Charm
Charm is a rare gift to win someone over without even snatching stars from the sky. In fact, everyone has this talent, but not everyone knows what it consists of and how to discover it in themselves.
The main components of charm:
• absolute acceptance of oneself, • self-confidence, • warmth, goodwill and friendliness towards others, • predominance of positive emotions, • energy.
Women who know how to get joy from the simplest things perfectly charge men with it. It is unlikely that anyone will remain indifferent to such people.
Femininity
But only femininity in the correct sense of the word! A skirt and manicure-makeup are not identical to this concept - they are just symbols. True femininity is within and, fortunately, most men realize this.
What a woman brings to the world and, in particular, to her man, is much more valued than even the most “feminine” wardrobe. In addition, femininity is often considered a sign of weakness. This is a big mistake. Vulnerability is unlikely to interest anyone.
So, femininity consists of:
• kindness, • tenderness, • care, • flexible psyche.
Demand
We are talking about the demand of a woman from other people. Even if she is not distinguished by any special talents or attractive appearance, competition only increases a man’s interest. However, you shouldn’t go too far here: flowers from a “secret admirer” or frequent communication on social networks can alert him, or even completely cool his feelings.
Knowing of limits
The woman you love should always be slightly in short supply - both in correspondence and in personal meetings. This will make the man even more drawn to her. Such a woman always has a lot to do, and she will not sit all day long thinking about her beloved.
And she is unlikely to agree to change her existing plans because of his unexpected call. It’s better for him to be bored without her than to be bored with her.
Respect
A woman’s self-respect is a trump card in a relationship. Such a woman will always be desirable and significant. If there are obvious signs of cooling in a relationship, a self-respecting woman will not try by all means to win them back - she will simply leave.
Any unworthy behavior of a partner must be stopped immediately - this is the only way to make a man respect himself and, as a result, fall in love with you. Naturally, no one has canceled a respectful attitude towards a partner either.
The absence of expectations and pretensions, true femininity, a sense of tact and proportion and, of course, self-esteem and a respectful attitude towards your loved one are valued one hundred percent by men in women.
Only a feeling of inner fullness that you want to share with others, and, first of all, with your man, will contribute to building strong and harmonious relationships.
Source
New in blogs
This is one of the most provocative and difficult chapters of my book to accept. But I am not afraid of accusations of chauvinism and misogyny, because I have long been known as such, I will risk encroaching on the myth of the “moral purity of women” and will express my thought directly and unambiguously: “ morality, as a personality characteristic, generally speaking, is not characteristic of a woman .”
I am well aware that this chapter will make most women furious and hysterical.
Here it is necessary to make a very important remark explaining the essence of my statement.
I do not believe that every woman is always immoral in her behavior, but I say that the very concept of morality is most often incomprehensible to her.
There are “moral” men, and there are immoral ones. And the woman does not understand the formulation of this problem AT ALL. She is excluded from this plane, she is OUTSIDE. Well, like a cat.
There are no moral or immoral women. Women exist OUTSIDE of morality, they are not subject to it.
What does the concept of morality primarily mean? The presence of conscience, firm concepts of good and evil, an internal desire for truth and justice, concern for the public good - categories whose super value is unconditionally accepted by a moral person.
We call the formalization of these qualities at the level of social, interpersonal connections and public attitudes morality.
Good and evil. For a woman, these categories are flattened to personal acceptance or rejection. By goodness, she often means restraint, non-aggression, ostentatious disposition, smiling, and helpfulness. In general, good is what is pleasant and beneficial. First of all, to the woman herself. Good “simply” does not exist for a woman.
Evil in her concept is the antipode of the above. So, a woman says: “You are evil” when she did not get what she wanted from a man; “I’m kind,” she thinks while lisping with the cat.
As for good and evil in general, you are unlikely to meet a woman who seriously comprehends these categories abstracted from a specific situation.
Simply put, well, she won’t rack her brains about whether her action is moral or not.
But here are the questions that she will definitely ask herself: - is this beneficial for me? - What will happen to me for this, won’t I lose, won’t I be punished? - how will this affect the relationships of other people towards me, first of all, those on whom I depend or need?
The very system of coordinates “moral-immoral” lies OUTSIDE the understanding and worldview of a woman, is perceived by a woman as something abstruse, artificial, superfluous.
But a woman knows how to PRESENT morality. Which, more often than not, she does, but only as long as it benefits her. A woman is a chameleon; she masterfully mimics when she is interested in achieving a goal, when it is beneficial.
What could this benefit be?
- attracting a potential man, formal compliance with his intuitive concept of what a woman should be; - a certain social status, ostentatious decency, “decency”; - direct self-interest; - the possibility of manipulation using categories, the deep meaning of which a woman does not accept;
A woman KNOWS the formal rules of morality and ethics of relationships with people (they are usually voiced when raising a girl by parents, school, and elders), but does not understand their meaning, essence and significance. Morality for a woman is the necessary “coloring” of the chameleon in CERTAIN CASES, a kind of formal ritual, the implementation of which she takes upon herself as necessary. But as soon as this attire ceases to be beneficial, the woman simply does what she needs.
Modern life, almost completely freed from the pressure on women of moral laws, confirms the COMPLETE ABSENCE of an internal moral core in women, as a structure underlying personality. Speaking about this, I do not blame women for this at all, they are who they are. But men should always remember this feature of women.
I go even further: and argue that morality INTERFERES with the main natural program of a woman, i.e., receiving and subordinating the resources of a man. It is for this reason that it is not reliably instilled in her: no matter what educational measures were taken in a woman’s childhood, if the game of morality is not beneficial to her, then the woman will not think about this topic. If there is no external moral influence from the level of society, family, laws, church, then we have a female who goes headlong to achieve her goals.
“Men came up with morality and also this... expediency - women would never have come up with this,” she says loudly, knowing that I am rushing after her.”
Zakhar Prilepin, “The Shadow of a Cloud on the Other Shore”
Nowadays it is often repeated that a woman is a social being, actually meaning by this the sociability of women and the ability to establish and build relationships with people. But these relationships usually do not rise above the level of mother, girlfriends, lover, husband, work colleagues, in other words, the “inner circle”, people in the woman’s sphere of direct interest. Morality in the female understanding, or rather its visual picture, the external side, serves precisely these relationships.
Conversely, male morality arose at the dawn of history as a means of universal intra- and intercommunity communication, serving the needs of the emerging diversified social production. To put it simply, people needed universal intangible values and general norms, rules of behavior accepted by the majority of people to facilitate production and trade relations, laws to approve the trustful coordination of joint actions. To kill a fellow tribesman for no reason is evil, to deceive a partner in a primitive business is evil, to take away someone else’s property or wife is evil. It was then that such concepts as reputation and business ethics arose.
It was then that religion arose as an institution for maintaining morality, while the formidable super-hierarch gods were accepted and revered as the main measure of people’s actions, their correctness or incorrectness.
Judeo-Christian civilization erected a pedestal for altruism and established service to the public interest as one of the highest virtues.
The progress of the human race was colossal: men, who came out of the caves and received moral standards that were universal for all, were able to create a prototype of separate (diversified) social production and trade, albeit still in the form of natural exchange of goods!
So-and-so was engaged in the manufacture of arrowheads and exchanged them for bread baked by so-and-so; one community or clan exchanged the fish they caught for skins obtained by their neighbors. Honesty in such transactions and the cooperation of men in “slaughtering the mammoth” formed the basis of the emerging moral norms. Man realized public (clan, clan, community) interest and developed laws to protect it, which became beneficial for everyone to observe together.
Male friendship, unnatural from the point of view of some modern psychologists, has an ancient and solid foundation in the form of male cooperation and mutual assistance between hunters and warriors.
The first inter-clan and inter-community military alliances appeared. Societies grew larger, adopting universal norms of behavior.
Of course, I am exaggerating greatly for the sake of clarity, I am not a historian, I do not indicate exactly when, where and how this happened, it is important for me to convey the essence, the principle itself: the institution of moral values should have appeared for the purposes of the public good, peaceful coexistence, industrial progress and family protection and private property .
Then the people came out of the caves... but the women did NOT come out of the caves . Their sphere of competence remained the home, family life, the birth and upbringing of offspring.
Social communications? Husband, children, neighbors in the “wigwams”. The means of these communications are the ability to understand the internal state of other people, psychological adjustment, cunning, manipulation, intrigue.
For women, their main life task remained the search, attraction and attachment of a strong and preying male, redistribution of resources within the family in favor of themselves and offspring, exchanging “love” and care for the man’s home for them. Men developed and complicated universal moral norms, being their creators, bearers and guardians, overthrowers, but for women, in essence, nothing has changed: the tasks are the same. Moreover, the morality inculcated by men came into conflict with the main biological task of women.
If you look at the history of Mankind and women from this angle, it will become absolutely clear that the formation and strengthening of civilizations was accompanied by the mandatory suppression and curbing of harmful and destructive female instincts. A woman, her very inner essence, contradicts moral norms, in particular, the Judeo-Christian Civilization. Our ancestors understood this very well and did not allow women to participate in the priesthood and judicial functions. What a pity that this wisdom, developed and carried through centuries and millennia of Human History, is so frivolously trampled upon!
"How so?" - the reader will ask me, “After all, we have been taught to perceive a woman as a standard of moral purity.” This is one of the most dangerous myths a young man faces in life.
Yes, a woman may well behave in accordance with moral principles, just as a cat does not always steal sour cream. Especially when I'm full.
Men themselves, alas, tend to invent a certain “moral purity” of a woman. And this, among other things, lies our craving for harmony: we try to endow a creature of angelic appearance with those personality traits that, according to our inner conviction, should be inherent in it. We subconsciously strive for perfection and completeness and speculatively “finish” a woman. At the same time, the possibility of objective perception and analysis of a woman’s qualities is blocked by sensuality and romanticization.
Most often, the painful, in our time almost inevitable, resolution of the conflict between reality and the fictional morality of a woman leads a man into a state of shock.
King Shlomo (Solomon) wrote three thousand years ago: “ I found one righteous man among a thousand, but among a thousand women I did not find one.”
(Ecclesiastes 7:1-29)
One way or another, even the smartest representatives of modern times guessed about the pressing animal essence of a woman, although they did not dare to announce their discovery loudly and decisively.
Andrei Prozorov, the hero of the play “Three Sisters” by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, admits with sadness:
“A wife is a wife. She is honest, decent, well, kind, but at the same time there is something in her that reduces her to a small, blind, sort of rough animal. In any case, she is not human."
Anton Pavlovich himself, in one of his letters to his friend and publisher Alexei Suvorin, writes:
“Women are most unsympathetic because of their injustice and the fact that justice, it seems, is not organically characteristic of them. Humanity instinctively kept them away from social activities; God willing, it will reach this point with its mind. In a peasant family, the man is smart, reasonable, fair, and God-fearing, but the woman—God forbid!”
Cesare Lombroso in his book “The Female Criminal and Prostitute”, to explain the immoral and criminal behavior of women, prefers to talk about “moral insanity”, as a kind of personality defect, illness, thus asserting in it exceptions to the rule. Poor Mr. Lombroso! In his naivety of his still romantic age, he assumed the immorality of women as isolated deviations from the norm, he conducted an outstanding study of the varieties of such deviations for his time, but he did not have the courage to suggest the simple idea that women are not characterized by morality as such.
To justify Lombroso, I admit that he did not demand so much from female morality, defining the “normal female type”, based on two qualities: maternal feeling and modesty.
I am certainly not a model of morality, although I have aspirations for this. And I will say with all frankness that such concepts as “honesty”, “passionarity”, “altruism”, “truth”, “friendship”, “mutual assistance”, “decency” are not an empty phrase for me, but the subject of my thoughts and constant internal work. So among women, their absolute majority, the very formulation of this task is absent - don’t get me wrong: this DOESN’T CARE or INTEREST them.
The story “I went on vacation” from the women's forum.
I returned from vacation three weeks ago. My friend and I were in Turkey in the city of Kemer. I heard so many stories about fiery and hot nights in this beautiful country, but I went with full confidence that this would not affect me, since I was married. I was happy for my friend that she could have a blast here!! We lay by the sea for two days and on the third day we decided to go shopping in the city. And there I met him!! Modest and speaks Russian very well. At first he gave me his business card like come again, but we chatted and chatted and in the end he said give me your phone number to the disco, let's go to the disco in the evening.) and I gave it!! And in general, away we go!! Dates, night walks, night cafes with Turkish cuisine and a lot of sex!!! Upon arrival home, we correspond every day, either just SMS or Facebook, we don’t see each other on Skype due to the time difference and it works up to 24 hours. I came home myself, but my soul remained there!! I dream about Türkiye almost every night! My husband knows almost everything, but his behavior simply amazed me, he didn’t do anything, didn’t yell... asked if I was divorcing him for now?? She said no and calmed down!! Indifference? And having arrived in my native Murmansk, I decided to go and live in Turkey!! Well, I don’t want to live in Russia and freeze my butt! My Turkish boy doesn’t know that I’m going to move, he only knows that I’m coming in September for three weeks, and I’m just going to resolve the issue of a residence permit, I want to open my own business there, Turkish is not a problem! Very scary!!! But there is only one life!! And no matter how my relationship with the Turkish guy turns out, I want to go to Turkey!! Sea Sun!!!
I read 700+ comments from women. The ladies wrote so much: ridicule, wishes of happiness, calls to come to their senses and accusations of stupidity.
But I did not find a single, I emphasize: NOT A SINGLE comment assessing her actions in the context of morality and decency.
NOT ONE comment condemning meanness towards the husband, and, possibly, children.
And NOT ONE woman condemned the whore and called the abomination an abomination.
Why was morality wrongly attributed to women? If you answer in one word - yes, they were punished more strictly. From childhood, a woman was given quite strict limits on behavior approved by her parents, society, and husband.
Strict parental upbringing, subsequent marriage with clearly defined responsibilities, the concept of which was instilled in childhood and supported by society and the church, strictly regulated a woman’s life. And society harshly punished draft dodgers; just remember Anna Karenina.
Just a hundred years ago, a woman who entered into an illicit premarital relationship, which became the property of society, was with a high probability simply deprived of her chances of a decent marriage and a favorable attitude from the “society.”
Adultery was condemned and punished quite significantly even a hundred years ago. I'm not talking about ancient times, when cheaters were simply thrown off a cliff onto rocks.
One way or another, patriarchal civilization had no illusions about a woman’s own inner virtue and relied on strict guidelines and regulation of her behavior.
Nowadays, most of the restraining factors have collapsed and we have what we have.
Feminists are very fond of calling past centuries “female slavery,” but just look at the women of our time to understand: our ancestors were absolutely right when they applied strict regulations on female behavior.
Do you, reader, personally know many women who would be tormented by remorse? Not by their ostentatious declaration, not by regret for the loss of a man, not by annoyance for missed material benefits and a damaged reputation, but by conscience.
Please note that the degradation of moral concepts and institutions of society is closely correlated with the process of matriarchal decay. A decent, normal person is now considered not to be the owner of strong moral principles, a developed mind, an honest, fair, sincere, seeking, kind person, but the owner of a thick purse, a consumer person, one whose motives are based on the desire to acquire and spend as much as possible . It was these traits that began to dominate in determining a person’s status in society and his position in the “table of ranks.” It is based on a woman’s worldview, pseudo-morality, which consists in the motto “take as much as possible and give nothing in return.” Matriarchal degradation is not only widespread lawlessness among women, but also an extremely dangerous loss of the moral guidelines of society.
What conclusion I want to offer men:
Never be deceived by the mystical decency of a woman, do not rely on her morality in exactly the same way as you do not rely on the decency of your neighbor’s cat or the monkey at the zoo. Know how to separate the window dressing of “demo mode” from a woman’s true motives. Think with your UPPER head and judge ONLY by your actions. Don’t invent your own fairy tale about “a woman’s decency” - it never existed and never exists.
D. Seleznev, 2012
What turns men off?
It would be reasonable to outline those “values” that scare men away; the action “from the opposite” will highlight the necessary qualities much more clearly.
Touchiness. If at the initial stage of dating, this can act as a stimulus to the desire to reveal all the facets of a woman, to understand her, then later chronic resentment will lead to the fact that an individual of the opposite sex will stop playing “What? Where? When I did something wrong” and will find a girl with adequate aspirations.
Frivolity. To a certain extent, it’s fun, but on the verge of irresponsibility and lack of any obligations, the thread of patience breaks...
Mismanagement. A woman should be able to provide minimal coziness and comfort, no specific requirements, but the lack of an “instinct for cleanliness of the surrounding space” is alarming even for the stronger sex.
Ungroomed. Brutality is what women value in men, but not vice versa. A woman should (first of all) shine and smell fragrant - this is how the Lord created her. For this reason, it is not appearance, but grooming that is the important quality that men value in women.
Omnipresent control. Without comment - when a lifelong investigation has been opened against you - only a few will be able to survive.
