Simp Polarity
Being a simp is accomodating women to the point of self degredation in the name of masculine and feminine roles.
A man may feel macho and masterful like a white knight rescuing her.
"Holding space for her storms" is an idea popularized by David Deida is an example of this.
Thats where you let her have a temper tantrum while you remain calm and listen so she feels heard.
In none of my relationships have I found i needed to do this and doing the opposite has worked well as explained below.
Being able to listen is great, but not with her unregulated anger.
And now I have a friend who has put herself in an impossible bind by expecting a man do to this for her.
She is an emotionally unregulated person expecting to find a highly regulated man, which is what she conisders an inherent part of masculinity, to help her heal by holding space.
But she is only attracting men at a similar level of self deregulation or inability to lead, which leads to her to be critical of men as incompetant and emotionally immature.
She beleives women have this right to holding space for whatever emotions because women are more victimized. Therefore, men need to put their needs aside for her helpless state, with justifications about hormones, feminine energy, etc. It's still feminism even though she is aware of many problems with feminism.
Tons of negative generalizations about men and her saying she feels she needs to be their life coach so she can mold them into what she need. Totally going into her masculine to control through criticism and essentially manipulation. She's agumentative and pushy about her ideas so there's no space for discussion. Get with the program boys.
My attempts to open and lead the conversation a different way tactfully where ignored so I decided to end it.
I said I'm looking for a equallty self regulated woman and I don't feel my ideas are being received so I'm going to end the conversation.
She promptly responded by continuing to argue her point in violation of the boundary of ending the conversation.
She said she felt it was a mutal conversation and said, "that's interesting" which sounds snarky like I'm so off the wall in my wrongness, one of those female barbs of casting aspertions, which is denialable but that would be dishonest.
There was no warmth at all, no "I'm sorry, I was enjoying our conversation and i do appreciate the things you say." Just argument in her head seeking to control through her therapuetic regime.
This was a conversation in writing and she was not a romantic interst.
In person with a romantic interest I have found a way what works whether it is with my ex wife or a first date: Confronting appropriateness and showing strength through anger if pushed into a corner.
First step escalation example: "You know you're doing all the talking."
She looks down and without apology says, "This date is going great." No shame at all, more like a test to see if I would take crap--experienced men recognize this.
We went to dance and there was sexual escalation later.
Worst case: She was talking to much and after gradual escalation I had to yell at her to , "Shut the fuck up!" She immediately said, "I deserved that" and calmed down and then wanted to have sex. I kicked her out because i was disgusted.
Once with my wife's complaining and criticism I blew my top and she opened up to me for days with warm gentleness. This is all by accident because even the dating gurus never said that because simp polarity runs so deep. They are mostly try-hards trying to get laid.
What women really fear is that you are too weak to protect. The first test is about if you can protect yourself because in the words of one woman on a dating show who explained why she was so rude: "If he can't even protect himself, how is he going to protect me?"
Women are not really looking for new age sensitivity queens in men--only if that's part of her control and safty strategy but she will be disatisfied and always find something wrong.
What is required is dominance.
Cesar the dog trainer defines dominance as "calm assertiveness," which seems like a reasonable definition for humans as well. That means usually you don't have to get over the top angry. Sometimes anger is a way to answer, "How would you fight for me?"
In the case of the women who forced me into anger, I think it was some kind of divine plan to get me to be able to express my anger when I was afraid to. Their intution was good enough to understand it. Now that I am able to there is no longer a cautious hesitancy in my reasonable tone but an edge that says, "You dare not" that is well understood.
The other important step has been for me has been to self-regulate, coming from a background of narcissistic rage aholoics that used me as their punching bag I learned that anger as bad and was not allowed to express it. I did not know how and when productively. And people could see it and take advantage of me. That was humiliating and built rage in me.
It was freeing to stand up to my father as he escalated to violence not direct blows but egging me on to through the first blow which he certainly deserved. I had to run into my room and close the door on his arm even though he as so old he could barely walk. It would have felt great to beat his face but I would have killed him. It was hard to not do it, very hard. It was a demonic trap with great bait, they were so demonized.
As men we have a right to claim as much pain as women. When we sort out our pain we can lead and that calms women. Not following steps 1 2 3 to calm her down so you can get laid that night. Men have to stop stuffing their trauma in general and for women.
For women who are too triggered to hear all this, maybe you should not be relating to men.
And how you respond on paper is not the same to live with body language and context.
Dating for sex made me more calculating and cautious.
Now that I date for marriage only I have no reason to hold back. getting to NO fast is fine.
I'm 62 and not going to suffer a lecture or aguments from a wounded girl in her masculine or guru boy following a formula.
My sugestion for women is not control through argument. It's receiving and submission within the context of confident self regulation and boundaires that make one secure around male energy. You could say it's being confident in your own feminine strength.
A man may feel macho and masterful like a white knight rescuing her.
"Holding space for her storms" is an idea popularized by David Deida is an example of this.
Thats where you let her have a temper tantrum while you remain calm and listen so she feels heard.
In none of my relationships have I found i needed to do this and doing the opposite has worked well as explained below.
Being able to listen is great, but not with her unregulated anger.
And now I have a friend who has put herself in an impossible bind by expecting a man do to this for her.
She is an emotionally unregulated person expecting to find a highly regulated man, which is what she conisders an inherent part of masculinity, to help her heal by holding space.
But she is only attracting men at a similar level of self deregulation or inability to lead, which leads to her to be critical of men as incompetant and emotionally immature.
She beleives women have this right to holding space for whatever emotions because women are more victimized. Therefore, men need to put their needs aside for her helpless state, with justifications about hormones, feminine energy, etc. It's still feminism even though she is aware of many problems with feminism.
Tons of negative generalizations about men and her saying she feels she needs to be their life coach so she can mold them into what she need. Totally going into her masculine to control through criticism and essentially manipulation. She's agumentative and pushy about her ideas so there's no space for discussion. Get with the program boys.
My attempts to open and lead the conversation a different way tactfully where ignored so I decided to end it.
I said I'm looking for a equallty self regulated woman and I don't feel my ideas are being received so I'm going to end the conversation.
She promptly responded by continuing to argue her point in violation of the boundary of ending the conversation.
She said she felt it was a mutal conversation and said, "that's interesting" which sounds snarky like I'm so off the wall in my wrongness, one of those female barbs of casting aspertions, which is denialable but that would be dishonest.
There was no warmth at all, no "I'm sorry, I was enjoying our conversation and i do appreciate the things you say." Just argument in her head seeking to control through her therapuetic regime.
This was a conversation in writing and she was not a romantic interst.
In person with a romantic interest I have found a way what works whether it is with my ex wife or a first date: Confronting appropriateness and showing strength through anger if pushed into a corner.
First step escalation example: "You know you're doing all the talking."
She looks down and without apology says, "This date is going great." No shame at all, more like a test to see if I would take crap--experienced men recognize this.
We went to dance and there was sexual escalation later.
Worst case: She was talking to much and after gradual escalation I had to yell at her to , "Shut the fuck up!" She immediately said, "I deserved that" and calmed down and then wanted to have sex. I kicked her out because i was disgusted.
Once with my wife's complaining and criticism I blew my top and she opened up to me for days with warm gentleness. This is all by accident because even the dating gurus never said that because simp polarity runs so deep. They are mostly try-hards trying to get laid.
What women really fear is that you are too weak to protect. The first test is about if you can protect yourself because in the words of one woman on a dating show who explained why she was so rude: "If he can't even protect himself, how is he going to protect me?"
Women are not really looking for new age sensitivity queens in men--only if that's part of her control and safty strategy but she will be disatisfied and always find something wrong.
What is required is dominance.
Cesar the dog trainer defines dominance as "calm assertiveness," which seems like a reasonable definition for humans as well. That means usually you don't have to get over the top angry. Sometimes anger is a way to answer, "How would you fight for me?"
In the case of the women who forced me into anger, I think it was some kind of divine plan to get me to be able to express my anger when I was afraid to. Their intution was good enough to understand it. Now that I am able to there is no longer a cautious hesitancy in my reasonable tone but an edge that says, "You dare not" that is well understood.
The other important step has been for me has been to self-regulate, coming from a background of narcissistic rage aholoics that used me as their punching bag I learned that anger as bad and was not allowed to express it. I did not know how and when productively. And people could see it and take advantage of me. That was humiliating and built rage in me.
It was freeing to stand up to my father as he escalated to violence not direct blows but egging me on to through the first blow which he certainly deserved. I had to run into my room and close the door on his arm even though he as so old he could barely walk. It would have felt great to beat his face but I would have killed him. It was hard to not do it, very hard. It was a demonic trap with great bait, they were so demonized.
As men we have a right to claim as much pain as women. When we sort out our pain we can lead and that calms women. Not following steps 1 2 3 to calm her down so you can get laid that night. Men have to stop stuffing their trauma in general and for women.
For women who are too triggered to hear all this, maybe you should not be relating to men.
And how you respond on paper is not the same to live with body language and context.
Dating for sex made me more calculating and cautious.
Now that I date for marriage only I have no reason to hold back. getting to NO fast is fine.
I'm 62 and not going to suffer a lecture or aguments from a wounded girl in her masculine or guru boy following a formula.
My sugestion for women is not control through argument. It's receiving and submission within the context of confident self regulation and boundaires that make one secure around male energy. You could say it's being confident in your own feminine strength.
