Excerpts from Warren Farrell’s book “Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say”

Excerpt 1:

Excerpt 2:

Excerpt 3:

On our sexual and social problems

Done with being gloomy for the week. If people think my moods change frequently, well, so do aspects of my life. C’est la vie. Drama comes and drama goes. Got plans in mind moving forward that hopefully will help minimize some of the bs I’ve been experiencing acutely over the last couple of years, and time will tell how successful these strategies prove to be. Either way, barreling on…

Tonight I’m rewatching Eric Orwoll’s video titled “Sexual Problems”:

Previously viewed the video by someone called BlitheringGenius and actually liked it as well, but Orwoll’s thoughts in reply interest me this evening.

For the record, I’m not saying any of this in reply to either of those guys’ videos…just thinking aloud.

First off, it’s quite apparent our culture is pushing some extreme shit these days, and popular media especially plays into that by weaving and illustrating “fantasies” that get into our psyches and tap into our competitive tendencies. There’s more to titillate, distract, overwhelm, and entertain us than any other time in history. Plus there’s economic pressures and coming up surrounded by massive institutions and corporate hierarchies. Unprecedented times we live in. Technologies through the roof and out the wahoo. Psychology rules in this age of marketing, social engineering (directly intentional or otherwise), global politics, and visual artistic mediums. This new reality cannot be overemphasized. Land of confusion, for sure.

Women and men are played in different ways. Always have been, likely always will be. And in changing ways, sometimes rapidly changing. Like gender role confusion and how we’re all being crammed into the new-age work paradigm. And we’re being sold these strange fantasies that aren’t truly in the best interest for womankind specifically or humankind generally. We womenfolk are being manipulated in some seriously fucked up ways, and we all know it, though the impact is being attributed to the female character categorically as if we’re all hardwired to act just like so. Well, we’re not, and 80% of men aren’t being abandoned on the sidelines. We all know far too many married mediocre people, even some couples truly in love. Just look around. People online are talking now as if the supposed top 20% of hunky and/or monied males are getting all the action and all or most women are automatically drawn toward them. Not so much.

Despite all of the hard-wiring we may come equipped with, personal experiences teach people a thing or two, at least if we care enough to pay attention. In my own case, I never was into jocks. Just not my speed. Even when I was thin and pretty and jocks took interest in me, they held no appeal. Because far too many of them prove to be either jerks or people I share little in common with, plus sports do nothing for me. Then out in the barscene in my 20s I encountered plenty of “hunky” types and had my fair share of rendezvous, and I learned that the attraction was nearly always no more than skin deep. Just turned out to not do much for me on the occasions I gave it a whirl. Now, I’ve dated plenty of attractive men, but I doubt we’re talking “top 20%” (however that’s to be defined). Doesn’t matter. Probably matters a lot more to avoid the “lowest 20%,” harsh as that may come across. But it’s not just about looks. Personality seriously factors in. What’s a fantastic body and money if there’s no heartfelt endearment or spark? What’s the use in tolerating a belligerent asshole irregardless of how much he earns?

A lot more goes into selecting “good genes” than looks and income, that’s for sure. Like whether the man would be a good father if you’re into breeding. And whether he’ll treat you with respect and share fundamental values. Those things matter too and women are just as hardwired to lean in those directions as well. Hence why the concept of romantic love even came into being — it was a development along the journey of evolution of human nature. Didn’t just spring up thanks to physical attraction and sharing provisions alone. Other steps occurred that we’re conveniently leaving out or have a very skewed perception of due to how we’re being manipulated with information. So much of what’s created to appeal to people today is intended to allure our base natures and arouse our primitive and less-civilized proclivities. That being no secret — just ask anyone in advertising.

We get so much of our ideas from television and films and now the internet, and so much of it’s based on fantasies, dreams, supposed ideals, and they’re intended to get us thinking all the time about what someone else has. Stoking the embers of our competitive spirits has proven highly profitable, as we know. Anyway, women are sold all these “Sex in the City”-esque narratives that serve the dual purpose of also prodding our insecurities, which doesn’t help matters either since that makes us spazzy.

What I’m basically driving at here is this: monkey see, monkey do. Take notice of what all we’re being shown and how the sexes are being instructed. Lots and lots of mixed messages, but one rings loud and clear for women and it’s that harnessing a financially successful, good-looking man is some major honor that garners envy and props. Better still if he’s housebroken. And that’s a dumb narrative, albeit a popular one being pushed all around. It’s a novelty, not a truly worthwhile ambition for most of us, because everything comes with a tradeoff. Yet the fantasy claims otherwise and tries to sell women on the notion of “having it all” and in every way. Just not healthy to approach living in this sort of manner. Deep down it’s not what most women want, as nearly all will figure out at some point in their lives. And while sex is nice, it can’t take the place of love, not for plenty of people, male or female, not if they want a truly meaningful life.

We know this stuff. Not saying anything new here.

But, as one female out here in the crowd I must say that monogamy isn’t the end all/be all we make it out to be. My polyandrous imagination can comprehend a hierarchy of sorts in terms of sexual relations and respective intimate connections and levels of devotion, but I suppose I can save those thoughts for another night. Just thinking that as a woman if my concern is with stability of provisions, I’m better off casting a wider net and becoming more flexible about the possible variety of relationships I might maintain simultaneously over the long-term. Heck, I think the real reason humans came to opt for monogamy is to reduce complexities (theoretically anyway). Possessiveness likes to get in the way, and that too is a natural development.

Where am I going with this? Nowhere. The night got away from me. Thoughts to be resumed another day…