Comments by "Rose S" (@roses6564) on "PsycHacks"
channel.
-
145
-
77
-
71
-
64
-
43
-
36
-
33
-
33
-
28
-
I've always said young women (teenagers) should be busy with "Men's Studies" - in the sense of knowing how, what and why to pick early on, and to maximize their own value for most favorable picking.
Unlike men, we don't have the luxury to wait, to "sleep on it," to hedge our bets, develop "optionality," and such.
If there is a true natural female disadvantage/underprivilege, this is it.
What men don't get is that not all women in their prime (teen and early twenties) can achieve the potential of that prime without conscious intervention. They may be young and fertile, but that doesn't necessarily mean at the peak of their attractiveness. Men often conflate attractiveness with fertility, which doesn't mean they are attracted to homely young&fertile chicks.
Many women are late bloomers, look awkward at the theoretically "prime" age, still clueless about how to set off their best traits. Some are still battling baby fat, others just the modern fat, which they still don't know how to keep at bay, etc.
Later some lose the weight and the "pretty" finally comes through, but then they're also late 20's, if not 30's.
So the Situation must be tackled methodically, with science, dedicated studies and lots and lots of timely self awareness. Otherwise, settling or indefinite singlehood are guaranteed, along with eventual marital dissatisfaction.
This is because for women, the quality of the relationship and how actually satisfied they are with it is "make or break": the most important part of life. But nobody tells them that, on the contrary, there's a lot of denial.
Both schools of thought lie to women. The Progressive's holy grail is the Career, the Traditionals urge them on Family at any cost (regardless of optionality for partner selection).
It's neither. For women, marital/relationship satisfaction makes or breaks life. Everything else is secondary, and yes, that includes children and family.
27
-
26
-
24
-
23
-
21
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@melstarr1864 Sad reality: most men and women have little in common except complementary gender roles (sex, child rearing, a few services most of which can now be bought/contracted out).
The only relationships that work in modern times are those that produce mutual joy spontaneously by having something EXTRA there, above and beyond complementary gender roles.
If there's no holistic/romantic PIES attraction (physical, intellectual, emotional, s;spiritual) and a real friendship based on shared interests, orientation and goals - the relationship fizzles eventually.
Some divorce, some stay as is, more or less miserable or just plain bored, for practical reasons.
Nietzsche had it right:
"It's not a lack of love that makes for unhappy marriages, it's a lack of friendship."
You can care a lot about an incompatible spouse you got habituated to, but if the "natural glue" is not there (holistic love, romance, attraction and friendship included) - it will not last without social controls or material incentive.
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
Sure, it's usually a withholding wife and a denied husband. But there are plenty of "other way around" cases - including those where the husband is hooked on porn or very low drive or has a neurotic ego (Madonna/Whore complex) and does not know how to approach the wife, so he is often afraid of rejection, or comes from a puritanical family, afraid of "soiling" the "mother of his children." Believe it or not, there are cases like this.
The wife usually wants to be approached/asked/pursued, otherwise she won't approach him since many women find the idea of having to ask the husband to have sex very demeaning.
There's also the reality that many women can do without sex with another; what they can't do without is their man's expressed desire for them.
On a different note, it is interesting how sex seems to be the only item society gets hysterical about, even as we know full well that the elusive marriage "contract" is multidimensional. If there is such a thing as marriage contract (spoiler: it isn't), then other dimensions should be included. A partner should be held just as responsible for failing to provide items that are extremely important to the spouse and affects their well-being. Not just sex.
Many women, for example, need companionship, conversation, connection and emotional intimacy with their spouse. These are as vitally important for them in the relationship as sex is for men. And yes, those needs must be met IN the relationship, not outside of it.
The argument that sex is limited to the couple whereas everything else is not, does not hold water. A woman can have great connections with many people, but if she is emotionally and mentally estranged from her husband, it's debilitating for her mental health.
So then is it OK for women to make the same fuss men make about the lack of sex - if they don't get their emotional needs met? Why are sexual needs more important than emotional/connection needs? Who says that?
Just because sex is material and the emotional needs are immaterial? That's BS. Mental health and emotional fulfillment matter just as much, if not more. Both men and women can easily give themselves orgasms, but they can't make themselves feel fulfilled in a lonely relationship. And women are way more affected by loneliness in the relationship than men are. If they get their sex, most men are OK without internal connection. Women are not.
Yet loneliness remains a very serious condition with measurable negative impact on mental health and quality of life. And no, sex doesn't fix loneliness.
Then what? What should happen when the man refuses to meet a woman's emotional needs and leaves her feeling lonely consistently? Or just can't? "I have a headache" goes both ways. "Can't do conversation now, I need to go to sleep." It never happens.
Rings a bell?
He is emotionally unavailable and only wants sex, if that. A minority of men don't even reach out for sex since they prefer porn.
Does that mean breach of contract? Or is it just sex deprivation that really matters in a marriage, and everything else can be procured elsewhere?
That's a bad idea, btw - one point where Dr. Taraban is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The woman is often sent out to have her "connection" needs met with someone else: friends, extended family, children, take a class, etc, and he does the same thing - talks to the bros.
All fine and dandy until one day she finds a dude she actually connects with emotionally, and if she belongs to the cerebral minority, intellectually too.
Then here's that "Where have you been all my life?" soulmate.
We all know what this is likely to lead to.
Then the husband has a conniption fit about "being cheated on," cuckolded , etc - when she'd been asking him - no, delete that, begging him - for years to pay attention.
Many cases like this.
You can't have it only your way, gentlemen. If you're gonna cry "sex deprivation," she has just as much of a right to cry "connection deprivation." So why not get the other type of "deprivations" in the contract while we're at it?
"Yeah, but marriage is about children, blah blah blah, and children are made with sex ...blah blah...and the Bible says... blah."
Um ...OK. No it's not. Not anymore. Or it'd better not be.
We're at 8 billion in an atomized global society with community breakdown, and marriage is still "just about children", therefore essentially about sex? Leave history where it belongs: in the past.
In the 21st century, what marriage is really about is voluntary intimacy, including the mental kind - or especially that kind. It's a sense of connection and belonging which can't be found in the community anymore. Only a strong intimate relationship can offer that.
Now if you both find yourself crying deprivation of some kind, the marriage is simply crap. Not to worry, you're in good company. Most people's marriages are 50 shades of crap even if they would have you believe otherwise. If you have the blessed chance, replace with high goodness of fit and don't look back.
Dirty little secret: society needs a lot more divorce, not less. It just needs to learn how to do it fairly, sans pettiness, drama and vitriol. Considering how clueless the young are, its a miracle about 20-30% of marriages are somehow lifelong happy marriages (or mostly).
Everyone else needs a wake-up call.
9