.png)
This morning I was chatting casually with a guy online (on a chat site, not a dating site). In the past, conversations were always contentious with this guy, and I could never figure out why, basically because I'm logical and rational, so when someone disagrees, my go-to my whole life has been to point out reasons, be logical, and wait for them to see my point. It was as if he either couldn't or wouldn't see my point, and conversations would always just wither on the vine - very unsatisfying. All of this is an example of overcoming that female socialization of giving chances, being kind, over-explaining, and hoping people, men especially, are rational and logical. Quite a few people just are NOT. I'm noticing now this ONLY happens online, not ever to me in real life. I now know what to watch for online so I don't get sucked into this, and I have in the past. So there's a spot I can level up.
When I was a teacher, my go-to phrase would be, "I'm not going to argue with you or be argued with" as a way to shut that down, with the understanding that if they cooperated, I'd be more cooperative also; if they didn't cooperate, then ask three other people, maybe even six, before you ask me - and when you do ask me, it better be nice and cooperative, or there will be consequences. It's super sad to me, but not all that surprising, that this is the level some men sink to. I'm literally treating them as truculent junior high school students. Ugh. I can't ever imagine dating anyone like this, ever. Online, though, it seems rampant, which again makes me leery of OLD.
Today he said something, I disagreed, he started arguing. I told him, my attention is the prize, you argue, you get no attention. He agreed and backed off! It works! But I want to go deeper, just like I did the last time. Why exactly is this so effective? I have an idea that men don't respond to empathy or calls for understanding; they respond to power, dominance, control, and consequences. That's sad to me, honestly pathetic, that seemingly everything has to be a pissing contest, but honestly, they bring it on themselves, so my sympathy is limited to rather non-existent these days. This is just such an unattractive trait, and I don't understand why they would shoot themselves in the foot. It seems like 100% self-sabotage. What do they get out it?
Clearly this is never the kind of energy I was raised with, never had in my family, never had with Jack. When I was a child, if someone attempted to start bickering, I'd either lay out solutions, tell them to pick one... or just walk away. That same energy is needed with men, but with a slight tweak to it. Limit chances! Limit chances A LOT, and always be prepared to walk away, that's the lesson I've learned from this. But WHY, though? Why are they like this? What do they hope to gain out of it? I see this as someone who wants interaction but doesn't know how to interact. That whole bickering energy just feels ickily like brother-sister energy, and I never want that from some man I'm attracted to. It feels socially incompetent. Does not compute.
Thanks for any and all insight into this, dear FDS queens! Happy Monday!
"men don't respond to empathy or calls for understanding; they respond to power, dominance, control, and consequences"
Truer words have never been spoken. I'm embarrassed by how long it took me to understand this. I applied my humanity to them, and it wasn't worth it. You can't put lipstick on a pig.
Men are like dogs, and you need to treat them as such. They are NOT rational, they operate from a purely emotional and instinctive place. They have no empathy (no one taught them and that's not their job to learn!) so appealing to them for fairness will get you nowhere. Treat them like dogs. They only understand consequences, punishment and power. Make them get on their knees to approach you — they'll like it
This post is really interesting, it made me reflect on my experiences trying to get empathy from men. I wasted so many tears and sleepless nights trying to "just communicate". I wondered why I was treated badly when I showed them empathy. I thought surely they would see my emotional support and reward me with the same loving behavior, right? Lol. Unfortunately it's true, men only respond to consequences, aka you taking your attention away from them. Life is easier now that I tune out male nonsense.
Personally, I no longer have time or patience for argumentative men. I'm 48. I expect manners. So, I would have blocked that dude from the beginning.
Why would you waste time arguing with a man you don't have to interact with? At the first sign of an argument, block and delete. Your time should be too precious to you to waste on some guy who is essentially no more than pixels on your screen. It's one thing if he's a coworker or family member and you have no choice but to interact, or if you're dating him and hoping to resolve a conflict or at least vet his style of conflict resolution to see whether the relationship is worth preserving. But some rando on a website? No. You should be too busy for this nonsense.
Never bicker with a man, especially not your own. Is he moody, grumpy, tired, and treating you with anything less than absolute respect? Excuse yourself and LEAVE, or HANG UP. We do not reward men with our attention when they misbehave. We do not gift them with our priceless time or energy when they are being unreasonable or trying to manipulate us. We simply leave the conversation and decide on our own time whether to see them or even speak to them again.
Until you are able to wrap your head around the concept that your time is the one thing you can't buy more of, and is therefore your most precious asset, you will not be able to successfully protect it from being stolen by useless scrotes--and useless people in general. A huge part of being HV is knowing your worth, and steadfastly refusing to squander it on undeserving LVM. Start by abstaining from time-wasting chats with internet men. You should be spending those valuable minutes at the gym, dining with friends, learning a language, walking your dog, etc. Anything but arguing with a man of all things...