In Healing the Masculine Soul, the author properly identified Communism as a feminine ideology. This is because it is rooted in theory (of equality) that goes against reality. He further states there is no more masculine trait than having the courage to express the truth of what is real, even when it goes against prevailing theories (and jacked up emotions).
This vid on what a woman even is reveals the feminine tendency to skirt reality in favor of theory.
And this basic feminine-masculine dichotomy of theory-reality bias is clearly seen in risk taking. The woman's very survival depends on getting the man to take the risk. He is supposed to ask her on a date, to pay for dinner, to make the first move to kiss, to propose marriage, not to mention answer the unexpected knock at the door and investigate the bump in the night. Today we castigate a man in vulgar terms who does not take risk others want him to by saying, "You don't have the balls ..." Male anatomy symbolizes the risk taking differential. We do not invoke female anatomy to shame women to act per the supposed inherent virtue of her sex.
It takes a strong man to stand up to such ego manipulation in not taking the risk others want him to when he realizes there is little to no pay off, no reward for him. (The ego manipulator doubles down, condemns the strong man for being 'selfish' AS IF the manipulator is not being selfish for wanting a benefit to be paid at the risk he takes).
In the NSRV Cultural Bible, the Study Notes differentiate a full wife in ancient days from a concubine. Today men do not have full wives according to this standard. A full wife is accompanied by a dowry; a concubine is not. Insulting to pay a man to marry a woman, you say? Try being a man hoping to get married WITHOUT providing a diamond engagement ring.
You will not find feminists raging to change this unequal risk dynamic. One sided risk; A major differentiator between men and women.
This vid on what a woman even is reveals the feminine tendency to skirt reality in favor of theory.
And this basic feminine-masculine dichotomy of theory-reality bias is clearly seen in risk taking. The woman's very survival depends on getting the man to take the risk. He is supposed to ask her on a date, to pay for dinner, to make the first move to kiss, to propose marriage, not to mention answer the unexpected knock at the door and investigate the bump in the night. Today we castigate a man in vulgar terms who does not take risk others want him to by saying, "You don't have the balls ..." Male anatomy symbolizes the risk taking differential. We do not invoke female anatomy to shame women to act per the supposed inherent virtue of her sex.
It takes a strong man to stand up to such ego manipulation in not taking the risk others want him to when he realizes there is little to no pay off, no reward for him. (The ego manipulator doubles down, condemns the strong man for being 'selfish' AS IF the manipulator is not being selfish for wanting a benefit to be paid at the risk he takes).
In the NSRV Cultural Bible, the Study Notes differentiate a full wife in ancient days from a concubine. Today men do not have full wives according to this standard. A full wife is accompanied by a dowry; a concubine is not. Insulting to pay a man to marry a woman, you say? Try being a man hoping to get married WITHOUT providing a diamond engagement ring.
You will not find feminists raging to change this unequal risk dynamic. One sided risk; A major differentiator between men and women.
