men argue to make a point, women argue for the sake of argument.

He pointed out to her wha she was doing and she's like "I don't care I know it's wrong anyway cuz you're a fking idiot" or something then she gave him the silent treatment and he shut up...men argue to make a point, women argue for the sake of argument.

(Double Take) not you make your Mother shut up? is it because you are an adult why you do that? I wish I could pull off total detachment like that. I'd rather her talk and I shut up even if I can foresee the Danger.


Alchemist, your posts are showing lots of wisdom, seems as if your knowlege is being increased during your every day life.

That said, I also think it's good that you're reading these books to expand your awareness. However, too much focus on what you think is negative will bring you to a state of paranoia and take focus away from your own sense of power - which was exactly what the matrix society wanted you to do in the first place anyway.

Remember, they don't care what you're worried about, all they care is that you're worried.

Your own personal power is the goal of all this. What you are focusing on now is low level game. There are more truths to uncover, so read the stuff and move on.

I actually think Scarf is right. I've finished reading this book and I also think, that the knowledge in these books is meant to give person freedom to act as he pleases - To show him the illusions and set him free sooner or later, to act freely.

I didn't say that people should stay angry all their life *

@Resonance

this anger you have will pass, I have been there myelf....
I still get angry sometimes but not so often anymore and when I do it doesn't last for a long time.

just be glad that you know and won't be a tool for manipulations. And remember that the guy who wrote the book 'the great female con' is married and has a daughter. So the book is not about saying that you as a man is doomed or should not be with a woman.

this anger you have will pass, I have been there myself....
I still get angry sometimes but not so often anymore and when I do it doesn't last for a long time

just be glad that you know and won't be a tool for manipulations. And remember that the guy who wrote the book 'the great female con' is married and has a daughter. So the book is not about saying that you as a man is doomed or should not be with a woman.

I agree, Scarf was right in saying our waking up is meant to empower us, as you shift your focus towards establishing a strong foundation and one of self respect, you will be able to set relationships on your terms.

Like Resonance I too feel betrayed disgusted and disappointed myself having learned the true nature of women through this book and my own experience but that just empowers me and strenghtens my resolve not to fall for any of their bullshit.

Scarfy,

after you realize the truth and that you have been living in sociaty full of lies for so long (not you everyone) anger will be the first natural reaction. You can't just say:
sociaty has led me to beleive all these lies and put a on happy face....

anger is just a stage after that will come a period of other levels.

"...women promote competition with men, they have affairs very often, they time their liaison with their affair partners so that they are most likely to be impregnated by their affair partners...this leading to 10% of men having fathers different to the ones they think they have..."
David DeAngelo (2005)

I was part of a group that ran a study in a few counties in the UK doing DNA analysis on newborn children, for inherited genes, it was based around tracking certain hereditary conditions, whether they were passed more along the maternal or paternal gene lines. Quite interesting stuff.

The results did not match up, some things that should have been passed down the paternal line were missing from the children in some cases, these are conditions that ARE passed down, so it was odd that they were not. So a thorough investigation of the samples was started.

Anyway, one of the things that did come out of it was that around 32% of the children's DNA did not match that of the father who's DNA was given as the father. This ended up invalidating the study as it affected the results so much.

The samples were anonymised, ie no names or ages or stuff, but kept together in family groups (mother/father/child), at first we thought that some of the samples had been mixed up but it was such a percentage that there was doubt about that.

They re-ran the study a year later and came up with a similar figure then as well, after using much more rigourous conditions for collection and storage of samples.

Needless to say, that little result was not passed onto the parents. (or onto the authorities, though I believe that through other studies they are aware of it and have been for a LONG time)