Why women like abuse

[Kelly Jones]

Being abused shows the woman that underneath it all, she is so incredibly important. She is being noticed so much! The attention-giving is so intense, the attachment to her is at peak levels. How she enjoys violence!

Without the violent arguments and domestic scenes, life would not be worth living for a female. She would feel that emotional bonds were insufficient to keep her alive. She submits with pleasure to arguments, from a deep and unconscious sadism. Her desire is to be the love of everyone's life, no matter who is sacrificed.

Being attacked and hurt shows to the world that she has legitimately earnt her glory (for she feels a tad guilty over the attention).

So, don't argue with or beat-up women, all you men. It's a waste of time. She'll win as long as you consider her important in your life. As if she needs your help.

If a female isn't rational, just leave her alone. Her deep desire for company will draw her to try reasoning with you. The slightest bit of attention from you feeds her ego and clouds her thinking. So be careful how you feed the animals.

.

[Transcix]

<snip>

[Dan Rowden]

Kelly's Bio

Or,

Same Bio Different Realm

[Transcix]

Hmmm, interesting.. do you you need any work experience to get this "social security", in Canada? I could use it.

So, you've had some tough love, then? I think there is always a way to approach even the most far gone woman (or person for that matter) so that you break through their 'defences'... unless perhaps you are related by kin and too many ego roles are already etched in place.

[Leyla Shen]

Well, after all this time and much deliberation, I have resolved a longstanding mental blindspot: the dicketh alone so does not maketh the male.

I have therefore concluded with absolute certainty that Ryan is a female.

.

[Steven Coyle]

Somebody likes Ryan's anima :P

Jung identified the anima as being the unconscious feminine component of men and the animus as the unconscious masculine component in women. However, this is rarely taken as a literal definition: many modern day Jungian practitioners believe that every person has both an anima and an animus. Jung stated that the anima and animus act as guides to the unconscious unified Self, and that forming an awareness and a connection with the anima or animus is one of the most difficult and rewarding steps in psychological growth. Jung reported that he identified his anima as she spoke to him, as an inner voice, unexpectedly one day. Oftentimes, when people ignore the anima or animus complexes, the anima or animus vies for attention by projecting itself on others. This explains, according to Jung, why we are sometimes immediately attracted to certain strangers: we see our anima or animus in them. Love at first sight is an example of anima and animus projection. Moreover, people who strongly identify with their gender role (e.g. a man who acts aggressively and never cries) have not actively recognized or engaged their anima or animus. Jung attributes human rational thought to be the male nature, while the irrational aspect is considered to be natural female. Consequently, irrationality is the male anima shadow and rationality is the female animus shadow.

[millipodium]

I think women like abusive men because their abusiveness will lead to success in the world, sadly. A real "winner" is one willing to abuse and beat.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

Trans,

do you you need any work experience to get this "social security", in Canada?

No. Usually, you just convince a doctor that you are inappropriate for any kind of work. Alberta, for instance, offers $1000/month (twice what a rational, independent, person would ever need) in the form of AISH -- I'm not sure what the other provinces offer.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I think women like abusive men because their abusiveness will lead to success in the world, sadly. A real "winner" is one willing to abuse and beat.

I tried to take Kelly's post as metaphorical, but I will respond to mil as literal.

Out of hundreds of abused females I have interacted with, only 2 or 3 actually liked the abuse, and those were SI (people who like to injure themselves, usually by cutting their own skin, but other forms take place as well). I did a research paper on SI, so I understand that one pretty well. Usually, people who SI were raised in an abusive environment and their brains developed under long-term exposure to the chemicals produced by the brain under emergency conditions. Brains like to have a stable environment, so they tend to encourage the body to produce the same chemical environment it developed in. People who SI tend to not be able to create that internal environment without physical injury, so they injure themselves to produce internal homeostasis. Provoking someone else to injure you is essentially self-injurious behavior.

Out of the other hundreds of females, none of them liked the abuse. It was the behavior that the guys displayed at other times that attracted them. In many cases, when they were not abusive, the guys would be the sweetest (perhaps too sweet to be realistic) guys in the world. In other cases, sort of like what mil was saying but not exactly, the kind of determination that leads to material success can also switch over to abusiveness, or the risks involved in reaching the top can lead to enough stress to make the guy snap sometimes and take it out on the woman; but she appreciated what a great guy he usually was and understood the stress he was under that she kept forgiving him. Sometimes it was the familiarity of the pattern (think Freudian). People tend to gravitate to environments like what they are used to, so if a daughter grew up in an abusive household she is likely to be familiar with the whole dynamic of an abusive household (not just the abuse part) and unconciously gravitate to a similar situation. She may even grow to expect the world to be a similarly violent place and not really expect anything different or misidentify an abuser as someone strong enough to protect her from exactly the sort of abuse that she is signing up for. In her attempt to escape abuse, she lands right in the middle of it.

They don't like the abuse. They just don't know how to do any better.

[Leyla Shen]

Somebody likes Ryan's anima :P

Jung identified the anima as being the unconscious feminine component of men and the animus as the unconscious masculine component in women. However, this is rarely taken as a literal definition: many modern day Jungian practitioners believe that every person has both an anima and an animus. Jung stated that the anima and animus act as guides to the unconscious unified Self, and that forming an awareness and a connection with the anima or animus is one of the most difficult and rewarding steps in psychological growth. Jung reported that he identified his anima as she spoke to him, as an inner voice, unexpectedly one day. Oftentimes, when people ignore the anima or animus complexes, the anima or animus vies for attention by projecting itself on others. This explains, according to Jung, why we are sometimes immediately attracted to certain strangers: we see our anima or animus in them. Love at first sight is an example of anima and animus projection. Moreover, people who strongly identify with their gender role (e.g. a man who acts aggressively and never cries) have not actively recognized or engaged their anima or animus. Jung attributes human rational thought to be the male nature, while the irrational aspect is considered to be natural female. Consequently, irrationality is the male anima shadow and rationality is the female animus shadow.

Steven, snap out of it! Not everyone has the same love affair with the unconscious as you--and Jung.

[Edit: after further contemplation, I take that back. There are a few individuals who do not share the same love affair with unconsciousness as you--and Jung!]

.

[millipodium]

I think women like abusive men because their abusiveness will lead to success in the world, sadly. A real "winner" is one willing to abuse and beat.

I tried to take Kelly's post as metaphorical, but I will respond to mil as literal.

Out of hundreds of abused females I have interacted with, only 2 or 3 actually liked the abuse, and those were SI (people who like to injure themselves, usually by cutting their own skin, but other forms take place as well). I did a research paper on SI, so I understand that one pretty well. Usually, people who SI were raised in an abusive environment and their brains developed under long-term exposure to the chemicals produced by the brain under emergency conditions. Brains like to have a stable environment, so they tend to encourage the body to produce the same chemical environment it developed in. People who SI tend to not be able to create that internal environment without physical injury, so they injure themselves to produce internal homeostasis. Provoking someone else to injure you is essentially self-injurious behavior.

Out of the other hundreds of females, none of them liked the abuse. It was the behavior that the guys displayed at other times that attracted them. In many cases, when they were not abusive, the guys would be the sweetest (perhaps too sweet to be realistic) guys in the world. In other cases, sort of like what mil was saying but not exactly, the kind of determination that leads to material success can also switch over to abusiveness, or the risks involved in reaching the top can lead to enough stress to make the guy snap sometimes and take it out on the woman; but she appreciated what a great guy he usually was and understood the stress he was under that she kept forgiving him. Sometimes it was the familiarity of the pattern (think Freudian). People tend to gravitate to environments like what they are used to, so if a daughter grew up in an abusive household she is likely to be familiar with the whole dynamic of an abusive household (not just the abuse part) and unconciously gravitate to a similar situation. She may even grow to expect the world to be a similarly violent place and not really expect anything different or misidentify an abuser as someone strong enough to protect her from exactly the sort of abuse that she is signing up for. In her attempt to escape abuse, she lands right in the middle of it.

They don't like the abuse. They just don't know how to do any better.

We're in agreement. I didn't say they like the abuse, I said they like abusive men. For the reasons you cited. It's their model for relationships and they actually consider nonabusers to be weak. I've seen it firsthand. I had to bail on that sickness.

[Iolaus]

mistake

[Iolaus]

That's funny, I have always seen abusive men as losers. They are emotionally pathetic. Maybe I just don't hang out with the right class of people.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

That's funny, I have always seen abusive men as losers. They are emotionally pathetic.

They are. And it's possible that there are guys out there with the same positive qualities, and yet not be abusive. I even go so far as to suppose that most men are probably not regularly abusive, and there are probably a substantial number of men who are not what I would consider abusive at all (although I have recently come to suspect that the reason most of those may not be abusive is because they are being sufficiently controlled by females).

Perhaps an additional component to this is that those females unwilling to treat men like dogs do indirectly cause the abuse by letting the animals get out of control.

[Cory Duchesne]

(although I have recently come to suspect that the reason most of those may not be abusive is because they are being sufficiently controlled by females).

on the other hand, perhaps men are abusive to the degree they are controlled by femininity.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

(although I have recently come to suspect that the reason most of those may not be abusive is because they are being sufficiently controlled by females).

on the other hand, perhaps men are abusive to the degree they are controlled by femininity.

Using the QRS definition of "femininity" - couldn't both be true? And wouldn't it seem natural that females would have better control over femininity than males, which would be why males lose control under the influence of femininity, whereas females don't appear to need to gain control, yet they have control in ways men do not?

[Cory Duchesne]

Using the QRS definition of "femininity" - couldn't both be true?

Oh I see what you mean.

when you say:

(although I have recently come to suspect that the reason most of those may not be abusive is because they are being sufficiently controlled by females).

Do you mean that these females who have their men under control, prevent their men from being abusive because they are masculine females, controlling their men with rational thought, rather than use solely feminine charms?

I suppose their is two ways for a woman to keep her man in line.

a) through sheer femininity (the consequent to this is that the man is likely to become abusive)

b) or through a degree of masculinity (the man is not as likely to become abusive)

I can recall how, in high school, the longer I was with my very feminine girlfriend, the more abusive toward my girlfriend and other people I had become.

Elizabeth: And wouldn't it seem natural that females would have better control over femininity than males which would be why males lose control under the influence of femininity, whereas females don't appear to need to gain control, yet they have control where men do not?

Women nag and bitch and express anger just as much as men.

They just don't exhibit violence in such a glorified and spectacular way, and this is because it is their role to appear soft and pretty.

They express their ugliness in the privacy of their own home so other people can't seem them for how they really are - - whereas men have less of a problem going public.

In fact, expressing violence publically is a fairly reliable way to get a hot chick.

Even if you are a serial killer - -chances are, while undergoing trial, you'll be recieving all sorts of letters by girls who want to marry you.

[Dan Rowden]

Relationships are abusive by default.

[Kelly Jones]

Transcix,

Well, I'm sure you don't mean *all* women, right?

Woman means "feminine-minded person". It's a useful generalisation, because biological females virtually always have feminine sexual characters.

Any exceptions to this rule are so extremely rare, that it's acceptable to use it as a truth.

Femininity is equivalent to "unconsciousness".

Personally I think most women like to be the victim and most men like to be the victimizer... so the men are their own victim, in essence, and the women are their own victim as well. It's too bad how each dynamic perpetuates the other.

Women are screwed up, it's true... but so are men.

A person who isn't capable of recognising the real causes for abuse can hardly be called a victim, since they don't have awareness of freedom from abuse.

Therefore, the real victim is the one who is capable of deep intellectual investigations and total orientation to truth, so can experience abuse.

Men are generally less unconscious of consciousness than women, so are more likely to be victims.

Kelly, are you a man or a woman? :) (name can swing either way)

I'm a masculine-minded female.

Hmmm, interesting.. do you you need any work experience to get this "social security", in Canada? I could use it.

I don't know about the Canadian welfare system. What could you use it for?

So, you've had some tough love, then?

Love is never gentle. It always creates havoc in the mind.

I think there is always a way to approach even the most far gone woman (or person for that matter) so that you break through their 'defences'... unless perhaps you are related by kin and too many ego roles are already etched in place.

If "the most far gone woman" thrives on abuse, she'll interpret your attempts to switch her onto sanity, as hurtful - and therefore abusive. She's not worth wasting time over.

But if someone can see that abuse is a madness, then they're not "too far gone" to help themselves out. They'll genuinely launch themselves forward after a good kick in the pants, rather than keep sucking life out of it.

.

[Cory Duchesne]

Relationships are abusive by default.

agreed

[Kelly Jones]

Elizabeth wrote:

They don't like the abuse. They just don't know how to do any better.

Anyone who doesn't like something automatically is attracted to the opposite. They already have a "feel" for what's better, like a compass needle has a feel for north.

Human media is full of disagreements.

Trying to escape boredom avoids becoming aware of Reality.

Enough said, I think.

[Cory Duchesne]

Trying to escape boredom avoids becoming aware of Reality.

Yes, good point Kelly.

I just want to add:

for average folk, becoming aware of reality doesnt seem like a good thing to do because reality seems to be more painful.

Thought is generally employed only to avoid pain. The thought of Santa Clause, or God, etc.....these are what keep people going.

Facing pain, and doing what is more painful doesnt make sense to ordinary folk.

Therefore, avoiding pain and boredom instead of becoming supremely logical seems most logical to most people.

Of course, they arent consciousness that this is their reasoning. Actually, its insnt even reasoning.

It's just animal instincts fused with irrational beliefs.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Do you mean that these females who have their men under control, prevent their men from being abusive because they are masculine females, controlling their men with rational thought, rather than use solely feminine charms?

Yes, and I'm saying that their feminine charms are tools of rational thought, and they are so single-minded in their goal that men never see behind the mask.

My mother was the epitome of what the QRS definition of femininity holds the surface appearance of, but it was not nearly so unthinking as the QRS depicts, nor at all as innocent as she projected to almost everyone. For example she talked about her days working as a court reporter at the Pentagon and how she would sometimes intentionally type documents on the wrong colored pages (everything was supposed to be color-coded) and tell the men she did so because she thought the other color was prettier. She's then giggle about it and tell me that this is the sort of thing I was supposed to do because men find that cute. There were other rules like "always let the man win because men like to think they are smarter," - meaning if I so much as played checkers with a man I was supposed to throw the game, "never let a man know you're smarter than he is because a man would never marry a smart woman," "if you're thin enough, you can have any man you want" - she later took that one back because I was too competative to throw games and refused to play dumb, and she used as evidence that these sorts of things worked because she married my father because he was an officer, and she wanted to get into the officer's club for the parties. She stopped telling me her secrets because I refused to play along, but I can look back and see other things she did and recognize why.

As further evidence that she knew what she was doing, my father was so abusive to his first wife and kids that one day when he came back from maneuvers, an MP was sitting on his doorstep with his divorce papers and his belongings, and telling him he couldn't go in the house (they treat officers differently than the enlisted). My father was abusive to me, but never to my mother - although she yelled and complained to him that he was abusing her on a regular basis. She'd blow the smallest thing all out of proportion and insist he was treating her like a slave. She didn't hold a job through almost her entire marriage to my father, she didn't clean house practically at all or practically ever (at one point I noticed that the dog was licking clean spots on the wallpaper near where she slept. That's pretty bad when the house is so dirty that the dog decides to clean up). She cooked and washed the cookware (but we weach washed our own dishes and my father put them away), did the grocery shopping, my father's laundry, and some of her own laundry - and that was it. She bitched her way to success.

When I got older I met my father's children and learned about his first wife. His first wife was calm, nice, obedient, and took good care of the kids and the house. They said that life would be normal - calm and happy - for 3 months while Dad was on maneuvers, then when he'd come home for 3 months he would treat all of them like he treated me growing up, then he'd go on maneuvers and everything would be back to normal for 3 more months. It seems to me that his first wife was truly feminine in that she didn't intentionally "do" anything to my father - and got abused for it; but my mother was QRS masculine minded with a feminine veneer and kept him under control.

During my marriage, just before it went really bad, one of the instructors at school could see where things were going, and tried to tell me how to control him. I was horrified. I expected reason and rationality to work (okay, I was niave), and I was not going to use any underhanded, manipulative tricks to get him to "behave." I learned that reason and rationality do not work on unreasonable and irrational people. I also learned that an awful lot of people become unreasonable and irrational when they are in love. As far as I know, I could be the only one in the world who can be in love and still excecute reason and rationality. Although it seems unlikely that there could be only one person with any particular characteristic, I no longer trust in the possibility of one other, much less the delusion that many people were just like me.

My mother's rational single-mindedness was possible for her because she did not love my father; she only wanted what she perceived he could give her. I don't think she was even capable of being in love. She didn't see marriage that way, and only saw men as a means to an end. She was very QRS-feminine, yet also so QRS-masculine that she played every feminine charm for whatever she could get out of it, whenever she could get something out of it, but only when she could get something out of it - in a single-minded persuit of her ideal life. Once she'd bitched my father into submission, she was able to get fat and lazy. Ultimately she got almost everything she ever wanted. If I'd never been born, she would have had what she would have considered to be the perfect second marriage. Of course, no man would ever have found out what she was really doing, and that's where women like this have duped the QRS.
.

[Pye]

.

Kelly writes:

Any exceptions to this rule [men/conscious; women/unconscious] are so extremely rare, that it's acceptable to use it as a truth.

The greater truth includes the exceptions, like with your sages and whatnot.



.

[Katy]

Relationships are abusive by default.

agreed

hear hear.