Social Commentary

If you’ve ever struggled vainly to figure out how to get out of the friend zone, the following should be quite familiar.

“I really like you as a companion, and I don’t want to risk ruining our great friendship if we get involved.”

“I’m not really looking for a relationship right now… we should really just be buddies.”

“I just broke up with my boyfriend and I need to get back to being myself before being with somebody else.”

“I need some space to be alone right now… let’s just be friends.”

Have you ever heard any of the above from a girl you liked? (…most men have, at one point or another)

Or worse, were you ever friends with a girl you liked and never even made a move in the first place, out of fear of hearing the friends-speech?

Dominance is a touchy topic. It's positively loaded with cultural baggage - in the West, we're averse to both the idea of being dominant over others and of others being dominant over us. It has all kinds of ill-favored connotations that most would rather just avoid. I'm throwing all of that out today though and talking to you about how to be a dominant man, political correctness and sensitivity aside - and I'm going to teach you a lot of things you didn't know about dominance before today.

In the post on how to be an alpha male (without becoming a stereotype), we broke down the difference between what's generally thought of as "alpha" and what alpha actually is, and about the character of the nomad -- the man who's neither alpha, nor beta, nor any other role in a social hierarchy, but instead operates outside it entirely.

I've long noticed a failure to differentiate among "being alpha" and "being dominant" in those who discuss social dynamics. They're treated as one and the same -- if you're being alpha, you're dominant, and if you're being dominant, you're alpha.

But they aren't the same. Being alpha's about heading up your group.

Meanwhile, being dominant... that's about something else altogether. What that is -- that and the winner effect -- is what this article is all about.

I'm sitting at Washington-Dulles International Airport outside of Washington, DC, listening to the ticket lady bark orders at a crowd of passengers trying to board a plane to Denver.

"Seating Areas 1 and 2 only!" she shouts. "If you're Seating Area 3 or 4, feel free to have a seat and make yourself comfortable, there's no need to stand. If you're Seating Area 3 or 4 and traveling with someone else you may board, but if not please wait for me to call your Seating Area. Boarding Seating Areas 1 and 2! Areas 1 and 2 only!!"

It strikes me that this woman is a stickler for the rules. And, that her admonition is probably entirely directed at those who prefer to break the rules -- the ones who can't stand the rules.

And that made me think about how different people deal with rules differently.

Some people need rules, and define themselves by them. If you take away the rules, they become scared and confused. If they see or hear about people breaking the rules, they become angry and upset and work to get those people back in line. If you give them new rules to follow and explain why those rules are necessary, they're the fastest to adapt and learn to work within them and uphold them.

Other people can't tolerate rules at all, and try to break them whenever possible. These are the crazy, dynamic people who never are still, and this personality type probably defines the founders of a majority of businesses and governments and new branches of art and science out there -- and they're also the ones you see ending up in shouting matches trying to get their ways, or ending up in prison for going too far.

And then you've got people in the middle -- I'm one of those. I don't like the rules, and I'm happiest when the rules disappear, but I'm fine operating within them if I need to so long as I know I'm working toward a place where I can be free and do what I want to do. People like me also tend to be good at using one rule to break another, thereby getting our way but making it difficult for the rule makers who comprise the majority of society to argue with us, because hey, there was a conflict in the rules -- we just chose one of them instead of the other.

It's my belief that whether you play by the rules or not is a big determinant of the trajectory you take learning to get better with women, what's easy for you, what's hard, and where you eventually even want to get to.

So let's talk some about the rule makers and the rule breakers.

You know that feeling. There's this girl you've been chasing forever. You positively, absolutely, can't stop thinking about her. She's the most amazing woman in the world -- you're certain of it. There's never been another one like her.

Her laughter sounds like the delicate tinkling of the finest crystal.

Her voice sounds like the music of the heavens.

The sight of her sets your heart pounding a thousand beats per minute.

You know that if you could just get her, you'd be happy forever and you would never want anything else ever again. Maybe you're not even certain if you believe in marriage or soul mates or "The One" -- but maybe you'd make an exception to all of that for her.

You'd do anything for her.

Well, as you well know by now, I'm not the type to hold punches, sugarcoat things, or sell you fairytales wrapped in gumdrops. So, this isn't per se a post on how to finally get that girl you can't stop thinking about.

Instead, this is a post about how you can wrest back control of your heart, mind, and dating life -- and how you can get yourself to a place where you're truly happy bringing actual women of quality into your life, instead of sitting there pining away for a vision (built more from your ideas of an idealized version of a flawless her than on her her actual self) of That One Special Girl.

"It's odd that men feel they must protect women, since for the most part, they must be protected from men."

- Abigail Duniway

One of the true but uncomfortable facts of life is that men and women treat each other the same way they treat other resources -- food, money, shelter, possessions. "You are mine," goes the thinking, much of the time. Or, alternatively, "You should be mine."

You'll see this in women to some degree, both with guys they want as providers and with guys they want as friends (curiously, women don't seem as fixated on "keeping" men in the lover category), but where you'll really see it a lot is with men -- particularly, the kind of man who doesn't get the kind of success with women he needs to feel that women are an abundant resource.

That kind of man is what you might call a "white knight." And he sees it as his mission in life to "save" women he views as "damsels in distress" -- only to make them his, of course.

If you ask me, this "pretend heroism" is a particularly sleazy way to try and get girls.

I'll share a personal anecdote: while I was out of town a few months back, my girlfriend, in a stressful position then, took to confiding in people about, well, everything that could possibly bother her. And, of course, as often happens in relationships, one of the primary things she confided about was me.

As it were, one of the folks she confided to turned out to be a real white knight. He was a photographer on a shoot she did; while she modeled, she also talked. And she vented about me. And this noble, heroic man, he decided that my girlfriend needed to be "saved" from me.

"I have to be honest, while we were shooting photographs today, I felt something for you," he told her in an email message afterward. "I want to take care of you," he continued. "This guy, your boyfriend, he doesn't realize what he's got. Maybe because he's too young -- he doesn't know how to value a woman as amazing as you are. I would treat you so well," he told her. "I want to take care of you after you break up with your boyfriend."

Sigh... I go away for a few weeks, and this is what I get, huh? Here he comes to save the day.

About a day ago, we had a commentator on the post on how to become romantic who weighed in to let me know that it's silly to try and get better with people, and that most people have better things to do, and that in fact you really should just be yourself, and anyone who doesn't realize how awesome you are is simply intellectually stunted.

Where do people come up with this malarkey?

I know he represents a vanishingly small minority on this site -- and likely was just a passerby -- but this mentality represents the majority of the thought on the subject in mainstream society.

"Just be yourself. If people don't like you for who you are, who needs 'em?"

Quite likely one of the most counterproductive mindsets a man could possibly have. Anyway, I addressed that commentator's individual points pretty thoroughly in the comments section of that article itself, so I won't revisit it here, but I do want to talk about this mentality of "just be yourself" -- and why it's such terrible, terrible advice.

Women do some strange, confusing things.

Things like getting rude and angry with men who are treating them as well as they possibly can. Things like telling a man they're not wearing any underwear... and then walking away when he gets too excited. Things like saying "no" when they mean "yes," and "yes" when they mean "no."

So you'll be forgiven for thinking it must be impossible understanding women.

And to top it all off, most women don't even understand themselves. They can explain some of the simpler things they do, but if you start asking them why they (or other women) do the more complicated things they do, you get answers that are full of holes. They sound good on an pure emotional level, but take a moment to analyze the logic and you'll realize it doesn't hold water.

Women really honestly don't know why they do what they do. So how could you possibly know? But, in fact, learning to understand women actually isn't an impossible task. It's a lot easier than you might think, in fact... so long as you understand a few little things, first.