Don't Argue with Women - Emotional Equivalency

[betplom]

I NEVER argue with women, because when a woman ties an argument to her emotions, there are NO winners, just losers.

What we are talking about here is called Emotional Equivalency which is what WOMEN [and Gay men] use as a strategy to argue their points. See, debating is about exchanging differing views to shed light on a possible answer by using logic and reason, but arguing is about trying to change someones views by using emotion [and usually NO facts or reason].

Well the number one reason most arguments get blown way out of proportion and get out of hand, is because someone ties their thesis of the argument to a bullsh*t emotional point, so that you arguing their thesis is also you arguing their emotions and emotional point.


Take for example an argument my boy had with his girl the other day while they were watching Jersey Shore:
Her: Ugh, I HATE Ronnies lying, cheating punk-ass!


Him: Aw, cmon baby, you bein way too tough on him, hes just a young p*ssy-whipped boy who got caught up in love but wasnt ready.


Her: Oh, so you think being a liar and a cheater is Ok then?


Him: Um, no, I didnt say all that Im just saying give the young boy a break, hes still learning about love and dating and relationships.


Her: [Emotional Equivalency time] Oh Ok, so all this time I thought I was dating a man who respected the sanctity of relationships but apparently you dont give a flying f*^k about being faithful, cause its ALL good if you are young huh?


Him: B*tch is you crazy?



And THERE it is she effectively tied her point that Ronnie is a cheater and emotionally equivocated it with her current relationship THUS putting her man in a position where if he was to keep defending Ronnie, he would ALSO be arguing in favour of being a lying cheating bastard which clearly would ruin his relationship and leave him home on Friday nights backing his fist in front of his laptop with his sweat pants bunched around his ankles instead of beating up his girls nani.

THIS my friends, is the reason you should NEVER argue with a woman because once she co-mingles her emotions into her point, you are no longer arguing about one singular subject, but you are arguing right down to the core of her very beliefs.

 

[betplom]

Men and women are after different things when we debate.




Men tend to, but not always, hold the truth to be the decider of the debate. (Manginas excepted thus the name). The man who illustrates the truth the best, is generally considered the winner of a debate. Women, not so much. And dont forget, women scoff at our school yard rules. Nothing seems sillier to a woman than the male code. When women fight and argue, there are no rules she adheres to. Women decide who wins a debate by who has been the snotty-mouthiest and by who emotionally manipulates the other into submission.


The truth matters not a bit to women.


If men are always more or less deceived on the subject of women, it is because that they forget that they and women do not speak altogether the same language, and that words have not the same weight or the same meaning for them, especially in questions of feeling. Whether from shyness or precaution or artifice, a woman never speaks out her whole thought, and moreover what she herself knows of it is but a part of what it really is. Complete frankness seems to be impossible to her, and complete self-knowledge seems to be forbidden her. If she is a sphinx to us, it is because she is a riddle of doubtful meaning even to herself. She has no need of perfidy, for she is mystery itself. A woman is something fugitive, irrational, indeterminable, illogical, and contradictory. A great deal of forbearance ought to be shown her, and a good deal of prudence exercised with regard to her, for she may bring about innumerable evils without knowing it, capable of all kinds of devotion, and of all kinds of treason, monstre incomprhensible, raised to the second power, she is at once the delight and the terror of men.
The Intimate Journal of Henri Amiel, Dec. 26, 1868


Angry Harry made a really good comparison on his website once: Men love to watch sports. They will spend hours watching men kick balls, shoot pucks, pot golf balls etc. etc. They will memorize stats, and they will see strategy everywhere in a game of sports. Men positively thrive upon these things.


But women? Not so much.


When women watch Soap Operas, they do the same things as men watching sports except they do it for social strategy. Women see social strategy everywhere in soaps how Kathy manipulated her love interest David into lying to his wife Ruth, causing them to have a big argument, driving David right into Kathys loving arms and the affair begins.


Social Strategy.


Thats why soap operas are popular with women. Its what Cosmo magazine is chock full of: How to socially manipulate people. Socially manipulating people is what women do. In fact, it is one of the only things they do.


Truth as men know it does not exist in the same way for women. Women are herd creatures and thus women find truth or right and wrong through the consensus of the herd. It is what the herd believes is correct that women believe is truth. Thus you see women are much more attuned to eternally changing notions such as fashion, or how they use social proofing the consensus of whom the herd finds a sexually desirable man to decide for their individual selves which man they find sexy. Men simply know what they find sexy in a mate, but women find men sexy because of other womens sexual preferences.


Women may have happy ideas, taste, and elegance, but they cannot attain to the ideal. The difference between men and women is like that between animals and plants. Men correspond to animals, while women correspond to plants because their development is more placid and the principle that underlies it is the rather vague unity of feeling. When women hold the helm of government, the state is at once in jeopardy, because women regulate their actions not by the demands of universality but by arbitrary inclinations and opinions. Women are educatedwho knows how? G.F. Hegel


When women argue, they are not trying to find the objective truth but rather are after manipulating the other(s) into feeling unified with them towards their opinion. If the herd believes 1+1=3, then it is correct because the herd believes it is so. If tomorrow, the herd believes 1+1=1, then that will be correct because the herd believes it is so. It is men who insist upon the objective truth based on principle and universality and continue to argue 1+1=2, no matter how much you cows moo at me. Women are not after finding the correct answer, but rather they are after manipulating others into feeling they are right and their opponent is wrong. In other words, they are socially manipulating their opponent when they argue, rather than seeking the actual, objective truth.


I think one of the absolute best things men can do with women is follow the advice of so many of those misogynists of old, and view women as children. A woman is the most responsible teenager in the house.


Of course, it is not actually that they are children. It is more likely that they do not develop the same sense of principle and justice to navigate the world, because society enables them not to have to. Regardless of whether they are or not, I think in almost every aspect from game to simple conversations a man is advantaged by continually reminding himself that women are teenagers. They exist somewhere in between child and man.

 

[MrX]

Plommer, c'mon.

If you want to talk to us about your new beliefs, please do so, but do it yourself.

I'm pretty sure no one wants to read pages of this copy and pasted shit from some douchebag we couldn't care less about. God knows, I don't. But if our old friend plommer wants to have a conversation about it, cool.

Talk to us.

 

[reno cool]

Plommers new book: Women are Plants, Men are Animals

 

[roguejuror]

Plommers new book: Women are Plants, Men are Animals

million seller name right there

 

[Blitty]

Copy/paste thread

 

[eggs]

His only belief is a lifetime of rejection for being hideous inside and out and as a result he makes thinks up.

End of story.

 

[slayerofeggs]

His only belief is a lifetime of rejection for being hideous inside and out and as a result he makes thinks up.

End of story.

end of life (but not for me)