Thread: Shit Tests, Deceptions and Manipulations

Many female behaviours have been given names like hypergamy, monkey branching, carousel riding etc. and defining these terms gives people an insight into women and their ways, but the rest is often referred to in the most general of terms.

We regularly talk about these, often with an example or three. I thought it might be a good idea to bring as many different examples as we can together in a single thread. In this way lurkers could see a litany of female behaviours and identify those that correlate to their own experiences, maybe even opening their minds to the things we talk about of which they have no personal experience.

One more thing. I was talking to a friend of mine recently. He had discovered this new thing called the red-pill, and when he mentioned it to me and found a receptive mind to talk to about it he got really excited. I have to say I was delighted for him. One thing I noticed was he had latched on to the terminology pretty quickly, it seems once you define something it sticks in the mind better rather than just being a collection of abstract thoughts.

So with this in mind let’s have at it. I would expect the members here to be familiar with almost all of this, but I think there might be a surprising insight or two as well to come. Here are a few to get the ball rolling:




Man Logic

I only recall hearing this specific term once in conversation, and yes it was being applied to me, but when you hear phrases like ‘typical man’ or ‘men always say that’ this is what they are thinking – man logic. When you hear this, you and everything you have to say is being dismissed. Basically what it says is ‘I no longer have any rational argument to offer, but you’re only a man so you must be wrong. How dare you, a man, contradict me, a woman, using logic and reason?’ And women wonder why they are seen as irrational!

Related to ‘Mansplaining’ in its dismissive nature, but without the male condescending overtones.




Uninvited

The ‘girls night out’ could be considered an example of this, but it is not the only one.

Imagine a scenario. You and your beloved are at home, contented, watching the telly. The doorbell rings and a female friend of your partner has come calling. The three of you sit and have a drink or two and all’s fine, a nice social visit.

At some stage your guest mentions an upcoming social engagement, a party or big night out. Your heart sinks – oh God what am I in for now? But you put on a brave face and say ‘Sure, we can make that.’

Your guest explains that you might not want to go because …….. (Fill in any excuse here – you hate country music or whatever your pet hate may be; you don’t know these people; whatever.) You think ‘thank you for the reprieve’, but there’s more going on.

It has just been made clear that you are not welcome, but your partner is. Now why would that be, you are a couple after all? Could it be that there’s something going on that you’re not meant to know about? The only thing that I can think of that would fit this scenario is some sort of liaison. Remember it’s a big event, not just a few girls gathering in a house to drink and talk shyte.

If you don’t believe this of your precious darling, try this. The next time it happens, say you don’t care about the downsides and that you’re going anyway. Watch the exchange of glances while you’re counting how long it takes for one of them to tell you straight out you can’t go. It won’t take long. Either that or it will be mysteriously cancelled soon after and your partner will be in a mood because she couldn’t go to the gig.

In short, if you get uninvited to anything whilst your partner is invited, you are being played in some way.




The False Apology

When your woman says something like ‘I’m sorry, I fucked up’ or ‘Please forgive me’, especially if she’s also crying, do not take this as genuine regret, it’s just another manipulation. She is playing on your emotions and the willingness of some people (you) to block out the whole episode and pretend it didn’t happen; it makes for an easier life if you just ignore all that bad shit over there.

But this is wrong, if you ignore all the bad shit, it just piles higher and higher. Remember, she understands she has messed up, but to her the problem wasn’t in the deed, it was in the getting caught. If she gets away with it this time she WILL do it again, she’ll just be more careful not to get caught next time.




The Pre-emptive Strike

Linked to The False Apology above, this is where a woman has done something that could endanger her way of life if it came out, like having sex with another guy for example, and she confesses her crime. There are two (maybe more) possible motives for this behaviour.

1. She’s done the deed and doesn’t want it hanging over her. If she brings it out into the open now, on her terms, she retains some control over the situation. ‘If I wasn’t truly sorry, why would I tell you? You need never have known.’ This is just panic that you might find out anyway, even years down the line.

2. She did it on purpose to rub in your face. ‘I did this, what are you going to do about it? Do what I say from now on or this will definitely happen again.’




It Just Happened

What can I say?

Lie, Lie, Lie, Lie, Lie.

Things don’t ‘Just Happen’, not when you have a say. Whatever she is talking about here, and it’s usually a sexual encounter, she made a decision, it didn’t ‘Just Happen’. Ignore any scenarios she may put forward here, they are merely distractions from the fact that she is LYING.

Congratulations for the compilation.

I always wondered if we could create somekind of red pill university, with classes being online, of course, just like coursera.

Its a pity that these definitions and many others are not compiled in a single place.

There are plenty of e-learning platforms, is there one that is free, easy to use and wouldn't censor red pill courses?

I'm not sure what to call this but it goes like this.... Queen mode or something IDK...

"don't you ever dare talk to me like that in front of anyone ever again" and I was always like WTF was she talking about?

There is something I hate, and I never seen any name for that, so I will call it "fake certainty". It when women state some things as facts, with what appears to be 100% certainty.
Its infuriating to me because you mostly depend on these signals to give credit to other people's ideas.

They do this to create an aura of infallibility, and eventually they start with "dichotomy thinking", or as we are most familiar with: I am alway right, and you are always wrong.

A gullible man that open itself to these manipulations fails to see its all tricks, where most things they are certain about are unverifiable. And most right/wrong definitions are theirs.

So you end up feeling like an idiot...

Thank you for compiling this, I think we can all add our own.

With regards to ''uninvited''. This is a good one because it happens all the time. Not only events but even conversations.
Women do not men (especially the bottom 97%) to know what they think.

They want you to hear what they say and see what they do - because these are essentially distractions from their callous and conniving personalities.

I like this one:

"I don't know" "I really can't say".
Ask a woman about height, money or educational attainment, status etc. Does she have ''red lines''. She will say 'hmm not sure, I really cannot say'' ''you really shouldn't reduce other human being to a commodity'' but she definitely would not open her legs to even the most charming average Joe.

"I don't judge"
This essentially means she wouldn't say that so and so is too short, too fat, too bald or too poor. She has these categories and believes them but socially speaking she wants to be seen in a good light so she makes these calculations internally.

I always like to ask such women if they would suck a homeless man's dick? Their reaction is priceless.

Originally Posted by Opaque

I always like to ask such women if they would sick a homeless man's dick. Their reaction is priceless.

My biggest wake up call on hypergamy and gold digging is in how I choose to dress. Dress sharp with an expensive 3 piece, goochie shoes, and bling, the most unlikely of women come onto me, the kind of women conditioning has led us to believe we can't attract, women that wouldn't take a 2nd look at me suddenly want to spark us a conversation like I'm the best thing since canned beer!

Dress in work cloths from my various hundreds of projects and they don't even notice me, I'm just the diesel mechanic, carpenter, welder, construction worker, in other words I'm just one of societies SLAVES! That was and still is my single biggest eyeopener to hypergamy and female fakery! That and Vanessa the Manmpire' whom intentionally lured a man into marriage with the full premeditated and executed DIVORCE RAPE!

Fuck these modern liberated cunts! They're not worth knowing!

Originally Posted by mgtower

My biggest wake up call on hypergamy and gold digging is in how I choose to dress. Dress sharp with an expensive 3 piece, goochie shoes, and bling, the most unlikely of women come onto me, the kind of women conditioning has led us to believe we can't attract, women that wouldn't take a 2nd look at me suddenly want to spark us a conversation like I'm the best thing since canned beer!

Dress in work cloths from my various hundreds of projects and they don't even notice me, I'm just the diesel mechanic, carpenter, welder, construction worker, in other words I'm just one of societies SLAVES! That was and still is my single biggest eyeopener to hypergamy and female fakery! That and Vanessa the Manmpire' whom intentionally lured a man into marriage with the full premeditated and executed DIVORCE RAPE!

Fuck these modern liberated cunts! They're not worth knowing!

Correction not sick but suck**

Seriously though, I get this all the time. I bought a nice suit for my first even job in the corporate world and I am an ugly mother fucker definitely on the 3/4 our of 10 scale. Women went out of their way to talk with me.

Man-Up / Be A Real Man

This is an obvious manipulation, but even though you’re aware of this it can still be effective as it works on your psyche.

You may hear a woman say something like ‘A real man would treat his woman well’ when, say, she’s angling for a holiday / new car / kitchen you simply can’t afford or just isn’t needed. Now whilst she might still be hopeful of gaining that prize by insulting your masculinity (which is supposedly toxic, so why re-enforce it) it is much more subtle than that.

What she is really saying is ‘You must conform, be a good little soldier and listen to what society is saying about what it means to be a man today’. It is designed solely to keep you on the slave plantation. Even when used to get you to defend her honour (that’s a joke) and provoke violence, she is still re-enforcing the notion of you being there for her benefit.

And what’s worse is blue-pill men also use this tactic. I can only assume that they need to bolster their own self-esteem as any dissent forces them to reconsider their own world view.

Whatever the source, the defence to this assault IMO is to chuckle whilst saying:

‘Sure what the fuck would know about being a man?’

This works equally well on both women and men.

Women have little defence against this as they are always saying men have no clue what it’s like to be a woman, it’s just flipping their own argument against them.

As for the guy, he just insulted your masculinity and got slammed for it. He’ll think twice before using this phrase again. Just be careful here though. Pick your targets well as you could just as easily spark a fight. You could modify it slightly to something like ‘Who are you to lecture me on what it means to be a man?’ without the laughter. Similar effect and less likely to provoke an altercation.

Rollo has a blog post somewhere that tries to distinguish between female solipsism and psychopathic behavior. If there is a difference, it is only by degree. Needles to say, this is one instance where Rollo failed to convince me. I bring this up because of the OPs mention of apologies.

With some experience you will note that regret for a woman is based on here dislike of suffering consequences. Please note the entire lack of any honor code in this. There is no moral lesson learned. They simply associate the negative side effects with what they did and in an intellectual way, understand that an apology might make things better. There is no sense of guilt or remorse involved. They simply are endeavoring to lesson the consequences being suffered.

This is why religious texts such as the bible command a woman to respect her husband, not to love him. If love where involved, then guilt would be felt. I'm not even talking about romantic love here. It's more like a love for humanity sort of thing. A creature void of the ability to love on any level will simply not feel guilt. It is an alien emotion.

There are of course, male psychopaths. My argument is that female solipsism is the same, just dressed up with a better sounding name. Also, almost all women exhibit the characteristic. Even red pillers like Rollo can't help themselves from making excuses for them.

Regarding topics like "man logic", I have noticed of late that feminists and SJWs are saying that things like the following:

Math
Logic
Statistics
Facts

Are all considered tools of the patriarchy. In this case, I actually agree with them. If they had any brains, they would realize how valuable these tools are and embrace them. Unfortunately for us, they don't. It's the equivilant of half of an ancient tribe discovering fire, while the other half wants to label it as evil and ban its use from existence.

I take pride in the fact that the above mentioned skills are male in nature. Never apologize for any of that.

You may hear a woman say something like ‘A real man would treat his woman well’ when, say, she’s angling for a holiday / new car / kitchen you simply can’t afford or just isn’t needed. Now whilst she might still be hopeful of gaining that prize by insulting your masculinity (which is supposedly toxic, so why re-enforce it) it is much more subtle than that.

What she is really saying is ‘You must conform, be a good little soldier and listen to what society is saying about what it means to be a man today’. It is designed solely to keep you on the slave plantation. Even when used to get you to defend her honour (that’s a joke) and provoke violence, she is still re-enforcing the notion of you being there for her benefit.

This can all be explained very very easily.

This is typical of mothers who manipulate their sons. Mothers hate their sons and want them to worship the gynocracy.
Therefore, they set their son up from a very early age to be pleasing and yielding to the female imperative.

Interestingly, since I come from Saudi Arabia, which is a highly patriarchal society, I see more men trying to be pleasing to women than in the western liberal countries.

This is why I refute tradcon values 100%.

Regarding topics like "man logic", I have noticed of late that feminists and SJWs are saying that things like the following:

Math
Logic
Statistics
Facts

Are all considered tools of the patriarchy. In this case, I actually agree with them. If they had any brains, they would realize how valuable these tools are and embrace them. Unfortunately for us, they don't. It's the equivilant of half of an ancient tribe discovering fire, while the other half wants to label it as evil and ban its use from existence.

I take pride in the fact that the above mentioned skills are male in nature. Never apologize for any of that.

When feminists say these skills are patriarchal; they do not mean by any means these are ''male'' skills. On the contrary, if you actually speak with feminists, even radfems, they will tell you that many patriarchal societies are rules by females. And this is true, in the Middle East, females actually rule society - but through ''social power''. They wield a huge level of influence in that way.

And Logic, Facts are an inventions for people with high levels of anxiety who cannot deal with the real world. ''Objective Truth'' (if such a things exists) is only useful in its' domain (physics, chemistry etc); you try and apply that to the real world and human relationships and you've lost the plot.

''Objective truth'' is very useful for men who think they are one step ahead of women when in fact women are controlling them like puppets.

Originally Posted by Opaque

''Objective Truth'' (if such a things exists) is only useful in its' domain (physics, chemistry etc); you try and apply that to the real world and human relationships and you've lost the plot.

This is very true. I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say they’ve lost the plot but they are certainly (unintentionally) misusing some of the tools at their disposal. That is why in other threads I have mentioned that I dislike the use of the word logic (or lack thereof) when trying to explain society and behavioural patterns, I much more prefer the word reason.

Like it or not, we are emotional beings and trying to bring things down to mere stats, while useful, ignores this fact. Asking if a behaviour is reasonable can include concepts such as logic, maths, statistics and examples (facts), but is not limited to them. It also leaves room for emotional responses such as likes, desires and impulses.

Personally I would not like to live in a world where everyone thought and acted the same way, which is what pure logic would suggest we become. Like the old saying goes: variety is the spice of life, but maybe someone should have added that too much spice can ruin the meal just as much as not enough.

Men understand compromise. It means both parties give up a little of what they want to reach a stable middle ground. As near as I can tell, women have no understanding of this. Any true compromise on their side is taken as a loss by them, and rest assured they will be pissed about it. Their idea of compromise is when the man finally sees it their way. At that point, it will have been "we" that made the decision. Then, if decision all goes south, you will find that you in fact forced her to agree with you, and the idea that went wrong will all be your fault. Why in gods name would anyone sign up for that?

Men, we have been fools for too long. There is nothing mysterious about them. The "mystery" comes from that fact that your mother told you from birth how wonderful women are. Then you try to reconcile this deeply seated belief with observable reality. It is truly mystifying until you realize your mother lied to you. Then it is all at once, very simple to understand.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

Like it or not, we are emotional beings and trying to bring things down to mere stats, while useful, ignores this fact. Asking if a behaviour is reasonable can include concepts such as logic, maths, statistics and examples (facts), but is not limited to them. It also leaves room for emotional responses such as likes, desires and impulses.

Personally I would not like to live in a world where everyone thought and acted the same way, which is what pure logic would suggest we become. Like the old saying goes: variety is the spice of life, but maybe someone should have added that too much spice can ruin the meal just as much as not enough.

In my, humble, opinion, I am not willing to discredit logic and cold rational thinking applied on human emotions, behaviors and interactions, not easily atleast. My rationale is, when we say "logic doesnt apply to X", what we are really saying, that the logic being applied to X is much more complex and input variables are far greater than which can be comprehended, atleast incomprehensible by the person/group making that claim. In other words, when I see that I cannot apply cold logic to a human situation, I will assume that either I am not smart enough or lack information about inputs, and will also assume that someone else, with more information and/or more intelligence, can comprehend it. If I be a little honest and blunt here, I'll say that claiming logic doesnt work on X is a little bit of arrogance, the assumption that I am smartest of my kind and because I am not able to apply logic, so no one else will be able to.

Also, pure logic may not always be that rigid. A classic example from the world of IT security is blacklisting vs whitelisting. Whitelisting is very rigid, but blacklisting is not. As long as you dont exhibit some blacklisted behavior, you are free to be unique self. I should be allowed to do whatever in my room, as long as I do not impose any problems on others, like playing super loud music while living in an apartment, very late into the night. If I do that, then that is a variety which my neighbors wont appreciate, and after a point they will retaliate. Legal/Formal retaliation or taking the matter in their own hands, either way, I will face retaliation.

Man Logic

I only recall hearing this specific term once in conversation, and yes it was being applied to me, but when you hear phrases like ‘typical man’ or ‘men always say that’ this is what they are thinking – man logic. When you hear this, you and everything you have to say is being dismissed. Basically what it says is ‘I no longer have any rational argument to offer, but you’re only a man so you must be wrong. How dare you, a man, contradict me, a woman, using logic and reason?’ And women wonder why they are seen as irrational!

Related to ‘Mansplaining’ in its dismissive nature, but without the male condescending overtones.

The opposite side of this, coined by UndeadChronic, would be called 'Bitch Think'

Which i would describe as: Believing in an idea that is based on immediate emotion, instead of a logical reaction.

The gun debate is a perfect example of bitch think. After a school shooting, all the parents start demanding we remove guns from all of society {good luck with that}. It's an emotional response, and fails to understand that:

1) Guns are why we have our freedom in America
2) Humans will kill each other regardless of the tools available.
3) Those few school shootings would pale in comparison to the number of people who would die if you tried to take away guns.
4) Without guns, we leave ourselves vulnerable to much worse entities taking over.

While "Dont subscribe to bitch think!" may be the fun and offensive way, a more gentle mantra could be:

"The emotional reaction is rarely {if ever} a logical solution."

Note to mods:

I got disconnected while making this post, if it could be deleted I would appreciate it.

Originally Posted by rkspsm

In my, humble, opinion, I am not willing to discredit logic and cold rational thinking applied on human emotions, behaviors and interactions, not easily atleast. My rationale is, when we say "logic doesnt apply to X", what we are really saying, that the logic being applied to X is much more complex and input variables are far greater than which can be comprehended, atleast incomprehensible by the person/group making that claim. In other words, when I see that I cannot apply cold logic to a human situation, I will assume that either I am not smart enough or lack information about inputs, and will also assume that someone else, with more information and/or more intelligence, can comprehend it. If I be a little honest and blunt here, I'll say that claiming logic doesnt work on X is a little bit of arrogance, the assumption that I am smartest of my kind and because I am not able to apply logic, so no one else will be able to.

Also, pure logic may not always be that rigid. A classic example from the world of IT security is blacklisting vs whitelisting. Whitelisting is very rigid, but blacklisting is not. As long as you dont exhibit some blacklisted behavior, you are free to be unique self. I should be allowed to do whatever in my room, as long as I do not impose any problems on others, like playing super loud music while living in an apartment, very late into the night. If I do that, then that is a variety which my neighbors wont appreciate, and after a point they will retaliate. Legal/Formal retaliation or taking the matter in their own hands, either way, I will face retaliation.

I certainly wouldn't wish to discredit nor even undermine the use of logic, it is a very powerful tool at our disposal after all, but not everything NEEDS to be brought down to logical thinking.

Imagine you have had a bar of chocolate sitting in the fridge / cupboard for a few days and have forgotten about it. You open the door, notice it and think mmmm nice bar of chocolate I think I'll have that now. Now so long as you're not diabetic or have some other reason for not eating that bar of chocolate the only real consideration should be do I desire to eat this now?

You could try to break down your sudden interest into logical questions like 'why do I want this now when I didn't yesterday?' but what's the point? Where is the upside to this type of thinking? A little non-thinking indulgence can be very therapeutic.

Maybe as you say understanding our emotions is just a matter of application and understanding all the variables concerned, but is it not also logical to accept that MAYBE it is not possible for anyone to truly know themselves to this extent in all situations.

Sometimes we do things solely for the enjoyment and avoid other things because we don't enjoy them. IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with this, in moderation of course.

I do however like your analogy of whitelisting and blacklisting, some things should obviously be no-go areas.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

Imagine you have had a bar of chocolate sitting in the fridge / cupboard for a few days and have forgotten about it. You open the door, notice it and think mmmm nice bar of chocolate I think I'll have that now. Now so long as you're not diabetic or have some other reason for not eating that bar of chocolate the only real consideration should be do I desire to eat this now?

You could try to break down your sudden interest into logical questions like 'why do I want this now when I didn't yesterday?' but what's the point? Where is the upside to this type of thinking? A little non-thinking indulgence can be very therapeutic.

You are very right in this scenario about the fact that its very difficult to answer from logic, why do I want this now when I didnt yesterday... atleast in deterministic logical models. But probabilistic logical models can still be applied, and can yield lots of results. It can help you in planning your workout based on your intake of carbs, it can also help you in finding ways to reduce the need (like maybe eating some fruits before eating chocolate).

My point is, I dont like to slap "logic cannot be applied to X" on anything, including human emotions. Probabilistic modeling can be done and then utilized to create effective strategies. One great example is NAWALT vs EWALT vs AWALT. That is nothing but three different consensuses on the probability of finding women not exhibiting certain negative behaviors. One camp says there is a significant probability, the next camp says that the probability is too low to gamble, and the last camp says that the probability is zero and the model is effectively deterministic.

You could try to break down your sudden interest into logical questions like 'why do I want this now when I didn't yesterday?' but what's the point? Where is the upside to this type of thinking? A little non-thinking indulgence can be very therapeutic.

This is where women excel compared to men.


Think about government benefits (social security in the US?). In the UK, women would not hesitate to rely on state benefits when they want. They don't think, well do I deserve it? what if it makes me lazy? What if it will demotivate me to find a job?

etc etc.

She will just take and take and take, and then if it runs out she will find the next resource to such from. And yea it is therapeutic as fuck, because over thinking can cause so many psychological issues which aren't healthy for men.

Originally Posted by Opaque

And yea it is therapeutic as fuck, because over thinking can cause so many psychological issues which aren't healthy for men.

This is such an important statement it probably deserves a thread of its own (and more).

Over thinking things is a curse. It is a very easy trap to fall in to, serves little if any purpose and as you say can lead to serious psychological issues. Been there, done that. Knowing when to let go, or unplug as some might say, is a very important life lesson.