12 June 2005

What annoys women

I somehow subscribe to this e-mail thing and rarely read them. Whoever writes it essentially repeats himself (good effort on focus, I'll give him that) that what women want out of a guy is less wuss, more taking control. He really preaches "cocky homour," and for the most part I agree. He also tends to dumb it down to a Maxim-reading level.

But here are some quick tidbits from his last e-mail, before I delete it:—

Here are some of the things that many women
consider to be "annoying":

- Calling her too often

- Telling her that you have "feelings" for her too early

- Giving away your power to her and making her the boss

- Always asking a woman what she wants instead of leading

- Acting submissive and weak

- Accepting her demands, bossy-ness, and manipulative requests

- Being her doormat and putting your own needs aside

"WHAT?" you say.

"HOW COULD THIS BE?"... you might be thinking.

How is it possible that demonstrating your
affection for a woman by calling her, telling her
how you feel, letting her make the decisions, and
putting her first could be considered ANNOYING, of
all things?

Well guess what?

IT IS.

Women, and ESPECIALLY the most ATTRACTIVE and
desirable women usually consider the above things
to be VERY annoying.

Of course, the reason for this is because no matter how good these kinds of behaviors seem on the surface, there's only one conclusion that can be drawn from them:

THE MAN DOING THEM IS A BONAFIDE, 100% CERTIFIABLE WUSSY!

AND WOMEN AREN'T ATTRACTED TO WUSSIES.

NEVER.

Now, do I really, really, REALLY mean that women are NEVER, EVER attracted to Wussies?

I mean, isn't that an over-generalization?

Nothing is always true, right?

Well, this one IS.

Actually, what I MEAN is...

As far as generalizations go, this particular one is as close to being true all the time as they get.

And just in case I haven't said this enough, let me say it one more time... just to make sure it's clear:

WOMEN AREN'T ATTRACTED TO WUSSIES.


In more a more legitimate debate, however, I would go as far as saying that there are possible matches for everyone. The issue at hand, really, is finding someone on the same page as yourself.

i.e. Let us say that you're shy, uncultured, and lack self-esteem. Is the Los Angeles type supermodel dimebag crackwhore going to go for you? Chances are, no. Could you find a awkward girl at the college? Now your chances are going up.

It really comes down to self-worth and exploring different groups of people to find others that you enjoy, and that enjoy you. The more people you meet, the more you get to reflect on yourself through their eyes.

Then there is that last chance factor, the whole "chemistry" bit. Too many people settle, so fuck them. Then again, I've found some very interesting matches, girls I've dated that have really blown my mind, only to have the situation wither away in front of me as they moved on. (It's also not easy dating when many girls are raised Christian and I tend to be interested in the occult. Doesn't seem to jive.)

Chemistry, though… I've had it with the weirdest people. That is the one thing hard to predict I suppose.

Just avoid the Los Angeles-type girls. They're fucking gross. And chances are they're making up for some major lack of self-esteem, were fucked up as kids, and are generally looking for another figure to reflect an aspect of their youth that they never got over. Could be another daddy to treat them like shit, another abusive boyfriend, who cares. Anyone attractive will have a slough of guys pursuing them, guaranteed, but these L.A. types will garner a large following of the worst kind of guy: aggro muttfuckers who have a false sense of self-esteem rooted in picking on smaller kids up in high school — they're meatheads chasing after bimbos. Rule of thumb, avoid these girls:

Also, if you get the chance, punch them in the stomachs near their uteruses (wtf is the plural for "uterus"?) so they can no longer procreate.

Fucking stupid people procreating is another post altogether, for later.

No comments: