MOST HELPFUL EXPLANATION I’VE EVER PROVIDED FOR STRONG WOMEN? —“This is quite

MOST HELPFUL EXPLANATION I’VE EVER PROVIDED FOR STRONG WOMEN?

—“This is quite possibly the most helpful thing you have ever posted (at least for me).”—

Women fear and reject us (men) all the time, for a zillion reasons every day. And we don’t like it really. Especially crazy chicks (the vast majority of women) when we are just trying to be friendly or get along, or learn, or whatever.

One of the things that makes us feel emotionally and intellectually and socially safe is to be around women who aren’t ‘fragile’. Strong men like women who are strong.

**Being a man around women is a little like being a gorilla in a glass-shop: everything is really easily broken if we aren’t really careful at all times.**

Strong women make you feel ‘safe’ that you can talk and act like your natural gorilla-self without fear that the glasses will break (the crazy chicks will get over excited). And the crazy chicks will rally and shame other women and god forbid, other gorillas to punish you, for accidentally breaking a goblet, just cause, after all, you’re just a gorilla.

I mean, that’s the reality of it. It’s that simple. That’s why strong men like strong women.

Women often wish men thought more like them and men wish women thought more like them. We all wish others would think more like us. I mean, everything is easier the more similar that we are.

But men are faster, stronger, and extremely dangerous super-predators. and when we get strong women around us we feel safer. Weak men want less strong women. Because if we don’t feel STRONGER then we don’t believe women will be attracted to us. (And they aren’t).

So it’s a totally logical thing we’re talking abut here. Men want strong women that they wont break, and get in trouble for breaking (or lose opportunity for sex by breaking). And on the other hand, men don’t want women that are so strong that they won’t be attracted to us. The thing that works against mankind, is that women are so attracted to gorillas at the expense of everything else (no matter what they say, that’s the data), that women force regression toward the mean, because impulsive aggressive alphas aren’t as useful as un-impulsive, cunning alphas. So without monogamy, assortative mating, and property rights, women will cause dysgenic reproduction. And without assortative mating you get the middle east: invariant dysgenia holding at the mean.

So that’s the truthful narrative, not the fallacy that’s cast by feminists.

—“I also think men do have that whole scaling Everest thing. So something not easily obtained is worth working toward.”—

Let me reframe this a bit: Men are scared. We are disposable and we know it. We are constantly threatened by permanent loneliness that can easily drive us to suicide. We mature later, and die earlier. In exchange we are stronger and faster, less sensitive and more specialized. We are, each of us, an experiment that can succeed or fail.

About a third of us are undesirable as providers or gene suppliers, and about another third only marginally desirable as providers, not gene suppliers. Men try climb everest in order to capture the best genes that they can. It’s not complicated.

And, worse, just as women must lie to themselves to control their paranoid impulses for acceptance in the tribe, lest not be able to seek rents when needed against fellow tribe members, men must lie to themselves so that they continue to work in the service of their genes despite the near total likelihood of failure.

Men look in the mirror and see much better visions of themselves than others do, and women look and see worse than they do – the mirror always lies. And it must, or we would never keep the relentless pursuit of the interests our genes. Because what is rational in real time, is inconsequential to the intergenerational requirements of genes.

This is why women can collect so many men to help them with so may different aspects of life without actually giving them sex, but merely the most remotest of chances that sex and affection are possible. Because men must play ever option available to them. And the lower on the curve they are, the more important are those options. And the more desperate the man the more aggressive he can become in pursuit of them – his genes drive him to reproduce, and his reason is a mere mouse riding an elephant of intuition, that does everything possible to lie to the mouse in order to get what it wants.

I think of the elephant of intuition as blind, deaf and dumb and reliant on the mouse of reason. Intuition wants satisfaction for all intents and purposes must feed upon chemical satisfaction, and it only gets chemical satisfaction from rewarding the unconscious genes. The rider is a device for getting satisfaction. Everything is a compromise between the blind deaf and dumb elephant that has no problem lying to the rider, and the rider has eyes and ears and can speak and control the body, but little else.

Curt Doolittle