Thread: What's your thoughts on why most men cannot live without women

Point on. The need for external validation and TV shows are what make men pursue women, even at their own expense. I'd add that it's more about external validation than sexual drive coz validation is what makes lots of men avoid buying sex, when it's in their best interest, and instead pursue or keep up with sh*t from their partners.

Anytime i hear a woman say the word "chivalry", i see a woman who wants to exploit men for her amusement.

They've been conditioned to think that way. I mean who hasn't? We're human after all.

Some will find purpose and something more than love like hobbies.

Originally Posted by Jacknife

A being who hangs their whole identity and sense of self worth with their physcial appearance, and cannot chop wood and carry water. A being that is almost cripplingly insecure by default. Who cannot even tell the truth amongst themselves about who they really are (why can't I find a nice guy???). A being that would rather believe in the lie that makes them feel good than any truth that is unpalatable. A being that cannot truly like others who are like them, in the way that men can really love their close friends. I cannot fathom wanting to harness my time and my money to this kind of being,

Wow, it's that last statement that resonates with me. Watch how your statement shows up in my own story:

Back in my 20s I took a night class at a community college, forgot what subject, but the teacher, a woman, was very smart and over the course of the course I came to admire her intellect. I could understand her. She had her shit together.

One evening, when class had ended and everyone was piling out of the room, I stayed behind to ask her a followup question on the night's material. But then, when that was over, I decided to ask her the most important question that had been perplexing me in life. I bet she could tell me.

Me: "May I ask you a question about women?"

"Sure", she replied, seeing this shift in conversation, repositioning herself on the desk to which she had been leaning, to now half-sit on its corner, arms now folded, curious as to what I was going to say next. It was just us in the room.

"Why is it that, when you ask a woman what she wants in a guy, she says all the things that a nice guy would be, but when you are those nice things, she goes for the jerks instead?"

I had no idea if this was a common observation, or would be years later. Pre-internet, guys didn't seem to talk with each other like this. I thought it was my lone observation. I didn't know who to ask, until now.

My teacher looked me in the eyes and no doubt saw my sincerity, perhaps even my innocence. She knew me by now, likely knew why I would trust to ask her, knew that I, as the young intellectual thinker I was, needed an answer I could use. One I could believe in. This is no time to answer casually, I bet she thought. So, she gave me her answer and, yes, I accepted it.

And it changed my life.

What she said was, when I ask a woman that question, what does she want in a guy, at that precise moment that I am asking her that question, at that precise moment, I am accessing her intellect and so it is from her intellect that her answer is brought forth, and as such it would be the best most nice-sounding set of wants that an intellect would produce. However, that same woman could go out to a nightclub that very night, walk in the door, see a jerk standing there ten feet away, dressed up and looking good, and be attracted to him. The woman will not summon to mind what she said to me earlier in the day. At this point her intellect is not engaged. It is her emotions in play, not her intellect.

I told the teacher I understood, and I did. Her answer was almost a description of my question, an acknowledgement of its validity, but she went deeper, into motivating forces, I suppose you'd say. Perhaps, too, hearing it come from an intellect I trusted, someone who was not me, and a woman yet, gave me the confidence that I was hearing truth and not just my imagination trapping me.

I thanked her, and left for home. Still, this was not the moment that changed my life.

All these years later I still remember the drive home in the dark, alone, radio off, as I thought about what she had said, where my life forever changed. I thought, what kind of a human being would tell a sincere someone (me) one thing but do another? Whether a woman is aware of her duality in this or not, what kind of human beings do this? And on such an important topic of human interaction as this, which I figured was only the tip of the iceberg. How can a human being have one part of their brain say one thing and another part of their brain say a different thing and not have these two parts talk to each other to get their shit together? And as this is how women are as human beings, then women are fucked up and I want nothing to do with them!

And upon thinking that, it was like a huge trouble lifted from my shoulders. No more fretting about trying to get a woman. Or doubting myself for being unable to get one like other guys can. That entire endeavor was removed from my plate. I cannot ever be with a mind that says one thing but does another. That is just an overriding common sense. Putting myself with such a person would be a completely disastrous thing to do and wrong for good mental health, I don't care what the rest of the world does. It suddenly got as simple and clear as that.

And at that moment I was forever free.

However, as I was still walking around in a blue pill society full of blue pill men who sought to place themselves with human beings who say one thing but do another, this made me keep my story to myself.

I just thought I would never get around to telling this story until I read what you wrote about this kind of being, Jacknife. So, thanks.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I just thought I would never get around to telling this story until I read what you wrote about this kind of being, Jacknife.

Not just any story...your super hero MGTOW origin story no less! I am pleased that my brain droppings elicited that from your locker and in to the open. What a tale! I read it slowly and enjoyed every morsel.

I, like many of us here I suspect, learned about what I wrote the hard way through suffering in marriage and relationshits. You on the other hand, applied your observation and insight and came to the same conclusions without having to marinade yourself in the trenches and get chewed up a little bit first.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

Wow, it's that last statement that resonates with me. Watch how your statement shows up in my own story:

Back in my 20s I took a night class at a community college, forgot what subject, but the teacher, a woman, was very smart and over the course of the course I came to admire her intellect. I could understand her. She had her shit together.

One evening, when class had ended and everyone was piling out of the room, I stayed behind to ask her a followup question on the night's material. But then, when that was over, I decided to ask her the most important question that had been perplexing me in life. I bet she could tell me.

Me: "May I ask you a question about women?"

"Sure", she replied, seeing this shift in conversation, repositioning herself on the desk to which she had been leaning, to now half-sit on its corner, arms now folded, curious as to what I was going to say next. It was just us in the room.

"Why is it that, when you ask a woman what she wants in a guy, she says all the things that a nice guy would be, but when you are those nice things, she goes for the jerks instead?"

I had no idea if this was a common observation, or would be years later. Pre-internet, guys didn't seem to talk with each other like this. I thought it was my lone observation. I didn't know who to ask, until now.

My teacher looked me in the eyes and no doubt saw my sincerity, perhaps even my innocence. She knew me by now, likely knew why I would trust to ask her, knew that I, as the young intellectual thinker I was, needed an answer I could use. One I could believe in. This is no time to answer casually, I bet she thought. So, she gave me her answer and, yes, I accepted it.

And it changed my life.

What she said was, when I ask a woman that question, what does she want in a guy, at that precise moment that I am asking her that question, at that precise moment, I am accessing her intellect and so it is from her intellect that her answer is brought forth, and as such it would be the best most nice-sounding set of wants that an intellect would produce. However, that same woman could go out to a nightclub that very night, walk in the door, see a jerk standing there ten feet away, dressed up and looking good, and be attracted to him. The woman will not summon to mind what she said to me earlier in the day. At this point her intellect is not engaged. It is her emotions in play, not her intellect.

I told the teacher I understood, and I did. Her answer was almost a description of my question, an acknowledgement of its validity, but she went deeper, into motivating forces, I suppose you'd say. Perhaps, too, hearing it come from an intellect I trusted, someone who was not me, and a woman yet, gave me the confidence that I was hearing truth and not just my imagination trapping me.

I thanked her, and left for home. Still, this was not the moment that changed my life.

All these years later I still remember the drive home in the dark, alone, radio off, as I thought about what she had said, where my life forever changed. I thought, what kind of a human being would tell a sincere someone (me) one thing but do another? Whether a woman is aware of her duality in this or not, what kind of human beings do this? And on such an important topic of human interaction as this, which I figured was only the tip of the iceberg. How can a human being have one part of their brain say one thing and another part of their brain say a different thing and not have these two parts talk to each other to get their shit together? And as this is how women are as human beings, then women are fucked up and I want nothing to do with them!

And upon thinking that, it was like a huge trouble lifted from my shoulders. No more fretting about trying to get a woman. Or doubting myself for being unable to get one like other guys can. That entire endeavor was removed from my plate. I cannot ever be with a mind that says one thing but does another. That is just an overriding common sense. Putting myself with such a person would be a completely disastrous thing to do and wrong for good mental health, I don't care what the rest of the world does. It suddenly got as simple and clear as that.

And at that moment I was forever free.

However, as I was still walking around in a blue pill society full of blue pill men who sought to place themselves with human beings who say one thing but do another, this made me keep my story to myself.

I just thought I would never get around to telling this story until I read what you wrote about this kind of being, Jacknife. So, thanks.

Add a couple ounces of indecisiveness it paints a picture of exactly what I learned!

Now take that reprobate indecisive emotional back peddling mindset and introduce it to feminism, now you have a monster that thinks she has every qualification and absolute right to be primary commander and chief of a relationshit with a man.

That's allot of the reason I saw psychological and financial devastation in fighting or following female directives, someone who thinks they have all the qualifications for leading and actually has none and can only orchestrate confusion and misdirection at best.

This mindset in modern women made me abandon them to their own devices and the damaging deprecations thereof. It was like stepping out of a bull arena and seeing the carnage from the grandstands and realizing THAT COULD BE ME BEING GOARED AND TORN TO PIECES!

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I thought, what kind of a human being would tell a sincere someone (me) one thing but do another? Whether a woman is aware of her duality in this or not, what kind of human beings do this? And on such an important topic of human interaction as this, which I figured was only the tip of the iceberg. How can a human being have one part of their brain say one thing and another part of their brain say a different thing and not have these two parts talk to each other to get their shit together? And as this is how women are as human beings, then women are fucked up and I want nothing to do with them!

Thanks Unboxxed, that is a fantastic post!!!

Women think emotionally, or let their emotions direct their actions. This is likely her primary reason for saying one thing and doing another. Logic plays a part but it is secondary. She says what she should but does what she feels.

Men mostly think logically, emotions are mostly secondary (we hope). When men think primarily emotionally those actions are mostly unchecked... Rage, mass shootings etc.... It pains me to say but: For the most part, women deal with their emotions day in day out, better than the average man.

It is, what it is. Evolution has made us this way. All part of TRP learning.

Originally Posted by Jacknife

Not just any story...your super hero MGTOW origin story no less! I am pleased that my brain droppings elicited that from your locker and in to the open. What a tale! I read it slowly and enjoyed every morsel.

I, like many of us here I suspect, learned about what I wrote the hard way through suffering in marriage and relationshits. You on the other hand, applied your observation and insight and came to the same conclusions without having to marinade yourself in the trenches and get chewed up a little bit first.

My apologies Unboxxed if this sounds in any way glib, but I mean it most sincerely.

It’s the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk.

Is this not what your teacher was effectively saying?

Talk to a woman and listen to what she says. It will often sound reasonable and well thought out.

Watch that same person’s actions and they will tell another tale.

There seems to be a disconnect between their thoughts and their actions. Emotional reactions may explain it to some extent, but I suspect some sort of duplicity is more at play.

But conning who, others or themselves?

They so often get themselves into so much shit that I suspect the latter more so than the former.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

It’s the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk.

Is this not what your teacher was effectively saying?

It goes deeper than that, more fundamental.

Contemplating what you state, stated in that way, can be seen as selectively performed. Where a person can walk their talk in some instances but not in others, like a simple error in one area of their thinking.

This, though, is something not correctable by the person. It's who they are. It's their brain. It's how they are wired. Or, perhaps miswired.

I believe that when those women told me they wanted those nice things in a man, that they 100% believed it, no artifice. It would be too horrible that any human being would consciously think, "I'm going to tell this nice man Unboxxed, who is looking at me with sincere eyes, some things that I want him to believe but I would actually never do myself. I'm going to tell him some things that will influence how he acts towards women moving forward, but I know it will fail him. I'll do this because, oh I don't know, it gives me a chance to imagine myself as an oracle of goodness and the feelings I get around that, and his actual consequences be damned."

If any woman actually did think that, she is a sinister human being. Careless, selfish, yeah those easy adjectives might more quickly come to mind but they gloss over the pernicious effects. You don't do that to people. It is one of the Prime Directives in life to not do that.

But, I don't think those women thought that. Of these women I had asked, to keep running into only sinister women is unlikely. More likely I ran into sincere women with broken brains. One after the next. They can't help it. And they would be just as harmful to me in many other situations if I were to become emotionally dependent upon them.

I'm not hating them. I'm calling out what I see in them. How many decades of my life do I want to spend harping on women's hypocrisies before I realize that there is just too much wrong there to call it choice? Do I want to crusade to change in women what cannot be changed? Of course not.

I'm suggesting that the phrase walking your talk itself becomes glib in comparison because it gets recognized as something familiar with which to argue. The Same Old Argument that we all know. So, she argues. That's her battlefield, words. An ongoing defense of the status quo ensues. I abandoned the status quo on that quiet car ride back home.

That goes for men, too. I could never get close to, come to care about, and then love, any man or woman whom I could not trust what they say, could not depend on what they say, whom I could not believe in. Not only would I not consciously permit myself this, but even as a matter of an emotional attraction sneaking around my intellect I could not gravitate towards this, like the way two magnets rebuff each other if oriented just so. Best to keep them at arm's length.

With me, you have to have an attractive mind, far ahead of any physical interaction. I can see that's why I had that perplexing problem to resolve.

Damn, Unboxxed, that's a really good start for a porn movie or a romance novel! Young unexperienced guy falls in love with the intellect of an older experienced woman... later on his drive home he doesn't think of her body but of her words and read between the lines... damn... the audience would love it! You should write it down if you got time for that.

Originally Posted by Smoking Wizard

You should write it down if you got time for that.

I think he just did!

Originally Posted by Smoking Wizard

Damn, Unboxxed, that's a really good start for a porn movie or a romance novel! Young unexperienced guy falls in love with the intellect of an older experienced woman... later on his drive home he doesn't think of her body but of her words and read between the lines... damn... the audience would love it! You should write it down if you got time for that.

It's the other teacher in another class with whom I was attracted. She was chirpy and fun. And smart. I guess I like the smart ones. One time, I showed up for class on a beer buzz and, after class, I said a flirtatious thing to her, standing only two feet apart. She smiled, quickly turned away, saying Ah, Unboxxed, with that "you're trouble" connotation.

She was married and I should not have done that but I knew it wouldn't go anywhere. It was fun, however.

And then there was the time...

The Yard Dog at the Community College

And it gets better and better. Now we are in Don Jon territory! It makes me smile because I know exactly what it feels like. What I absolutely loved was the phrase: "Oh man, what should I only do with you?" And my response was silence mixed with a dirty look and smile. Oh gosh, these times are gone now without fear of getting in trouble I guess. Poor youth, and poor horny, underfucked teachers...

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

It goes deeper than that, more fundamental.

Contemplating what you state, stated in that way, can be seen as selectively performed. Where a person can walk their talk in some instances but not in others, like a simple error in one area of their thinking.

This, though, is something not correctable by the person. It's who they are. It's their brain. It's how they are wired. Or, perhaps miswired.

I believe that when those women told me they wanted those nice things in a man, that they 100% believed it, no artifice. It would be too horrible that any human being would consciously think, "I'm going to tell this nice man Unboxxed, who is looking at me with sincere eyes, some things that I want him to believe but I would actually never do myself. I'm going to tell him some things that will influence how he acts towards women moving forward, but I know it will fail him. I'll do this because, oh I don't know, it gives me a chance to imagine myself as an oracle of goodness and the feelings I get around that, and his actual consequences be damned."

If any woman actually did think that, she is a sinister human being. Careless, selfish, yeah those easy adjectives might more quickly come to mind but they gloss over the pernicious effects. You don't do that to people. It is one of the Prime Directives in life to not do that.

But, I don't think those women thought that. Of these women I had asked, to keep running into only sinister women is unlikely. More likely I ran into sincere women with broken brains. One after the next. They can't help it. And they would be just as harmful to me in many other situations if I were to become emotionally dependent upon them.

I'm not hating them. I'm calling out what I see in them. How many decades of my life do I want to spend harping on women's hypocrisies before I realize that there is just too much wrong there to call it choice? Do I want to crusade to change in women what cannot be changed? Of course not.

I'm suggesting that the phrase walking your talk itself becomes glib in comparison because it gets recognized as something familiar with which to argue. The Same Old Argument that we all know. So, she argues. That's her battlefield, words. An ongoing defense of the status quo ensues. I abandoned the status quo on that quiet car ride back home.

That goes for men, too. I could never get close to, come to care about, and then love, any man or woman whom I could not trust what they say, could not depend on what they say, whom I could not believe in. Not only would I not consciously permit myself this, but even as a matter of an emotional attraction sneaking around my intellect I could not gravitate towards this, like the way two magnets rebuff each other if oriented just so. Best to keep them at arm's length.

With me, you have to have an attractive mind, far ahead of any physical interaction. I can see that's why I had that perplexing problem to resolve.

The women that I tangled with seemed like children: They would get into trouble, look to a parent figure to bail them out, and then swear up and down that they would learn from the experience and never make that mistake again. But as soon as they were bailed out and everything was set right, their good intentions went right out the window and they went back to fucking up and soon found themselves in trouble again.

Of course, part of it was my fault. I played the white knight and rescued women in trouble. And that's like a parent-child relationship where the child never has to pay for her own fuck-ups: As a result, the women never learns anything or grows up. She's free to do whatever she wants and simply looks to her white knight to clean up after her. (Or punishes the white knight if he won't.)

Anyway, I was never sure how much of it was the woman's fault for playing the eternal child or mine for playing the white knight. But eventually I figured out that I needed to quit playing the white knight around women. And that effectively ended any close relations with women, because it seems like just about all of them are children looking for a white knight to bail them out of one kind of problem or another. Sooner or later they start getting needy and start leaning on me to address some issue in their life. But I don't play that game anymore.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I believe that when those women told me they wanted those nice things in a man, that they 100% believed it, no artifice.

Yes indeed, they probably did believe it. I’ve been there and witnessed this, but what did they believe an hour, or a day later?

What happens when the crunch hits the punch?

I have mentioned that I was once friendzoned by one that I totally worshipped. We would talk often about HER problems, never mine but that’s another discussion.

I would let her talk, reason things out for herself whilst throwing in the odd question to make sure she knew her options.

Time after time she would come to a conclusion as to what she should do, only to come back to me a week later telling me she had done the opposite.

What they believe is right when theorising and what they do are often two completely different things. Isn’t this the problem?

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

More likely I ran into sincere women with broken brains.

Ha!

And how many have you run into who’s brains aren’t broken in some way? Outside of direct family where personal prejudice maybe a factor how many can you count?

I’ve known hundreds if not thousands of women through all their stages of life, child to pensioner, and there are less than a handful that I would even try to defend their reasoning as compared to their actions.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I'm not hating them. I'm calling out what I see in them. How many decades of my life do I want to spend harping on women's hypocrisies before I realize that there is just too much wrong there to call it choice? Do I want to crusade to change in women what cannot be changed? Of course not.

Absolutely 100% agreed.

This is what (IMO) many don’t get about us. We are called names: misogynistic, haters, extremists, whatever.

Telling the truth about female behaviour is not misogynistic, telling lies about their behaviour is.
Telling the truth about female behaviour is not hating; telling lies about their behaviour is.
Telling the truth about female behaviour is not extremist; telling lies about their behaviour is.

So, who are the people telling the lies about female behaviour?

It certainly isn’t us. And yet we are labelled the misogynists, the haters and the extremists.

Go figure!

Originally Posted by Jackoff

Yes indeed, they probably did believe it. I’ve been there and witnessed this, but what did they believe an hour, or a day later?

Probably anything else that pleased them to believe without intellectual prompting by Unboxxed.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

What they believe is right when theorising and what they do are often two completely different things. Isn’t this the problem?

Yes, accessing their intellect is their Charly moment. A fleeting thing, one accessed only externally by other people. End the conversation and the intellectual override is no more.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

And how many have you run into who’s brains aren’t broken in some way? Outside of direct family where personal prejudice maybe a factor how many can you count?

Nothing memorable. I've forgotten so much. The girls I knew were all broken brains. In general social conversation, women always betray themselves with me. Even in my Mensa lunch group, the ladies say things so unbalanced. (ie, how anti-woman it was that the men returning from WWII were returned to the jobs they held prior to going off to war, displacing the women who had filled in for them in their absence.)

Originally Posted by Jackoff

So, who are the people telling the lies about female behaviour?

It certainly isn’t us. And yet we are labelled the misogynists, the haters and the extremists.

Go figure!

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I believe that when those women told me they wanted those nice things in a man, that they 100% believed it, no artifice. It would be too horrible that any human being would consciously think, "I'm going to tell this nice man Unboxxed, who is looking at me with sincere eyes, some things that I want him to believe but I would actually never do myself. I'm going to tell him some things that will influence how he acts towards women moving forward, but I know it will fail him. I'll do this because, oh I don't know, it gives me a chance to imagine myself as an oracle of goodness and the feelings I get around that, and his actual consequences be damned."

If any woman actually did think that, she is a sinister human being. Careless, selfish, yeah those easy adjectives might more quickly come to mind but they gloss over the pernicious effects. You don't do that to people. It is one of the Prime Directives in life to not do that.

I find that most women will lie straight to a man's face, a stranger, friend or relative. If she feels her answer will hurt his feelings, she will avoid the truth at all costs.

Dating advice: Women know what they find attractive in a man, it's common knowledge of the 6 sixes. Not many women will straight out and tell a man looking for dating advice to hit the gym and buff up, find a better paying job, spend more time grooming, dress to impress etc. They mostly say, just be yourself, no one likes a fake, keep trying you will find someone she is out there... When he is in the lower 80% the chances are slim to none. Women don't like to see men working on bettering themselves, they want men to be naturally attractive, if you have to work at it, you are faking it or could fool them into thinking you are naturally a top 20%er.

Women's view of men: "Oh, he's such a nice man". No he's not, he's a boring man. Women think emotionally and if he is boring her emotions will not be stimulated. Women crave excitement and drama, that is why the "Bad Boy" is attractive to most women. That's why "Nice guys finish last".

When her partner finds out she has been misbehaving: In stead of owning up to what she has done most times women will try everything in their "Avoidance Handbook" including lying, gaslighting, sucking up and changing the subject and water works... (misbehaving = spending too much money <----> cheating)

Women are the masters of manipulation. Why do organizations get good looking female students to go out and sell things or to get donations? Because sex sells, the young women in their prime get better results.

Originally Posted by RustyNuts

I find that most women will lie straight to a man's face, a stranger, friend or relative. If she feels her answer will hurt his feelings, she will avoid the truth at all costs.

Dating advice: Women know what they find attractive in a man, it's common knowledge of the 6 sixes. Not many women will straight out and tell a man looking for dating advice to hit the gym and buff up, find a better paying job, spend more time grooming, dress to impress etc. They mostly say, just be yourself, no one likes a fake, keep trying you will find someone she is out there... When he is in the lower 80% the chances are slim to none. Women don't like to see men working on bettering themselves, they want men to be naturally attractive, if you have to work at it, you are faking it or could fool them into thinking you are naturally a top 20%er.

Women's view of men: "Oh, he's such a nice man". No he's not, he's a boring man. Women think emotionally and if he is boring her emotions will not be stimulated. Women crave excitement and drama, that is why the "Bad Boy" is attractive to most women. That's why "Nice guys finish last".

When her partner finds out she has been misbehaving: In stead of owning up to what she has done most times women will try everything in their "Avoidance Handbook" including lying, gaslighting, sucking up and changing the subject and water works... (misbehaving = spending too much money <----> cheating)

Women are the masters of manipulation. Why do organizations get good looking female students to go out and sell things or to get donations? Because sex sells, the young women in their prime get better results.

That's a good point. That's basically the premise of modern "woke" liberalism: It's better to lie to people than to hurt their feelings. If someone's obese, you praise them for body positivity rather than being honest and telling them they're unhealthy. Because telling them the truth would hurt their feelings and amount to "shaming" them.

So the truth goes out the window. The truth hurts, so everyone gets used to telling comfortable lies in order to feel good.

"So the truth goes out the window. The truth hurts, so everyone gets used to telling comfortable lies in order to feel good."

And here we are, in a upside down world. War is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strenght. Double-plus-good, eh?

Remember the book 1984? This is where this road will lead. It's not just lying about female nature, it's about lying all the time.

Seeing all the comments, it seems like a lot of guys got it figured out about women but then again this is a mgtow forum.

What are the elements or factors allow us to see female nature for what it is. That something that blue pillers(and to lesser degrees PUAs and Incels) don't have?