Re: the novel experience of female/normie oppositional defiance

I’ve been noticing an interesting oppositional-defiant phenomenon, specifically in my sisters, as my social influence increases in my family. To set the stage–I’m accustomed to using de facto coercion because reason is a luxury (i.e. peacocking at best and a nonfunctional cost most of the time). Maybe this is from being, historically, an Omega male (who got out of the ghetto and is now somewhere between Delta and Beta).

This oppositional defiance primarily manifests in small things, like checkers or putting furniture in the back of a van. I gave one sister advice in a game of checkers that amounted to “You only have three possible moves, this one gives your opponent a double-jump, and this one is the better of the two remaining.” She thought for a moment and did the move that gave her opponent the double-jump. Then when she got double-jumped, she looked shocked.

This sister is the nice one with the high GFP and is, statistically speaking, literally the only 28-year-old virgin left in the world. She’s a walking archetype of the old “nice Christian girl” that used to be a thing in this country. Still, she was transparently attempting to defy all logic and reality in order to feel like she’s not submitting to male advice.

On the one hand I sort of admire her ability to play the meta game of life at the expense of a meaningless game of checkers. She’s using the game of checkers to get empirical information about the world, even if it means losing. I’m not sure what the information is–maybe it’s my reaction, maybe she’s testing the limits of positive psychology—but it’s obviously more important than checkers. I’m masculine-brained, so making a logical mistake on purpose in order to lose a battle in order to win a war is hard for me.

(On the other hand, I’m not very impressed with her sense, in this particular case, that there was some other possible outcome that needed to be tested for. That indicates she hasn’t run this simulation before in 28 years of being alive.)

Anyway, another example is my older sister who’s more of a fast life history strategist who grew up in a fundamentalist evangelical home. Obviously she didn’t like it, but a lot of it stuck, so her religion is now a weird mashup of Christianity, feminism, and the perennial philosophy (H/T MM). She didn’t get all the way from her K-nurture to her R-nature but she made some headway. We were putting some things in a van and, being Mr. Male Brain, I skipped to the end and explained how they would have to fit. She tried every other way first, naturally. She then considered taking two trips, and I got to watch it slowly dawn on her that we couldn’t do two trips. We would have to do it my way.

In both cases I got a very specific sort of credit where now I’m “good at X type of things” which makes me a sort of specialized authority figure for X. Maybe they see it as reality doing the coercion bit for me like a servant, so now I’m more of a “big man” in their eyes than before. So I would no longer need to use coercion to get the one sister to do the right checkers move. But it doesn’t generalize (yet). Clearly this would be easier than shouting and throwing a hissy fit each time. Which I’ve observed is, effectively, the standard Alpha method (see e.g. Trump). I think you have to enjoy it to live your entire life that way 24/7.

This phenomenon generalizes to normies. I’ve been able to get this sort of specialized respect from every type of person except Qvangelicals, who appear to be immune to bad predictions, possibly as a matter of religiosity and selection bias. No number of lost bets suffices, in my experience, to convince a Q-tard that their map of reality needs a reboot. To their credit, they usually pay out when they lose. That’s probably due to the religious fundamentalism.

Anyway, I suppose the shit-testing I described before is a compliment. It’s an empirical reality-check comparing their feelings to my judgment by the metric of which is a more trustworthy guide. I can respect judging the trustworthiness of something before putting trust in it. That’s just good sense. I’ve been told that women (and therefore normies generally) tend to be cagey about things they might get emotional about because they’ve spent their entire lives getting jerked around and, in the worse cases, taken advantage of. Trusting people is a hard emotional decision. And should be.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Re: the novel experience of female/normie oppositional defiance

  1. Pingback: Owl convo re: personality archetypes based on big data | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s