Are Men Hardwired To Dominate?

Are women hardwired to let them?

Saying we are "hardwired" to act a certain way, so we don't have a choice, puts us in the category of animals. Being self-aware means having a choice in how to act, how to behave, and to choose to see things from other angles. Without choice in behavior, there is no difference between humans and any other life form, except a little extra grey matter to make better weapons and grow more food. The very fact that we can choose the way we behave is the thing that makes us sentient.
Anyone who is "hardwired" to dominate me belongs in a cage, not walking around free, unmedicated. That is a complete and utter violation of my rights as an individual, and anyone else's. It is no different than large wild animals roaming Suburbia, or downtown; they get tranquilized and put in the zoo, or worse. Only animals who do not try to dominate individuals are left to roam freely.
What makes an animal different from a human? If it's all "hardwired", then NOTHING.

     If you cannot wrap your mind around this, then here's an example to help you.

A young woman was recently raped in an alley behind her apartment by a man she worked with.  He could not overpower her completely, so he cold cocked her with a rock. She came to after a few minutes, when he was nearly finished doing his disgusting crime on her. He had put the rock down close enough for her to reach; she grabbed it and smacked him in the head with it. It didn't knock him out; he tried to choke her to death. She smacked him again, and he got off her clutching his head. Then he dropped to his knees, covering his eyes. He reached for her again, grabbing an ankle. 
      She kneed him in the head. He fell over backwards, but started to get up immediately. She still had the rock in her hand. It was obvious that his goal was to kill her.
     She still had the rock in her hand. She knew he was going to try to kill her if he could catch her. She kicked him in the chin, knocking him backwards, and jogged to the taxi she saw in the main street. He was going to kill her; so, why didn't she smash his head with the rock? She was fighting for her life against a predator; that's the "hardwired" reaction, right? 
     She knew he was married with two children, and she did not want to be a monster too. She MADE A CHOICE. 
     She could have easily killed him, and she would have not been charged with anything since it was pure self-defense. The only way to stop a creature twice your size from attacking you is to injure it badly, or kill it. You can't strong arm a creature that's twice your size and hold it down, and drag it to the police department. You HAVE TO injure or kill it. 
     She CHOSE to not kill this creature, even in a life or death situation, with her sentient mind. If she did not have choice over her behavior, there is no question that this would have ended in the death of the male coworker.
     Choice. Sentience. 

Monkey Culture Confirmation Bias

Confirmation Bias is the tendency to pay more attention to things which reinforce your beliefs than to things which contradict them.
Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.
...Beliefs about people are very common examples; Asians are good at math but not driving; Blond haired Caucasians are happy but not logical; Italians are fair minded but mobsters; African American males are good at sports but not academics; Men are good at all kinds of things mechanical, are innately brave, and are logical; Women are not good at things men are good at, are weak and scared, and are not logical~
All of these beliefs have been rotated around society for years, but not because they are TRUE. They are not believed by everyone, only those who WANT to believe them because it serves their own ego and identity. Confirmation Bias happens when a person who WANTS to believe these fictional images finds an example that fits; three Asian kids in their classroom, one of them is good at math, two are average, but the person says "SEE! ASIANS ARE GOOD AT MATH!" because he or she has found a single example that matches. It does not register that the other two Asian kids are not math whizzes. A boy was taught how to fix the car by his father, who was taught by his grandfather; but no one would teach the boy's sister, and no one would teach his mother, either. Instead of comprehending that he is being actively coached, and that his sister and mother were being actively excluded from the coaching, he only sees that his father, grandfather, and self know how to fix the car and that his sister and mother do not. He then fulfills his ego fantasy that Men can fix cars naturally and Women can't. His sister, on the other hand, is being taught by their mother how to cook extravagant meals, and her mother was taught by her mother in law and grandmother; no one is teaching her brother or her father, and no one taught her grandfather how to cook. She also confirms her ego fantasy that "Women can cook naturally and Men can't". Both the brother and sister have Confirmation Bias, and most likely so does the rest of the family. If the men taught the sister how to fix the car, with the SAME patience, detail, and attention they use with the brother, and also showed the same confidence in her ability to learn, and the same pride in her when she did learn, then the odds are that she would learn just as well as her brother; but they will NOT explore that, they won't try it, because they DON'T WANT IT TO BE TRUE.

"Maybe the idea is to raise awareness and catch things within ourselves faster."
~Dr. Massimo Rossetti

Male Supremacy Is A Myth

I was just kidding, it's not a myth, it's alive and well, and like Visa, it's 

LOL! It looks like a bunch of 10 year old boys arranged the photo, and someone's parent made them include their little sister! So much for adulthood.

 EVERYWHERE YOU WANT TO BE.

LOVE this one, except for the obvious; just one question: WHY?

And is sadly childish. Who raises kids to believe their gender or race is superior, or more important?!? Do they really think that makes the world a good place to live in? Maybe they just don't have the brain for dynamics.

Male Supremacy

supremacist [sʊˈprɛməsɪst sjʊ-]

n

a person who promotes or advocates the supremacy of any particular group

adj

characterized by belief in the supremacy of any particular group

supremacism , suprematism n

~note: if you think this is a "male bashing" post, or you think this post says that "all men are supremacists", go back to YouTube and whine about Justin Bieber some more (since he has done terrible things to you personally...). Of course not all men are male supremacists, if they were, the whole world would be in slavery and revolt at all times until one gender was dead.
 

     The lack of in-depth research on the phenomenon of Male Supremacy is a direct result of science departments worldwide still being controlled by a male majority. Whoever is in charge has the power to bury research that has been done, or to limit, deny, or sabotage funding to any research subject they don't like. If a focus of research is going to compromise one's stellar reputation, power status, image or ego, the odds are that one would quash it if at all possible, even if the finding might result in wonderful and illuminating discoveries that would help the whole world. Those who desire control, and who have obtained it, do not give it up so easily.

     Therefore, if you do an internet search for "male supremacy" or "male elitism", you may not find very much, especially in the way of literature. But if you want to find out more about it, do some research on your own, right in your own back yard.

     Men who believe that "only men get it", whether "it" refers to comic books, science fiction, cooking, carpentry, cars, humor, lawn care, dogs, reptiles, insects, music, skateboarding, motocross, knitting, raising sons, cleaning gutters, etc, etc, etc, are displaying Male Supremacy. It's that simple. And women who buy into this are accomplices to Male Supremacy, because they are getting something out of it personally. 

     Ask around; ask people in your family, friends, neighbors; they won't be able to lie... much... they will fall into nervous joking if they feel like they've been "caught". Ask them if they think there are things that "women don't get, but men do". 

     You see, the Supremacy is in the assumption, and the assumption is about an ENTIRE GROUP "getting" something that another ENTIRE GROUP just "can't get". The implication is that the first group is smarter, better, and more able to understand things, and that ALL MEMBERS of that group are more able and capable. AND, that ALL MEMBERS of the other group are NOT as able or capable.
     In other words: Uncle Frank believes he is inherently good at auto mechanics because he was born with a "male" gene for it, and that his sister is not, because she is a female. He does not remember that his father let him help work on the family car as a kid, but did NOT let his sister help. He doesn't remember all the times his father had to re-do what Frank messed up, and re-explain how to do things. He also does not remember that his father's friend let him work in his shop when he was a teenager, even though he was always making mistakes and costing the shop owner money. His father's friend patiently took him under his wing and allowed him to learn in a safe environment, overlooked his foibles, and encouraged him. That same shop owner yelled at Frank's sister when she came anywhere near the shop, treated her like she was"in the way", or a "pain in the neck", even when she was bringing Frank lunch or messages from their parents. The shop owner also spoke of male friends with high praise regularly, and women he knew with rancor. In reality, the shop owner had relationship issues, and a personal jealousy and resentment toward all women he developed during adolescence when he could not get a certain girl to go out with him, and also a father who abused his mother when he drank, resulting in the man's overall crappy attitude toward any human of female persuasion. Frank was unaware of the man's personal issues, but he listened to the man's barrage of insults toward women every time he was in the shop, which influenced young Frank's perception much more than he knew. ~Uncle Frank does not remember it as it really happened, he only remembers it in a selective way that increases his belief in his own "inherent" talent, and diminishes his sister's. And he has transferred his belief in his sister's lack of ability onto all women, just as the shop owner did. IF Frank's father had included his sister in fixing the family car just as enthusiastically as he did Frank, then both children would have a different perception of "inherent talent and ability".
     A similar situation happened at Cousin Joe's house; Joe was given a real electric guitar for Christmas, and allowed to play it to his heart's content, except when his parents couldn't stand the noise. He was also given lessons, paid for by his parents, and his teacher at school helped him as well. Joe's cousin Marybeth, who had also asked for a guitar for Christmas, got a little radio instead. Her parents also said no to piano lessons. No guitar, no lessons, no teacher taking an interest in helping her. To this day, Joe believes his talent for music was inherently superior to Marybeth's; he sincerely believes that even if she were to have been given a guitar, and lessons, that she would not have been able to "keep up" with him. And how convenient, since there is no way to prove it one way or another without going back in time and taking the guitar away from Joe and giving it to Marybeth, he will believe his own arrogance for the rest of his life. In Joe's mind, his parents gave him the guitar BECAUSE they saw he had inherent talent, and also in Joe's mind, Marybeth's parents did NOT give her a guitar BECAUSE they saw that she could not have that same inherent talent, since she was not a boy. Joe believes that any woman who plays guitar is an anomaly, and that she probably is lacking in skill and knowledge, and could never become as skilled as his favorite male guitar players. When he sees a woman who is surpassing in talent and ability, he simply ignores her, or decides she is "unattractive", in order to diminish her in his own mind. Joe did come across one female guitarist whom was exceedingly skilled and he could not deny that he found her physically attractive as well; to rationalize this in his mind, instead of conceding that perhaps he was wrong about guitar talent being "inherently male", he made up a new place for this particular woman in his imagination. He made her "the exception to the rule", and put her on a pedestal all by herself, as if she were a freak of nature; thereby avoiding having to include females in his "brotherhood of guitarists" in his head. 

     A black supremacist believes that all blacks are smarter than all other races, exactly the same as a white supremacist. A Chinese supremacist believes that all Chinese are inherently smarter and better than all other races. An Arab supremacist believes that all Arabs are smarter and better. And so on, and so on.

     Any human being who believes that one group of humans is inherently smarter or better than another group is a supremacist. Period. There is no "other" definition, no rationalization, no way out of it. If you think you "get" stuff because you're a guy, and you assume that someone else can't "get" what you "get" because they are not a guy, then you are a supremacist. And unfortunately, supremacy causes all kinds of harm in society, far and wide, as we have learned from witnessing racial supremacy in humans throughout history. 

     The reasons there are more men who are supremacists than women are not hard to see if you actually look for them. The number one reason is because little boys are TOLD they are better, in most cultures. Why are they told this? Usually in order to motivate them to do what is wanted of them. The number two reason is... because little boys are TOLD they are better. Stronger, smarter, faster, etc, etc, etc. And in order to keep this myth alive, adults separate girls and boys in competition, and discourage girls from trying to reach their full potential. The reasons for this are worth exploring as well, but the fact remains, that's what adults have been doing for a long time.

     So, without making it more complicated, look around at who believes what about brains, ability, and understanding. Watch how people treat men and women differently, and boys and girls. It's fascinating, albeit disturbing and depressing. But with a little objectivity, we can all be researchers, and go right around the hallowed halls of "science". 

DANCING HEALS AILING SOCIETIES

Put dance lessons back in public school, the way it was before the Civil Rights riots. Humans can't seem to figure out that friendship and regular social interaction between boys and girls (not just between boys and boys, or girls and girls) is essential for kids to develop normal, healthy, well rounded social connections and skills. Adults STILL can't handle integrated anything, they STILL feel compelled to teach boys one thing and girls an entirely different thing... that contradict each other, no less... brilliant....
So, what worked before? Dancing. Let's put it back, before everything is lost completely.

Check this out, a little school in L.A. :
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1083/is_3_83/ai_n31440489/

Look at how much fun they're having:

Racism Doesn't Discriminate

Believing that one's own race is superior to all races, OR believing that one's race is superior to ONE OR TWO OTHER races, OR believing that another race is INFERIOR in some way, in ANY way, is all racism. If you are a human being, you are not exempt from any of these definitions. They apply to you and all of your friends and everyone you know, and every human being on Earth. If a person believes they are a better person than another because of their own race or the other person's, then they are a racist.
 

LIBERAL? REALLY? ARE YOU SURE?

 So... how can a person call themselves "Liberal" and back all kinds of laws removing personal freedom at the same time? Doesn't quite sound like high comprehension.

These studies linking "Liberalism" (I use the term loosely, it's not classical Liberalism they're referring to) being linked to having a higher IQ, and "Conservatism" (also used loosely, they seem to think "Conservative" means ignorant and unable to think) are hilarious. And all of them are calling a "High IQ" from 101 to 110. Here is a quote from the last one I read, lol: "Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said. " Uh, no, darling, that desire would be about having a HUGE EGO, not a HUGE IQ. Ego and IQ are NOT intrinsically linked, kiddo, you can be dumb as a stump and believe yourself a genius... A person with a high IQ WITHOUT an EGO problem would not DESIRE TO SHOW IT by aligning themselves with anyone. Go back to college so you can learn how to comprehend things better... no wait, please don't, never mind. Get a regular job, learn about reality for a while.

If there is no Conservatism, then there is a tendency to destroy and forget what previously worked very well, what was built by previous generations with blood, sweat and tears, including escape from tyranny and building a free society where all citizens are equal. 
If there is no Classical Liberalism, then there is a tendency to forget to figure things out and learn new methods.
The definitions of Conservative that the media is trying to present is about sheer ignorance and stubbornness; this is a juvenile misunderstanding of Conservatism. I thought the same thing when I was 14. 
The definition of Liberalism that the media is trying to present is really just Anarchy; a true Liberal does NOT seek to destroy what's already tried and true, and does NOT SEEK TO DISRESPECT OTHERS. A true Liberal SEEKS TO IMPROVE, WITHOUT CAUSING MAYHEM AND DESTRUCTION, and DOES NOT TRY TO TEAR OTHERS DOWN just because they believe something they don't AGREE with. That's NOT intelligent progress. You MUST LEARN what people did before to understand why things are the way they are NOW. And you MUST LEARN from DIFFERENT SOURCES, NOT JUST FROM PEOPLE WHO ALL AGREE WITH EACH OTHER AND WHO HAVE A SIMILAR AGENDA. That is called indoctrination.

TRUE LIBERALS SEEK PEACEFUL PROGRESS AND PERSONAL FREEDOM FOR ALL,
INCLUDING THOSE THEY DISAGREE WITH. 

THEY DO NOT SEEK ELITISM OR EGO STROKING, THEY DO NOT SEEK TO INSULT OTHERS,
THEY DO NOT SEEK TO BELONG TO A POLITICAL AGENDA OR FOLLOW A POLITICAL LEADER.

 

lib·er·al

 [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] 

adjective

1.

favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2.

( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3.

of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.

4.

favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

5.

favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

EXPAND

noun

14.

a person of liberal principles or views, especially in politics or religion.

15.

( often initial capital letter ) a member of a liberal party in politics, especially of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

con·serv·a·tive

 [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv] Show IPA

adjective

1.

disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

2.

cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.

3.

traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

4.

( often initial capital letter ) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

5.

( initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.

noun

8.

a person who is conservative in principles, actions, habits, etc.

9.

a supporter of conservative political policies.

10.

( initial capital letter ) a member of a conservative political party, especially the Conservative party in Great Britain.

11.

a preservative.

How To See Narcissism

     We all grow up in Western society with people around us who have Narcissism. If we don't have a family member who is one, then we should feel very blessed; but there will be one or more somewhere in our lives. A classmate, a teacher, a coach, a family friend, someone at our place of worship, a healthcare person, an auto mechanic, a neighbor, it can be anyone at all. And so we get used to the behavior. When we get used to behaviors, we don't notice that something is wrong until something happens because of it, like the mail carrier showing up with a black eye because her husband, who everyone thought was a great guy, is really a narcissistic abuser who attacks her verbally and physically because he thinks she is having affairs with people on her route; she will lose everything she has worked for all her life just to get away from him. Or when the neighbor loses everything he has to his narcissistic wife, who not only left with another guy, but took the kids with her.
     The abusive person shows themselves in their words and actions, but since we are used to the behavior from others we have known, we tend to dismiss it, even make excuses for it. Often we are completely oblivious, being duped by their innocent, sweet, helpful, charming personality that they show us, or being drawn in to their gossip.
     The N spouse will often tell people what a nightmare of a person his or her spouse is, but so will the spouse of the N, turning to friends for support. The difference between them is this:
When the N spouse is talking about his nightmare partner, he or she is not seeking a solution, or actual help, from the people he is telling this to. He or she is not trying to figure out how to fix it, or asking advice. He or she is not trying to get the other to go to counseling, or trying to figure out how to get away from the abuse. He or she is only talking about the partner in order to paint a negative picture of him or her, and there will be no evaluation of his or her own behavior, and there will be no counseling to find out how he or she is contributing to the situation.
     The N only talks about the other in order to exact an outcome: to be seen as the victim of a crazy or terrible person. NOT to find real solutions to fix the broken relationship.
     The person who is on the receiving end of the "crazy making" will eventually start talking to people outside the relationship, hopefully, in order to get a reality check on their own sanity, and to connect with non-abusive people who honestly have their welfare in mind. They will also be trying to find solutions, gather advice, try to make it work, try to change things, volunteer to help the other, often to their detriment. Yes, they will talk about their partner, venting frustration and anger and fear, but it will be in the vein of seeking solutions, advice, and help.
     The N does not seek help for their own issues, or for the relationship. Or for their partner. They honestly think they are innocent, and that they have no reason to shoulder any blame. Seeking help for any reason translates to admitting fault in their minds, and that is unacceptable. To them, taking part of the blame means taking ALL the blame. They must be righteous and innocent, or they are a pathetic piece of crap. They must be a victim, because to them, there is only victim or perpetrator. Good or bad. Clean or filthy. Strong or weak. Very important or unimportant. Brilliant or stupid. Pure or unclean. Kind of like a severe germ-phobe, they want to be completely sterile, or they feel infected. Their partner, however, is of course "infected" in the N's mind, and that means they will infect the "clean" N. Blame cannot be theirs alone, ever. They can't carry it.
     One pretty common reason for a person with N issues to not be able to see their own behavior is because they have been exposed to a person who was/is very abusive. How does one be the victim of an abuser and be narcissistic/abusive at the same time? This can be where the black and white thinking gets solidified; that other person is bad, I am good because I am not them. So I do not need to take accountability for anything I say or do, because I am not the monster: they are. And so many children of abusive parents grow up without knowing self-responsibility, or true self-reflection and correction. They have become accustomed to looking outside themselves to find the reason for the misery in their lives, and feel that if they turn the mirror on themselves, they will be inviting that same scrutiny and monster-vision from others. As long as they are a legitimate victim of someone else, they can remain faultless in their own eyes, no matter what they really say or do. Ask someone why they did something wrong; watch how they try to get out of it. That is another way to see Narcissism.
     Even if the N spouse goes near admitting fault, it will be some kind of rationalization, like "I did do that, because of what you did." That's something that most people will say occasionally, even often, but the N spouse will do it every time. They will also say "Well I did do that, but we all have problems." Not taking responsibility one's own self, without trying to justify, and name others in the blame. Even if others are to blame in a given situation, the person who does not have the N issue can take responsibility for their own actions, separately from anyone else's actions.Even if they state reasons why they were thinking unclearly, like stress, or anger, or childhood issues, they are still able to be fully accountable.
     Here are some comments, I will post them anonymously, from partners of N's that you can read through. If they make you angry and defensive, or if you feel disgust for these commenters, you might be an N yourself. Prove the psychologists wrong~ go get help, do some self-examination, drop your ego and call a therapist. Look up Sam Vaknin. Look up Steve and Kim Cooper. Click this: http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/03/29/narcissists-who-cry-the-other-side-of-the-ego/
If you are an N, you probably will already be rolling your eyes or looking up something else, or looking for the place to comment on this post so you can argue about it. Whatever, you will do what you want to do, regardless of anyone else, even regardless of how it affects you. But if you have the time to look up your favorite band on Youtube, then you have the time to read about Narcissism.


"He told all of the parents at our child's school that I was a prostitute and junkie. People wispered after me in the halls. I had lost my successful design business in LA left my prior marriage for him, lost my career and was totally isolated and alone on the verge of homelessness with our child."\

" I was 8 months pregnant and after being ignored for weeks at a time, bantered at, accused of this n that, enslaved/ isolated- I took a bath and broke down.. Cried, Sobbed,- couldn't stop. The neighbors called the police thinking I was beaten and when police left, he stood over my pregnant naked body glaring at me repeating, "you are white trash, jerry springer shit."/


  "Begging her to get help. Trying to keep my family together. Always being a referee between her and our children. Constantly being belittled, ridiculed, told I was the problem and lied on. Mentally, Verbally and Physically abused. I was her doormat. It finally took her physically hurting me AGAIN to snap out of it and say NO MORE!!"/

"In a fog, trying to figure out what was wrong with me. He was always angry. Every few years I went into counseling, but was instructed to try things that brought on even greater punishments"/

 "I thought I was going mad and couldn't make sense of just how out of control my life was.....and know I understand that the last 3 years of my life has been manipulated, controlled and almost destroyed by the man I loved.
The harder I tried, the more he wanted......more love, more support, more time, more energy.....a neverending demand on my mental, emotional and physical resources, not to mention my finances. I lost count of how often I heard him say "you don't love me" or "you don't care about me". "/

"...his dog bit me, unprovoked and vicious, bit a hole right through the skin between my toes. My husband witnessed it and didn't move at all.No emotion, no concern, no reprimanding/controlling his dog.I ran to the bathroom crying as much from the emotional pain of his utter lack of concern for me or my feelings, as from the pain of the bite itself. I sat in that bathroom for 45 minutes crying and thinking. When I came out and confronted him about his coldness, he stated " that's not a bite, if my dog *really* bit you, your foot would be dangling from your ankle".

 "I fell over the dishwasher door that was open. I was huge pregnant with twins. I couldn't get up. As I was trying, my ex ran to the dishwasher door to see if I bent it and left me to roll around trying to get up. One of our children helped me get up.
WHAT THE???"/

"My youngest boy is somewhat nervous in public (but great company and has many friends) If he is nervous when he finally gets the limelight at a party etc., and starts talking about something for a little too long (but has everyone's attention and usually their interest too) his big brother and his friend will say let's go swimming or do any manner of even sneakier things to steal the lime light and make him look foolish including openly mocking him, but of course pretending that it is funny and good natured. If they can make him cry and get embarrassed while they are still just laughing and having fun then they have really got him and will of course pretend that it is his fault for being oversensitive, ie. there is something wrong with him and they are not only perfect but also in a position to judge him defective."/

RINGERS

Ever wonder why the people you actually hear on the radio and TV going on and on about their political views and opinions are always extreme jerks, no matter which party or cause or movement they claim to represent? And every party, cause, and movement has at least one really loud superstar who spews insults and hate. No, YOUR party is not without a loud ass mouthpiece, sorry, kiddies, you're not exempt. Ever wonder WHY they are out there, and why they STAY out there? Does your party's loudmouth jerk honestly represent your views, or the way you talk, or the way you feel, for real? Doesn't it make you feel uneasy when they spew crap that you don't really go along with, in the name of your party? If you remember that every single group seems to have these people speaking FOR them, in the most extreme, uncouth, discourteous, dirty way possible, doesn't it make you WONDER where they came from? And why don't they go BACK there?