What is scary about the end of literacy as a culture is that people who do sit down and read actual books are probably the losers now who can't function.
The people who just are zonked out on various apps all day consuming short form video content are working jobs, buying homes, raising families.
75% of women experience responsive desire meaning they don't feel spontaneous urges for sex the way men do.
they feel desire AFTER stimulation begins not before. every man who interprets her lack of initiation as rejection is misreading normal female biology as personal failure
researcher Emily Nagoski identified two desire models. spontaneous desire appears out of nowhere. you see something attractive and your body responds. this is how most men experience desire. responsive desire emerges in response to stimulation already happening. the desire comes after the touching starts not before
this fundamental mismatch creates the most common sexual conflict in relationships. he wants her to initiate or show desire first. she rarely does. he interprets this as low attraction. she's confused because once things start she's fully engaged and enthusiastic
- responsive desire means she may not "feel like it" before intimacy begins but becomes fully aroused once the right stimulation starts. this is not reluctance. this is how her desire system functions by design
- initiating non-sexual physical affection without expectation is the most effective way to activate responsive desire. massage. playing with her hair. holding her. the body warms up. desire follows. expecting her to arrive pre-aroused is expecting spontaneous desire from a responsive system
- stress is the primary suppressor of responsive desire. cortisol blocks the arousal pathway at the hormonal level. reducing her daily stress is more effective foreplay than any physical technique
- the statement "I want you but there's no agenda" is paradoxically more arousing than "let's have sex" because it offers desire without creating performance pressure
- understanding this one concept eliminates the most destructive thought pattern in relationships: "she doesn't want me." she does. the activation sequence is different. learn the sequence and the response follows
this single piece of sexual psychology would save more relationships than any technique or position guide. the desire isn't absent. the ignition sequence is different from yours. once you understand this you never misread her again
Okay so here's what I'm talking about. I recently went out with a male friend for the first time. This was not within any kind of "dating" context. Just friends.
He got a beer and had no bottle opener. He asked if I had a bottle opener. I had a lighter so I opened his beer with my lighter.
On the surface, whoever has the means to open the beer should open the beer. But as a woman, even outside the context of dating, I read that as a weakness in him. It turned me off to viewing him as any type of potential mate. Even when that wasn't a potential in the first place.
I was talking to him about this this morning, asking his permission to tell the story and he said "well now anytime we hang out I'm going to ask you to open my beer just to fuck with you."
And this immediately reversed my reaction because purposely fucking with me in this lighthearted way is a show of confidence and dominance.
Women are always reading your signals to assess your potential mate value. Even the women you're not dating. Even the women you're just passing on the street.
Keep your problems smaller than your life. A flat tire is a flat tire. A bad meeting is a bad meeting. A canceled flight is just an extra two hours. These things become catastrophes when you let them. But they stay manageable when you remember the depth of your real life- the people you love, the work you care about, the beautiful years still ahead. Zoom out. Fit your reaction to the size of the problem.
My parents died suddenly in a car accident 25 years ago this year. I was 21, and became a guardian for my little brother and sister (10 and 12 at the time).
I've spoken about the accident and its impact on a couple of podcasts, but it's fresh on my mind as my brother just shared with me a handwritten letter I sent to him at his school. He's kept it with him ever since.
I've transcribed it below; he told me last night that it's helped him many times over the past two decades. Sharing it here in case what I said back then in an attempt to help a little lost boy is of assistance to anyone else.
23 July 2002
To Harry, From Freddie.
1. Don't panic.
2. You have many people watching your back. I am one of them and I am watching it very closely.
3. The accident was nobody's fault. Therefore we cannot legitimately blame anyone for it. We call it an accident for this reason.
4. We cannot bring Mummy and Daddy back – but this has important consequences:
– We need to remember what they taught us.
– We need to behave as they would have wanted us to.
– Because they are not alive, but we are, we owe both ourselves and their memory a duty to live as well and as fully as we possibly can, not to give in, not to give up. Because of the accident we have been given a very special insight into what it means to be alive – to live as fully as we can, to consider others, to work at what we are good at, and work even harder at what is difficult.
Something has been wasted, something has been lost. We must make sure that our lives are not. We shall always regret that Mummy and Daddy are not here – let us not regret anything we do, or know that we had a chance and threw it away.
Whatever happens, I have got your back. Even if I do sometimes hit you with cricket balls.
Run straight, look your foe in the eye, and never back down. Strength and honour!
I love you very much.
I can't express how lucky I was to have spent my formative years with an internet that was shaped by >110 IQ nerds instead of third world content farms struggling over 5$ of ad revenue
I love going down rabbit holes on this site. Some Arabic dude posting flowers to some blow job video. A bot account that used to post about American football now trying to scam.
Quite moving stories sometimes.
When a man asks what a woman brings to the table, he's anxious about being taken for granted once he has committed. Women gatekeep sex and men gatekeep commitment. That's how it is.
This question, though, sits wrong with women because it means being reduced to a list of traits and transactions. They want the man to see a soul, that which makes her special and unique. They don't want to have been chosen because they bid five more blowjobs per month than the other girl. This is fair!
This is classic masculine algorithmic thinking versus feminine impressionistic thinking and it never stops being a point of contention. But the standard egomaniacal answer that women often give to this standard male anxiety - "I am the table" - doesn't help. If anything, it makes it worse.
If you, as a woman, can't hear something terminally male-brained and listen for the feeling underneath it, you're going to have a bad time in a committed relationship anyway. No guy worth anything is going to commit his life and fortune to a woman who is so wrapped up in feeling special that she refuses to empathize with him.
And if you, as a man, can't fish your mind out of systems and diagrams enough to see another human being as greater than the whole of the sum of their parts, you are similarly fucked. You've got a lot of work to do before you stop getting dumped by good women.
The actual table is the *relationship*, and the way that both of you want to contribute to it and take from it. That is the secret third thing that can be reduced to concepts and quantities, and that is the thing that you both can negotiate on and get creative with. And that, after everything else, is what you both want a clear understanding of before making a commitment. Everything else is a morass of ego and scorekeeping.
The reason you’re unhappy is that you haven’t found the right thing to buy. There’s something out there you can purchase that will make this all go away