An article for discussion

[Jay Davis]

Well actually I still mostly adhere to my lizard brain. LOL! Intellectually I think it's crap that I do but I can't seem to shake the need to be "good." Even though I'd rather be a bad little slut!

LOL!

Fury

I'd argue that you're adhering to early childhood sexual-identity programming, which over-wrote the default evolutionary pattern, but the difference is either semantic or moot. By all means, have fun, and don't feel the least bit guilty as long as no one is getting hurt (who didn't want to be, at least...).

 

[FurryFury]

This is what I am trying to do but guilt is my middle name! It's hard wired! I get by somehow!

Fury

 

[Jay Davis]

This is what I am trying to do but guilt is my middle name! It's hard wired! I get by somehow!

Fury

Yeah, guilt is definitely programmed into our personalities in childhood, not by evolution. I think someone was working overtime when they put those lines of code in my routines...

 

[FurryFury]

Yeah, guilt is definitely programmed into our personalities in childhood, not by evolution. I think someone was working overtime when they put those lines of code in my routines...

OOh! I like how you put that Jay!

LOL!

Fury

 

[TaintedB]

Oh there's definitely a bit of the old PT Barnum in this article, but do you think the basic premise is true?

The basic premise is really true for heterosexual women who have unconscious submissive leanings and there are a great many women like that. It's not especially true for dominant women and also not real useful with conscious submissives who've been exposed to a lot of "dominants" (like the kind they tend to meet online) . The first group is uninterested unless they want to one-up you; the second are hip to the obvious "signs and symbols" that most vanilla men try at first when learning to do the power thing, because all those tiresome online fellows do the same things, and they tend to be a lot more picky and specific and conscious of the sort of power they're looking for. I've known many a dominant woman, however, who, although she didn't like her men to act powerful in their personal relationships with her, she did like them to have the traditional outer symbols of power (wealth, fame, influential job, recognized talent, etc.)

Another thing this short article didn't go into: many women may be attracted to power in a man, but different women are attracted to different aspects of power. A lot of mercenary women appear to be attracted to men of power (rich or influential men) but it's often just so they can become the power behind his throne. They have no intention of submitting to his will. The cold, heartless, daring bad boy act that turns some women to jelly will not work on others. The "I am a master of certain skills or knowledge areas" type of power-flaunting again, only works on some women who are interested in power, but not all. And there are dozens of other ways to demonstrate power. Humor, a quick wit, is often what young men who have not yet acquired the outer trappings of power, use. Remember your college days and the humor wars you guys would get into, particularly in front of an appreciative, laughing woman? You'd all try to out-do the others in clever repartee. That was a dominance competition. Some people are naturally charming and charismatic in a dominant sort of way, and they go far with women and seemingly effortlessly. My last dominant was like that. He also did the daddy thing, not because he was trying to get women particularly (I think I kept him busy enough for ten women ), but because it felt natural and good to him. Again that's a way of expressing power that some women (usually self-aware submissives) respond to but not others.

So yeah, while there are a few exceptions and while the application of the principle is not simple, it's generally ture, and it's also an old, old premise. People have said for hundreds of years that women seek out "a good provider." That's basically what power boils down to at the core biological level: someone who can take care of you and of any children you might have.

 

[TaintedB]

Second, it assumes that this basic evolutionary programming can't be over-written by events in our personal development. Again, this is false to the point of silly. Like most adults, my adult sexuality was heavily influenced by events and relationships in my early childhood. Those events were apparently strong enough to over-write the basic lizard-brain programming that the author thinks should make me want to fuck anything in a skirt.
.

Methinks you underestimate the lizard brain. Of course we have higher kinds of intelligence but the instincts are very, very strong, very compelling, because they work on our emotions and the more one denies the power of one's emotions to control, the more they do control, as a general rule. People buck their lizardness, but usually only for a while (like a few years or ten) and then nature takes over again.

 

[snasu]

I once read an article of brain chemistry in males and females. I can't remember all the details, but in general, it indicated that certain sex and relationship chemicals spiked in females when shown picture of males that had signals of being a "good provider".
It would probably be related to this concept.

as an aside, it also indicated that male and female sexual/relationship brain chemistry was most closely relate after the male had orgasmed and this was the point at which the researchers figured "love" or longtermed relationship triggers were set in males.

If I remember where I read it, I'll post a link.

 

[Private_Label]

...

By learning to adopt the actions and attitudes of the dominant male, it is possible to create these sort of emotional disturbances in women at will. Almost any girl that you can manage to talk to in a SPECIFIC sort of way can have her "lust triggers" ignited like a blow torch. And when the ability to seduce becomes more a skill than mere luck, your chances of suffering the humiliation of being rejected vanish too. Now you have done more than learned to act the part of a dominant male, you have *become* one. And truthfully, there's no real difference...

OK no where does it mention what the specific "the actions and attitudes of the dominant male" one must adopt. I have a sneakin' suspicion that one might find it differnt for each person.

 

[Jay Davis]

OK no where does it mention what the specific "the actions and attitudes of the dominant male" one must adopt. I have a sneakin' suspicion that one might find it differnt for each person.

Well, of course he doesn't tell you what those actions and attitudes are for free! Then he wouldn't have anything to sell.

I promise you, this guy's selling something, and it ain't worth what he's charging for it.

 

[Marquis]

Interesting responses.

I posted this article to see if people would make a correlation between being a Dominant male, as in dominant relative to other males, dominant in society, and being a Dominant male as in dominant to your female partner, fulfilling her submissive needs.


I often wonder myself if there is a correlation between the two. The guy who wrote this article runs some kind of seminar to help losers pick up chicks.

Is being dominant with your female simply a part of being an alpha male? I think not. I know a few guys that are dominant men in most endeavors, but choose to take a more submissive role with their women. I'm sure JD will tell you all about those if you ask him.

Anyway, there's a lot more I want to say about the article, but I really don't have the time right now.