Girls are not receptive to friendship

This article is over 8000 words and was written because someone asked me online Do you think love fades away? If you have any questions for me, you can ask them on Compesh and use the "ask to answer" feature to get me to answer them. Forgive the headline, I'm not saying that girls aren't friendly people, but there is no other way for me to express the subject of my article with a snazzy headline. I've had lots of friendly and positive experiences with women I hardly know, some passers by in the street, some in a social environment I became friends with.

However what I am noticing, is that the process to befriend a woman is very different than the process to befriend a man. I don't read pick up artist advice that is given out blogs, books and forums etc, so nobody has put words into my mouth or stewarded the way I think. This is just me explaining the way I see the world, from my own convictions. I know how to become friends with women and can do so easily, but it's not good enough to say what I normally say to men, to women. It just wouldn't work!

Although women are people too, human, with thoughts, feelings and dreams, lots of men in society still find it hard to approach them, know what to say to them to become their friend, or even just understanding them as people - as if they are a foreign species. "We're just like you" women say with a smile, not only to highlight how human they are living the human experience of life in the 21st century, but also to try to reassure those men that they should just treat them how they would treat anyone else, being nice and kind, and just go with the ebb and flow of conversation, that he can take part of the interfacing process, and so can she, if they are both co-operative, kind, and giving stock to the interaction at hand.

"Women are confusing" men say, and on the flip side, women also say that men are confusing. I'm not expecting to be able to draw parallels between my behaviour and another person's behaviour, male or female; but if someone is behaving outside the standard practical process, then obviously one would ask themselves why that is happening, how to best deal with it, and learn where the other person is coming from once they know. Such things would not only help them become a better version of themselves, but it would also break down barriers of miscommunication and allow one to show appreciation for another person more effectively when they know how to make someone happy for the receipient's sake, not their own.

What happens when you try befriend women

Any man who has interacted with women, knows that what women say is not what they mean. A woman can say one thing and mean something completely different. I don't feel the need to give examples of this, as that is outside the scope of this article. All the men who are clued in will know what I'm talking about. Whereas with a man his language has to be deconstructed so one can understand the way they are using language, a woman's language has to be decoded so that one knows what they truly mean by what they say.

Another thing I know is that women do not know what type of man they are looking for in a relationship. Women always say that they want a particular type of man, then later on they go for someone who is completely different (most likely the opposite lol). Don't watch what women say, watch what women do. If you want to know what type of man a woman wants, look at what type of men she dates, do not look at what men she says she wants. Don't watch what women say, watch what women do. I know the feminists will disagree with me on this fact that every red pill man knows, but I have the perfect retort to their counter-argument, if anyone cares to comment below with their disagreement on that point, telling me that it also applies to men as well, when it only applies to women.

One thing feminists always say is that "no means no", and that a woman's no should never be taken as a yes. Feminists with their "gender is a social construct" beliefs, have no idea why men think the opposite, considering as they believe that men and women are innately the same with all differences in their behaviour stemming from the environment. They believe that these behavioural differences between men and women particularly stem from discouragement, people being pressured to follow gender roles, and a proliferation (or lack of) role models. So why do men think that no (sometimes) means yes? Feminists do not understand how attraction works, they think they know, but they do not know. Allow me to explain. I will give 3 examples of this.

1. A girl gives a non-verbal signal for you to approach her (eg, a long relaxed stare or sultry smile or she strokes her hair while looking at you), so you take the hint and approach her. If you did not take the hint, she would never of approached you, no matter how much she wanted to, as society socialises women to be passive and not approach people. There are women who want to approach men who do not feel they can due to social pressures or socialisation.
2. A girl in a nightclub or at work or school approaches you and says that you are cute. She has implictly said that she wants to have sex with you, as she has complimented your appearance for the first thing she said to you. However before you have sex, you will have to be conversing with her, dancing, having drinks, getting to know her and whatever else happens before the sex. You know the woman wants to have sex with you straight away, but because of her "s**t shield" due to s**t shaming, she has to go through the motions before having sex with you. So in the nightclub/school/work she is saying no to sex (until later), when really she means yes (in the very beginning).
3. You are lying in the same bed as a girl and she says we are not having sex. This means that you both will be having sex. You just have to convince her, because she wouldn't be in the same bed with you with underwear or no clothes on, if you weren't going to have sex. Later on you have consensual sex.

Even though this is true, if a woman says no or stop or even gives you a certain type of body language (non-verbal communication is very common in asia) that is dismissive, or uncomfortable, you must stop straight away. This also includes scenarios outside dating, sex and love, even little things that happen as friends. This does not mean that you should push the boundaries to see what the maximum forthcoming behaviour you can get away with with a woman is, before she eventually says stop, like stroking a girl's arm or leg, tapping her or doing what Julian LeBlanc does. Not only is that wrong, it's also borderline illegal. You should be a good person, not just for yourself but for the people you interact with too; but for those who are deviant, you don't want a woman to have a #metoo moment. As Bill Clinton said, "It's a good thing that we should all have higher standards. I think the norms have really changed in terms of, what you can do to somebody against their will, how much you can crowd their space, make them miserable at work. You don't have to physically assault somebody to make them, you know, uncomfortable at work or at home or in the other - just walking around. That, I think, is good." You don't have to be accused of rape to know that one!

So as you can see from the three examples above, women have a s**t shield. Women want to be sexual with men, but because of s**t shaming and lots of men not respecting easy or promiscuous women, they reluctantly tone down their rightful sexuality. In fact there are women who will never approach a man no matter how interested she is in him, even if he doesn't get her hint, just because of the social pressure for women to be passive and not approach, those social pressures for gender roles, which stems into s**t shaming. So women want to be sexual, but they don't want to be seen as a s**t, and with good reason too. The stigma still exists.

I can try to discuss the reality of what it's like to be a woman, as a heterosexual man in another blog article or a podcast episode, as that is outside the scope of this article, but women face a constant onslaught of sexual harassment and creeps barraging onto them, violating their freedom and autonomy. As women are weaker than men, what is going on is very sinister as women cannot defend themselves, so it's just a very sad fact of reality really. If a woman isn't being followed, shouted at or having someone walk behind them, in bad catcalling, a woman is facing creeps who exhibit red flags in their behaviour, such as controlling behaviour, lacking authenticity and lacking congruence, flip flopping, unnessacary lying and more.

Men caused their own demise of women being standoffish, by us antagonising women

Not only do women have a s**t shield, but they also have a pervert shield, they use to protect themselves from sexual harassment and creeps.

Women having a pervert shield, is a good thing, isn't it? I would say yes. Women making precautions, aborting an interaction or getting as far away from someone as possible due to a gut instinct or red flag, has saved women from being raped, beaten up, murdered, and even other things such as facing psychological abuse in a relationship or having their agency violated. I'm not quite sure anyone else calls it the term I gave for it, but it makes sense right? And women doing so is a good thing and is always appropriate to every situation given the real and potential threats they face from men.

Women are oblivious to their standoffish nature, because they've never had to approach anyone in their life to make friends or get a boyfriend.

One thing I am noticing interacting with women, is that women are starting to not just distrust men (with good reason), but also be guarded and fickle more so often. Women are more reluctant than men to share any information about themselves and their life so they are guarded, and a woman can be here today and gone tomorrow for seemingly no reason, even on the same day if you start to interact with them. There is no accusation or lingering thought that I've done anything bad or could possibly do something bad in future, no bad vibes, but it appears to me that something contradictory is going on, when women claim to be friendly, and they are standoffish. This is not a case of the woman giving short answers to hint that she's not interested in talking, as these women would ask me why I've stopped talking to them if I was to disappear or ignore them. It's just to that either both of us are miscommunicating, or she is hard to talk to as she intentionally chooses not to say much, and when asked a question, I can tell that she doesn't like the question asked so I have to ask another one. So there are questions that can be asked to both men and women, and questions that can only be asked to men that you can't ask women - and I'm not on about seuxal questions.

So what am I on about exactly? Well find out below and with a woman's perspective on it.

A woman's perspective

I tried to be open minded by asking a woman's opinion on this, and the conversation went like this...

"Do women not realise how contradictory and paradoxical it is to be afraid to do something with a man to get to know them, because they don't trust men in general because they've been abused or hurt by men in the past telling him "I don't know you" or "Tell me about yourself before I do X with you", when the ONLY way you can know whether to trust someone, is to get to know them?

So on the one hand, women fear chatting to men who are strangers, doing certain activities with men or saying certain things about themselves and their life to men because they don't trust men - so they shy away from getting to know them and which hinders their ability to form a strong bond with them because they are guarded - but on the other hand, the only way to know whether to trust them, is to get to know them (provided no red flags or gut instinct happened).

So women say they want to have good relations with men in general and have male friends or partners, but their actions from being guarded, shying away from certain words and actions, prevents them from forming strong and lasting relations with men.

The only way you can know whether to trust someone is to get to know someone. Also as much as a woman thinks that that a man will get to know her in conversation and she'll be able to screen him, if he notices that she's guarded through her words or actions, for lack of or for present, he will think the relationship is one sided or that she is not really interested in interacting with him, so he will become guarded too and eventually withdraw himself from engaging or interacting with her, which counter-intuitively restricts her ability to get to know him.

The only way you can know whether to trust someone is to get to know them. And on the flip side, you have to allow the other person to get to know you.

PS. I am aware that male entitlement exists, and that women are verbally and physically abused after rejecting men (even murdered or raped) for not wanting to speak to them. Men have a blame for this culture too. However it's a vicious cycle. Men act a certain way because of women, and women act a certain way because of men, and nobody breaks the cycle. It's a vicious cycle."

"I can't speak for women who have been abused by men. I am talking about my experience. I don't have bias against men and I have the same trust issue irrespective of gender [LOL]. I get to know people male/female by talking about neutral subjects first or about something we have in common. And slowly move conversation to personal stuff. If someone asks personal stuff on day 1 it makes me uncomfortable. And I avoid them. And if I am comfortable about the person in general, I am still a shy person so I may not discuss certain things. (But I let them know it's me and my shyness and not them or anything to do with trust.) Also none of my female friends have shown trust issues towards men, unless they have seen them do something creepy."
"Would you feel uncomfortable if someone (male or female) asked you personal questions as the first thing they say to you while chatting, becaus you feel they might use that information against you (to exploit you or leak it publicly) but not have a problem saying it if everyone in the world could be trusted, or because you have to feel comfortable around someone before you are your true self around them?"
"The latter, I have to feel comfortable. I mean, leaking information publicly is a concern but that's not the first thing that comes to my mind."
"Why the latter? What concern is there with the latter?"
"I dunno. I am used to talking personal things with close friends perhaps that's why. I guess I should also feel comfortable hearing their personal experience on that matter. For example, if the subject is "first love", I have no interest if a stranger talks about it, would creep me out too. But if a friend talks about it, I would very much like to know and I would also share my expeirence with the friend."
"Me and you are completely different people. (I am not referring to you not having an interest in personal things a stranger talks to you about, more about you not being comfortable with hearing or talking about it.)"
"Yeah it's both ways. Uncomfortable to hear stranger talk about personal stuff and also uncomfortable to share personal stuff with strangers."
"Why would it make you uncomfortable?"
"But strangers become friends pretty easily in my life [LOL]. Matter of few hours or days, Depends on person and our Dynamics. So I have exchanged personal stuff on day 1 with many [LOL] even if they ended up being temporary friends."
"Yes I know it depends on the person. People like who they like and not everyone can get along with everyone. But why would it make you uncomfortable?"
"To answer your question, I need to have that sort of friend dynamic otherwise I feel uncomfortable"
"In my opinion it sounds like if you feel uncomfortable, then the fault lies with the other person (not you), that they did something wrong or failed to do something they should have done."
"No, I wouldn't fault anyone. We can't manufacture chemistry [LOL], and if we can't get that kind of dynamic bonding [tingles], we just can't. It's the nature of our personalities. [LOL]"
"I'm 100% sure that if someone else you could be friends with gave you the wrong opener or failed to consider a particular thing to say, even though you could be friends if you met in different circumstances on a different day in a different environment after different happenings, because the way things unfolded happened the way it did on that day, you would feel uncomfortable; but if you met on a different day under different circumstances in a different environment, you would feel comfortable. So I do not believe you when you say"

I wouldn't fault anyone. It's the nature of personalities.

"I think it's more to do with"

The initial conditions we both had on Monday in June made me not want to be his friend, but if we met for the first time under DIFFERENT conditions on Thursday in September, we would be friends.

"I see it all the time. You would not believe how many times I see it all day every day all the time! Not just happening to me, but also to other men I know when they interact with women (it applies to some men too but mostly women)."

"First impression don't matter to me. Like you said, I have had no impression or even meh impression of people I met on day 1 or first few times in general. Later on, I have gone on to become real good friends with them."
"Good initial conditions: Good interaction, has chemistry, become friends
Bad initial conditions: Bad or neutral interaction, no chemistry, don't become friends.

And in both scenarios with the EXACT same people with no abuse happening the initial conditions are different. I see it all the time."

"In fact, I think 50% of the times I think I have met people on a bad condition in the sense that they didn't create a good impression [emphasis] on me. But then, I am open minded [LOL] and first impressions don't mean much to me [LOL]. I have seen those with good first impressions turn into bad person and vice versa"
"Your everyone is an individual belief that you can't define someone by what demographic they belong to, is wrong and it makes you naive to how the world (or society) really works. I do not believe that everyone is an individual. I believe that you can define someone by what demographic they belong to, even if they cannot control the demographic, such as we can't control what sex we are born as. That doesn't mean that all women are like that, but most are. On the micro level, everyone is an individual, but on the macro level, people follow a pattern. This is best known when you interact with a group where everyone in it fits the same demographic, or if you talk to enough people in that demographic where there are cultural factors which reinforce the behaviours of the demographic."
"I think you are the one mistaken. You are stereotyping people. Although it may look like a group of people behave a certain way, if you examine closely you can see differences."
"I run a get paid to website that my users use to earn money. I have identified 33% or a third of my users to be fraudulent. It doesn't matter the gender, age, country, traffic source, hobbies, etc, it is always 33% no matter what I do. Individual behaviour is unpredictable and chaotic, group behaviour follows a pattern. On the micro level, everyone is different from each other. On the macro level, people behave in similar ways to each other and are predictable. I'll let you reply then I will make my next point based on what we said earlier. I just had to clarify the wayI think and the way you think, before we continue so there's no confusion as to who believes what."
"I work in an ad agency LOL. You can't apply the same logic to personal stuff and friendship. Business works differently."
"Of course you can! ;)"
"Interpersonal behaviour is more complicated than that."
"I disagree. There are certain behaviours that only women do. There are certain behaviours that only black people do. There are certain behaviours that only children do."
"I am not talking about certain random behaviour. I am talking about how/when/what of personal information sharing between individuals."
"Of course there are some anamolies or outliers, but for the most part, only the people in the demographic do the behaviours that their demographic only or mostly does. I'll let you finish before I refute your point. Oh you've finished."
"My personal experience with both men and women has been the same when it comes to sharing personal information. When I examine the friendship, neither I nor the friend (male/female) shared the information too soon. We both took our time to feel comfortable and then we have shared."
"Let's move on from certain random behaviour. Do you want to talk about personal information sharing between individuals? I can talk about personal informations haring between individuals. Get ready for this one. It will blow your mind. Be ready to be amazed by my nuclear wisdom. Get ready. ;)"
"Hahaha ok"
"Here's a fundamental maxim for heterosexual men who want to meet new women."
"If an interaction starts bad, not only will it be GUARANTEED to end bad, but it will be IMPOSSIBLE to redeem the conversation and the person will NEVER want to interact with you later on - in all types of relationships (including platonic)."
"That's the thing I hear about job interviews LOL. But for both sexes."
"It only applies to women. It doesn't apply to men, only women. I'll give you some examples."
"I am trying to recall such situation from life...."
"You make a joke that she doesn't find funny ---> The woman never wants to interact with you again. You are asked a question and give an answer she doesn't like. ---> The woman never wants to interact with you again. You are told that you can talk to them about anything, but when you talk about why you are sad about something, you are perceived to be emotional or no longer amusing to talk to ---> The woman never wants to interact with you again."
"Hold on, lemme give my input here."
"You start a conversation topic and you are immediately or shortly asked to talk about something else, despite you starting 90-100% of the conversation and she starting hardly any. You then ask her to think of a conversation topic. ---> The woman never wants to talk to you again. I can give more examples, but those are the most common and easy to understand ones. Let's flip it round. If the genders were reversed, would men react the same? NO! When women maje jokes to men they hardly know, men don't get a screwed up face then immediately walk off if they don't find the joke funny. When women answer a man's question in a way he doesn't like or doesn't give him the emotional validation he was looking for, he doesn't get offended or think she thinks less of him and walks off. When a woman is sad about something or in pain for getting a splinter in their foot, the man doesn't tell her to stop whining and moaning about it and talk about something interesting again."
"Wait.... You are copy pasting loads of stuff."
"So you can sprout your "everyone is an individual" "it applies to both genders" "both genders act virtually the same" hippie dippie bullshit but this isn't the Nick Jr world, this is the REAL world. I'm not copying and pasting. These are my original thoughts. You won't see these elsewhere online. I also did not rehash other people's opinions online and rewrite them. If the genders were reversed, men do not react the way women react."
"I thought you wrote everything on notepad while I you were waiting earlier for me to reply LOL. Anyway, for the first point."
"If a man's interaction with a woman starts bad, it is guaranteed to end bad, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to redeem the conversation. Even if both parties are attractive, have money and a compatible personality. The woman will look past all the redeeming qualities or she will assume there are none to be found or that there is no value she can obtain from this person."
"For the joke- Only one time I felt like never talking to a man due to a bad joke. Why? Because after the joke, he paused to inform me it was a joke and further paused expecting me to laugh. It was terrible, I felt like I was obliged to laugh. For all the other people who said bad jokes, they just moved on with the convo and it never made me not want to talk to them ever."
"However if a man has a DIFFERENT opener and opening lines hen introducing himself to a woman, and is in a different initial conditions (maybe a different environment), the man and the woman will be friends. So going back to earlier when I said. So I do not believe you are correct when you say"

I wouldn't fault anyone. It's the nature of personalities.

"I think it is more to do with"

The initial conditions we both had on Monday in June made me not want to be his friend, but if we met for the first time under DIFFERENT conditions on Thursday in September, we would be friends.

"I see it all the time. You would not believe how many times I see it all day every day all the time! Not just happening to me, but also to other men I know when they interact with women (it applies to some men too but mostly women). That is what I mean.
Here's a fundamental maxim for heterosexual men who want to meet new women.

"If an interaction starts bad, not only will it be GUARANTEED to end bad, but it will be IMPOSSIBLE to redeem the conversation and the person will NEVER want to interact with you later on - in all types of relationships (including platonic)."

If a man's interaction with a woman starts bad, it is guaranteed to end bad, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to redeem the conversation. Even if both parties are attractive, have money and compatible personalities. You can respond with your point now. I don't think you understand how attraction works, but then again, you don't think I understand how attraction works, so it's equal."

The girl then replied

You are asked a question and give an answer she doesn't like ---> The woman never wants to interact with you again

"Depends, if it is religious or something deeply important to woman, wrong answer means women may lose interest. But so do men. But I have no statistics who loses interest more often."
"They can be lifestyle questions, knowledge questions, political questions, hobbies questions, or even having a a silly opinion on a playful and frivolous topic like which fizzy drink are you? Any and every sort of question really. But in all instances, the answer to the question is not somthing that the woman had in their minds before the interaction as a preference of people they like talking to, and the answer was not provocative, rude, neglecting or controversial. Just everyday normal conversation people have in the street or a bus stop really. Just very tame answers for tame questions. I'll give you an example."
"Someone who is open minded will always be open to opposite idea or answers irrespective of gender."

Me: Did you do any dangerous games as a child?
Girl: Nope I didn't do any
Me: Are you sure? ;)
Girl: *doesn't want to talk to me any more and either aborts the conversation or carries on replying with short and closed responses giving dismissive signals that she's not interested any more so I take the hint and leave*

The girl I was debating with then told me "Close minded".
I responded "Men would NEVER behave in that way when women approach them. Men do not do this unless they are gay or have lesbian parents. This is a fact. If a man's interaction with a woman starts bad, it always ends bad, and it's impossible to redeem the conversation or any interaction with her. Men do not behave in this way to women. Women can redeem themselves to men when starting an interaction, but men can't do women. So now, I don't believe that everyone is an individual. People are defined by their demographic. Groups follow a pattern."
"Oh I have seen something similar in men. Example, a guy I know commented that he will never talk to a girl he met because she mentioned something about sales and shopping and that was enough for him to conclude she is a gold digger."
"That is the REAL world. Not the hippie dippie bullshit world."
"But I don't have statistics, except I have seen both genders do that."
"I've been in mixed schools, I've been in a boys school and I've been in a girls school that also had other boys in it but mostly girls in it. So I've been in an environment full of mostly women with 10x or more girls in it than boys. Let's be real here Jade. You can't honestly say that in western society in 2018, that men and women have the same behaviours. No they bloody don't! What you're doing is gender denialism. What I'm saying is politically incorrect so you won't see it on reddit, yahoo answers or quora."
"I am talking about one particular behaviour and in that I don't see any difference in how men and women behave."
"But if you get off the internet that has a liberal and blue pill bias where conservative and red pill people (like me) are socially cleansed from social networks and forums, and interact with a balanced group of people (not a group where everyone thinks the same), and ask them, you'll find that loads of them agree with me"

Then someone jumped in the conversation to add their two cents in, let's call him Joseph and let's call the girl Naomi. "I'll quickly jump. in. Tynamite, don't you think that it has to do with attraction first? It happened to me that women laughed on my jokes that were even no jokes. If a woman finds you attractive, you can say anything and she would like to continue conversation with you. Naomi, what do you think?"
"Loads of men think the same way I'm thinking, but they won't tell you women that because of political correctness. PC culture."
Naomi replied to the guy who jumped in, "Joseph, I agree. That's what I am trying to tell. It all comes down to the dynamic between two people. You can't manufacture the chemistry between 2 individuals [LOL]. If they have chemistry, the friendship will work out. And how chemistry is created is something even scientists are struggling to find."

Don't you think that it has to do with attraction first? It happened me lot that women laughed on my jokes that were even no jokes. If a woman finds you attractive, you can say anything and she would like to continue conversation with you.

I replied "Yes looks are important, but personality is also a significant component of attraction. Also what people forget, is that your social skills are ALSO a component of your attraction. What you lot are not considering is that it IS possible to CREATE attraction."
Joseph added "Well I know that chemistry can be built by us men if we know how ;P There are some guys born with it 1%, the waste majority never learn it. Small minority learn some knowledge in that field."
I added "You're imagining attraction to be like rolling two sets of dice and if you get a double 6 or both numbers add up to 7, attraction happens. You're saying it like it's just two people are born with the right traits. It's not as simple as that. Attraction can be created if you know how to do it."
Joseph replied "Agree on that one"
I continued "If you have social intelligence, you can can use your high social skills by CREATING attraction in scenarios where it would never blossom if you hadn't of done or said what you done or said. So attraction is not like rolling two dice with your hands. Attraction is more like having two sets of dice in a dice cup, and you manipulate the cup to get the dice out of the cup to get the number you want. You can't guarantee that you'll roll a 6, but you can increase the probability of you rolling a 6 by how you choose to roll the dice out the cup. Naomi, you do not understand how attraction works."

Don't you think that it has to do with attraction first?

"You are so wrong. Attraction can be intentionally created by design. You Naomi do not understand how attraction works."

And that was the end of the discussion. Also later on a man chimed in to agree with me, that women do abort conversations with men they don't know if they tell a joke she doesn't like or for any other petty and seemingly absurd reason.

A couple of days later, the conversation resumed.

"Tynamite, I remember you tagging me with a question, I was too tired to answer and now I can't find it. I think it was something about why I don't share personal info despite being promised secrecy and no harm, correct? I remembered our discussion when I was at the doctors today LOL. You still wanna hear my thoughts on this?"
"Yes that was the question. I really don't get it or understand the reason. I'm a busy person too. In fact I'm failing to keep on top of life due to a backlog of things to do where the backlog got caused by health issues."
"Ok, here I go, I will try to explain with examples.

Example 1, I didn't mind giving personal info to doctors (which reminded me of our discussion and that's when it hit me). Because I feel the doctors will use the info and benefit me in prevention of cure of health problems.

Example 2, my mom. I have spent the majority of my life with her, and she has best interests for me. Yet I don't share many personal info with her [LOL]. Because I don't feel there is any need for her to know, she cannot use that info for her own benefit and I do don't get any benefit from sharing my personal info.

Example 3- researcher/surveyor. They too promise secrecy of what info we give. And I would give personal info, if I believe it's going to help humanity or our planet [she means if it helps herself lol] or something like that.

Last example, strangers who go on blind dates. Neither I nor my friends have done this [LOL]. But I am sure they share personal info. Because they believe it will help them both in building relationship."
"But what if someone is just curious?"
"In short, I feel uncomfortable, but at subconscious level, I think the brain is looking for benefits [LOL], either for me or for someone else [emphasis on else LOL]. In fact, I started thinking of examples based on this "benefit" assumption came up with all combinations of where 1, 0 or no person benefits as I have experienced."
"Why do you have to always think about what you gain from the transaction? You are a take take take person, not a give give give person. Why not just tell someone because they are genuinely curious about you and care about you, with them having no other reason or hidden motive?"
"I personally don't, it doesn't even cross my mind [LOL]. I think that's how our [emphasis on our LOL] subconscious perceives it. Like I said, consciously I simply feel discomfort."
"You are SO weird and nonsensical."
"No, you are just trying to look for some answer which I don't have and you can't accept my experience."
"I understand everything you're saying. Just because I understand doesn't mean it makes sense."
"It's common knowledge that anything you can't relate sounds nonsensical."
"I can understand something and still find it confusing at the same time."
"Well, like I said, your last question stumps me too [LOL]."
"Confusing is the wrong word to use."
"Because I never experienced that and I dunno what would happen. Unless I test that, my theory can be refuted or accepted."
"Perplexing is a better word to use. There's 5 things I find perplexing about women. I can understand it from their perspective and understand why they think and do the way they do, but it's still perplexing. And on the flip side, I'm sure there's things that I say and do that people can understand from my perspective, but they find that perplexing too. So it works both ways."
"I find humans in general "perplexing" to borrow your word."

Well, like I said, your last question stumps me too

"I asked"

Can I ever be in chat room with zero weird people in it?

"I find humans perplexing too."
"Oh I didn't notice that question."

Well there you have it! That's just one of the many examples of women's behaviour, which prove that men think logically and women think emotionally.

What is the cause of this behaviour? Yes, what is the cause of this behaviour? I would say three things. First, that women have not had to work on their personality as much as men need to, secondly because we are easy come easy go to them like fashion accessories, and lastly because because women distrust men so much, their creep radar has gone into overdrive, so a conversation with a woman is half the ideas, signals and profile of the person, and the other half is the tacit message that a man can be trusted to be a friend and truly is what he says he is. Men caused this problem by how we treat women. If women could trust men, and not be violating a woman's agency, bearbaiting them, controlling them and sexually harassing them, we wouldn't have this problem.

It's not enough for men to merely have a conversation with a woman. They also have to be psychic. Men have to encapsulate a woman's mind into his own mind, in order to have a good conversation with them. So any man with social skills who is successful with women, will have a miniture model of women's mind in general and the mind of the woman he's speaking to, just so he can have a substantial conversation with her, and he'll have to not lie, and not lack authenticity and congruence.

What feminists get wrong about affirmative consent

I upset an asian girl with a quiet voice at the job centre for being dominant. It's funny. :D I don't know exactly what I did. I'm at the job centre and she puts my details up on the computer screen. She asks me for my education. I say I studied computing at university as a bachelors. She types it up on my record. She shows me a list of jobs on excel. It contains thousands of jobs. One for each row. The header of the columns contain triangles which are used to filter the results. I tell her what to do by telling her to click the triangles. She ignores me twice. The third time she says in an annoyed voice "I know what to do. I know about the triangles. I have a masters in computing" (I told her I have a bachelors.)

Earlier I told her that she can't print out thousands of rows but when I ask her if she's going to print the excel document. She ignores me. She refuses to print it and closes down excel. She then tells me what to do by telling me to write down the website with the jobs. I have paper right next to me but no pen. There is a pen on her side of the table not being used. I take the pen from her side of the table without asking for her permission. Then she takes the pen off me then writes the website down herself and gives it to me. When it's time for me to go I ask her to tell me when the next appointment is so I can put it in my phone. She refuses to listen to my instructions and she writes it down on an appointment card and gives it to me. When she made the masters degree comment I replied with sarcasm lol. That's what happened lol. I did NOTHING wrong!!!!

She only behaved like that because she is asian with a quiet voice (the quietest voice I have heard in my life), so she must think that I am doing the abusive controlling behvaiour that her exes have done, as there is a stereotype that asian women are submissive and dosile. What I did with the pen can be seen as flirting.

To a normal everyday person, I did nothing wrong. A woman told me "She seems like a really stubborn b***h and I guess that some feminists indoctrinate her and tell her that she can't accept help from a man. You can be happy that you aren't in jail for mansplaining!11!!!!" To a feminist, I was in the wrong being a patriarchy goon by silencing women's voices like when men interrupt women when they talk or refuse to listen to or consider their contributions in a conversation. When I told the story to a group of feminists, they told me that I was in the wrong because me taking the pen without permission is rude and that I can't tell an employee what to do. I gave three examples of instances where someone telling an employee what to do is good and appropriate to the context of the situation to always do, as just because someone is an employee with experience and qualifications, doesn't mean that they are always right about everything. People who are intelligent or good at their job can be wrong too, and people can miss out on the help they need if their requests or advice is not listened to.

The conversation with the feminists started because a feminist was complaining about how men like to kiss women without verbal consent first, relying on instinct or non-verbal cues. Imagine you're a heterosexual man. Which below do you think is the romantic way to kiss a woman?

The feminists didn't see my point (although they thought they did), so I then gave them an article to read, and they dismissed it by saying that it's anecdotal. As I can some up with original arguments to make my point, I then put it a different way.

Let's put it this way.

Imagine there is a Facebook group (that can be used for making friends due to the type of group it is) and an attractive girl posts a thread in the group with a photo of herself and a message saying that she's new to the group and wants people to pm her so she can make friends.

Five males (or men) react to her thread.

Person A sends her a private message (pm) right away, forthright without any solicitation.

Person B sends her a friend request then messages her once she accepts, forthright with her solicitation.

Person C comments on the thread "Can I add you?" waiting for consent to add her even though she solicited pm's.

Person D comments on the thread "Can I pm you?" waiting for consent to pm her, even though she solicited pm's.

Person E comments "pm me" waiting for her to pm him, waiting for her consent, even though she solicited pm's.

CHALLENGE!!!! Now list in order from 1 to 5, which people of a/b/c/d/e the woman will be most attracted to, with the least attracted to at the bottom. Highest is 1. Lowest is 5.

Do you think all 5 will rank the same or not?

Any self respecting masculine man will do A or B and not C, D or E. This might sound petty but how one introduces themselves to the opposite sex if you are a man, dictates the whole relationship. If it starts bad it ends bad.

Actions A-E will have a different reaction with girls BEFORE the guy even says hello. This is a fact. The girl will treat you differently based on which A-E you do. This is a fact. It's just gender denialism. If you do A or B, she will be more atracted to you. If you do E, she will think you have aspergers.

Feminists are gender denialists. They think gender is a social construct, when it's not. Because they can go to their boyfriend or casual sex partners or one night stand and use affirmative consent and the man is happy with it, she thinks the reverse is also true. How wrong she is! If a girl did A-E to a guy who posts in a Facebook group wanting friends he wouldn't give a s**t which a-e she did. But the girl would care? I know more about attraction than these 2 feminist girls who claim that because they're women, they know best about what they like. It might sound petty and trivial but if it starts bad it always ends bad.

What happens in a long term relationship with a woman

Below I will start the second half of my article for why women are not receptive to friendship. Men typically think that once they are in a relationship with a woman, that they have the game hook like and sinker. Well it doesn't work like that. If you've found a woman in an LTR or marriage that is receptive to you being more than friends with her, don't think that because you're married to her that she will always love you or always have a passion for you. Even though women consume the majoriry of romance books and movies, it is men who are the true romantics. Also it is women who fall in love with the lifestyle their man gives them in a spiritual way rather than the man's syncrasies per se. I don't want to get married, but even I know that you would be surprised how many marriages fail because the woman loses interest in the man, when he is doing the exact same things after marriage that he did before they got married. So what about him did she marry and what was she thinking when she married him, because it obviously wasn't for the money, as he doesn't have lots of money?

When people get married to a woman, typically 3 things start to happen.

The spark dies

When two people first start dating, it's magical, you get butterflies, it's intellectually stimulating, an emotional rollercoaster. However when you both are married, you're not going to feel the same way as you did when you first started dating. How does one be with someone for 5, 10, 15, 20 years and still keep it fresh, still keep it the same way as when they started? You better hope your partner is patient, kind and emotionally intelligent; as you can be doing your part 100% and your spouse can be doing nothing.

Mating season is over

When two people are married, because they have both signed a contract that says they will be in a committed monogamous relationship for the rest of their lives, married people feel that they don't have to try as hard as they did before. Mating season is over. Married people don't put as much care into their appearance as they did before. They don't go out on as many dates as they did before. They don't have as many conversations as they did before. When you marry someone, it is highly likely that they will start doing a lot less than you.

An affair happens

Maybe it's possible in asia with their collectivist culture, but as someone in an individualist country such as the UK, I think an affair will happen. When I was in school, relationships were not called relationships, they were called links. If you were dating someone, you were not dating them, you were checking them. Relationships are no longer long term, now we have mini-relationships.

I do not think it is possible for two people to stay in a committed monogamous relationship for 20 years or for the rest of their lives. I think if you're married, that your spouse will definitely cheat on you. It's just a case of whether you know about it or not. And if they're not cheating on you, you're cheating on them!

Conclusion

A lot of ideas have been discussed in this article, and this article is long enough as it is, so I won't even summarise the article in my conclusion. Just know the following...

Women have a s**t shield and a pervert shield. On the one hand, they want to be sexual with men but refrain from doing so due to social pressures and repercussions, and on the flip side, they claim to be friendly and appear to be doing outwardly friendly behaviours, but if you scratch beneath the surface they are anything but, and they're oblivious to it. Understand the nature of women to sneak past their defence. How does one do so? Well that is outside the scope of this article. I'll leave that for you to figure out. ;)

Women prefer the man who gives them tingles, but the man who gives them tingles is no good for them. Imagine the dilemma that causes. Can one be both? Maybe. Well you know what I say, You can't make rules to explain to people how things that are typically done with intuition, are done. What use is giving everyone a manual, if everyone's doing the same thing? Understand how to do the mating dance that women like, to start and maintain high chemistry relationships with them.

But what if you don't know how to be socialable or give women what they want? Well there's not much I can say with that, as to my understanding of pick up artist material even though I've never read any before, is that what they teach accounts for 20-33% of the interaction, so everything starts with you.

So when I was asked by someone online Do you think love fades away?, this entire article of over 8000 words is my answer. I thought of the answer in a couple of seconds, but it sure did take hours to write! So that is my answer to the question.

Further Reading

• The Female Imperative: DNA & Bad Boys
• Feminist story proves major Game concepts to be nothing but the full truth
• Compliment & Cuddle: The Beta Male Method To Getting Laid