Over the last few months, Vox has been writing a fair amount about rabbit people and the various forms of discourse. I personlly am very much within the heterotopic or modern discource camp, often to a fault. This, combined with my natural introversion, emotional detachment, and my poor ability to read social cues, leads to me being naturally insensitive to others or their feelings.
It is one thing to be purely heterotopic on the internet. Savaging some random idiot you’ve never met and will never meet or having sport with a silly rabbit is one thing. The internet and internet discourse is naturally impersonal and oriented towards modern discourse, so I feel free to let loose without worrying about offending people or being insensitive. If you get offended by some random jackass (ie. me) on the internet, you have much bigger problems than that random jackass; you should probably work on those.
I generally surround myself with male friends more given to the heterotopic side of things, although, not quite as extreme as me. So when with my male friends in RL I can usually engage in discourse with only a minimum level of attention to being sensitive.
On the other hand, I do have some female friends and many of my male friends are married, so often our activities are mixed-company, and females are more prone to sensitivity-driven discourse. While in discourse with said female friends, I try to generally be more sensitive, but my “more sensitive” is still far more analytical than the norm.
At one such mixed activity, after a negative off-hand remark to one of my male friends about Naomi Wolf, I found myself in discourse with four females (most of my male friends left for the other room, unnoticed by me until I was already well-enmeshed in the conversation; the others stayed quiet) about such sensitive topics as feminism, rape, submission in marriage, etc.
While I tried to keep myself from being intentionally inflammatory, it ended up with one of them blowing-up at me emotionally (I hit an personal emotional button or two without intending to). It came to light that it was the consensus among my female friends that I can be a pompous, insensitive ass at times and that this can cause them hurt.
I recognize that I can at times (usually?) be an insensitive ass, and I admitted as such as we spent some amount of time discussing it. Once that conversation ended, I ended up meeting each woman individually and apologizing any times I may have hurt them by being insensitive. I also said I would try to be less insensitive in the future, for they are my friends and I have/had no intention of causing them distress.
I did not apologize for either my positions or for expressing them, although, they did make me reconsider my position on the Biblical view of women in the workplace. (As EW recently argued, “Women were meant to labor so as to help their men support a household and multiply the species. A clear-eyed read of the Bible makes this clear.”)
So, now I’m going to try to be more sensitive in my discourse with the females around me.
But at the same time, I do not want to become a man beheld to the whims of others’ emotions. I do not want to become a rabbit given to prostration and capitulation at the whiff of negative emotions.
So, how do I do this? How do I become less insensitive?
Additionally, as I do so, how do I avoid letting my rhetoric become overly feminized?
Essentially, how do I draw the line between working towards being a rational Sigma/Alpha (or at least a strong upper beta) and not being, as Francis so delicately put it, an “Aspergery fucktard”.
Or should I just avoid discussing “controversial” topics with women?
Anyway, based on the recommendation of Joseph of Jackson, I pre-ordered the 2nd Edition of Verbal Judo from Amazon. I’ll review here when completed. I’m hoping reading this might give me more information to work within sensitivity-driven discourse, without giving myself over to it.
“So, how do I do this? How do I become less insensitive?”
It’s a trap. Don’t do it.
“Additionally, as I do so, how do I avoid letting my rhetoric become overly feminized?”
You can’t. It’s theoretically possible, but you’ll overshoot the mark every time if you try to do this.
“Essentially, how do I draw the line between working towards being a rational Sigma/Alpha (or at least a strong upper beta) and not being, as Francis so delicately put it, an “Aspergery fucktard”.
Pick your topics and responses carefully. When talking to women, never tell them something they don’t already “know”. Use generic replies,they don’t deduct points for being derivative and not particularly clever or else they’d have to penalize themselves into abject pointlessness.
“Or should I just avoid discussing “controversial” topics with women?”
No need. If you say something that causes their eyebrows to raise,burst into laughter and say “Gotcha,didn’t I?” or “I’m just kidding,but really though…..” You can say anything you want to them as long as you pretend you’re a particularly harsh,edgy, or ironic satirist. They’re not smart enough to know that you’re lying to them.
“Anyway, based on the recommendation of Joseph of Jackson, I pre-ordered the 2nd Edition of Verbal Judo from Amazon. I’ll review here when completed. I’m hoping reading this might give me more information to work within sensitivity-driven discourse, without giving myself over to it.”
Don’t take even one step down that path or you’ll wake up one day and find your actions and words dictated by morons. How do I know? I am you. This world has enough hyperventilating morons who refuse to grow up,what it desperately needs is more people who are willing to speak the plain truth, who don’t care how you feel about the truth, who don’t pull punches because they aren’t capable of it. These idiots don’t know it,but you’re spoon-feeding them the medicine they need. Medicine tastes bad,that’s its nature, but it’s good for you in the long run.
If I ask you “Does this hat look stupid?” I don’t want you to tell me my hat is awesome and reassure me I made a good purchase, I want you to tell me,objectively, if the hat is stupid or not. If you think it is, “Yeah,bro, that hat’s pretty retarded.” is not going to bother me nearly as much as wearing a stupid hat around all day making a fool of myself unintentionally is.
That’s just my two cents,though. Besides, I know from experience, the second you try to be more “sensitive”,people will mistake that for you pussing out and all your “friends” that you’re trying to accommodate are going to line up around the block to take advantage of your “weakness”.
Don’t be more sensitive.If they’re really getting on your back about it and you want them to think you’re being sensitive,use a little more discretion,listen more,and when you reply say shit like “Interesting…” and “Hmm” and “I never thought about it like that before” (which is true, you just don’t add the “because I’m not a total dumbass) part to the end of it).Women can’t tell the difference, and because they have one-track minds they’re only going to bother you about not being sensitive enough every so often,not every 15 minutes. They’ll forget all about your “lack of sensitivity” an hour after they bitched you out about it.
I’ve spent a LOT of time around women. If they’re trying like hell to “change” you, that means you’re doing something right.
Got one small piece of advice that has helped me a lot. When one comes to a point in a discussion where there is no chance of either
A ) Convincing anyone
B ) Having a nice/interesting/intellectually challenging time
C ) Changing any outcome of any real life situation to the better
Then one should just stop. Even if one is right, if others refuse to accept it there really is no point. A polite “lets just not go down this road since nothing good will come out of it” is usually enough. Some times it actually leads to people perking up and actually listening, simply because of the polite gesture.
I’ve beens struggling a lot with the fact that I piss people off, being pretty good at stomping on bad arguments and making my viewpoints more or less irrefutable (or at least not refutable by those I argue with). I’ve decided its better to just not go that way -. and save ones intellect and rhetorical skills for the times when they are really needed.
Unless you’re in a clinical setting, never think about people as “males and females”. Use “men and women” instead. It’s a minor change, but I’ve found that it helps humanize other people more and make it somewhat easier to empathize with them. Calling women “females” is an oft-mocked trait of an “Aspergery fucktard”
I just dont apologize. Closest I get is a shrug and saying I’m sorry for being a misogynistic asshole who happens to be right. Then I smile and tell any women to go make me a sammich and get me a beer.
Also, because I’m pretty open with the people I interact with about my thoughts, I only discuss red pill ideas when I feel like it. I’ve done it enough to realize that even the people you think may listen to you generally won’t. Don’t feel pressured to speak if you dont want to. Do it for fun. For shits and giggles. For the lawls. And when you dont feel like a real discussion, just make fun of everyone. Show them how ridiculous the world is by giving it the finger and laughing.
>It came to light that it was the consensus among my female friends that I can be a pompous, insensitive ass at times and that this can cause them hurt.
And you’re changing to deal with it for them, instead of helping them to change to deal with it themselves because. . . ?
If I was really their friend, I wouldn’t juvenilize them like that. Coddling people to the degree you describe keeps them weak and dependent, and that’s not what you want for your friends, is it?
And if they can’t handle that, then you know the alternative case is true: it’s time to get better female friends. Next! them and move on.
“This, combined with my natural introversion, emotional detachment, and my poor ability to read social cues, leads to me being naturally insensitive to others or their feelings.”
That’s me down to a fucking tee.
Having said that, a few things have helped me a good bit.
1) Ask open ended questions about the other person. For men, ask what do you think. For lassies, what do you feel about?
2) Since we’re both introverted, above average height and in good shape, we want to possibly try and go for the whole Sigma, mysterious aloof thing. Vague, emotional for her, answers for lassies, with some sardonic humor. Have the frame, and you can take the hits.
3) Don’t talk to women about anything redpill until you’ve fucked them. Then the fun begins. Unless she’s a bit of a slut methinks.
4) The more people are involved with The Cathedral, the LESS they will be open to red pill ideas. So find out their background first. People want to feel good about themselves. Talk about the wrong thing and their world belief gets shattered. Having said that, if they want you to apologize, maybe yous are onto something.
5) Read books like How To Make Friends and Influence People, anything by Robert Greene, Get a few books on body language, and this one for faces. http://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Face-Reading-Illustrated-Encyclopedia/dp/0965593126/ref=pd_sim_b_1. Seriously mate, I’m borderline Aspergery fucktard, and even though I’ll probably never be socially competent, people do respond to very similar cues and you can learn them off.
I’m still learning as well, and it be hard shit, but it can be done like. G’luck with it.
Having said all of this, the more time goes on, the less I’m giving a flying fuck.
Previously, I’d fuck up a lot, and I’d really care.
Now I’m fucking up a lot less, and caring a bit less if I do.
Dear Sir,
you seem to be writing from a country that is run by sociopaths for the benefit of degenerates. There is no way to speak that will satisfy such people – using the term “people” advisedly.
The correct solution is to get your passport in order and leave. Until you can do that, say nothing that will jeopardize your chances of leaving.
The rest of the planet is much more rational. You can speak plainly about most topics in most countries.
Warm regards,
your friends on Planet Earth
“This, combined with my natural introversion, emotional detachment, and my poor ability to read social cues, leads to me being naturally insensitive to others or their feelings.”
This is basically me, though I’ve become pretty good at reading social cues (I’m not near as good it reading social cues as a natural social butterfly would be, but I’m a damn sight better than I was as an Aspergery 16-year-old). The way I handle dealing with the sort of situation you’ve described is to a) not give my opinion unless specifically asked and b) not giving a solitary fuck. I also make a general point of not talking to women about anything serious.
Most people don’t want to know the truth; they want people to agree with them and rationalize their false beliefs. Thus, there is no point in trying to tell them the truth. I believe that a wise Jewish carpenter once said to not cast pearls before swine lest they trample them under their feet then turn and tear you to pieces. This seems like solid advice.
Additionally, if you do decide to tell people what you believe and why (once asked, of course), stick to your guns and don’t apologize. Be calm and civil, but don’t backtrack. If the conversation seems counterproductive or starts getting out of hand, leave or change the subject. There is no point wasting your time talking to people who won’t be civil, let alone listen or even change their ways and beliefs. Let them have their righteous anger, and go on your way.
Finally, avoid talking to women about serious things unless they demonstrate an ability to handle such topics seriously and intelligently. In my experience, about 7-10% of all women are capable of handling serious subjects intelligently; the rest are not. Leave them alone. Most women simply want witty banter and gossip (a la Kitty from Pride and Prejudice). Give them that or leave them alone.
It’s not your duty to right the world’s wrongs, nor is it your duty to tell every single person the truth. If you were able to find the red pill after seeking it out, then it’s reasonable to conclude most people will find the red pill as well, but only if they look for it. And if they’re not looking for it, don’t shove it in their face. And don’t care what they think/feel about you either. Their thoughts and feelings are subject to change and, paradoxically, the less you care about what they think, the more they will like and respect you.
Hmm, want a woman’s sensitive perspective?
I can discuss issues when the conversation partner remains calm and rational. But red pill stuff is very important to some people to prove, and they get fired up while arguing for it. This is when shit can happen. I remember I was discussing psychiatry with someone. They were very anti-psychiatry and saying most of those locked up against their will are not a danger to anyone – they just lock them up cuz they won’t agree with the treatment. They also said something that sounded like “if someone’s attempting suicide, just let them do it, don’t call the cops or anything”. It was, to me, a very personal issue, because someone I cared a lot about was severely depressed and seemed to talk about suicide a lot. It angered me that I was supposed to do nothing while they were committing suicide (jumping, or cutting, or poisoning themselves, or whatever), and it angered the conversation partner that I was “pro locking people up” (I wasn’t). In retrospect, it was just a misunderstanding (our views on this were closer than we thought), but because it was personal to me (and a burning justice issue to them), it blew up so bad.
I guess the lesson is not to poke any old wounds (if you know about them) and not to continue arguing once someone wants to change the subject. Those are, I think, the only two cases where I would think about being sensitive.
Oh, and about getting fired up in an argument. Reason for why misunderstandings happen is because when fired up and angry, people stop listening and are only interested in being understood rather than understanding. Feeling of righteous anger is not any less a feeling than grief.
>Hmm, want a woman’s sensitive perspective?
No, and we don’t want yours, either.
I’ve gotten pretty good at discussing difficult political stuff with young females over the years. Here’s my take.
First, although they object, just like in Game, maintain the Alpha frame at all times. Before anything controversial comes up, I recommend a variation of Agree and Amplify: http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/example-of-a-technique/
This gets them to think of you as being a badass on BEHALF of something they already believe. My post on it didn’t come across as well as I would have liked (Starbucks was closing), but the gist is there.
Part of the success of today’s left stems from their ability to promote decidedly beta goals through an alpha frame, caring and sensitive messages delivered by politicians who go for the throat if you disagree with them.
http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/president-edward-cullen-2/
Instead, the right (and I recognize you’re no fan of the GOP, which I respect) comes across as the “wrong kind of assholes”:
http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/the-wrong-kind-of-assholes/
I haven’t read the article you link yet about feminine rhetoric, but for better or for worse, we’re in a feminized society. We have those who accept this and use it for awful ends and others who reject it and find themselves getting nowhere because they can’t talk all “sensitive.” My solution is to accept but not acquiesce.
There is reason and truth, the dialectic. My goal in every conversation like the one you describe is to understand the feminine frame that’s there so that I can successfully transform it to that correct masculine one. One way I do this is that when I’m discussing an ugly truth, I alter my tone and soften my words so as to convey that I really wish that it wasn’t true, but I have to accept that it is. This disarms my opponents’ accusations of heartlessness. I deal with this here:
http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/when-love-is-hate/
If you need any clarifications or have any questions, don’t hesitate to comment or send me an email. I live for the type of conversation you describe here, and I’m damn good at it.
And thanks for the link last weekend.
Thank y’all for the advice. I’ll think it over and we’ll see what happens.
@ Nergal: Don’t worry am not going to let dictate what I think or say and there is very little chance that I’ll overshoot given my already extreme insensitivity. I will also not take people taking advantage of my weakness, and I’m pretty sure my friends won’t. My post is not about becoming and emotional sap, but merely about not being an insensitive, aspy asshole. In this particular case, I stepped all over a very sensitive and personal issue to one of the women, I really just want to know how to notice when these mines come up and avoid them. I’d be up for lovable asshole.
@ hpx: I realize my odds of convincing anyone are slim to nil, but I simply enjoy discussions. I derive great pleasure from political or philosophical debates. I don’t do it because I expect it will do any good, but simply for enjoyment’s sake.
@ Leap: I’ve never apologized before. The three apologies I made in that night are more apologies than I’ve made in the last half decade.
@ Acksiom: I can’t next them. One of them is a good friend, and for a female she’s very rational. The others are all wives of friends; I couldn’t next them without nexting my friendships. As for infantalizing them; I know it’s that way, but I later talked with my one good friend, and she said that women don’t view sensitivity as infantilizing. I don’t really understand it, but it seems it is so. So, if they don’t think I’m treating them like a child, why should I worry about it?
@ Francis: It’s a lot to learn; I’m trying to build that Sigma frame, but it’s very unnatural to a natural Omega like me.
@ zhai: My country might be borderline sociopathic, but it’s home. I’m also not sure where I’d go that would be less so.
@ Simon: That’s good advice. Simply leaving politely when things get out of hand might be the best bet.
@ Emma: I don’t get fired up. I try to avoid it, because when I do get fired up I can be extremely aggressive. Usually I’m criticized for being too emotionally detached and analytical about situations.
@ Acksiom: I’ve seen Emma elsewhere, she seems decent. No need to be overly hostile.
@ Martel: The wrong kind of asshole is a good way of putting it. Your advice is good; I simply have to find the right balance between accepting and acquiescing.
>@Acksiom: I can’t next them.
Yeah, actually, you can. Just like anybody else in life.
So what you actually *mean* is that you simply *won’t* next them. You’re *choosing* not to require respect for your boundaries from them, and instead letting them not only walk all over you but actually guilt you into remodeling yourself to suit them.
>One of them is a good friend,
Not if you have to compromise yourself like that around her, she isn’t. If you can’t rely on her for things this small, she won’t be reliable for larger things. And that’s not a good friend. That’s not even a friend at all. That’s just an acquaintance.
>and for a female she’s very rational.
[shrug] So? That’s like saying a butter knife is very edged. It may be true but it don’t cut much
>The others are all wives of friends; I couldn’t next them without nexting my friendships.
And the problem with this is. . .what, exactly?
There’s a lot of truth and guidance to the aphorism that we’re all the sum of the 5 people we spend the most time with. Again, if you have to compromise yourself that much for them, they’re not your friends. You’re just using each other.
So get out there and spin some friend plates, kid.
>As for infantalizing them; I know it’s that way,
There you go then.
>but I later talked with my one good friend, and she said that women don’t view sensitivity as infantilizing.
[shrug] So? People in general don’t view a lot of things correctly, let alone western world women in particular. It is infantilizing, and since you admit it, and presumably, as I said, that it’s bad for them, then you’re not being a friend to them either by continuing it. Which means you’re just using each other.
>I don’t really understand it, but it seems it is so.
No, it isn’t. They’re just using that as an excuse. It’s not a male-female thing; it’s an adult-child thing. They just want to keep their status and privileges as children in adult bodies, and are exploiting you to help them with that.
Ignore what women say; react to what they actually do.
>So, if they don’t think I’m treating them like a child, why should I worry about it?
Well, I thought it was because you were their friend, but since you know you’re infantilizing them with this crap, yet are going to continue doing it, I guess you aren’t, really.
I’ve seen Emma elsewhere too, and based on her behavior, I have no use for her. She’s not here to contribute anything valuable to androsphere conversations; she’s here to troll for attention. How often have you seen her agree with a pro-male androsphere theme versus argue against it? I keep a running estimate of that sort of thing in my head, and guess what, she consistently and reliably posts herself straight into the Standard Egomaniacal Attention Whore Timesuck bin.
This is true of a lot of male commenters too, but it’s endemic to female ones, and should be assumed as the default.
Finally, (A) that wasn’t hostile at all, let alone ‘overly’; it was at worst indifferent, and (B) WTF does ‘need’ have to do with it? When exactly did ‘need’ become a requirement or standard for our behavior? No. People don’t need to ‘need’ to do things first. They are entirely entitled to just do them, just because they *want* to. You know, that little thing called ‘Freedom’, Northerner?
I thought you might be pulling our legs originally, and now that you’ve tried to use one of the classic marxist cheats on me (and now you know what you can do with it, too) I’m somewhat more convinced.
Free Northener,
“I don’t get fired up. I try to avoid it, because when I do get fired up I can be extremely aggressive. Usually I’m criticized for being too emotionally detached and analytical about situations.”
Interesting. In that case, I remember reading a book by Dale Carnegie (sorry, I forgot the name). He said that it’s hard to convince someone in public, because admitting they were wrong would feel humiliating. They’ll go on arguing even when there is no point. They might agree with you in private though, after some thought. When this happens (you throw logic at them and they don’t budge), don’t forget you are also arguing for the audience, who are not so emotionally attached to the outcome of the debate… You might convince some people there.
Acksiom,
“she consistently and reliably posts herself straight into the Standard Egomaniacal Attention Whore Timesuck bin.”
I don’t know what your problem with me is, but you’re lying. Most of the time, I do agree with pro-male themes. However, I also try to think critically, and to fully agree with something, I test it out. I hate for my worldview to rest on weak fundament.
I also have a sense of humor, and allow myself to say non-serious things on some sites, because it is allowed there. But in general, I do try to be useful in conversations (be it for intelligent debate or humor). If you find me useless, just ignore me.
Aaaaaand right on cue:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-politicially-leftist.html — money quote: ” It’s the cowards and intellectual weaklings of the world who plain don’t have the stamina, fortitude, work ethic and maturity to become independent adults and enjoy the real world.”
And, http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2013/02/alpha-mail-female-process.html — money quote: “Ignore what women say, and observe what they do. They are not logical nor rational in their first responses to stimuli or information. And they are not prone to taking responsibility for wrong behavior.”
Read The Whole Things.
>I don’t know what your problem with me is,
That’s because I don’t have one. You would have to matter to me first, and you don’t.
>but you’re lying
Cites or it didn’t happen.
>However, I also blah blah me me I’m this I’m that me me me wonderful me so wonderful so great blah blah blah me me me me me.
Thank you for proving me right through your behavior.
>If you find me useless, just ignore me.
No; if *you* don’t like *my* criticism, *you* should just butch up and improve *your* behavior.
“You would have to matter to me first, and you don’t.”
Then why did you start this? Quit, and I’ll believe you. You started this, so saying this NOW looks pretty damn silly.
“Cites or it didn’t happen.”
You’re the one claiming I disagree with pro-male themes more than I agree with them. The burden of proof is on you, buddy. You’re the first one to say something like this. I’m kind of known for being anti-feminist, so you are probably lying (no one can be so deluded. You might as well say David Futrelle is an MRA).
“No; if *you* don’t like *my* criticism, *you* should just butch up and improve *your* behavior.”
Heheh, I’d take your advice if you had any criticism to give. I always reflect on criticism of me, and you’re not making any sense.
He wrote:
>No; if *you* don’t like *my* criticism, *you* should just butch up and improve *your* behavior.
She wrote:
>Heheh, I’d take your advice if you had any criticism to give.
If I saw a man and woman talking like this in person, I would say, “Just get a hotel room already, your sexual tension is obnoxious for the rest of us.”
In the spirit of sensitivity-driven discourse, however, I would note that this blog is supposed to be Free Northerner’s blog, and this post is supposed to be about Free Northerner’s emotional needs, not about the needs of random commenters.
All of us writing here, myself included, are being incredibly egotistical. Egotism is like cocaine – it’s a short-term fix, not a substitute for personal growth.
Free Northerner, I don’t know a damn thing about your personal life. I do know that you write good blog posts, so you should feel good about that.
As for dealing with women in real life, and dealing with egotistical people who comment on your blog, the solution is the same – get away. Find some space in which to breathe.
Personally, I would recommend Asia. Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Moscow, Phuket – Asia is full of places where you can unwind. If that’s too far, you can just go to Vancouver, or an uninhabited forest. Contemplating mountain goats doesn’t solve your problems, but it reminds you that your problems are small and Nature is big.
Sensitive people sometimes interrupt folks and say, “Hey this is about MY NEEDS.” Dare to be selfish, Free Northerner.
” how do I avoid letting my rhetoric become overly feminized?
Essentially, how do I draw the line between working towards being a rational Sigma/Alpha (or at least a strong upper beta) and not being, as Francis so delicately put it, an “Aspergery fucktard”.”
The rhetoric of political correctness is sophistry – it can be used to argue for any claim. It’s pretty easy for a clever fellow to use the rhetoric of feminist sensitivity to argue that his highest duty in life is his own selfish hedonism. We don’t argue this because it’s true, we argue this to demonstrate that it’s ABSURD.
Reductio ad absurdam is not just a rhetorical trick, it’s a great way to prove that you’re a cocky-funny guy.
But don’t take too long. Make a joke about how it’s all about MY NEEDS. Then walk away and take action that doesn’t involve shallow people. Go hiking, or whatever.
In the long term, you might stay in touch with silly female acquaintances, even though they are not mature and responsible enough to be real friends to you. That’s your choice, but it’s a minor choice. Your life story is more important than their minor supporting roles in your life story.
The story of Free Northerner is written, directed, produced by Free Northerner. Free Northerner is the star of the show.
@ Acksiom:
>So what you actually *mean* is that you simply *won’t* next them.
True enough.
>You’re *choosing* not to require respect for your boundaries from them, and instead letting them not only walk all over you but actually guilt you into remodeling yourself to suit them.
I’m not sure where this came from. They’ve never violated my boundaries.
I’m a natural Omega and a former loser. I’ve been purposefully “remodeling” myself for about 8 years now to suit my own purposes. I’ve reached beta, maybe edging into upper beta. I’m not allowing them to remodel me; I’m questioning whether I should remodel myself to better achieve my ends based on input I’ve received from others.
> Not if you have to compromise yourself like that around her, she isn’t. If you can’t rely on her for things this small, she won’t be reliable for larger things. And that’s not a good friend. That’s not even a friend at all. That’s just an acquaintance.
I don’t have to and never have compromise myself for her. One of the other women said I came off as an asshole. I asked her if I did, she answered that I could, but she was used to it.
> And the problem with this is. . .what, exactly?
>There’s a lot of truth and guidance to the aphorism that we’re all the sum of the 5 people we spend the most time with. Again, if you have to compromise yourself that much for them, they’re not your friends. You’re just using each other.
You seem to have a very low view of male friendship. I much enjoy the company of my male friends and I’ve never had to compromise myself for them.
>[shrug] So? People in general don’t view a lot of things correctly, let alone western world women in particular. It is infantilizing, and since you admit it, and presumably, as I said, that it’s bad for them, then you’re not being a friend to them either by continuing it. Which means you’re just using each other.
You might be right. Other than the one friend, the other I mostly only spend time with in mixed company because they’re my friends’ wives.
>Well, I thought it was because you were their friend, but since you know you’re infantilizing them with this crap, yet are going to continue doing it, I guess you aren’t, really.
I didn’t say whether I was going to continue to do so or not. I’m still not sure what I’m going to do, and probably won’t until I decide in the moment, but most likely I’m going to follow Simon’s advice.
> How often have you seen her agree with a pro-male androsphere theme versus argue against it?
The couple times I remember reading her comments they seemed generally pro-male. I’ve only read a few of her comments though.
>Finally, (A) that wasn’t hostile at all, let alone ‘overly’; it was at worst indifferent,
It came across as hostile. I asked for advice, she provided some, and you told her her advice was not wanted.
> (B) WTF does ‘need’ have to do with it? When exactly did ‘need’ become a requirement or standard for our behavior? No. People don’t need to ‘need’ to do things first. They are entirely entitled to just do them, just because they *want* to. You know, that little thing called ‘Freedom’, Northerner?
Yeah, and I didn’t touch your freedom. Your post is still up, unedited; you received no warning, no modding. Just because you have freedom, doesn’t mean you have to choose to exercise it without self-discipline and common courtesy. As well, just because you “want” something is not reason not to exercise some personal self-restraint.
Only children, spoiled women, and entitled leftists think that their “wants” override base courtesy.
> I thought you might be pulling our legs originally, and now that you’ve tried to use one of the classic marxist cheats on me (and now you know what you can do with it, too) I’m somewhat more convinced.
I’m not quite sure what you mean by this.
> Read The Whole Things.
They were good. I’d agree with both.
I think, Acksiom, that you are assuming a bit more from this post than I actually meant (or possibly, I simply expressed myself poorly).
I am not looking to become a bleeding-heart pansy, tiptoeing fearfully around the slightest hint of emotionalism and prostrating myself before everyone who gets somewhat offended by what I say.
I am naturally somewhat of what Roissy would insult as an “aspie”. I am not, in any way, clinically aspergers or anywhere near it, but as I said, I do not read social situations well at all. I am looking to be able to read social situations better and know the difference between ‘this is a fun discussion’, and ‘this is something people are taking seriously’. Or the difference being an unlikeable, butthurt jackass and being a respected alpha/sigma/greater beta.
@ Emma:
I’ve read a few of the Carnegie books. Also, outside a couple of close friends I know are rational, I don’t debate to convince people any more; most people simply can not be swayed by cold, rational argument and I suck at rhetoric. I debate simply because I enjoy debating.
@ zhia2:
That is excellent advice. I should concentrate more on building myself, less on what others think; I tend to be overly self-conscious and possibly overly introspective.
Also, rhetorical tricks like that are the kind of advice I’m looking for. It sounds sort of like ‘agree and amplify’. I want to figure out how to be more in the realm of ‘cocky-funny’ rather than ‘arrogant prick’.
I have no desire to go to other countries, I quite like mine, but I’ve actually just started talking with a real estate agency. Hopefully in the next half a year or so, I’ll have my own secluded little place in the country.
I have no problem with people having their own little egotistical debates on here. It can be enjoyable to watch.
Eh, I’ll let Hitch sum it up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Hg-Y7MugU