WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.5K

I’m dating this girl and I’m sensing some things that aren’t lining up and I just don’t know if I feel like it really matters or not but.....

So specifically to the women poal users, if you start dating a guy and he asks about your sexual history, are you honest with him? Or do you downplay it like everyone seems to think on here?

I’m dating this girl and I’m sensing some things that aren’t lining up and I just don’t know if I feel like it really matters or not but..... So specifically to the women poal users, if you start dating a guy and he asks about your sexual history, are you honest with him? Or do you downplay it like everyone seems to think on here?

(post is archived)

[–] 4 pts (edited )

I'm not sure that is 100% true. I think it seems that way sometimes because young women have all the sexual power in the relationships and men have none. They bring their bodies to the relationship men bring the skills and resources, it's not an equal exchange.

As we get older the power dynamic flips.

Men and women have co-evolved to exploit each other and maximize their mating potential in an assymetric way. Cognitively, the survival strategy for women means they pay attention to a different set of data of the world around them from men. For example, women are very high in neuroticism and negative thoughts because they are always in physical danger and are primed to notice infinite detail about the world around them because they are wired to get their child to survive to about age 5 to 7 using only their wits, their minds and their political / emotional saavy.

Men have a different set of roles in a relationship and society and are primed to notice details at a different resolution than women because we have to go out and hunt food and kill our enemies and help raise our children after about the age of 7 or so.

I think women are hypersmart but in a very specific domain.

If you listen to women have conversations with guys like Alexander Grace and Richard Cooper, you will notice that even the highest tier women (most beautiful / most accomplished, highest sexual market value) have absolutely ZERO comprehension of how a man thinks. But, ask the same woman about things she is an expert in and she will destroy the average man cognitively.

I don't believe this is a lose lose proposition. I think we have to start to accept women for what they are: women. We co-evolved for survival, we simultaneously exploit each other and complement each other.

I heard the greatest line from Seinfeld on one of his cars and coffee shows. He had a female comedian in the car and she asked him would it matter if his wife lied to him or something like that. He said something I like a lot: "The only thing that matters in a relationship is whether or not both partners have the others best interest at heart."

Which really kind of sums up a lot. It allows for both people the full spectrum of collaborative / competitive behaviour while recognizing that in order for the relationship to survive both partners must share the same goal. The moment one person in the relationships focus is not the best well being of the other, it's done.

I can see what you are saying, but I think that boxes women into a caricature that doesn't describe them at the correct resolution.

Marriage will never be successful if a woman thinks she is equal to a man. Or vice versa. Equality is a lie made to weaken the traditional family. Men and women are different and cannot be equal. Women are envious of men's strength and intelligence. The fact that you wrote that long ass post proves that you think you are smart instead of accepting the limits of being a woman. No woman has ever scored 175 on an IQ test. Stop trying to be a man and enjoy being a woman. Be thankful that smart men exist and do your best to support them.

[–] 1 pt

you will notice that even the highest tier women (most beautiful / most accomplished, highest sexual market value) have absolutely ZERO comprehension of how a man thinks.

This is strikingly true. Feminists, in particular, assign motives to men that only make sense from a female perspective: "He's only doing that because [insert bewildering reason that would never occur to a man.] Women imagine that they understand men, but men know that they barely understand women.

[–] 2 pts (edited )

Just to add to this a couple of points:

  • I agree.

  • I think this is an excellent example of asymetric co-evolution. It isn't that women know what we don't and vice versa, it is closer to something along the lines of whay you said.

  • While I think in part this is a difference via evolutionary differentiation, it is also important to recognize when our women hand our arses to us when we overstep what we think we know about the world. There are a few women around here that have a far more sophisticated grasp on our evolutionary biology than a lot of us men.

By that I mean, that a lot of the difference in understanding has to do with the social roles that we play in society. Let's face it, all of civilization revolves around female reproductive organs and in a way women simply don't have to spend any time thinking about men. They can spend all of their time over-analyzing their half of civilization and it all works out because men just show up no matter what.

Or to paraphrase Richard Cooper, women don't care about your struggles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIZEACtHLMI

Only posting Richard because he summarizes the words of others into reasonable sound bites.

Which is why I like your feminist point. They screwed over women because they can spend all of their time running around in circles convincing them selves of bullshit because at the end of the day men make everything and men make everything run.

Only in the last 5 years are we really seeing the consequences of femal self delusion as they struggle to take on male roles in society according to feminist standards. All of the SJW stuff is basically feminists trying to run things and beta males letting them.

[–] 0 pt

There are a few women around here that have a far more sophisticated grasp on our evolutionary biology than a lot of us men.

Women have a hard-wired mastery of the politics of the small groups in which our ancestors evolved, and the tribal group is the focus of their attention. At its best, that can keep everyone nurtured and happy, but at its worst that can lead to manipulative behavior to which a man has no inbuilt cognitive defense. Leftist tactics are essentially feminine ones: name-calling, ostracizing, demonstrating.

Men evolved to deal with what is outside the group, which was not very much at first. Just predators to fight and prey to capture, but very rarely, other tribes. Men would range about over a wide area around the tribe, while women tended to keep to the center with the children. I think holidays are a big deal for women precisely for that last reason. They would get tired of the same old place, its resources exhausted, so it would become time for the tribe to move on to a fresh locus, an upheaval which required much organizing. Men, being mobile, had no compelling imperative to uproot.

Which is why I like your feminist point. They screwed over women because they can spend all of their time running around in circles convincing them selves of bullshit because at the end of the day men make everything and men make everything run.

As human numbers grew, the men who ranged outside the tribal center would encounter other tribes more and more, and so evolved peaceful ways to trade and de-escalate conflict through ritual, gift-giving, and eventually, linguistic means to communicate with the many groups in an area. To this day, small tribes in South America and South East Asia maintain rituals of greeting. There was a documentary on a South American tribe which had no such rituals, and they were pariahs, maintaining their distance from all.

It is this culture of dealing with the outsider, rather than the politics of the small tribe, which became the foundation of civilization. It was singular, while the small groups remained multiple, separate and eventually, embedded in the larger structure.

This structure of women on the inside and men on the outside remained until quite recently historically. It may have been universal literacy that burst this bubble, or more likely, universal employment in industry. The inner structure, of which women were master, shrunk down to single-generations of one family, but the outer structure, created by men, exploded in size and significance, through the stone-age kingdoms celebrated in Homer, to the large states we have in the present day. States operate on the basis of realpolitik, which is based on the male way of seeing things. There are historical examples of female rulers, but they tended to operate differently. Bargaining was less important to queens, and they were more warlike and driven to annihilate enemies (as a threat to their babies, maybe?) rather than come to a truce, a fact which contradicts the feminist equation of maleness and violence.

Only in the last 5 years are we really seeing the consequences of female self delusion as they struggle to take on male roles in society according to feminist standards.

I mentioned that leftist ideology and tactics were essentially feminine, and that the male viewpoint has a blind-spot in regard to dealing with these. Alinsky tactics are all just methods of rallying support and pestering an enemy into a state of confusion and acquiescence by attacking them where they have no rational defense. Collectivism is the politics of the small tribe writ large. It has profound emotional resonance, even if it maps extremely poorly on to reality. Victim groups are essentially the tribe's infants, so anyone who is seen to oppress them must be annihilated from the feminine point of view which has also been adopted by feminized males. Diversity and inclusion are also feminine values which are benevolent in the small tribal group, but a become pathological in a wider society where it is crucial to discern between allies and enemies.

All of the SJW stuff is basically feminists trying to run things and beta males letting them.

The original feminine inside-group has become a new and threatening outsider, against which civilization has as yet, very poor defenses because it attacks through the blind spots, does not recognize the evolved rules that worked so well to create that civilization and does not understand the value of what it is trying to destroy.

[–] 1 pt

I’m female and I agree with this.

I’m somewhere on the spectrum, which I believe makes me think more “manly” ... because I see chicks do this shit all the time and I literally don’t know where they get these ideas from! It doesn’t matter how smart they are either! It’s disgusting and utterly unavoidable. Women that don’t do it are few and far between. And when you do find them, there will be a trade off. Don’t expect a woman that doesn’t do it to remember your birthday ... ever.

Although I will say, as I get older, men do this shit as well ... maybe it’s because more men are becoming more feminine. Whatever it is, it’s even more infuriating. Talking a chick off the ledge is way easier than talking a pussified man off the edge. I depend on men NOT to act like women. When they do they look CRAZY!