Athlone: In some ways, you have a point. “Those” men(manginas and white knights who tolerate the expression of negative qualities by their women for whatever reason) do screw things up for the rest of us.
There are quite a few in the MRA/Roissysphere who would actually agree with you. I see posts talking about how these men, not feminists, are in fact the real “enemy” so to speak.
[Reply]
» Reply to this Comment «
dan_brodribb says:
July 14, 2010 at 1:07 pm
“I would love not having to use game techniques. I have a very big “inner beta chump” and, when my girlfriend tells me two tender words, I want to tell her ten of these words and give her ten kisses.
But several relationships have proved me that things do not work that way. Every time I have been myself (that is, a beta chump) in a relationship, it has become a catastrophe”
I’m sorry to hear that, NBT. Feeling like you can’t be yourself sounds very lonely.
For what it’s worth, you don’t sound like a chump to me.
dan_brodribb´s last blog ..Time for a Change of Heart Try The Heart WayMy?ComLuv? Profile
[Reply]
» Reply to this Comment «
Hambydammit says:
July 14, 2010 at 2:13 pm
Such a complicated topic! I’ll keep myself to one aspect of it. Remember my post from a while back about defining love? ( Here it is: http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/what-is-love/ ) The principle model used by psychotherapists these days focuses on love as a decision to behave “lovingly” towards someone we’ve committed to. Of course, this decision is often accompanied by deep feelings of passion, but that’s kind of beside the point.
PUA relationships are often built around getting the girl to put the behavior before the decision. That is, the guy wants sex and the girl gives it to him. This pattern continues for some length of time until the guy decides to dump the girl or keep her — at which point the GUY is making the decision to behave lovingly by giving the girl the commitment she wants.