with No Comments

Post No.: 1005masculine

 

Fluffystealthkitten says:

 

‘Love bombing’ is considered a red flag in romantic relationships. This is when someone bombards you with affection in order to gain your trust but it’s all manipulative, and so their true colours will eventually reveal when they turn cruel and controlling towards you once you show commitment to them, or don’t respect your boundaries after you say no.

 

We don’t want to be so suspicious of affection that we distrust the good people out there and settle for the mediocre though. It’s like being wary of commercial fraudsters – we could say that one sign of long-con fraudsters is how they seem to have done tons of background research on your company and know so much about what you seek and need… But that’s also a sign of parties who genuinely wish to create a productive partnership with you. We don’t want parties who waste our time by not doing their research on our business, position or goals. We deserve better. The more reliable signs of fraudsters include how nothing they claim can be independently backed up, they want money transferred to them upfront, or romance scammers isolating you from your friends and family.

 

So, despite the name, the problem isn’t really about the ‘bombing’ of love, attention, genuine concern, gifts, admiration, saying the ‘right things’ (as if the wrong things are better(!)), declarations of fondness or other affectionate or effortful gestures. When we observe couples in such deep love doing ‘sickly sweet’ things together that we wish to puke – this speaks about us and the state of our own relationships! Thus what’s ‘excessive’ or ‘trying to move things too fast’ is subjective. Well I suppose if they claim that you’re their soul mate after only a day then definitely! Yet what if you felt the same way about them for that rare, but not impossible, love at first sight?

 

Therefore the real problems to beware of are the possessiveness, control, dominance, seeking constant validation, narcissism (‘love bombing’ is often linked with narcissistic personality disorder), pressuring to commit, emotional manipulation, gaslighting, jealousy when you’re with others, wanting to know your every step regarding where you are and whom you’re with, anger against criticism, threatening shouting, blames and not taking any responsibility for wrongs, the denigrations or devaluations of you, and the discarding then returning as if they cycle between hot and cold i.e. the negative behaviours that reveal their true character and selfish intentions. It’s ultimately about the abuse that we shouldn’t overlook just because of any amount of the positive things they’ve done, are doing or have promised to do.

 

Genuine love stays consistent and the person stays true to their kind words. (There’s also a possibility that someone has a level of OCD that affects their relationships, and their chronic obsessions with you and compulsive showering of affection aren’t due to malintent but crippling fears about losing the relationship with you. Maybe they’re still not right for you because they’re too much for you to personally handle but such people would require our empathy and compassion, and perhaps a chance to see if they can change for you.) How nice and kind are they towards those they’re certainly not romantically interested in – in front of and (if you can find out without being the stalker yourself!) behind your back – too i.e. is their apparent personality just an act for you because they want something from you, or just how they generally are?

 

How do they treat especially those they consider as having a ‘lower status’ than them? Are they nice to everyone, including waiting staff and strangers? This person may just treat you well, and you may think this is all that matters – but it might be only a facade. How will they be once they’ve gotten what they want from you? Do they often speak ill of others behind their backs? You mightn’t hear them disparaging you – but that could be because they’re doing so behind your back. It’s almost expected for people to put on their best behaviour during job or pre-tenancy interviews, and indeed when dating – seeing how they behave when they don’t think they’re being scrutinised is therefore vital to know.

 

Don’t dismiss the (rare) good people of this world just because the deceivers superficially copy some of the behaviours of good people. It’s understandably safer to err on the side of caution but our detection skills need to be more refined. We see this too often in pop psychology when it comes to detecting lies e.g. liars typically protest their innocence to the end, but this doesn’t mean that those who ‘defensively’ protest ‘too much’ cannot be innocent. If someone truly feels like they love you without manipulative intent, it can sometimes come out as effusive. If someone is innocent, they can incessantly, vehemently plead their innocence.

 

Speaking broadly, it’s a sad state of affairs when people cannot accept that some other people can be copious with their kindness and compliments without having an ulterior motive (i.e. altruism) but that’s the perception for many in this modern individualistic culture. We might think ‘everyone can trust me but I cannot trust anyone else’ but this’d be a bias. Or maybe one is really thinking ‘I wouldn’t trust myself so I wouldn’t trust anyone else’?! It’s sad that many couples in relationships are more likely to wonder ‘so what are you seeking from me this time?’ if they receive a spontaneous flattering remark or gift from their partner! It’s so transactional. But when we presume the motivations of others, it often only speaks of ourselves – like assuming others are only generous if they want something from or fancy someone else because that’s what we’re like. Well if someone is conceited and wrongly assumes your motivations for being caring then just say goodbye. This should be easy because you weren’t seeking anything from them anyway. You were only trying to give but they didn’t want to take, and that’s fine.

 

Now it’s not that women like ****holes. They do like nice guys. What they don’t generally like are feeble, insecure, clingy, needy, un-ambitious, passive and lily-livered guys. But somehow certain cultures have conflated ‘being nice’ with ‘being weak’. Be nice – just don’t be weak, which doesn’t mean being an ****hole in the slightest. It’s a clarification that simple cavewomen and cavemen both need to understand for a better world. (Crude caveperson instincts include shallowness, irrationality/poor logic and relying on over-simple heuristics like unrefined stereotypes.) Niceness is a desirable trait and we need more of it in this world. Meow.

 

A related oversimplification that contributes to this ‘men need to be ****holes to get women’ error is believing that women want what can be regarded as ‘masculine’ traits in men. But this isn’t accurate because some traits regarded as ‘masculine’, like pushy aggression, elevated self-importance (especially chauvinistic beliefs), promiscuity, being unemotional, taking excessive risks, not engaging in housework or caregiving i.e. the ****hole traits, aren’t desirable by most women. We really don’t want to promote these traits in men, even though certain popular social media personalities have been precisely championing such traits of late.

 

Calling the desirable traits that heterosexual females want in male partners as ‘masculine’ also makes it sound like women should avoid being brave, independent, confident and assertive – when these are desirable traits in females too. Women who express these so-called ‘masculine’ traits shouldn’t be called ‘bitches’ any more than men who express so-called ‘feminine’ traits like nurture and vulnerability shouldn’t be called ‘weak’. It’d speak about us as outdated cavepeople otherwise.

 

How the likes of Andrew Tate treat women shouldn’t successfully work for them with any women ever. But it’s just an extension of what pickup artists already understand regarding ‘negging’ women and not complimenting them too much. (See Post No.: 0965.) It’s lamentable that they really do know how to exploit the hearts of (cave)women, and it’s sadly encouraging a community to believe in quite misogynistic views. Women shouldn’t unconsciously respect and feel more attracted to men who subtly put them down while they self-aggrandise. This shouldn’t earn these men high status.

 

The most attractive men ought to be those who try to lift the statuses of women up and are modest about themselves. Men who regularly say the nicest words or do the kindest things shouldn’t be seen as lesser or taken for granted. The nicest should be romantically rewarded the most. It’s not business, sport, in court or war – judge whether someone can be tough, dominant and ruthless in these contexts, not romantic ones. It’s like the best soldiers and sportspeople know how to switch it on during combat or a match and then instantly switch it completely off once it’s all over. The least socially intelligent are those who cannot adapt to different situations fluidly i.e. are just competitive constantly, even amongst their mates. What’s so ‘big’ about someone who likes to dominate friendly conversations or other friendly contexts? Know when to compete and when to cooperate.

 

So if you really want to judge whether a man is ‘masculine’ enough – judge them in a context where winning truly matters, not when cooperation does (plus understand the difference between a strong versus insufferable competitor – one should always maintain humility, not arrogance, even in competitive contexts).

 

Men can therefore be attentive, helpful and incredibly nurturing without being less of a man. It’s somewhat like men who have no insecurities about their manliness aren’t concerned about wearing pink because they know that’s got nothing to do with what it means to be masculine. With critical thinking, we know this is true. But when we, as female, male or other; heterosexual, homosexual or other; rely on our (caveperson) instincts – which we typically principally do in romance – we might prejudice someone as ‘effete’ because of something this superficial.

 

If you’ve got your own life figured out, and therefore you’re content, then there’s every reason to be expansive and to tend to others selflessly. Altruism is thus actually evidence of someone who’s got it psychologically together. It therefore takes an enlightened individual to realise that nice people actually possess the higher status – they’re confident and know they’re high enough in value to not feel the need to snub others to try to lift themselves up. They’re in fact so self-assured, they find no threat to their own status for trying to lift the statuses of others up, as long as their adulations are genuine and don’t seek return, as opposed to obsequious or fishing for approval.

 

You sometimes hear football/soccer fans screeching tragedy chants against opposing teams. Those within the ingroup will find this funny thus it makes them feel good. But from a neutral viewpoint, you realise that it’s generally only (some of) the fans of the relatively lower-status team who’ll bellow these tasteless chants towards the relatively higher-status team to try to put the latter off their game, because that’s all the former have got. It’s the lower-status team’s fans who’ll holler, “Who are ya?!” if their team surprisingly scores a goal to lead or peg back a higher-status team, not vice-versa. It’s the lower-status team that attempts to humiliate those they find threatening.

 

Praises come easily from leaders; put-downs and schadenfreude come easily from bullies. Being nice isn’t subservient behaviour; negging isn’t ‘alpha’ behaviour. Use the Twitter comment button below if you disagree.

 

So value niceness from others. Be nice towards others. Just don’t confuse it with weakness, or think that to be strong one needs to be stereotypically ‘masculine’. Men are neither servitors to nor masters over women.

 

Meow. I suppose, ultimately, it doesn’t really matter because things naturally sort themselves out. Smart, strong, confident, modern, self-respecting men don’t want cavewomen anyway. If they’re not an enlightened individual then they don’t deserve you. No need to turn into a caveman and become misogynistic. Just find a smart, strong, confident, modern, self-respecting woman. They exist.

 

Comment on this post by replying to this tweet:

 

Share this post