A Wicked Project

A somewhat random post here that I am writing for the benefit of my readers, especially the newer ones.

If you have been around these parts long enough, odds are pretty good you’ve seen something like this:

  1. ‘Spherian writer pens a post in which he takes a stand that goes against the common grain (as far as general society is concerned). The goal of the writer in this instance is to make things better, at least within his own perspective.
  2. A woman reads this and blows up. She says that the post is evidence that the men of the sphere are horrible human beings and that the writer has something wrong with him. If the woman claims to be a Christian it usually involves an allegation of a dark or twisted soul.
  3. Men, sometimes the writer, sometimes the commentators, try to tell the woman that nothing malicious was meant. They carefully try to explain to her the logic involved, and why she should reconsider.
  4. This doesn’t work.

The reason why this ultimately doesn’t work is because the woman is not thinking logically, she is thinking emotionally (or rhetorically, if you prefer). Furthermore, her thought processes are centered around projecting- both emotions and intentions. It goes something like this:

  1. Woman reads something she doesn’t like.
  2. Woman becomes upset about it, because it upends some part of her self-image or her understanding of the way things are supposed to be.
  3. The woman recognizes how upset this makes her at a subconscious level.
  4. She tries, again at a subconscious level, to figure out why she is upset.
  5. Her default settings kick in, which involves projecting her own nature upon the person writing.
  6. Her thought process is something akin to- a) this person made me upset, b) I would only make someone upset if I meant to make them upset, c) therefore this person intended to make me upset.
  7. If this person intended to make me upset, then they are not a good person, and therefore what they have written has a malicious purpose behind it.

Emotions and projecting drive this behavior. Appealing to reason and logical will never work with the woman because she isn’t thinking logically. You cannot convince her of your good intent (or at least no malicious intent) because no amount of logic will affect her emotional reaction to what she read.

My advice in this situation is to always let the woman be. Ignore her ranting. She won’t be swayed by anything you say or do aside from total capitulation. You will simply waste your time, and probably derail the whole conversation. Now, perhaps my readers have some ideas on a way to “solve” this problem, but I haven’t seen anything work to date.

Advertisements

12 Comments

Filed under Blue Pill, Red Pill, Women

12 responses to “A Wicked Project

  1. A Visitor

    Hmm…you hit the nail on the head, Donal. Ignore them. Don’t feed the troll. A way to permanently deal with them is if they have a static IP address to ban them. Make the ban six months long.

  2. I used to prefer the ignore.

    Now, I prefer the proactive approach. Address it and then ban if necessary.

    There’s no use for allowing comments that are typically totally off track or projecting unless you’re looking for examples to prove your point. That’s the only time I can see that it’s useful. Otherwise, it’s simply cluttering up the comments which often include a lot of derailing.

  3. Men only posts or ban the troublemakers.
    Too many posters are intent only projecting their own errors.

  4. theshadowedknight

    Tell her to be quiet and read. If she comments a single time after than, ban her. The Bible commands women to learn silently. A woman’s opinion is worth little unless it is to satisfy your curiosity on a particular subject. They have very little to add and are adept at creating a disturbance and enjoying the resulting drama.

    The only way to solve this problem is to recognize that a woman interrupting is the problem, not her taking offense. Once she realizes that emotive tantrums are going to get her nowhere, that same emotional view will put her on the path to a more receptive mood.

    The Shadowed Knight

  5. fuzziewuzziebear

    The last two times that Insanitybytes has posted a comment on Sunshine’s new site, I have told her that she is a very effective proponent of MGTOW.
    I don’t know if it is working.

  6. Now, perhaps my readers have some ideas on a way to “solve” this problem, but I haven’t seen anything work to date.

    Although it works fairly well, I’m told an empty 40 oz. bottle is frowned upon in polite society.

  7. Fuzzy, I skip most women’s postings.

  8. Michael Kozaki

    The reason why this ultimately doesn’t work is because the woman is not thinking logically, she is thinking emotionally (or rhetorically, if you prefer).

    I would challenge the exclusivity to women. Men do this in nearly as large numbers, they are just more careful in how they express it. But most are as logically dishonest, clinging to their logical errors like a tick on a boar hog.

    Female emotional spewing is fairly accurate as to the cultural thinking of most men (who are too ashamed to spew it in polite company). But it shows at the voting booth. Or voluntary organizations that don’t require success or making money. Like church. Or the mob. So it’s wise to keep abreast of it.

    But I do agree to not waste time trying to argue with illogical people. It’s like trying to argue religion with men. It’s not logic they want. It’s self-justification. Were it logic, everyone would be Jewish or Catholic or an agnostic of some sort. But people are tribal, not logical. And women just express this less tactfully.

    She won’t be swayed by anything you say…You will simply waste your time, and probably derail the whole conversation.

    This is the “red pill” idea, and it fully applies to men. If the truth hurts, we would rather have a lie. As the saying goes, we can’t handle the truth, be it about religion, sex, evolution, IQ, genetics, or whatever. Men are less likely to make jackasses of themselves in a combox, true (they have been beaten down more by society by women) but it’s still hard to get very far in the combox using dialectic, period. So it’s mostly a circle jerk of people who already agree on the basics and are just chipping away at the finer points. That’s ok. But it’s foolish to pretend the majority disagree, and the female spewing is a nice reality check on this fact as long as the troll is not fed.

  9. Now, perhaps my readers have some ideas on a way to “solve” this problem…

    “Lol” usually works best.

  10. Pedat Ebediyah

    @Michael Kozaki

    This isn’t about men though.

  11. Michael Kozaki

    Pedat, yes it is. Read OP point #3.
    Men love to feed female trolls. Emotion, not logic, rule here.

  12. KP

    ‘Lol’ usually works best

    Or “You’re so cute, dear!” if you’re feeling wordy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s