<iframe src="https://archive.org/embed/keeping-a-woman" width="560" height="384" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen="true" mozallowfullscreen="true" allowfullscreen></iframe> Tell me this, why do you think some men feel the need to "keep" a woman? Why is this considered a necessity in their relationships? The wording here reveals deep fears and insecurities. I will use this video to educate on male psychology, a valuable lesson for those who can grasp it: Emotionally wounded men tend to view relationships as an endless attempt at damage control. For them, a relationship functions as a chore or some sort of operation they need to constantly get on top of so it doesn't slip through their fingers. A problem to solve that quickly turns into an unsolvable problem - because it never needed solving in the first place. One could argue that these are deep-set and unrealized trauma programs as well, so a vast contingent of western men are unaware of this shared collective wound. Imagine the amount of energy and willpower that goes into living like this. Self-deprecating and destructive would be an understatement. This is how men who are often removed from their natural masculine identity from an early age tend to conceptualize relationships - as inherently unhealthy, as something that needs fixing and repair and maintenance. The western man's biggest fear, in relation to women, is that their innately selfish and transactional nature will inevitably become exposed and mirrored back to them through the feminine channel. Why, you ask? Because that's the only area of life where they feel weak and truly disempowered, and not in control, and the only area of life where they cannot buy themselves into guarantee and security. It comes with the relationship - a man's need to be vulnerable, but this vulnerability also implies exposing one's fears, anxieties, insecurities and darkness to their partner of choice. It comes with the burden and responsibility of confessing to one's shortcomings and weaknesses - and to one's selfishness. But a selfish and exclusively self-serving mind ponders all social dynamics through a lens of vulnerability. It's always some sort of inherent paranoia or emotional posturing that comes into play. To the emotionally wounded man, it's all ego games and power play, at all times - no interaction is safe from this sentiment, everything is about social positioning and egoic self-preservation. Everything, including little micro-comments, micro-expressions - all of it becomes part of the competitive theatre. It is strange, among other things, for a man to constantly think like this - this is, at its core, a feminine way of viewing life, a feminine way of being, and a deeply feminine trait. Women tend to think like this, this has evolutionary benefits (of course), females tend to attach great importance to details men might often find trivial, and to the theoretical "what ifs" of life. But when a man behaves this way, "what if she leaves me" - women will flee from this like poison. They will not only intuitively sense this but will make sure that their man knows that they've sensed it - and this tends to make men with childhood wounds even more insecure in their imagined position. It is the single most unattractive thing a man can be in a woman's eyes - fearful of the world and its judgements, and fearful in the face of uncertainty. And if a man presents *her* as the face of that uncertainty, she will never invest into such a man emotionally, not truly - because he will have inadvertently given her all the power in the relationship - as the source of his greatest fears. She can never find safety, respect and admiration in the arms of a man that does not embody that safety, respect and admirable qualities. There is no fearlessness or bold indifference to danger (all masculine traits) in these behaviors, and it is exactly this kind of worldview that constitutes the western man's inability to command undying loyalty from a woman. Not all western men, of course, but a vast and growing majority. No matter how you spin it, how much demagoguery you use, how many impressionable women you momentarily sway through arguing points - what we are ultimately engaging in here is complaining. Women do not respond positively to complaining, or forcefulness, and neither do they respond well to raw logic and sense. They don't care about the validity of the argument. What they do care about is this: Women respond to the invisible and innate knowing of a man's presence, his potential to function as a moral and spiritual authority to her untamed nature. A man who complains about a woman's nature simply does not understand said nature. But a man who understands female nature knows that only through becoming the means through which she can transcend that nature - can he receive that undying loyalty that these men so deeply crave. But are also too afraid to admit to it. Afraid to make it part of their vulnerability. Afraid to make it their quest for self-improvement. Which would not only break the spell of their unattractiveness but would also genuinely work to make them better and stronger men. Men who can be relied on, respected, admired - and men worth following unconditionally through difficult times.