competition, dominanance and violence

[Non]

Evolutionary psychologists are interested in why behaviours evolved in particular ways. They argue that males compete for mates whilst women choose dominant males. Males become dominant by being violent.

[Sloppy Zhang]

I would argue that males become "dominant", by exhibiting desirable traits more than any other male.

 

These traits manifest differently over the course of time.

 

There have certainly been eras, and there are certainly locations in the present world, in which violence equates to dominance success. Where the more violent you are, the more successful you are. The more money you get. The more food you can provide. The bigger house you can acquire. The more you can take care of a woman and a family.

 

So to a woman seeking a long term partner that can ensure some measure of security, well that would be a good choice.

 

But there have been (and I would say that if you lived in a developed country, this is the case for you) in which being violent can actually set you back a great deal. Someone who is intelligent and calm would have an edge. Look at Mark Zuckerberg. Would you say he's violent? But I would say he has quite effectively established a "dominance" over the other males in the world. Did he do this by being violent? No, he did it by being smart (and perhaps a bit Machiavellian, but that too is intelligent in a way).

 

Though I don't keep up with his personal life, I doubt Mr. Zuckerberg has any problem "getting" women. And if he decided to be "violent", and just punch all of his competitors, I don't think he'd get very far!

 

 

But you should also keep in mind that everyone has their own preferences. Even in times of peace, some women want a guy who can established a certain degree of raw, physical strength. Some women find that repulsive, and want a guy who will play by the rules of society.

 

Some guys like hot, air headed women. Some guys prefer a woman who has a superior intellect and with whom they can interact as equals. Some guys like to be dominated by women, so it all depends on who you are.

 

No hard and fast rules, I'd say.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[三江源]

This explains why Eddie Izzard is so loved by women. It's his violent coloured lipstick.

[Non]

I would argue that males become "dominant", by exhibiting desirable traits more than any other male.

 

These traits manifest differently over the course of time.

 

There have certainly been eras, and there are certainly locations in the present world, in which violence equates to dominance success. Where the more violent you are, the more successful you are. The more money you get. The more food you can provide. The bigger house you can acquire. The more you can take care of a woman and a family.

 

So to a woman seeking a long term partner that can ensure some measure of security, well that would be a good choice.

 

But there have been (and I would say that if you lived in a developed country, this is the case for you) in which being violent can actually set you back a great deal. Someone who is intelligent and calm would have an edge. Look at Mark Zuckerberg. Would you say he's violent? But I would say he has quite effectively established a "dominance" over the other males in the world. Did he do this by being violent? No, he did it by being smart (and perhaps a bit Machiavellian, but that too is intelligent in a way).

 

Though I don't keep up with his personal life, I doubt Mr. Zuckerberg has any problem "getting" women. And if he decided to be "violent", and just punch all of his competitors, I don't think he'd get very far!

 

 

But you should also keep in mind that everyone has their own preferences. Even in times of peace, some women want a guy who can established a certain degree of raw, physical strength. Some women find that repulsive, and want a guy who will play by the rules of society.

 

Some guys like hot, air headed women. Some guys prefer a woman who has a superior intellect and with whom they can interact as equals. Some guys like to be dominated by women, so it all depends on who you are.

 

No hard and fast rules, I'd say.

And you don't call that violence?

 

Violence comes from the word violate. In the process of intently "becoming more dominant" you violate other males.

 

But don't fool yourself, these women want murdering men and violence. It's what makes them hot.

 

And at the end of the battle you do want her to like you as the violent man you were.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Non

[joeblast]

And you don't call that violence?

 

Violence comes from the word violate. In the process of intently "becoming more dominant" you violate other males.

 

But don't fool yourself, these women want murdering men and violence. It's what makes them hot.

"becoming more dominant" necessarily means that someone is violated? wth???

 

that kinda sounds like the terrible adage of "letting a corporation keep too much of its money somehow takes money from poor people" as if the corporation doesnt employ a shtload of them!

 

You do realize that you dont have a right to not be offended, yes?

[Non]

TO actually "become successful" in this life...

 

I would say MOST have to develop a sort of violent/aggressive mindstate. Even if the men aren't necessarily, overtly, or explicitly physically violent in mind they are.

 

Why? Because it's natural to be aggressive. When this world is so FULL of crap, some things will tick you off. You will inevitably have to harden your heart and say "f*ck it" in some way or another and be cold.

 

To even develop the willpower to continue in the face of such competition, to "compete" with something other than overt violence like Mark Zuckerberg you had to have been a bad-ass in one way or another.

 

A man who is being overrun and dominated by other males is not even going to develop the willpower to compete, or to continue with his life unless he is forced to fight. Otherwise he is beat down.

 

Women compel men to be dominant for them, to be aggressive. Don't fool yourself, women want a man to break his back for them, to compete for them and to show aggression for them, and be dramatic. Even if it's wrong. Women want the aggressive man. Life is war. They want the violent man.

 

You would think we would have evolved by now to exclude violence from our lives but we thrive on violence to this day. Women still get hot over violence and aggression.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Non

[RiverSnake]

But don't fool yourself, these women want murdering men and violence. It's what makes them hot.

 

 

When going into my International Relations major my favorite professor told me that in IR there are two kinds of people: those who want to tell you how the world should be and those who want to tell you how it is.

 

-It must be difficult living life in an ideological box. Its a shame that some people never realize that their the common denominator in their own problems.

 

-Peace

[Non]

When going into my International Relations major my favorite professor told me that in IR there are two kinds of people: those who want to tell you how the world should be and those who want to tell you how it is.

 

-It must be difficult living life in an ideological box. Its a shame that some people never realize that their the common denominator in their own problems.

 

-Peace

 

 

So I tell you how it is and you tell me how it should be? Or does it really matter which one is doing what, as long as we know we are both doing one of these.

[zerostao]

competition does not come from the word violate. in this world there is alot of competing. you should choose however you feel you will compete best. maybe you are exactly right, i personally have never observed a male going out and clubbing a female, dragging her off and then they live happily everafter. also i am not sure how the approach of . "i just knocked off your bf to get closer to you" would play out.

i have seen cases of guys not being able to use up their sexual energy on a regular basis, and it resulting in a strong negative influence, resulting in loss of ability to think and behave rationally, sometimes leading to willful stupidity.

not sure which taoist practices you enjoy? do you practice any martial art?

[Non]

competition does not come from the word violate. in this world there is alot of competing. you should choose however you feel you will compete best. maybe you are exactly right, i personally have never observed a male going out and clubbing a female, dragging her off and then they live happily everafter. also i am not sure how the approach of . "i just knocked off your bf to get closer to you" would play out.

i have seen cases of guys not being able to use up their sexual energy on a regular basis, and it resulting in a strong negative influence, resulting in loss of ability to think and behave rationally, sometimes leading to willful stupidity.

not sure which taoist practices you enjoy? do you practice any martial art?

 

 

I believe it's all just more subtle than overtly being violent and aggressive but it all comes down to that. Its just socially accepted forms of violence and aggression.

[三江源]

Women still get hot over violence and aggression.

 

Lets speak hypothetically and assume a worst case scenario : that all women are mentally ill and get sexually aroused by men being violent and aggressive.

 

What's the next step?

 

Should we talk about it a lot and keep saying "OH NOES!!!"?

 

I dont mean to be dominant here, oh hold on, yes, I do... because I'm wondering what the point of this endless chat is.

 

Is the purpose of it to turn men off women and encourage them to turn gay or be celibate or just masturbate a lot?

 

Suppose everyone on the board agreed with you, Non, and said, "YES!! my girlfriend makes me watch dogfights as foreplay!!!"

 

What then?

 

You want to start a peace awareness campaign for womens sexuality, so that women can get hot for men who are sitting quietly reading or lying on the floor playing with the cat?

 

or what?!

[Aetherous]

.

Edited February 24, 2011 by center

[Sloppy Zhang]

But don't fool yourself

 

Non, have you sought a professional who you can sit down with and talk about your past experiences and where you're drawing all of these conclusions from?

 

Unless you care to open up to us about what exact experiences you've gone through that lead you to this conclusion?

[Non]

This is true...the world is a violent place and those who step up to the plate to fight, who fight with all they have, they become dominant.

 

But there is a greater violence than external wars. It's the violence a man has within himself. Men who go around the world killing everyone, they might have a little bit of mojo, maybe (actually probably not, due to experiencing so much trauma)...but men who control their subconscious tendencies, who follow their heart always in what seems right and pure, honing themselves to be helpers...those are the most dominant males on earth. Power goes to them.

 

External violence means that the man is still too afraid to face the internal, to face himself, and it's projected outward onto the world. This just creates more problems psychologically. Don't become a warrior...trust me. There is enough of a battle going on when you choose to be responsible for your life, and the wellbeing of others. Greater than any world war. Much harder than killing innocent people, is killing the unhelpful tendencies we all have, which keep ourselves and others in patterns of self inflicted suffering.

 

Eh, I'm learning...just some ideas for you.

 

right but the internal battle is still a battle. Do you want to continually battle yourself? Is a person who has to battle himself always better than a person who doesn't have to?

 

Maybe even the internal battling is not a necessity, just as much as having external wars motivating internal battles is not a necessity.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Non

[Aetherous]

.

Edited February 24, 2011 by center

[suninmyeyes]

 

Women compel men to be dominant for them, to be aggressive. Don't fool yourself, women want a man to break his back for them, to compete for them and to show aggression for them, and be dramatic. Even if it's wrong. Women want the aggressive man. Life is war. They want the violent man.

 

You would think we would have evolved by now to exclude violence from our lives but we thrive on violence to this day. Women still get hot over violence and aggression.

Non,I mean seriously come back to earth.Try and some dream nice dreams rather than these half baked "real"dreams.

[gendao]

[NeiChuan]

So it is true, women consider men who are:

 

More spiritual, virtuous & principled = less manly, less sexy & wimpier!

 

So, Non actually seems to have some valid points, here...

 

For generalizations.. Yes.

 

But it all depends on the person.

 

To have a confidence in your spiritual perspective, to me means more strength. Why?

 

To have comfort in the darkness, is to prove you have no fear.

[Aetherous]

.

Edited February 24, 2011 by center

[markern]

It is all a matter of perspective and focus.

 

"For women, however, spirituality was the strongest predictor for the number of sexual partners, the frequency of sex, and the tendency to have sex without a condom."

 

So not only are yoga classes and meditation course filled with 80% women, they are also the women that are the easiest to get into bed and probably the ones who likes sex the most. These women are also highly well aware that there is a lack of men who share their interests. They are afraid they won`t find a boyfriend that will be willing to practice tantra with them or who will be willing to discuss their interests at and their spirituality at all. So even it the do find vegetarians slightly less manly the vegetarians are much likely to get those women into bed. It`s just basic supply and demand. Anyway, we all know from the experience of many taobums that as long as you don`t just have belief and a diet without meat but actually cultivate you will develop your energy to a level women find highly and instantly attractive. Probably especially so for women who are into spirituality. IN other words qigong classes and yoga retreats etc. are a mecca for guys like us. It`s basically our hidden harem.

[joeblast]

So it is true, women consider men who are:

 

More spiritual, virtuous & principled = less manly, less sexy & wimpier!

 

So, Non actually seems to have some valid points, here...

If you subscribe to his "if, then" logic, which I feel is rather faulty in this instance as presented...

 

impossible to generalize accurately, at any rate, though I understand the "in general" context.

Edited February 1, 2011 by joeblast

[Aetherous]

.

Edited February 24, 2011 by center

[gendao]

"For women, however, spirituality was the strongest predictor for the number of sexual partners, the frequency of sex, and the tendency to have sex without a condom."

 

So not only are yoga classes and meditation course filled with 80% women, they are also the women that are the easiest to get into bed and probably the ones who likes sex the most. These women are also highly well aware that there is a lack of men who share their interests. They are afraid they won`t find a boyfriend that will be willing to practice tantra with them or who will be willing to discuss their interests at and their spirituality at all. So even it the do find vegetarians slightly less manly the vegetarians are much likely to get those women into bed. It`s just basic supply and demand. Anyway, we all know from the experience of many taobums that as long as you don`t just have belief and a diet without meat but actually cultivate you will develop your energy to a level women find highly and instantly attractive. Probably especially so for women who are into spirituality. IN other words qigong classes and yoga retreats etc. are a mecca for guys like us. It`s basically our hidden harem.

But if it was truly just supply & demand based upon the numbers game...and these scenes have a vast surplus of women (essentially a "harem")...then shouldn't it be the spiritual women who are getting less sex...and the spiritual men who are getting more??? If there are 4 girls for every 1 guy?

 

So if things were simply based off the numbers - spiritual guys should be having 4X more sex than spiritual girls, right???

 

Yet not only do we not even see sexual parity here - but actually the reverse! Spiritual men are getting undersexed...despite being in lopsided environments (allegedly) teeming with 80% women!!! This shows that statistically, they are actually performing farrrr below average. Their female colleagues are sexually avoiding them like the plague in these communities..

 

Seriously, how can girls be having more sex than guys in groups that are 4/1 f/m???

 

So apparently, spiritual girls must simply be choosing to have loads of sex with...non-spiritual guys - whom they find cavemanlier and therefore, sexier. Or are there any women's romance novels about spiritual vegetarian men? Has anyone seen one with the Dalai Lama, Ken Wilber or Thich Nhat Hanh on the cover yet??

Edited February 1, 2011 by vortex

[Birch]

I love how these thread about "what women want" don't actually involve asking any women.

 

They're fun to watch though

 

I liked Cat's post.

 

Oh yeah, but wait, someone will come along and tell me what I want what I really really want, I wanna... (sorry for random "Britpop" reference) because that is my deep and darkest secret, or something or other.

 

Oh wait, I'm too "old" to be in this thread

[Aetherous]

Kate, what do you want?