Category Archives: Women

Interesting South Asian Phenotypes

This young woman or teenage girl is named Amoolya. She is a South Indian.

This young woman or teenage girl is named Amoolya. She is a South Indian.

As you can see, Amoolya is very much a Caucasoid, although her rather Indian looks would prevent most from thinking she is a European Caucasoid. Clearly there are a lot of Caucasoid genes in South India; not all of South India is Australoid.

A South Indian bride all dolled out in her bridal garb.

A South Indian bride all dolled out in her bridal garb.

She is extremely beautiful. Her features remind me of Raquel Welch. She also has a very exotic phenotype. She could be a Latin American or certainly an Arab. She is probably out of the range of most European women due to her exotic features, but there are definitely some Italian women who look like this. Her genes and phenotype are also primarily Caucasoid.

34 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Babes, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, South Asians, Women

Beauties from Around the Globe

A beauty, Paromita Mitra. She was Miss Bangladesh. She could easily be a Med European White.

Paromita Mitra, apparently from Macedonia.

Paromita Mitra, Miss Bangladesh.

Next up, we have a Macedonian, Miss Macedonia. A Mediterranid type.

Stefani Borsova, Macedonia.

Stefani Borsova, Macedonia. Med European White.

Next up, some sort of a Miss France and its colonies competition held in the Maldive Islands.

Competitors for the title of Miss Maldives.

From France and its colonies. Left to right at top:Miss Martinique, exotic mixed race type from a Caribbean Island. Miss Limousin, from the mid-south of France. Miss French Guyana, another exotic mixed race type from South America. Miss Cote D’Azur, from the beaches of the French Riviera. L to R, bottom, Miss Franche Compte, from the region in Central France near northwestern Switzerland. Miss Languedoc, from southwest France near the border with Catalonia. Miss Lorraine, from northeastern France, near Belgium, Luxembourg and Germany. Miss Guadelupe, Black woman from the Caribbean.

Extremely exotic woman from Bashkortia.

Extremely exotic woman from Bashkortia, Russia.

Bashkortia is a Russian republic near Tatarstan. The people there are Turkic and speak a Turkic language. The area is located near the south end of the Ural Mountains. The Bashkirs and Tatars are mixed race Asian-Caucasoid types like many Turkic peoples. They have a very exotic beauty to them. Really much of Central Asia is made up of mixed Caucasoid-Asian types.

15 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Asia, Babes, Eurasia, Europe, France, Macedonia, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Russia, Women

Which War Forward, Western Woman?

Your choice ladies, the Qatar Model or the Brazil Model. Which will it be?

Your choice ladies, the Qatar Model or the Brazil Model. Which will it be?

You radfems don’t like the sexual objectification of females? Fine, I present you with…drum roll…Qatar! You happy now?

8 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Humor, Radical Feminists, Women

Female Prisoner Too Violent to Ever Be Let Out

Here.

She obviously gets some sort of a DSM diagnosis.

So what do we give her? Antisocial Personality Disorder (sociopath)? I am not so sure about that due to all the self-harm, although she is vicious. Since when do sociopaths display all this self harm? Sociopaths hurt others, not themselves, and they only kill themselves when the jig is up. They commit suicide to avoid arrest or in prison to avoid the pain of imprisonment, but only rarely in other cases, though some get alcoholic, depressed and suicidal in middle age as the sociopathy starts to burn itself out. I think she has some psychopathic traits though and would score fairly high on Hare PC-L test.

She mostly looks like a Borderline. Borderlines can be quite violent, even female borderlines. And borderlines are notorious for horrific self-harm, suicide threats and suicide attempts. They are not usually this violent though. This crazy bitch has murdered a fellow inmate and attacked guards several times, carving up one’s cheek.

Is there a syndrome called Borderline-Sociopath or Sociopathic Borderline? If there is, she might be something like that.

Whatever she is, she sure is awful evil for a female. Females are not usually this bad. Females can be evil, but their evil is more annoying and infuriating than dangerous. Male evil is much worse because it is menacing, violent, dangerous and homicidal. I have dealt with some evil females in my life and while I wanted to kill most of them at the time, obviously I never did it or even tried or plotted. On the other hand, none of them were really dangerous to me. They were just trying to be as infuriating as possible to provoke the maximum possible violent and crazed reaction from me. I call it “trying to get murdered.”

I will take female evil over male evil any day though. Evil men are terrifying. Evil men have tried to kill me, and I say that with all seriousness. I have had scenes with evil males where it was literally kill or be killed. “I either try to kill these guys, or do nothing and let them kill me.” Others have not tried to kill me but instead beat me very badly, even with heavy objects.

As long as humans are not physically dangerous, they can sort of be tolerated no matter how wicked they are. But violence and the threat of injury or death via attack is a whole other matter.

 

6 Comments

Filed under Australia, Borderline, Corrections, Crime, Gender Studies, Law enforcement, Mental Illness, Mental Patients, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, Self-injury, Sociopathy, Symptoms, Women

On Dhimmitude and the Zakat

From here:

squeezethejuice (Muslim): There is nothing wrong or immoral with Jizya, b/c those paying also get benefits that even we Muslims are not entitled to. And should always be comparable in amount to the amount of zakat that Muslims are expected to donate; same order of magnitude. Among the benefits, for example, they are exempt from joining the Muslim army and potentially fighting defensive wars against their own Christian or Jewish brethren, even those who have committed acts of violence against innocent Muslims.

What ISIS and the others don’t understand about Jizya is that we Muslims are bound to offer security & protection to those paying it, i.e. no threats or anything.

And there are more ways to pay Jizya than just money. While the Jews are rich and will never be in this situation, poor Christians can offer their young daughters in marriage to Muslims, and of course we should consider their Jizya paid for the next 5 years if they have done so.

Angemon (non-Muslim): Zakat is 2.5% of the yearly income, jizya has always been crushingly heavy with the intent of humiliating non-Muslims. Those two taxes are not “comparable” or in the “same order of magnitude”, and historically the jizya was collected through force, mafia style – it’s no coincidence that the term “mafia” comes from the Arabic and originated in a region who was once under Islamic rule.

And it’s not that non-Muslims were exempt from joining the Muslim army – the Janissaries were originally non-Muslims abducted from their families – because they had a special status. It’s that Muslims were too afraid of letting non-Muslim owning weapons (for fearing a rebellion) or letting them fight (especially when Muslims were fighting against he native trying to get their land back).

Think about it: if non-Muslims were paying the same amount of tax as Muslims and not being drafted to the army them human nature would cause Muslims to convert out of Islam and not the other way around. When Muslim conquered a new land they were in minority so they couldn’t risk letting the conquered getting their hands on weapons and starting a rebellion.

And can you imagine a Muslim leader, indoctrinated to believe that Jews and Christians are always scheming against Muslims, let’s say, Christians from a land he just conquered to fight against Christians who were trying to drive the Muslims out of their lands? Why would Christians being forced into battle against their own people side with the Muslims? No, non-Muslims were forbidden from owning weapons and fighting because Muslims feared for their safety. Would they need to fear for their safety if they treated non-Muslims fairly?

Even if we were to overlook the jizya, there are plenty of degrading conditions in the pact of Umar that make it quite clear that non-Muslims in a Muslim state don’t have the same rights as Muslims. Heck, let’s let Abu Waleed explain by his own words how “wonderful” life is for non-Muslims in a Muslim state:

Besides the barrage of lies about jizya and the status of non-Muslims in a Muslim state, poor stj makes a remark about Jews that was probably straight out of a deleted scene from Borat. What do you think it would happen to a Jew who couldn’t afford to pay the jizya in the hands of someone who seems to think all Jews are rich?

We know what happened to Kinana when he told Muhammad he had no treasure hidden. He was tortured with fire on his chest and, since he neared death without saying anything, Muhammad had him beheaded. And since Muhammad is the example Muslims are supposed to emulate…

stj also seems to believe that it’s ok for poor Christians to sell their daughters into marriage with Muslim men as payment for the jizya. So much for “security and protection”, non-Muslim women in a Muslim state are to be used as chattel for the enjoyment of Muslim men.

Notice that he said that “There is nothing wrong or immoral with Jizya” because those who pay it, even if they do so by selling their daughters into marriage, are entitled to the “benefits” explained by Abu Waleed in the above video, so he doesn’t see anything wrong or immoral with using non-Muslim women as currency. So remember, if you think it’s immoral to sell a girl into marriage to someone who will regard and treat her as subhuman trash you’re an “Islamophobe”.

Note the Youtube video above. That is exactly what dhimmitude is supposed to be under the Islamic state, and for centuries, non-Muslims probably had to live in dhimmitude. However, state-imposed dhimmitude has been dead since about 1900. Even in Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, it does not exist. I believe some form of dhimmitude was enforced when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan.

It looks like ISIS is trying to impose some sort of dhimmitude on the Christians under its rule. The Shia are faring war worse. ISIS simply kills any Shia they can get their hands on. They do the same thing to any Alawite they can get their hands on in Syria. ISIS also kills Yezidis at random and on sight. Both Yezidis, the Shia and the Alawi are considered to be heretics. When ISIS took over the Druze region of southern Syria recently, a number of Druze villages were ordered to convert to Sunni Islam or die. The villages duly converted. In truth, Druze really isn’t even Islam, although it looks a bit like it. Some Christians have also been given the “convert or die” or the “convert, leave or die” option by ISIS in Syria.

Since dhimmitude for all intents and purposes has not existed for 115 years, it seems a bit silly to rant and rave about how Muslims force all non-Muslims into dhimmitude when they are the majority because it is simply not true.

However, these Al Qaeda radicals do indeed want to bring back dhimmitude is some form or another. Jihadis have raided Christian homes in the Dora region of southern Baghdad and ordered Christians to pay the zakat or be killed. After ISIS took over a town in Syria recently, they ordered all Christians to pay a zakat. The zakat was quite a hefty amount, and most of the Christians did not have it.

As you can see in the video, the purpose of dhimmitude is to make life as a non-Muslim under Muslim rule so awful and humiliating that many non-Muslims simply convert to Islam to get out from under the oppression. All of the arguments for the zakat are false. It’s not a protection tax; instead, it is more like a Mafia protection racket. The non-Muslims are told to pay protection fees to the Muslim Mafia. If they don’t pay up, bad things are going to happen just like if you refuse the pay the Mafia’s protection tax. There is no humanitarian aspect to this tax.

The Muslims have always lied about what happened in the countries they conquered. In most lands it was the same story. Gradually, over time, more and more non-Muslims converted to Islam, although Spain, the Balkans and India were exceptions. The Muslims say that more and more infidels simply embraced Islam over time, apparently because it is so groovy. That’s clearly not what happened. They were terrorized into converting via dhimmitude.

Egypt has a large number of Coptic Christians. However, under Mubarak, they were not allowed to repair their churches when they started to fall down. This is one of the tenets of dhimmitude – Christians are not allowed to repair existing churches nor are they allowed to build new ones.

Also the periodic terror that is inflicted on non-Muslims in many to most Muslim countries can be seen a form of dhimmitude.

24 Comments

Filed under Africa, Alawi, Christianity, Egypt, History, Iraq, Islam, Islamic, Judaism, Middle East, North Africa, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Shiism, Social Problems, Sociology, Sunnism, Syria, War, Women

Islamic Feminism

Here.

An excellent article, and she makes an excellent case that fiqh rulings that justify zina and huddud laws are irrational and are not valid interpretations of the Quran. The fiqh rulings were made by Islamic scholars down through the centuries. They interpreted various passages in the Quran as meaning this or that.

For instance, the idea that women are supposed to cover up their whole bodies comes from an interpretation of the Quranic statement that women must cover up their “jewels” when out in public. In the Quranic context, it seems that the jewels refer to a woman’s private parts – her breasts, ass and pubic area. Somehow “jewels” was interpreted by partriarchal male scholars to mean that a woman had to cover up the near entirety of her body. Make sense? Of course not.

Zina and huddud laws are those that regulate sexual behavior. In practice, they have regulated the sexual behavior of women but not men. Women are imprisoned under these laws for adultery and fornication. Even women who are raped are imprisoned, incredibly enough, for adultery and fornication as in Pakistan’s huddud laws.

Zina laws are also the basis for the honor killings that are so prevalent in the Muslim World. Various excuses for honor killings that say that people other than Muslims also do this do not hold water as the practice is largely confined to the Muslim world.

Clearly though, honor killings are an Arab practice that spread to Arabized cultures such as Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Caucasus, Turkey and Berber North Africa. On the other hand, there seem to be Muslim nations where this does not occur especially where Islam was a recent foreign import and local religious traditions have not yet been usurped. Honor killings are rare to absent in Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Burma, Cambodia, the Philippines, Indonesia, Albania and Bosnia.

The author shows that passages criminalizing sexual behavior actually refer to people having sex in public or where others can see them. So fucking in public and probably strip shows and pornography are covered but private sexual behavior is not.

In addition, the Quran grants divorce rights to women, yet fiqh rulings have always forbidden divorce by females and instead codified divorce initiated far too easily by males.

In Mohammad’s time, female Muslims were relatively free. They have only become more restricted with time. For instance, Ayesha was known to frequently preach in the mosque after Mohammad died. When was the last time you heard of a woman preaching in the mosque?

I have read a few of these feminist and progressive interpretations of Islam. While they make sense, they unfortunately seem irrelevant to our times.

This is because the Muslim world is going backwards and not forwards. All across the Muslim world, Muslims are getting more fundamentalist and less progressive and liberal. The spread of ISIS and Al Qaeda and their various offshoots, along with Islamists winning various elections in Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Turkey and Iraq are indicative of this trend. Even where seculars won elections such as in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Lebanon and Tunisia, strong, often armed fundamentalist groups continue to operate. Each of these countries deal with armed Islamists stirring up trouble, in Pakistan’s cases, a world of trouble.

Show men one area where Muslims are liberalizing.

The Muslim World is evidence that clocks do indeed run backwards at times.

16 Comments

Filed under Arabs, Asia, Culture, Feminism, Gender Studies, Islam, Law, Pakistan, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Sex, South Asia, Women

PUA/Game: Worst Advice Ever Given to Men

“Just be yourself.”

If you ask women how to be successful with women, they will always say, idiotically, “Just be yourself.” Great idea except it doesn’t work. If your natural self is a chick magnet, then ok, be yourself, fine.

But if this worked then no one would ever have to learn game, right.

Alpha/Sigma: Top 15% of men. Attractive to many of the females much of the time.

Beta: 70% of men. This is your “normal, regular, everyday guy.” Not that there is anything wrong with that! Attractive to some of the females some of the time.

Omega: Bottom 15% of men. Elliot Rodger. More or less attractive to almost none of the females nearly all of the time.

Now let us assume that all of these guys are just being themselves. What’s the problem with Omegas? The damned problem is that they are just being themselves! When they are “being themselves,” they are acting Omega, period.

Nowadays a lot of Beta guys are trying to figure out how to be Alphas. They feel that being Betas is causing them pain and hardship with females. What is the problem with these Beta guys? The whole damned problem is that they are being themselves! To these guys, being yourself means being Beta. Why are they learning Game? They are learning Game in order to be themselves less, to create a new persona using the techniques of Game.

The fact that women always give us this stupid advice shows me a couple of things:

  1. Women do not have the foggiest idea of what it means to be a man.
  2. Women apparently have no real conscious understanding of male-female dynamics and what sort of men women are attracted to, ignore or are repelled by. Why do women have no understanding of the Real World. I believe it is because women to not believe in the Real World.

Females simply prefer to live in Fantasyland from the time they are girls playing Dollhouse through marriage and possibly onward, although older and even elderly women are often have a better understanding of Cold Reality than any other woman. This is probably because when a woman becomes elderly, she really doesn’t need the comfort blanket of fantasy anymore. She’s seen the real world and lived through it and is not afraid to tell it like it is.

Why do females dislike the Real World? Everyone knows that the Real World is a cold, cruel, hard place. Men are cold, cruel and hard anyway, so they just accept this and move on. Women are very sensitive creatures and it’s hard for them to accept a brutal and depressing reality, so they simply say it doesn’t exist.

3 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Women

PUA/Game: Newsflash: Women Love Men Who Love Women!

I took a class once on D. H. Lawrence. It was all women except for me and one other guy.

Well, it was paradise.

Every day after class, I ate lunch with these three beautiful women aged 27, 28 and 37, and I was 22. Two were married and another one was living with a man who happened to be a huge cocaine dealer. We got along famously; I hardly fought with any of them even once.

All of these PUA/Manosphere types who argue that the only way to get along with women is to be an asshole to them or treat them like shit are just wrong. At the time, and hopefully even now yet, I loved women. I truly did. I spent a lot of my time hanging around with women. Many of my best friends were women. I could easily sit on a couch on an evening with three women and watch a Bette Davis movie. I didn’t even like guys; if I had my preference, I would have spent most of my time around women.

On the other hand, I didn’t put up with any crap from these women either. When the 27 year old once said, “Well, you are pretty skinny…”, an obvious insult to my masculinity, I immediately responded, “Shut up, cunt.” She looked hurt and said, “I’ll box your ears, you macho pig.” The other women looked at me with a mixture of disapproval and respect. One said, “Booob…” But I didn’t hear much more crap out of any of them for the whole semester.

I was regarded as a sexual threat and a best friend at the same time, and by the end of the semester, I was starting to know the majority of these chicks (the two married ones) in a Biblical sense.

I can’t see how a man whose philosophy is that the only way to get along with women is to be an asshole to them and treat them like shit loves women. I can’t even see how he likes women. I would say with an attitude like that, you can’t be anything but a misogynist. The fact that this is the template over in the PUA/Manosphere speaks volumes about the misogyny-enriched loamy soil in which these movements sprouted.

Believe it or not, if you really like women, or better yet, if you really and honestly love them, it shows. Women figure it out real quick. And contrary to the crap from the Manosphere/Misogynist-sphere, I do not think most women prefer misogynists to ladies’ men. In other words, newsflash! Hey Manosphere! Listen up! Women love men who love women! Just as you might expect. Duh. But a real ladies’ man doesn’t take any crap from women either, and believe it or not, women actually respect that.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Women

Types in the Manosphere Part 1

From a comment on a very interesting blog called Gunlord. I like this guy a lot. He’s basically a MGTOW type (perfectly happy being a total bachelor, not really wild about women anyway), but he doesn’t like to talk about it, doesn’t hang out on the MGTOW forums and thinks the whole movement is stupid.

Some of his ideas I seriously don’t agree with, but others make a lot of sense.

From the comments page:

You have the standard male supremacists who want women back in the kitchen, the MGTOWs who think women in the kitchen are “parasites,” the transhumanists who think some combination of artificial wombs, sexbots, and buttsex will liberate men from women, the “Human Bio-Diversity” enthusiasts who are called “white knight nationalists” by everyone else, the Christians who want to establish a theocracy, the atheists who think religion is a sneaky plot by women to enslave men, the Aspies who think even men without autism are just “women lite,” and so on and so forth…

In this post, I will go over the male supremacists, the MGTOW’s, the transhumanists, the Christians, the atheists and the HBD’ers.

Male supremacists: Very common on the Manosphere. They want to go back to the old days, which means, I dunno, before 1920. Take away all women’s rights because they are too crazy and emo to deserve them anyway. I never could get down with these guys. I’ve long been an equity feminist, and at one point I was actually a member of NOW (The National Organization for Women). This is so retrograde and reactionary that it’s simply bizarre.

MGTOW’s: These are a light version of female separatists, but they are not a corollary of lesbian separatists. They are into living the bachelor life and putting off marriage for as long as possible. They have a very dim view of women to say the least and advocate replacing them with dolls, fleshlights, porn, masturbation and at the very most prostitutes. They wish to avoid relationships with women and even advocate not dating them. They think men should even limit their friendships with women. In other words, they think women are a plague to be avoided at all costs.

They have a somewhat rocky relationship with the rest of the Manosphere, especially the PUA types who they call “pussy beggars.” In return, the PUA’s refer to MGTOW’s as “Omega losers.” Politically, they are almost all Libertarians.

They have a very open view of what is available to men lifestyle-wise: live at home, live with roommates, move around the country, take off and go live in foreign countries, change careers, make as much or as little money as you like, and especially, quit caring about what society demands of you and start embracing nonconformism. Do it your own way, and don’t let women, kids or society get in the way. Guys, do whatever the Hell you want and quit caring what anyone thinks about your choices. There are supposedly a few MGTOW’s who are married or in relationships, but I have not met them.

I like these guys in a way. I like their open-ended view of the possibilities for males. They don’t care if an adult male lives at home! Wow. Face it, societal demands and restrictions trap a lot of men into this or that job, location or lifestyle. When you have a wife and kids to support, you can’t exactly be a free-spirited vagabond.

I also love that they are reclaiming bachelorhood. Yay! For too long bachelorhood has been seen as a bizarre pathology, and at some point, all men are required to marry and hopefully have kids. At my age, it’s not that I need to get married but more that it’s seen as way weird that I never got married even once. If I would have tied the knot for a year, I would be in much better shape.

Bachelors are seen as possible homosexuals, incel losers, antisocial loners or out and out bizarre and possibly/probably dangerous weirdos. In other words, if you never got married, well obviously it is because something is wrong with you. At some point in your bachelor life, you will reach a point where pretty much all society is rejecting you, and it does not feel good.

I am not down with the living without women and avoiding sex out of preference, as I have never been that way. Sure, there have been periods with no girlfriend in my life, maybe even years, and there have been periods of incel living ranging from months to a year or possibly more. I never cared about marriage as long as there was one or more women in life and hopefully I was getting some sex. As long as I have women and sex somewhere floating about my life, even on the horizon, I am happy as a clam and see no need or reason to marry.

I don’t regard women as parasites to be avoided at all costs. I’d just as spend most of my socializing with women and blow men off. Why would I prefer to be around women all the time? Because I like to live dangerously!

Transhumanists: Ok, this is insane. These are the male version of lesbian separatists. Replace sex with women with sexbots and mix in a lot of fagging off with other guys while you’re at it. For babies, we will grow them in artificial wombs. No need for women and those yucky ovaries. I have no idea what their politics is like. Sorry, this is way too weird for me.

HBD’ers: I had no idea they were part of the Manosphere. Apparently they are a very wussy part of the Manosphere because they spend most of their time white-knighting. These guys don’t care about women or men. All they care about is genes, IQ tests and eugenics. They love those wonderful White and Asian races, and they have nothing but utter contempt for those disgusting, inferior Black and Brown races. Politics is conservative to Libertarian. Many are strong supporters of the Republican Party and spend much of their time Democrat-bashing.

Christians: Supposedly want to establish a theocracy. I haven’t heard of any of these sites. There is one good Christian Manosphere blog by a guy named Dalrock who isn’t even a misogynist. Extreme hypergamy is even effecting these hardcore Protestant fundamentalists. Politics is probably Republican Party.

Atheists: They supposedly blame women for the plague called religion and think women set up religion as a plot to enslave men. That’s pretty crazy, and thankfully I have never been to such a site. Politics? No idea.

17 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Conservatism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Libertarianism, Man World, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Religion, Republicans, Sex, Sociology, US Politics, Women

Why Men Might Want to Learn to Like “Chick Music”

Females often also like the harder music that we males often like, but to be honest, when it comes down to it, females will usually prefer softer music, and males will often like harder music. You might think it’s pussy to like chick music, but I have been listening to it all my life.

I think it is good for men to get into chick music, if you like it. For one thing, a lot of it is good music. For another thing, a lot women, especially young women, love this kind of music. So now you have one more thing in common with women! Females are typically very happy to find a normal, regular, non-wimpy guy who actually enjoys the type of music they like.

In addition to sharing one more common thing with women, listening to this type of music can help you think like a woman. I actually do have a very large part of me that more or less thinks like a woman. You might think that is pussy or gay, but actually it enables me to get along with women very well! The more you understand women, the more you learn to think like a woman, the closer you will get to women. If you have good Game, that can lead to lots of great sex.

Honestly, most of the most notorious womanizers I have ever known were not ultra-macho types but instead they were somewhat androgynous. Their androgyny meant that they had a lot in common with women, and they sort of thought like women too. This is one more thing that they had in common with women, and it enabled them to get along with females very well.

This is why I have never agreed with the “You have to treat women like crap. It’s the only way to deal with them,” point of view. Lots of men who truly love women do great with women. And a number of these guys love women so much that they actually think like a woman to some extent. Women love men who love women, and they also love men who can think like a woman to some extent without being a wimp or a queer.

36 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Music, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Women