Women have a strategic advantage in relationship that they tend to exploit unbeknownst to themselves. These instincts, behaviors, and strategies have been hardwired into the human organic computer through millions of years of neural myelination that have been passed on in the form of cellular memory. Women don’t think about it, they don’t do it consciously, they aren’t aware that they tacitly interpret and judge reality in the experiencing of it.
The female mind was created to be in relationship with children. The woman thinks that femininity is superior to masculinity, that is why she is female, as such when their is a disagreement between the male and female she refuses to look from his perspective or compromise or negotiate. She uses her bias and the feminine bias of society and the children to get her way. She basically hijacks the relationship and holds it for ransom.
If you observe women’s arguing styles you realize that they can’t get over their programming, they act like a mother in the following ways. They presuppose their moral authority, they try to control the narrative as though they are talking to a child. They correct the narrative, changing words, they are not just expressing a different sentiment they think that they have the final edit on the conversation. They talk over you, interrupt your, nag, whine, repeat themselves, refuse to agree, participate, or move towards the solution or compromise, they quote people outside of the relationship whose opinions don’t matter and they will even violate the boundaries of the relationship by bringing people into the argument who are not part of the conversation in order to take their side. These are not the behaviors of a person who is in relationship or a person who give equal credence to their partner. The correlation between psychopaths and the narcissistic narrative has recently been discovered and fascinatingly, my theories show that the female brain, especially in relationship with a male brain acts psychopathicly, whereas the male brain is more sociopathic.
The female brain operates from moral authority, operating on superficial aesthetic snap decisions as to what looks right and what sounds right. The female mind is in relationship with its own authority and as such wants to expand and intensify its authority so it uses illegitimate behaviors and strategies in relationship to create a disparate impact in its own favor. While men think about creating value for the relationship women think about getting what they want from the relationship and in this way women attack the relationship. Even in a relationship of two women will try to increase their status, social climbing. Women don’t debate analytically offering evidence, and reasons, or being open to experiment, they argue emotionally not being able to conceive of any other solution besides the one that they are leaning towards. They ask leading questions, they try to control the direction of the conversation, they force an emotional moral frame editing the consideration set of the conversation as if they were the arbitrary judge of the conversation and they try to force you to participate with their premise.
The female mind sees reason as a hostile, alien, influence and refuses to participate with it, or she will conflate moral authority with sapiential authority and herself the high priestess of both, but she is absolutely incapable of not being perfectly predictable in her positions and behavior.
The woman acts as a mediator between father and child, a liaison, a go between, and she can use her position to bring the family unit closer together or to sabotage the father. She can try to win the child’s favor so that he likes her more by spoiling the child. If the father competes in this way it is more damaging for the child because he can play the parents off each other and the child starts to think in terms of possessions instead of relationship. The mother can misrepresent the father to the son and further damage the relationship between them. Some women go so far as to make the father an object of contempt and ridicule to the children.
For those of you that are familiar with my theories on emergent properties in collective judgments of societies you might remember this piece I did to illustrate how society protects women from men they are in relationship with. Note further that the man is basically accepted into a society by having children, that is his root in society, his entrance into a society. Women use every possible strategy to expand and intensify their control, to make it permanent.
Most cultures have an age of adulthood which has historically ended the authority of the mother and begins the authority of the father and the preparation of the child to be a responsible and functional part of society, which also means that the issues that the mother has protected and instilled in the child through invasive narrative or psychological manipulation have to be removed and the child has to be made mentally and emotionally healthy and a contributor to society. The child is also at this time responsible for the laws of the land and is no longer able to make appeals to feminine authority in the form of mercy and charity claiming to not be responsible for their actions and the consequences thereof. The problem with America is that none of the social strictures on women apply and at the same time women are unconscious of their instincts and processes and of the evil they do innately. They don’t have to scrutinize themselves or criticize themselves and they refuse to take responsibility for their actions or the consequences of them. At the same time the refuse to confine their attentions and judgment to realms in which they are valid and get good results, completely incapable of not tacitly judging and interpreting everything from the position of moral authority. Refusing to participate with reason they are passive aggressive and perceive themselves at the same time as being passive resisters and reformers of society while all they are really doing is making society weak and vulnerable.