?) women, and what can I learn from this? That is, about women, or Woman. What is the baseline ‘woman’ from which you differ?. Or am I misunderstanding what I have read in your posts here?
I am not a contentious person, Looking for light, not heat, at least intellectually.
Maybe I’ll get a clue when I read your cook book, which I have ordered.
I can appreciate what I perceive as frustration. As far as I can tell there is no remedy for it. Perhaps you will indeed get insight from my book or perhaps not as I have organized it in such a way that the greater message is only recognized by a small minority of readers–according to the letters I’ve received by them. Not all “light” is actually beneficial or universally accessible. I’m not optimistic and that isn’t intended to convey hostility but rather it would seem that each of my attempts yields an all too familiar response in terms of your method of inquiry which I perhaps mistakenly associate with a dead end. Perhaps then, rather than attempt a public personal exchange, on this subject, on my blog, I’ll leave you with this: https://caprizchka.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/the-need-to-breed/
(left out a word): …so YOU aren’t unusual in my experience…
Pingback: Thought Crimes of a Race Traitor | caprizchka
Pingback: Twist, Oliver Twist | caprizchka
Pingback: Just Not White Enough | caprizchka