Background music for a better reading experience
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEua4dPfZbg
Between two persons, only the more powerful one is capable of unconditionally loving the weaker party; the vulnerable person's love toward the powerful person can only be conditional.
Men love women unconditionally, while women are only capable of loving men in a romantic sense with conditions. The only possible way a woman can love a man unconditionally is through maternal love.
Man's love
The problem is contingent on not only the way in which man craves to be loved, but likewise the way in which woman is capable of loving. Man desires a sacrificial love, sacrifice implies loyalty and connection. What men want from love, and what woman’s love amounts to is fundamentally irreconcilable. In matters of love (and not simply lust,) man is an optimistic egalitarian. He loves as he wishes to be loved. In matters of love, when man is young and oblivious to the ways of women, he is a true adherent of the golden rule: "treat others as you would like others to treat you".
The foolness of man’s nature lies in the belief that the loyalty quintessential to woman’s maternal instinct will be available within a romantic context. He believes rather naively, that as his mother loved him, his idealised girlfriend could. He remembers the love he got from his mother growing up and upon this concludes that women are capable of such great love. They are, but this great love is reserved solely for their children, not to man.
The anctient Greek differentiated between these types of love. They referred to romantic love as eros, after their god of love and fertility. They used the term storge to express the love between parents and their childs.
Man has an idealisation of women's love, not a realisation. During childhood, up until puberty, there's not much difference male and female siblings receive very pure, high quality love from their environment. Parental love extends to both of them, which with the onset of puberty, plays a cruel trick on the psychology of the boy. It gives him a template for woman's love that comes to expect as a standard of all women, making him derise something which is unattainable to him, unaware the love he desires is maternal in nature, unable to be felt for him. He is taught by his mother’s love that unconditional loyalty, noble character, gentleness, sacrifice and trust are intrinsic of the feminine essence. And so as he grows from a boy into a man he comes to the rather logical conclusion that if he is “a good man,” he can expect to be loved by his lover in much the same way. His mother, well-meant but quite incorrectly likewise affirms this notion to him. This is a wicked lie, but a man whose heart is yet to be broken does not realise this. He thinks woman’s love is immutable. He doesn't know that her love for child is different from that of her love for him.
At that point, he must re-evaluate his notion of woman's capacity of love.
He is ought to learn woman's love for her mate is of vastly reduced moral and psychological quality than that of her love for her child.
And so he continues to be wanting to be loved like when he was a child, not realising such love is reserved for children. Believing that the love he desires is romantic love, when truly is was maternal love. This dichotomy strucks him in puberty as he gets his first girlriend. Nothing lasts forever and as the inevitable breakup comes, he is faced with the fact that the unconditional loyalty inherent to the maternal bond is absent from the mating bond.
Of course, there are those who had narcissistic, detached, or otherwise unloving mothers. The mothers who always put on a good public face of being nothing other than wonderful, but due to an affliction of personal defect did not share the love intrinsic to the maternal bond with their son. Men who had mothers that never endowed them with the maternal bond find it easier to understand real female behaviour as adults. Men deprived of maternal love are better adapted for dealing with women as mates in adulthood.
The man who grew up as a neglected boy never foolishly believed that a girlfriend would love him as his mother would, he believed she would love him exactly as his mother did; with extreme conditionality. Rather perversely, the standard of which such a man holds women to romantically is more in line with their true nature. Unlike most men, he was not taught to expect a sacrificial love from women because he never experienced this love to begin with. His mother didn’t love him like a mother, but like a partner, ergo, he was loved for his utility rather than his essence. And so it stands to reason that man’s frame of reference for the quality of woman’s love is based upon how his mother loved him. A man whose mother did not love him like a child when he was a child is therefore, in adulthood, at a perverse advantage. He has no idealisation to shatter, because his expectations of women in relationships are realistic.
The more neglect you got from your mother as a child, the lower the bar was set for your expectation toward other women's love.
Vica versa, if you had a loving mother, the bar was set very high and you are bound to hit it.
Men are romantics pretending to be realists, women are realists pretending to be romantics.
There's a long standing myth in society that girls are the hopeless romantics. This couldn't be further from the truth. Throughout history, it were always men who moved mountains in order to attain the girl they set their eyes on. Just think of all the poets, writers, painters, musicians, athletes, conquerors and inventors who worked hard night and day on their feat with the sole purpose of impressing a lady. It's men who serenades, we are the hopeless romantics, not women.
Men believe that love matters for the sake of it.
Women love opportunistically.
Woman's love
Women are incapable of reciprocating man's love. There's a hierarchy of love that trickles down:
Man sacrifices for woman, and woman, for child.
Rarely does the river flow upward. As such, if man wants to believe that women can love the same extent as he, then he is doomed to disappointment and misery when she invariably acts within accordance of her nature rather than his idealisation.
The epitome of a woman’s love is infatuation. To define it, this is a lust for your power and an obsession with how your character makes her feel, secondary to your power. Woman crave men with power, since they themselves don't possess it. So to put it crudely: opportunism and emotional self-appeasement alchemised with lust is what woman's love is.
Man oft forgets that love does not flow upward in the sacrificial sense. He makes the mistake of thinking that because he can love a woman without lusting for her, that a woman can do the same. She cannot, because her love is not based on sacrifice, it is based on the appreciation of man’s sacrifice met with lust. The more man sacrifices for a woman, the more likely he is to fall in love with his investment.
The more a woman sacrifices for man absent of animal lust, the more repulsion she feels for him, interpreting her need for investment as a shortcoming on his part. And so there it is, unspoken in word but detected in sentiment; woman expects man to love her more than she loves him, reinforcing the hierarchy of love. Female sacrifice is predicated on lust and mental entrapment.
Male sacrifice is expected, and freely given.
A woman who does not lust for you cannot love you as you wish to be loved. Lust is the basis for her love, absent of lust you have "like" rather than "love." Women are masters of self-deception, in combination of being emotionally neurotic. If they were to become too self-aware, they could end up hating themselves because they cannot overcome their animal elements.
They can’t make themselves love you in the way you want them to, even if they tried to. To do so would ravage them with immeasurable misery. So as unfair as you may think it is that your girlfriend can never love you the same way your mother did, it is likewise unfair to expect her to do so if you wish her happiness. Women are what they are; your perception of them no matter what that might be will not change their fundamental nature. You can learn to accept them or reject them out out of the idea their conditional love isn't worth it for you.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEua4dPfZbg
Between two persons, only the more powerful one is capable of unconditionally loving the weaker party; the vulnerable person's love toward the powerful person can only be conditional.
Men love women unconditionally, while women are only capable of loving men in a romantic sense with conditions. The only possible way a woman can love a man unconditionally is through maternal love.
Man's love
The problem is contingent on not only the way in which man craves to be loved, but likewise the way in which woman is capable of loving. Man desires a sacrificial love, sacrifice implies loyalty and connection. What men want from love, and what woman’s love amounts to is fundamentally irreconcilable. In matters of love (and not simply lust,) man is an optimistic egalitarian. He loves as he wishes to be loved. In matters of love, when man is young and oblivious to the ways of women, he is a true adherent of the golden rule: "treat others as you would like others to treat you".
The foolness of man’s nature lies in the belief that the loyalty quintessential to woman’s maternal instinct will be available within a romantic context. He believes rather naively, that as his mother loved him, his idealised girlfriend could. He remembers the love he got from his mother growing up and upon this concludes that women are capable of such great love. They are, but this great love is reserved solely for their children, not to man.
The anctient Greek differentiated between these types of love. They referred to romantic love as eros, after their god of love and fertility. They used the term storge to express the love between parents and their childs.
Man has an idealisation of women's love, not a realisation. During childhood, up until puberty, there's not much difference male and female siblings receive very pure, high quality love from their environment. Parental love extends to both of them, which with the onset of puberty, plays a cruel trick on the psychology of the boy. It gives him a template for woman's love that comes to expect as a standard of all women, making him derise something which is unattainable to him, unaware the love he desires is maternal in nature, unable to be felt for him. He is taught by his mother’s love that unconditional loyalty, noble character, gentleness, sacrifice and trust are intrinsic of the feminine essence. And so as he grows from a boy into a man he comes to the rather logical conclusion that if he is “a good man,” he can expect to be loved by his lover in much the same way. His mother, well-meant but quite incorrectly likewise affirms this notion to him. This is a wicked lie, but a man whose heart is yet to be broken does not realise this. He thinks woman’s love is immutable. He doesn't know that her love for child is different from that of her love for him.
At that point, he must re-evaluate his notion of woman's capacity of love.
He is ought to learn woman's love for her mate is of vastly reduced moral and psychological quality than that of her love for her child.
And so he continues to be wanting to be loved like when he was a child, not realising such love is reserved for children. Believing that the love he desires is romantic love, when truly is was maternal love. This dichotomy strucks him in puberty as he gets his first girlriend. Nothing lasts forever and as the inevitable breakup comes, he is faced with the fact that the unconditional loyalty inherent to the maternal bond is absent from the mating bond.
Of course, there are those who had narcissistic, detached, or otherwise unloving mothers. The mothers who always put on a good public face of being nothing other than wonderful, but due to an affliction of personal defect did not share the love intrinsic to the maternal bond with their son. Men who had mothers that never endowed them with the maternal bond find it easier to understand real female behaviour as adults. Men deprived of maternal love are better adapted for dealing with women as mates in adulthood.
The man who grew up as a neglected boy never foolishly believed that a girlfriend would love him as his mother would, he believed she would love him exactly as his mother did; with extreme conditionality. Rather perversely, the standard of which such a man holds women to romantically is more in line with their true nature. Unlike most men, he was not taught to expect a sacrificial love from women because he never experienced this love to begin with. His mother didn’t love him like a mother, but like a partner, ergo, he was loved for his utility rather than his essence. And so it stands to reason that man’s frame of reference for the quality of woman’s love is based upon how his mother loved him. A man whose mother did not love him like a child when he was a child is therefore, in adulthood, at a perverse advantage. He has no idealisation to shatter, because his expectations of women in relationships are realistic.
The more neglect you got from your mother as a child, the lower the bar was set for your expectation toward other women's love.
Vica versa, if you had a loving mother, the bar was set very high and you are bound to hit it.
Men are romantics pretending to be realists, women are realists pretending to be romantics.
There's a long standing myth in society that girls are the hopeless romantics. This couldn't be further from the truth. Throughout history, it were always men who moved mountains in order to attain the girl they set their eyes on. Just think of all the poets, writers, painters, musicians, athletes, conquerors and inventors who worked hard night and day on their feat with the sole purpose of impressing a lady. It's men who serenades, we are the hopeless romantics, not women.
Men believe that love matters for the sake of it.
Women love opportunistically.
Woman's love
Women are incapable of reciprocating man's love. There's a hierarchy of love that trickles down:
Man sacrifices for woman, and woman, for child.
Rarely does the river flow upward. As such, if man wants to believe that women can love the same extent as he, then he is doomed to disappointment and misery when she invariably acts within accordance of her nature rather than his idealisation.
The epitome of a woman’s love is infatuation. To define it, this is a lust for your power and an obsession with how your character makes her feel, secondary to your power. Woman crave men with power, since they themselves don't possess it. So to put it crudely: opportunism and emotional self-appeasement alchemised with lust is what woman's love is.
Man oft forgets that love does not flow upward in the sacrificial sense. He makes the mistake of thinking that because he can love a woman without lusting for her, that a woman can do the same. She cannot, because her love is not based on sacrifice, it is based on the appreciation of man’s sacrifice met with lust. The more man sacrifices for a woman, the more likely he is to fall in love with his investment.
The more a woman sacrifices for man absent of animal lust, the more repulsion she feels for him, interpreting her need for investment as a shortcoming on his part. And so there it is, unspoken in word but detected in sentiment; woman expects man to love her more than she loves him, reinforcing the hierarchy of love. Female sacrifice is predicated on lust and mental entrapment.
Male sacrifice is expected, and freely given.
A woman who does not lust for you cannot love you as you wish to be loved. Lust is the basis for her love, absent of lust you have "like" rather than "love." Women are masters of self-deception, in combination of being emotionally neurotic. If they were to become too self-aware, they could end up hating themselves because they cannot overcome their animal elements.
They can’t make themselves love you in the way you want them to, even if they tried to. To do so would ravage them with immeasurable misery. So as unfair as you may think it is that your girlfriend can never love you the same way your mother did, it is likewise unfair to expect her to do so if you wish her happiness. Women are what they are; your perception of them no matter what that might be will not change their fundamental nature. You can learn to accept them or reject them out out of the idea their conditional love isn't worth it for you.
