Brehs give this a read
@KravenMorehead™ wrote this in another thread and i was
at this. Its a long read but well worth it. I think he did a great job of explaining the man/woman dynamic without it sounding like diatribe.
Men and women are the human embodiment of the masculine and feminine principle respectively. At the baseline though we're both human. same skin tissue, same bone structure, same senses, same muscles, same capacity for intellect. Neither is inferior or superior to the other in this regard. The only immediately discernable difference between the two genders/sexes is in our reproductive systems. That's it.
Now, take man-made stuff off the board and insert a male and female in nature.
The male's body (all organs) is designed to interact aggressively with nature, nature including not just the surrounding environment and other species, but other human beings. This does not make him superior to the female; it is simply his function. It has the same capacity to interact passively with nature as the female does, but this is not masculine.
The female's body (all organs) is designed to interact passively with nature, including other human beings. This does not make it superior to the male; it is simply her function. It has the same capacity to interact aggressively with nature as the male, but this is not feminine.
remember that I said femininity and masculinity does not start with human beings, we simply embody those principles, so the above statements are not an insult, or an attack on the female or the male.
Now, as far as interaction with nature goes, the masculine interacts with nature aggressively. it is the nature of masculinity to do so and nature designed it that way on purpose. We see it in the human male when it is born. And is to happens that masculine solves problems by attacking them. if a man were to see lets say a mouse, and run away from it, every female in the room, no matter how she identifies herself(feminist or no), would instantly regard him as feminine, as non-masculine. It is not masculine to solve problems by averting them. If in the same scenario the man were to IMMEDIATELY lunge at the mouse and kill it with efficiency, the females in the room would regard his masculinity as higher than they did before the scenario. Masculinity is defined by the efficiency with which you are able to achieve your desires, with mastery of whatever environment you surround yourself with. If you think of anytime a female is turned on by a man's actions, any situation where a chick senses masculinty and becomes aroused, you'll notice the former sentence (mastery of one's surrounding environment through active/aggresive interaction) in play. A man on a basketball court dominating the opposition. A mechanic fixing an automotive problem with ease where every other man was confused. A man entering an establishment and having the employees immediately at his beck and call. Masculine solves problems by attacking them
The female may interact aggressively with nature as well. But her biology limits that, not only by physiological design, but reproductive processes. Aggressive interaction with nature incites friction on high level, which on a larger scale is referred to by humanity as "violence." and a woman can only defend herself against violence in circumstances where her physiology and reproductive cycle doesn't inhibit her. So in nature, a female may incite violence and be able to defend itself against violence up until say, her menstruation cycle kicks in, or she becomes pregnant. Then she runs the liability of the enemies she's created killing her when she's at her weakest. Men can also be caught slipping, but the risk is much smaller. Does this make femininity inferior to masculinity? fukk no. It is simply yin and yang.
(this is what most men and women are miseducated on, and it this ignorance is the source of chauvinism(and feminism, which is the logistical counterpoint to chauvinism but both were invented by the same people for the purpose of social engineering.)
) Femininity interacts with nature on a slower friction level, or slower vibration level. Remember that I've taken human-invented devices and institutions off the board, and I haven't stated any difference in intellectual capacity. Feminine solves problems by averting them.
Now let's move to the psychological level. With the male, problems are solved on a regular basis by attacking them. In order to be of that aggressive disposition successfully and on a regular basis(i.e. to be able to survive until you die a natural death of old age), you need to focus on the big picture. And that perception, that way of looking at things, gets internalized as the male grows older, and manifests itself fully in male behavior, where everything from how a man thinks to how men act is an extension of that.
Masculine perception is macro.
With the female, problems are solved by averting them. Here's the thing; in order to solve problems successfully and on a regular basis by averting them, you have to see those problems coming before they hit. In order to see problems coming before they hit, you have to pay attention to detail. And that perception gets internalized and manifests itself fully in the female, and every thing from how a woman thinks to how women act is an extension of being detail oriented.
Feminine perception is micro.
Masculine manipulates by aggressive interaction with the opposite sex(macro). The macro is obvious and in-your-face. If a man wants to know a secret for example, or follow a hunch, he'll be upfront and ask directly. You'll often hear of a woman feeling coerced into doing something by way of physical intimidation(aggression).
Feminine manipulates by passive interaction with the opposite sex(micro). Let's say a woman wants to follow a hunch, or find out the truth about some information she got through gossip. She'll start a seemingly random conversation, and drop subliminal references in the conversation, keeping the conversation going long enough for the subliminal word or phrase to be cloaked in the middle, but observe the response or physiological response to the subliminal. Because masculine perception is macro, subtext, subtlety, innuendo, red herrings (all which are details and fall under feminine perception, the small picture, the micro) go over the man's head. And it so happens that the "conversation" is a litmus test that the woman uses to determine the validity of the information she desires to confirm.
This is how masculinity and femininity manifest in human beings psychologically, and it accounts for all differences in behavior. It is why when a man and a woman go out on a date, the female will wear a dress with all kind of details like sequins and such, jewellery etc, whereas the dude will have on a plain dress shirt. It is why women do what men equate to "beating around the bush
" when they are communicating with men. It is why a woman will be excited with her interaction with a guy (subtext /flirting(romance from the feminine perspective)/ micro), and then the dude says something direct(macro) - "so when are you gonna let me hit
" and blows the chick's high
Because things ceased to be subtle and became more direct, when she would've let him hit if he had kept the subtlety going a little longer till her emotions got to the right point.
Speaking of emotions, emotions are energy in motion — in other words, molecules vibrating in a specific pattern based on what his/her senses are
percieving from nature, thus influencing a human to restructure his/her behavior to suit the change in the environment, for present and future survival. We are socialized to believe that "men are logical, and women are emotional", and individuals from both sexes use that falsehood for manipulation purposes when it suits them, but it's a falsehood; an oversimplification at best. Saying men are logical and women are emotional is like saying men have arms and women have legs. Men often get angry; anger is an emotion. It takes logic for a woman to successfully marry a man she doesn't care for and divorce him for his money without him figuring it out. The truth is that both women and men are logical, and both women and men are emotional. The difference is, because masculine perception is based on the macro, masculine emotions are widespread and bombastic, like a bomb going off, because it is responding to a
perception of the big picture. whereas feminine emotion is detailed and ornate, because being subtext-oriented there's a thousand different extras she's
percieving at once. When it comes to logic, masculine logic, in a debate for example, will focus on the big picture(macro), whereas feminine logic will focus on subtext(micro). This is why a lady will get angry at her man for being nice to another woman at a function/event, because men not being subtextually inclined by nature may not realize that the woman was flirting with him, and by communicating back to that woman he was completing the circuit, so if she was flirting specifically to piss said lady off(which will go over his head as well) she succeeded, and he was a cooperant force, although unknowingly. This is also why a guy may list certain problems he has with female behavior(big picture allthough his macro perception may be false), and the woman only percieves his words in subtext allthough her subtextual interpretation may be false (nikka must not get any p*ssy if he got this much to complain about
).
What romance actually is, is communicating to the opposite sex in their own "language", if you will.
When a woman communicates femininity(micro) (from appearance to her behavior with him), to a man, she entices him on the primal level(sexually). When she communicates masculinity(macro) though, she entices him on a psychological level, i.e. his soul will become
animated because she is speaking his language as a man. That is romance. This is why when a girlfriend behaves like one of the guys in certain cirumstances, her man will over time increase in desire to be around her and keep her on the team. This is how men work on an
animal level. The problem is men are miseducated from childhood to
percieve the feminine in an inferior way, which makes men forgo compatibility with the opposite sex, in search of animal desires, due to
ego taking over.
When a man communicates masculinity(macro), whether it's via appearance or his behavior with her, he will entice a woman on the primal level(sexually). When he communicates femininity to her (the detail in his choice of words, the subtlety with which he looks at her, touches her, etc) it will
animate her because women being the human embodiment of the feminine principle are detail oriented. This is romance. This is how women work on an
animal level. This is why women lose themselves in music, it is why, luxury being in the details/production values of a thing, women are attracted to luxury more than men. You take a woman out to dinner, you meet her, bring her out to the car and it's a luxury car with detail and she becomes excited, she enters the 5-star restaurant and sees the detail in the restaurant's layout/design and becomes animated, you take her on a vacation to another country and she sees the detail, etc. Men are socialized to percieve a woman's attraction to luxury as a negative and although women can marry a guy they don't care for/see no symmetry with and that is a negative, men are miseducated that a woman's attraction to luxury in of itself is proof of her being a
golddigger, when that simply isn't the case. It's when a woman
forgoes mental compatibility in search of those things(i.e. submits to her animal desires due to
ego, as opposed to making decisions on a higher level) that she becomes a
golddigger.
The problem is that those that control this era of human society socialise the human sexes to misunderstand each other; to perceive the opposite sex as inferior in regards to intellect, due to these differences. and
When you percieve something to be unequal to you IN ANY REGARD(physical, mental, biological, social rank, status), and by EVEN THE SLIGHTEST MARGIN, you will not apply rules of conduct both ways. This why the dating is a cesspool of bullshyt on both sides. It's the result of purposeful social engineering at the higher economic level by those in power. (Those same people whose race black people are socialized to have the desire to mate and breed with, no disrespect to my multiracial brothers and sisters, because everything happens for a reason. Miscegenation is essential to keeping black people asleep and unaware of our true nature as we are the immune system of the planet; we keep it in check, and we brought the understanding of the planet to the other younger races. If we were to wake up, the bullshyt will be over. But that's for another thread.)
Men are socialized to perceive the behavioral differences in women as a testament to female intellectual inferiority and male intellectual superiority.
Women are socialized to percieve the behavioral differences in men as a testament to male intellectual inferiority and female intellectual superiority(albeit behind closed doors
).
But neither conclusions are correct, it is simply the yin and yang of nature manifesting itself. And if men and women were to be properly educated on this, not only would the majority of relationship problems disappear overnight, but chauvinism and feminism would dissappear, because they would have no reason to exist. But this miseducation by those that control society is why each gender forgoes intellectual compatibility in search of things that entice us. And this is why the problems with the sexes exist.
and shorty shrugs my arm off her like
...so i was like
...so its like that yeah? aight.
acting like shyt cool and all
....so i did what any ruthless nikka did and asked her for answers and lied about mine
and later on when we all left she jumped on me talmbout...yooo azzanova, thanks for trying to help me..it was soo hard, yada yada. Anyways, long story short..i seen shorty on campus couple times after that throughout the year until i left, and not once did i say a word to her. I even remember she came to the computer lab one day, was about to sit a computer away from me and when i got up to leave she started talkin to my homegirl...we looked at each other for like 12 seconds, i didn't smile, say wassup or nada. Gave her a
and just walked right past her.
