Having said that... many of us discovered something interesting. Kink / BDSM is basically putting on the role of a very evil man in a consensual or safe way, for a very scene, which is exciting, and thereafter we can go back to being boringly kind (and call that aftercare lol). And it is sort of learnable like a basic stage role. Grab hair, push down, until forehead on the floor etc.
I don't think a man has to be a rollercoaster (scary, exciting) to be attractive, but has to be able to put on that kind of role sometimes.
And this is the solution to the "women both love and hate dating assholes" dilemmas. Make it a limited, consensual stage act.
Yeah, but if you're pissing people off you're probably doing something right lol. Sometimes you have to point out that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes!
YES! This exactly! My brother has one particular daughter (of three daughters) and she always was dating the "bad boy" type. As a sister who could give him honest feedback, he asked me why his one daughter was drawn to the bad boy type. I told him that it's an ego thing. That despite him being a player and screwing other girls, if she can tame him, make him change his ways for HER, then it's a ego boost. She could fix him when other girls couldn't. No other girl could change him, but she could. I knew better than to chase after bad boys. Yes, there is the allure, but it's more like "I know this is bad for me like too much alcohol, but it could be fun." But I didn't want to risk that toxic crap.
In my latest manuscript (that is with my beta), my male romantic lead admits he had to get over his anger issues and learn to trust (after being dumped by a shitty fiance who had an affair with his best friend after he had a horrific accident) before he was willing and ready to pursue a relationship with my female protagonist, needing to be healthy on the inside before having a healthy relationship with others. She is dealing with her own issues of trust (especially having a former narcissistic boyfriend who was emotionally abusive) and he recommends therapy, as that helped him. I hate stories with toxic relationships and always push for people together despite being badly broken and the relationship is the magic sauce that automagically fixes everything. It doesn't.
Yes, you're not dealing with logic and decision-making in these situations, so when parents or friends try to intervene, they get nowhere. It makes for compelling fiction, but in real life, it can put you through the wringer, to say the least
I'm always... disappointed in women's choices of this sort of literature, movies, whatever, and even more so in their real-life situations that mirror this. This is a perfect example of why women have such a hard time making progress. In many ways, women are their own worst enemies.
You and many feel disappointed because we have been taught since little kids about “the perfect fairer always kind and empathetic gender” on and on and on since forever… an impossible yardstick if you ask me (yet many laws are enacted as if it is indeed a reality).
Seeing what happens behind stages is an eye opener, for men and women alike.
It has actually been the great vast internet, the brave ones not scared to receive backlash (like the author of this article) and those that gathered around to share notes that we can now easily open the lid to see.
There have always been hints though, by women themselves as they are more acutely aware instinctively: if we remember that grandmother that would frown at your girlfriend “I don’t trust her, I don’t like her, get away from her” out of the complete blue or that friend girl that’s always with guys and would openly admit that she doesn’t have that many friend girls and doesn’t get along well with her own for the most part.
Anyways, human nature, it comes in all sorts of shapes, colors and behaviors. Can’t really get disappointed for not being what we can’t be.
I think most people are their own worst enemy, it definitely isn't limited to one sex or the other. And sometimes you have to make a few bad choices to understand a good one, we are after all only human.
Women are not a monolith… I don’t identify as a woman; society does. I wish women’s weird choices had as little bearing on society’s understanding of “my species” as Andrew tate’s immoral behavior does.
"If they were ugly and/or poor then they’d be on an episode of Dateline, not in a romance book."
Not sure I agree with this part (or maybe i misunderstood). Michael Bloomberg (as one example) is objectively ugly and yikes, his voice. Also famously a prick to women. Yet he has more NDAs on file than the CIA. Hes famous for remarking how great it is for be a single billionaire in NYC. See also Bill Clinton. power and money seems to compensate for a lot of ugliness.
I think Bloomberg’s wealth and influence insulated him, though he was rather unfortunate looking. Though wealth alone isn’t enough to engender the type of loyalty that the “it” guys enjoy. Hence the need for NDAs at all
It's because he's the only one being seen. Guys like him are easy to flex in the problem is that the fellas who can step in him aren't seen by society when they do it.
Yes of course, Andrew Tate has no female fans, definitely doesn’t receive gifts and love letters, and isn’t deluged by women in social media DMs. And 365 only sold millions of copies and got a movie deals for the lols. Right you are
Jeffrey Dahmer got female fans too - 0.00001% of all women who have ever heard of him. Tate is also likely exaggerating the amount of female attention he receives, because it’s in his interest to do so.
I found this article already at the edge of triggering a tsunami of criticism, can’t imagine then the other words-nuke waiting your drawer.
Quite a brave take.
It has invited a lot of denial I don’t know why: in simpler terms the bad boy adventurous type is a thing, since forever… suddenly many are acting as if all those movies and books and songs and novels flopped.
As someone trying to work on a light romance, I appreciate this far more than you know. Big help! (but I'm trying to be more positive than evil in it)
"What that says about female desire and our nature in general, I won’t say here. It’s so dark that I don’t think I’ll ever release the article about it I wrote one late night."
Well, as a Christian I would say it says that we all have sinful natures we must struggle with and tame. Men and women both. But if you do release that article, I would like to read it.
Well I think it's demonstrably true that bad boys hold a certain appeal to some women, you only need to appeal strongly to a certain subset of the female population to achieve romantic success.
Sensitive nusician types also appeal to many women,of course they're also "High status"but I don't think they have anything to do with the Tate archetype
It's old news, or at least should be seen as such by this stage. But it's not simply that women give men status as you put it. It's much more in the other direction, as no matter how much those manosphere types criticise women they won't and/or more precisely are prevented from)relegating women both within their own minds and in society generally.
OMGGGGGGGGGGH this was drinking a tall glass of nice cold mineral spring water 😅 alao please send me that articula because im so down for dark unfiltered thoughts about female desire!!!
I don't know if it's 'all' girls, but a lot of hotties are really attracted to guys that are violent dickheads.
I used to be that guy, and it certainly worked. I stopped doing it because I realised it was ruining my life (and because I'm not actually a violent dickhead) and the deluge of interest noticeably subsided. Meanwhile my best friend went in the opposite direction, realised he could scrap pretty well and started throwing his weight around and suddenly the girls were willing to crawl over broken glass to get to him. Which was lucky because there was generally a lot of broken glass around.
I'm sure there are a lot of women who don't find all that attractive, but there are a hell of a lot of (honestly pretty ditzy) ones who lap it up, and generally they're wearing short skirts and have their boobs sticking in everyone's face so it's all very high profile, high drama, exhibitionist type of stuff.
None of this is ubiquitous though, this is a certain niche ecosystem you're looking at and it's full of narcissistic bullshit. I'm not a woman so I can't say for certain, but I'm sure there are quite a lot of woman who look at Tate and think 'why would you?', just like I look at a Lamborghini, and while I can recognise that at some abstract level they're a pinnacle of....something... I can't imagine anyone older than 15 who would actually want one. In fact I'd go as far as to say that owning a Lamborghini is a sign of some deep character flaw, although if I was actually saying it I'd probably use the word 'fuckwit' a lot more.
In the same way, lusting after Tate is probably a sign that you're either 15 or kind of retarded (which is the same thing). It is a status symbol, but a status symbol for retards. Can you actually imagine bringing him into your friendship circle in the real world? Would your friends be like 'Wow Kristin, well done! You go girl!'? Or would they all be gathering in the kitchen and asking each other "WTF is wrong with Kristin... why is she hanging out with fuccboi all of a sudden?"
>Women want him with a ferocity usually reserved for professional athletes and A-list movie stars.
Doubt, doubt. The Manosphere is the least attractive hobby: https://datepsychology.com/the-most-and-least-attractive-male-hobbies/
Having said that... many of us discovered something interesting. Kink / BDSM is basically putting on the role of a very evil man in a consensual or safe way, for a very scene, which is exciting, and thereafter we can go back to being boringly kind (and call that aftercare lol). And it is sort of learnable like a basic stage role. Grab hair, push down, until forehead on the floor etc.
I don't think a man has to be a rollercoaster (scary, exciting) to be attractive, but has to be able to put on that kind of role sometimes.
And this is the solution to the "women both love and hate dating assholes" dilemmas. Make it a limited, consensual stage act.
I totally want to read the forbidden late night article lol
Maybe one day 😁 I’ll have to be prepared for literally everyone to be mad at me
Yeah, but if you're pissing people off you're probably doing something right lol. Sometimes you have to point out that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes!
YES! This exactly! My brother has one particular daughter (of three daughters) and she always was dating the "bad boy" type. As a sister who could give him honest feedback, he asked me why his one daughter was drawn to the bad boy type. I told him that it's an ego thing. That despite him being a player and screwing other girls, if she can tame him, make him change his ways for HER, then it's a ego boost. She could fix him when other girls couldn't. No other girl could change him, but she could. I knew better than to chase after bad boys. Yes, there is the allure, but it's more like "I know this is bad for me like too much alcohol, but it could be fun." But I didn't want to risk that toxic crap.
In my latest manuscript (that is with my beta), my male romantic lead admits he had to get over his anger issues and learn to trust (after being dumped by a shitty fiance who had an affair with his best friend after he had a horrific accident) before he was willing and ready to pursue a relationship with my female protagonist, needing to be healthy on the inside before having a healthy relationship with others. She is dealing with her own issues of trust (especially having a former narcissistic boyfriend who was emotionally abusive) and he recommends therapy, as that helped him. I hate stories with toxic relationships and always push for people together despite being badly broken and the relationship is the magic sauce that automagically fixes everything. It doesn't.
Yes, you're not dealing with logic and decision-making in these situations, so when parents or friends try to intervene, they get nowhere. It makes for compelling fiction, but in real life, it can put you through the wringer, to say the least
I'm always... disappointed in women's choices of this sort of literature, movies, whatever, and even more so in their real-life situations that mirror this. This is a perfect example of why women have such a hard time making progress. In many ways, women are their own worst enemies.
You and many feel disappointed because we have been taught since little kids about “the perfect fairer always kind and empathetic gender” on and on and on since forever… an impossible yardstick if you ask me (yet many laws are enacted as if it is indeed a reality).
Seeing what happens behind stages is an eye opener, for men and women alike.
It has actually been the great vast internet, the brave ones not scared to receive backlash (like the author of this article) and those that gathered around to share notes that we can now easily open the lid to see.
There have always been hints though, by women themselves as they are more acutely aware instinctively: if we remember that grandmother that would frown at your girlfriend “I don’t trust her, I don’t like her, get away from her” out of the complete blue or that friend girl that’s always with guys and would openly admit that she doesn’t have that many friend girls and doesn’t get along well with her own for the most part.
Anyways, human nature, it comes in all sorts of shapes, colors and behaviors. Can’t really get disappointed for not being what we can’t be.
I think most people are their own worst enemy, it definitely isn't limited to one sex or the other. And sometimes you have to make a few bad choices to understand a good one, we are after all only human.
Women are not a monolith… I don’t identify as a woman; society does. I wish women’s weird choices had as little bearing on society’s understanding of “my species” as Andrew tate’s immoral behavior does.
"If they were ugly and/or poor then they’d be on an episode of Dateline, not in a romance book."
Not sure I agree with this part (or maybe i misunderstood). Michael Bloomberg (as one example) is objectively ugly and yikes, his voice. Also famously a prick to women. Yet he has more NDAs on file than the CIA. Hes famous for remarking how great it is for be a single billionaire in NYC. See also Bill Clinton. power and money seems to compensate for a lot of ugliness.
I think Bloomberg’s wealth and influence insulated him, though he was rather unfortunate looking. Though wealth alone isn’t enough to engender the type of loyalty that the “it” guys enjoy. Hence the need for NDAs at all
It's because he's the only one being seen. Guys like him are easy to flex in the problem is that the fellas who can step in him aren't seen by society when they do it.
1) I don’t know a single woman who has even a vaguely positive opinion of Andrew Tate. The woman he is around are paid to be there or trafficked.
2) Everyone makes fun of that 365 movie, calling it ridiculous. You’re really using some poor examples to make your point.
Yes of course, Andrew Tate has no female fans, definitely doesn’t receive gifts and love letters, and isn’t deluged by women in social media DMs. And 365 only sold millions of copies and got a movie deals for the lols. Right you are
Jeffrey Dahmer got female fans too - 0.00001% of all women who have ever heard of him. Tate is also likely exaggerating the amount of female attention he receives, because it’s in his interest to do so.
I think the weak is attracted to the weak.
I just think Christian are very well aware of it. Let's say the bibel is.
I consider criminals, in most cases – weak. And the women seeking contact with them - always weak.
As I wrote in my first comment. That you brooded about. But then we are in agreement.
Why would he need female fans? Would it validate his message? His audience is young men and boys so obviously he does not need female fans.
I found this article already at the edge of triggering a tsunami of criticism, can’t imagine then the other words-nuke waiting your drawer.
Quite a brave take.
It has invited a lot of denial I don’t know why: in simpler terms the bad boy adventurous type is a thing, since forever… suddenly many are acting as if all those movies and books and songs and novels flopped.
As someone trying to work on a light romance, I appreciate this far more than you know. Big help! (but I'm trying to be more positive than evil in it)
"What that says about female desire and our nature in general, I won’t say here. It’s so dark that I don’t think I’ll ever release the article about it I wrote one late night."
Well, as a Christian I would say it says that we all have sinful natures we must struggle with and tame. Men and women both. But if you do release that article, I would like to read it.
lol wtf is this Pearl Davis ass horseshit
Well I think it's demonstrably true that bad boys hold a certain appeal to some women, you only need to appeal strongly to a certain subset of the female population to achieve romantic success.
Sensitive nusician types also appeal to many women,of course they're also "High status"but I don't think they have anything to do with the Tate archetype
And it only comes from being chosen by a man with endless choices. Even if he’s a bastard.
Men with endless choices always cheat. You're fooling yourself to think that gives you status. Your just another bedpost notch
It's old news, or at least should be seen as such by this stage. But it's not simply that women give men status as you put it. It's much more in the other direction, as no matter how much those manosphere types criticise women they won't and/or more precisely are prevented from)relegating women both within their own minds and in society generally.
Scarily true, I think.
OMGGGGGGGGGGH this was drinking a tall glass of nice cold mineral spring water 😅 alao please send me that articula because im so down for dark unfiltered thoughts about female desire!!!
I don't know if it's 'all' girls, but a lot of hotties are really attracted to guys that are violent dickheads.
I used to be that guy, and it certainly worked. I stopped doing it because I realised it was ruining my life (and because I'm not actually a violent dickhead) and the deluge of interest noticeably subsided. Meanwhile my best friend went in the opposite direction, realised he could scrap pretty well and started throwing his weight around and suddenly the girls were willing to crawl over broken glass to get to him. Which was lucky because there was generally a lot of broken glass around.
I'm sure there are a lot of women who don't find all that attractive, but there are a hell of a lot of (honestly pretty ditzy) ones who lap it up, and generally they're wearing short skirts and have their boobs sticking in everyone's face so it's all very high profile, high drama, exhibitionist type of stuff.
None of this is ubiquitous though, this is a certain niche ecosystem you're looking at and it's full of narcissistic bullshit. I'm not a woman so I can't say for certain, but I'm sure there are quite a lot of woman who look at Tate and think 'why would you?', just like I look at a Lamborghini, and while I can recognise that at some abstract level they're a pinnacle of....something... I can't imagine anyone older than 15 who would actually want one. In fact I'd go as far as to say that owning a Lamborghini is a sign of some deep character flaw, although if I was actually saying it I'd probably use the word 'fuckwit' a lot more.
In the same way, lusting after Tate is probably a sign that you're either 15 or kind of retarded (which is the same thing). It is a status symbol, but a status symbol for retards. Can you actually imagine bringing him into your friendship circle in the real world? Would your friends be like 'Wow Kristin, well done! You go girl!'? Or would they all be gathering in the kitchen and asking each other "WTF is wrong with Kristin... why is she hanging out with fuccboi all of a sudden?"