Friday, 28 September 2012

Core Masculine and Feminine Traits

Humans, like most mammals, exhibit a significant degree of sexual dimorphism. Sexual dimorphism is an evolutionary adaption that allows each sex of the same species to play complementary roles within the greater context of the ecosystem and the conflict with other species for dominance. To deny that sexual  dimorphism exists requires a major dose of chutzpah and self-delusion. I consider myself a benevolent sexist, as opposed to a misogynist (patriarchal man) or misandrist (gender Feminism) sexist.  That is, gender equivalency but not equality: for each trait of a woman, there is a corresponding trait in a man, but they are not the same thing.

Men and women naturally form very different social networks.  The natural male organization is the hierarchy, whereas women form more amorphous networks best described as 'big-A' Anarchy. The male social construct is the dominate one in our society, largely because Anarchy fails due to the inability to counter violence and malevolence (i.e. tragedy of the commons). With the advent of agriculture in the Neolithic age, society developed organized religion and the associated dogma that created the social structure of patriarchal hierarchy, known by the shorthand patriarchy. What happened before the advent of patriarchy is disputed, e.g. Sex at Dawn rosy picture of female promiscuity reward-enforced Anarchy versus nasty and brutish barbarism. There have been some efforts to develop a middle way between the male-centric and female-centric social constructs (i.e. matrix management), but thus far they are largely in the nascent experimental phase.

The problem with patriarchy was rather than leave women outside it and let them form their own social Anarchy, they were incorporated into it as chattel and put at the bottom of the pile. First-wave Feminism was an appropriate response to the patriarchal hierarchy that arose when egalitarianism and technology gave some women the means to object. The problem was and is that the leaders of feminism were very masculine women. Rather than develop a female model of strength based on feminine strength, they sneered at femininity and have tried to force women to become more masculine. That is, rather than make the human social environment more feminine, Feminists have tried to make women adapt better to the male social construct of hierarchy. Feminism does not claim to shame women into adapting to the hierarchy, quite the opposite actually, but this is the realization of gender Feminism versus the abstraction of equality Feminism.

At the same time, Feminists have tried to weaken men by emasculating them and making them more feminine. The combination has made everyone weaker. Feminism jumped the shark with the second and subsequent waves. Women are not temperamentally suited to being masculine. They do not have the testosterone that makes that degree of drive and determination possible without mental illness. As such, too many women transform themselves into neurotic perfectionists who loathe themselves for their inability to live up to the gross expectations of society. I know, I've dated them. It was a mistake in the effort to become egalitarian, and we are all reaping the consequences now. Any future philosophy must explicitly acknowledge the sexual dimorphism of the human psyche.

If we want to return to a past where men were men and women were women, but replace the paternal hierarchy with a more balanced system, we need a common vocabulary of what is a masculine trait and what is a feminine trait. Traits are categorized based on whether they are core traits, that are fundamental parts of the male or female psyche, or whether they are more nebulous peripheral traits that trend to one sex but can be expressed by both. Our modern culture is weird, so if you want a good description of what traits are masculine and feminine, look to the classics.
Do not yield to unmanliness, O son of Prithâ. It does not become you. Shake off this base faint-heartedness and arise, O scorcher of enemies!
The above is a quote from the yoga bible, the Bhagavad Gita, one of the earliest metaphysical texts not lost to the ravages of history. Least you be fooled into thinking that yoga is a hippy female pursuit, it was historically a tool to enforce violent patriarchy. The Bhagavad Gita is an allegory where the mentor Krishna convinces the protagonist Arjuna to fight in a just war when Arjuna wants to be a pacificist rather then kill his friends and relatives. Plato, Shakespeare, etc. all contain messages that are not politically correct in the slightest: Taming of the Shrew anyone?

In terms of personal growth, it is helpful to view every personal trait as a skill that can be improved with practice. For example, strength is a skill one develops by practicing the art of lifting heavy things. So says Pavel Tsatsouline. All the body's organs respond and adapt to stimulus they face, including the brain. If you practice drinking alcohol, your liver will get better at processing it quickly.  I don't recommend you work hard at improving your liver.

Masculine Core Triad


Many people would emphasize strength as a manly trait, but humans are tool users, and that means weapons. The reality is that a small chimpanzee is much stronger than almost all men yet men are the apex predators of the animal kingdom.  This was accomplished through the melding of military organization (hierarchy) and primal technology. Being an athlete will get you more chicks then lifting weights. The guiding principle of body-building, muscle isolation, hurts athleticism by negatively affecting coordination. Athletes must have excellent muscle irradiation, such that the entire body supports both proximate and distal actions.

If you look at American football, the quarterbacks have the most prestigious position and the hottest wives.  The most athletic guys, the wide-receivers, also do very well with the ladies. The biggest and strongest guys on the field, the linemen, are not nearly as attractive. Being big and tall is a proxy for athleticism, but if you've ever had the opportunity to demonstrate athletic dominance, let me tell you that concerns over stature evaporate as soon as someone points out they've only ever seen that on Youtube before.

Erwin Le Corre demonstrating simple yet fluid athletic movements. Compare this to a spastic extreme sports video of your choice.

As a man, you signal athleticism through physical size, muscle tone, good posture, and fluid unencumbered movement. Diet, exercise, and rest are all important in developing an athletic body and mind, with diet being by far the most important of the three. The most successful method to improve male athleticism has to be the paleolithic movement, of which I would suggest reading Mark's Daily Apple and Perfect Health Diet for an introduction and beware the garbage blogs that are stained with modern philosophies like Libertarianism. It's all about reconnecting to what you are: a cunning, stalking killing machine that was evolutionarily so dangerous that even large carnivores were artificially selected to instinctively run away. Go barefoot once and awhile; the human foot is the most complicated appendage in the animal kingdom by far, having about twice as many parts as the human hand. And please don't shave your chest.


Confidence is the metric for a man's degree of social dominance in the hierarchy. We all understand it fairly implicitely, in terms of how men naturally order themselves based on confidence. A man with high confidence has no problem maintaining eye contact without coming across as hostile. He's a natural leader and effectively manages people without bruising egos, because others simply expect him to give orders. Its the expectation and welding of personal power in relationships.

Confidence is often regime specific.  A musician might draw women to him like moths to a flame at a jam session, but if you put him in a game of co-ed soccer he'll completely flame-out because he's a crappy soccer player. A key lesson for men then, is try to meet women in activities you are good at.  You confidence will shine through and you'll do much better with the ladies as a result. If you suck at yoga or ballroom dancing, it will not be a good medium to meet ladies despite the favourable gender ratios unless you put in the effort to become good at it.


Courage can be best described as a lack of hesitation and a willingness to accept personal risk. I choose the word courage over bravery as courage implies a moral aspect whereas bravery is generally just a lack of physical fear and may indicate simple bravado. It's implied that a courageous man would shield his women and children from physical and moral assaults.

The easiest way to display courage to a woman is to approach her without hesitation. Approaching a woman in a social situation where flirtation is not socially appropriate (i.e. the day compared to the singles bar) signals a lot of courage. It's not the same thing as confidence, although people often confuse the two. Courage reflects a man's willingness to overcome his fear, uncertainty, and doubt and act in spite of them. Confidence reflects a man's past success leading to an expectation of future success. Generally speaking, consistent application of courage leads to greater confidence for men.  A man with courage can adapt himself to changing circumstances, whereas a man might be born with high confidence just because his parents were noveau aristocrats and he has money and power as a result.

Feminine Core Triad


Female beauty at its core signals reproductive health. While good genes do increase a woman's attractiveness, e.g. a pretty symmetrical face, a 0.7 waist-to-hip/bosom ratio, men are really after healthy women. It's women who select for good genes (hypergamy), men are more interested in spreading their seed as wide and far as they can (polygamy). Our culture is incredibly soft, pampered, and ill so very, very few women are in the ideal 21-25 % body fat range (fashion models are typically 17-19 %), have a nice degree of muscle tone, or have healthy radiant skin, teeth, and hair. It's easy to stand out in a crowd.

Unfortunately, we have a culture of shame that makes body image a very touchy issue for women. My comment to that is, most of the popular culture surrounding nutrition is flat out wrong, so it is not a surprise that so many women struggle to be healthy since all the assumptions they make about food and exercise are wrong. Industrial food culture has ravaged our health, so if you want to become the most beautiful woman you can, I advise reading Perfect Health Diet and Paleo for Women. Paleo dietary principles do not work as well for women as for men, I would advise women to lean more towards being a vegetarian who eats meat, but it is still a source of rationality in the field of nutrition that is typically devoid of rationality. Beware of vegetarian protein sources such as wheat and soy, because many plant proteins contain peptides that can act as fake hormones in your blood.

Exercise hard: women think sweat is unwomenly but it carriers a lot of the same attractiveness-boosting pheromones that male sweat does. Most women have trouble losing weight because they have no muscle, are insulin resistant as a result, and therefore excess calories never go into protein synthesis. Get away from the canard that muscular women are bulky: if a woman is bulky its because she has a lot of interstitial muscular fat, i.e. her muscles are actually like a finely marbled beefsteak.

Aging well means your body regularly turns over all the structural and catalytic proteins that make up your body. My guideline is that if you stop menstrating your body fat is too low, and the heavier a women has ever been the higher the body fat limit is before leptin kicks in amenorrhea. Do not abuse your body with obsessions and addictions. Binging is particularly harmful.

Meghan Currie showing off her attractiveness by practicing yoga. If you met her you would not call her pretty but you would call her beautiful. She is an excellent example of a woman who has aged very, very well.  

Women can also enhance their beauty by dressing well. Dressing with class helps signal that a women will age well and not let herself go. Aim to be pretty and classy, not hot and sexy, if you're looking for a long-term relationship. A women in a halter-top and yoga pants relies too much on her youth to show her beauty, and thus presents herself as more suitable for a short-term fling.


Feminine grace is the counterpart to masculine confidence, and it reflects the ability of a women to effortless flit from social network to social network. Grace manifests itself in terms of a pleasant demeanor, mastery of non-verbal communication, and diplomatic actions to smooth over ruffled feathers.

A woman with high grace can typically flirt with any man without anxiety because she can easily disengage without offending any feelings. If she's attached, she can flirt for fun and deftly insert the existence of her boyfriend into the conversation to avoid miscommunication. For women, it's a big deal to flirt with a guy or throw out an indication of interest, and it shouldn't be. You have to practice to get good at grace, like every other skill. A woman with a bitch-shield up lacks grace because she cannot effortlessly handle unwanted male approaches. How effectively and politely a woman manages and rejects advances by men is a very good measure of her grace. If a man respects a woman more after she rejects him than he did before then she has good grace.

The reason why Meghan Currie can post yoga videos of her in her panties (or less) and get away with it, while a more masculinized yogini like Sadie Nardini would, and is, pilliored for it is because Currie has grace. She role-plays a mischevious pixie, and women love her for her unabashed feminity, sexual inneudo and all.

Unfortunately for women, while grace works in the social scene it is not quite as helpful in a career situation since most corporations organized along a parternal hierarchy model.  The expectations of Feminism is that women should either: 1.) do both well, or 2.) be careerists who don't form long-term attachments to men.


The dichotomy between the autistic, rational male brain and the empathic, rationalizing female brain is the largest psychological difference between the sexes. Naturally speaking, the male is the tool-maker and the female is the tribe-builder.  The combination of technology and tribe are humanity's massive evolutionary advantage over other animals.

Men use rationality to understand the nature of the world, to build physical things, to understand abstract concepts, all requiring rational thought. Empathy explicitly uses rationalizations to create common ground between two people or peoples where none exists. So a woman can hear about about a natural disaster in far away Africa and be moved by empathy to donate money, even though rationally her money will probably not be effectively used to ease the suffering of anyone, let alone the actual victims. A man wants to be altruistic, to provide, only to people to whom he has an emotional connection. Empathy is the cornerstone of female social structure and how order is enforced without the threat of violence.

For a women, her degree of emotional openness, or vulnerability, governs her ability to express empathy in a positive way. Maintaining vulnerability is risk-taking behavior for a female because she risks investing emotionally in a man who might not reciprocate. We all understand beauty well, we mostly understand grace even if we don't observe it because good grace is invisible, but our culture has seriously messed up our view of vulnerability. Please watch Brene Brown's discussion of the topic of vulnerability and shame here:

Feminism has sought to destroy female vulnerability under the misguided notion that it makes women weak, and to bring forth culture of shame instead.  For example, read how Amada Marcotte shames men for being 'too needy'. Vulnerability is a woman's most powerful tool to invest in a man but it's going unused. Instead we have a debased empathy, where some groups are demonized (i.e. all men are potential rapists) and others inappropriately lionized (i.e. all women are victims of patriarchy). Men's rights activists often call Feminist-debased empathy '(female) solipsism' although personally I think the choice of nomenclature is poor and obscures the issue.  The issue is there's been a war against women showing men empathy in relationships, and surprise, it's resulting in poorer quality relationships.  Basically feminism is trying to say, women aren't responsible for the well-being of the tribe, and they're trying to force men outside of the emotional connectivity of the tribe. This is a terrible long-term strategy because ostricization will eventually result in men resorting to violence to restore dominance.

That said, Feminism's lancing of vulnerability has probably hurt men more than women. It is men who desperately desire an emotional refuge from the rigors of incessant inter-male competition. Women, by in large, have been denying this to men over the last sixty years. Men are right to loathe Feminism in this regard because Feminism does nothing for men. With that said, Feminism's war on vulnerability only work if women show solidarity.  If some women seek the competitive advantage vulnerability provides in the long-term relationship marketplace, those women that continue to deny vulnerability make it starkly obvious they are suitable for short-term relationships only.

From the female triad we can see that the popular notion that men are better able to improve their sexual attractiveness than women is bullshit. Women can radically improve their value as a mate if they put a lot of effort into self-improvement. Just adding vulnerability back into the mix is a huge competitive advantage.  A man will not realize a woman's vulnerability in his conscious mind, but when she provides him with a source of positive empathy he will reciprocate by becoming emotionally invested in her. A woman who is not vulnerable is just a receptacle for the man's cock.

Peripheral Traits

Discussion of what these traits are truly composed of would probably take another blog, so in the interests of brevity I'll just list them.  Masculine peripheral traits are: creativity, passion, rationality/autism, altruism, determination, and discipline\austerity. Feminine peripheral traits are: patience, intelligence, memory, charisma, sensuality, and fidelity.  

Ideally, men should spend about 75-80 % of their personal development time on masculine traits, with a focus on the big three, and 20-25 % of their time on feminine traits. A man will probably see the best results if he focuses on the peripheral feminine traits rather than core ones, as these enhance the man without excessively subtracting from his masculinity.

Anti-traits and Contrary Traits

Men and women will often accept displays of anti-feminine and anti-masculine traits as an example of reproductive fitness but poor long-term suitability. They are the 'dark-side' of masculinity and femininity.  This is because there is a time and place for the anti-traits: in times of extreme stress, such as war and famine, when the social fabric breaks down they become critical for individual survival as the tribe perishes.

The core anti-traits for men are belligerence, a ready willingness and ability to employ violence; arrogance, a facade generated to hide fear, anxiety, and doubt; and Machiavellianism, a willingness to generate negative externalities that place risk on others. A murderer is belligerent, a player is arrogant, while a banker who manipulates the stock-market to enrich himself at the expense of pensioners is Machiavellian, all of which can be attractive to women.

The core anti-traits for women are slutiness, a willingness to be sexually promiscuous with high-status men; bitchiness, a nasty and unpleasant demeanor, and shamefulness, a willingness to exploit passive-aggressive emotional weapons to prevent others from being successful. Note that negative female traits are well-defined words, I don't even have to provide examples, as are positive male traits. Also expression of male anti-traits is often illegal, whereas expression of female anti-traits can only result in social repercussions.

In contrast to anti-traits, contrary traits indicate a lack of a of a positive or negative trait.  So, for example, supplication contra-indicates confidence as a man will automatically place himself lower on the social hierarchy then he rightfully belongs. However, contra-indicating negative traits also signals weakness! A man who is a pacificist is also indicating his lack of fitness because he won't employ violence even when it is justified.


Gender feminism is bad, mkay?  So is patriarchal misogyny.  We need a middle solution, one that compromises between hierarchy and Anarchy.

Unfortunately, while patriarchy has been almost completely discredited, the failure of equality Feminism to win over the hearts and mind of women has gone largely unacknowledged except in some corners of the internet. Instead, we have gender Feminism embodied by websites like Jezebel which create a culture of gynocentralism and misandry, and it is making women progressively less happy with themselves. Again, to stress, if you want to see unhappy, unfulfilled, hateful women, go read the articles and comments at Jezebel.

We must acknowledge that women derive their strength from feminity.  There has been a sustained effort to kill off grace and vulnerability to force women to fit into the hierarchy of society and that was a mistake. Women want to be empathic and vulnerable towards men, its how they temper the violence out of men. There are two paths that every one of us can follow:

The current path
The alternative path

Pick one.

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

How (Not) to Argue with a Woman

Ok, this is a public service announcement to all you angry, bitter, jaded-sounding men in the so called 'manosphere' of men's rights, pick-up artists, and other sundry issues:

You are doing it wrong.  You are attempting to talk to women as if they are men, but they're not, so you don't understand why when you try to explain something to them it doesn't seem to register.  This comes down to how the human brain works, and the differences between men and women.  The 'manosphere' is all about the dichotomy between the sexes, ans so strongly apposed to Feminism's desire to make us all androgynous hipsters, so please perk up your ears and listen.

Evolutionary speaking, the mind can be roughly segmented into three parts: the instinctual (or reptilian) mind, the emotional (or mammalian) mind, and the rational (or human) mind. The thing is, the earlier the segment of the mind evolved, the more dominate it is over the other pieces. So the emotional mind can't stop instinctive actions from occurring, and just as critically the rational brain gets pushed into the background whenever we experience strong emotions.

The problem men have is that we naturally argue in quite a vigorous fashion.  Women, on the other hand, are naturally more predisposed to avoid confrontation which is to say they are more fearful and anxious then men are. When a man tries to argue with a women as if she's a man, she perceives him as being angry and, surprise!, she becomes afraid.  Even in our soft culture, most men are far stronger then women and so men easily physically intimidate women. This is an emotional response is women, to avoid angry and upset men because that's where the risk of physical violence or rape comes from. We have laws that discourage violence, and anonymity on the internet that shields identity, but the emotional response is there, programmed in by eons of evolution back when homo sapiens was homo erectus.

The key thing to realize is that anxiety is an emotion, and as such it's governed by the emotional brain.  It's not rational for a woman to be upset about what some bitter and jaded Men's Rights Activist is screaming about on the internet. Whenever a woman's emotional brain becomes engaged, her rational brain retreats.  The moment you make a women anxious, you've lost the debate. The only way to return to a rational discourse is to give her 45 minutes for her amygdala to calm down, which means removing the stimulus that made her anxious in the first place and providing comfort.  This isn't something that's under your control on the internet, needless to say (but it is good advice for real-life).

To reiterate,
You cannot have a rational argument with a woman's emotional mind.
You cannot have a rational argument with a woman's emotional mind.
You cannot have a rational argument with a woman's emotional mind.  
Now, if you choke down an even bigger slice of self-reflection pie, try to recognize that if you are angry, your emotional brain is engaged. Which means you aren't rational.  You might think you're rational, but you're not.  Sorry, you're just not. Guess what?  The anxious women think they are being rational too, but neither of you are, so you keep talking past each other and no progress is made. So if you find you anger levels rising, the only solution is to step away from the computer for an hour and do something productive. You cannot control her behavior, but you can control yours.