“What we do not manage, we get manage by…”
The Information Age
Unlike the Industrial Age or to a lesser extent the Post Industrial Age, the Information Age has brought about and given rise to an increased demand for soft skills, the cluster of personality traits, social graces, methods of communication, and personal habits centering around enhanced relationships with other people, rather than just tasks and objective completion. While these demands are most acutely felt within the business/economic domain, they are spilling over and being absorb within the cultural and social domains as well. Simply put, highly socially skilled individuals tend to outperform, rise higher and go further within business organizations than those that are less skilled in those areas. Likewise, sole proprietors who are highly socially skilled make, have and maintain social/business relationships that ultimately make them more successful than those who are not.
Dual Gender Specialization
At the crux of the Information Age is social specialization, and in particular, dual gender specialization. Whereas the social shift involved in the Industrial Revolution was primarily a male dominated specialization shift, the social shift in the Information Age is hallmarked by the massive inclusion and rising parity of women in the work place environment and the rise of feminism within our business and social fabric. Feminism has forged some incredible benefits and opportunities for both men and women, as well as creating immense complexities socially that have yet to sort themselves out. Where they have not been resolved socially we feel a tremendous amount of friction. Nowhere is this more apparent than in today’s dating environment.
Responding to Hierarchy of Needs
Regardless of the fact that society is becoming increasingly feminine driven and in many ways women have surpassed the equality mark with regards to men, women are still not inclined to transition into gender equity with regards to dating and courtship accountability (gender equitable roles). While on the surface of it women seem to loathe to relinquish a courtship system in which the opposite gender (males) take all or at least commonly the majority of the risk of rejection, in initiating the courtship, unjustly shouldering the financial burden of the costs associated with such courtship and having to already achieved a measure of societal success, as displayed by ones’ place in society (commonly defined by one’s career/job), which is a connotation of the hypergamous status dimorphous marker of status, wealth, power and fame. The expectations transcend the initial dating rituals as well, as women typically still expect men to take the leadership role and be accountable for the health, direction and vitality of the relationship. Furthermore your failure to act upon your gender assigned role of leadership, will and quite openly will be judged as a fitness test to your worth and viability not only as a mate choice, but that of your maturity and worth as a man. What we’re witnessing here is a direct confrontation between rational cultural and social thought and biological drivers and demands. To argue against this we’re simply railing against a base biological drive and need here. No amount of rationalization, propagandization or wishful thinking will usurp the reality that women are naturally choosing biological base needs over social and cultural conventions, such as feminism, as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs dictates. Maslow’s Theory of Human Motivation speaks to this with a clearly defined order of ascension of psychological needs and when clustered, biological and psychological needs always trump social conventions of esteem and self-actualization. (take a moment to familiarize yourself with the hierarchy of needs chart). What all this is telling us, again and again and again, despite the rise and acceptance of feminism, women want us to be men, need us to be men and desire us to be men.
Please pardon this interruption as we take a momentary station break to let this news set in… This moment brought to you by Eckhart Tolle:
“It seems that most people need to experience a great deal of suffering before they will relinquish resistance and accept reality.”
“It is incredibly painful to stand in opposite of what is…” (resisting reality)
“You can’t argue with what is. If you choose to try you will suffer.”
We now return to our regular scheduled program…
Managing Masculinity and Social Dominance
Repeated social studies have demonstrated and reaffirmed the common observation of the consistent erotic appeal of male dominance as sexual cues of attraction and desire for women, whether those are the hypergamous triggers of physical, social or status cues of dominance or ‘alpha’ traits. These base traits of desire do not diminish over time, nor are they usurped by elements making up relationship equity, such as the longevity of the relationship, emotional investment committed, resources committed such as time, energy or finances, nor the nostalgia of memories and times cherished and shared. It even usurps the common good of her offspring, the emotional wellbeing, development and security of her children. At a woman’s base biological need is a desire to be with an unapologetic masculine male- a Man. Social dominance plays such an important role in feminine attraction that manipulating this single variable socially has repeatedly shown and proven dramatic improvements in a man’s sexual market value- the degree to which he is sexually valued by women in the dating market environment.
Answer the phone…
Common sense, everyday observation and intuition regarding a man’s role in claiming his biological heritage of providing leadership, accountability and stewardship within a relationship has been backed up in virtually every scientific and social study conducted upon it and echoed by countless women when they say honestly that they “want to be treated like a lady.” That statement is an enticement, a call out for you, a longing wish for you, to be the man that fills and guides her life and her life with you. For you to simply be the man (the masculine role figure) in the relationship. Whether the analogies are being the pack leader, or Captain and First Officer or the great Silver Back male gorilla in the mist etc, etc, your gender expectation is to assume command of leadership responsibilities within that relationship and with her.
Screening & Filtering
If she fights you for this role, you shouldn’t put up with it or stand for it. Plain and simple. If she fight you for leadership control, she’s announcing her inability to appropriately partner. It’s unattractive, unfeminine and a proven detriment to the healthy wellbeing and happiness of any relationship, as proven by divorce statistics and relationship satisfaction studies, which clearly indicates an unease in the household when women wear the pants in the family. While fiscal issues a generation ago used to dominate the ‘cause’ for divorce, currently now unhinged from the requirement of ‘cause’ in ‘no-fault-divorce’, the most cited reason for instigating a dissolvement of a marriage is the wife’s unhappiness within it. Want to insulate yourself from the +50% marriage failure, with women doing +70% of the filing? Screen and filter your partner for a woman who recognizes the value of biologically driven sexual roles in a relationship and who actively supports and reaffirms those roles. Stunning concept I know… women who value, support and reaffirm ‘traditional’ values in relationships tend not to divorce. If we want to entice and promote feminine behaviors (feminine arts) in our partners, we have to fill the leadership role first, or like any social creature, she will, and as pointed out, to everyone’s determent, if she becomes synonymous with that role.
Case of Feminist Economics
The sad reality is as our society becomes more and more feminized, and feminism becomes the defacto cultural monopoly governing our society, masculine men are becoming a scarce commodity… and more valuable because of it. Oddly that’s a plus to a man’s sexual market value, now and more so in the future. The alarm here isn’t that masculine men will create higher value and demand for relationships, but that by acting through their very nature (male), and having the leverage to do so, masculine men will chose polygamy lifestyle with younger, more attractive and fitter partners than women his age or peer group. While this has always been the case in the apex of male society, it is now becoming a staple and attainable for the common man. This is exactly what much of the men’s community and the pick-up community are promoting and celebrating. And with good cause. Furthermore women can embrace a feminist social standing, as long as their base psychological needs are fulfilled, not called into question or put into jeopardy, but once they are, and in particular within the realm of ‘safety’, their effeminate hipster/emo boyfriends and partners may become woefully inadequate, whether that threat is physical, financial, economical, or child rearing and family development side of security, her feminist leanings openly condition, support and promote partnership dissolution… often the masculine surrogate they ultimately turn to is a societal one– government. One they ultimately cannot divorce themselves from.
Ultimate Gender Expectation
Our gender schemas are deeply embedded within the cognitive and social frameworks regarding what defines masculine and feminine. While there is a multitude of socializing agents that work to formalize, instruct and guide these roles, what is apparent is the consequences of those socialized function have on our relationship structures and our relationships health and wellbeing when coupled with the very unchanging biological nature of our being. Ultimately it is an individual’s choice and obligation to take the helm of their life. To make the decision they choose fit to guide and direct it. To do so otherwise is to sail the seas of circumstances with an helm unmanned.