Before I take the time to write a proper wrap of my #NoNothingNovember, I’ll include this brief thought I had from a conversation I had with my best friend last night.
As you may recall, I once wrote a post on Sisyphus and the human condition.
“…to be human is to struggle. Life is struggle”
When I was talking with my buddy, conversation turned to that theme again and I said:
Humans need a mountain to climb. For men, that mountain is accomplishment, accolades, and other achievements. For women, the mountain is you. Don’t give them a peak.
To clarify what I mean you could go back and refer to what I said further, in my Sisyphus post:
Inertia is death…
Why would a man wish for a neverending mountain? Because…at the top of the mountain, it’s nothing but downhill from there.
But there’s a man who’s said it better than I – for, though he uses more words saying it in the long form, a certain nuance is made apparent; and that nuance might make all the difference. But I want you to focus on a specific part – which commenter Earl pontificates upon.
After reading his post for the third or fourth time; after my thoughts writing this post and my thoughts reading his post coalesced; I posted this comment.
Upon further reflection, I think the issue is that one cannot be “satisfied” with a women in a relationship, especially if she is “the one”. For the day you are satisfied is the day she is not.
Satisfaction is the peak from which she can only see downhill.
The higher value the man, the steeper the climb.
The less secure the man, the steep the descent.
And the more “game” a man has, the steeper he can make the ascent, the more gradual he can make the descent, and perhaps he might be able to convince her to make one more trip back up, for a better look at the view if he finds her on the way back down.
I don’t think I have it completely correct. I might not even be close. I am, however, getting closer.
Wald
This concept and the one explored in this post are related. But how and to what extent?
English translation of the lyrics.
Pingback: Random Thoughts #3 | Manosphere.com
Interesting insight. I like the analogy of man as mountain and woman as climber. And I agree that a man can make his peak never-ending, or at least much taller, with strong relationship game.
Thank you for the kind words.
It occurred to me that women spend their lives preparing from relationships, getting in them, getting out of them, preventing other women from stealing their men and vice versa. It’s the reason why real-life women fail the Bechdel-Test.
Wald
Pingback: Random Thoughts #3 | Neoreactive
Interesting. Makes me wonder if this applies to all women or just the codependent ones.
I imagine as opposed to “either or” it’s a matter of to what degree.
Wald
Well, I figure that Christian culture quite fostered codependency in women, so it may really be 90+%.
Interesting way of putting that.
In a sense, it’s useful for both men and women to need each other in a marriage. Yet, the balance is delicate.
Wald
In a way, that may be true. It likely depends on whether you judge codependency as a mental illness or as the desirable state.
For me as a man, it was quite an unfortunate state, to say the least.
I think it behooves a man to be independent and it behooves a woman to let herself be dependent on a man who is not dependent on her.
Wald
You are missing the truth that is hidden in plain sight, though. There is a reason why it is called co-dependency. It is because the really dependent person is the narcissist. He is dependent on her admiration, while she is merely co-dependent, as she provides the really dependent person with that admiration in this symbiotic relationship. The co-dependent is not so much dependent as she thrives on the dependent person’s dependence.
Then I am not missing the truth. We’re talking past each other using different words to mean similar things.
I don’t think we disagree at all, actually. Just finding the words that mean the same thing to both of us…
Wald
Well, the ironic thing about is that the narcissist, although being the primarily dependent person, is less dependent on any particular woman, because when she fails to provide the praise, he will quickly switch her for another. While she really is fixated on him. Thus many women keep running after ‘their’ narcissists. Just look at the fan page of Sam Vaknin.
My point here is that it is not wise to be a narcissist, because it is not wise to be dependent – as you already pointed out. But someone who is not a narcissist is not interested in a co-dependent, because a codependent’s clinginess would be rather annoying.
Then again, from what I hear, American women are quite the opposite of co-dependents in many regards and have become narcissistic monsters themselves.
But I am starting to ramble. My original point was that a confident woman may in fact not need you to be dissatisfied, because it is the smothering and insecure co-dependent that can not feel secure unless she feels ‘needed’ by a ‘needy’ man. And ‘needy’ in this case means a guy she thinks she can or has to ‘fix’, not the kind of needy that is often referred to as unattractive. Rather the ‘taking’ and predating needy.