The Paradox About Women

One thing I think weird about, is that why universities don’t have a major dedicated for studying women? Women are such a complex subject there should’ve been some documentary and scientific approaches, curated by a single subject to be studied. And I am not talking about feminism, but female psychology, female biology and female capabilities.

Most women lack security.

From my personal experiences, most women seem to have security problems. And I would term this as more of a biological tendency than a mental one.

Plus biological issues directly affect a person’s psychological behaviors.

I would start from men.

Men don’t have security as well, and it is usually due to a few reasons. One, they are unloved. Two, they have financial troubles. Three, they have poor medical conditions.

But women generally don’t have problems like this, or to say, women don’t suffer as much insecurity as men do in these situations.

Women generally don’t feel a problem of being unloved. And usually financial troubles do not innately pertain to a woman’s psychological insecurity. Poor medical conditions impact somehow, but I would say their insecurity comes from a biological need of protection.

The theory can stem from the prototype of primitive society, where men hunt, and women gather resources.

Besides this, being biologically fragile compared to men, gives women an innate incentive to seek protection from outside world. And commonly, these needs for protection come from a few distinguishable physical possessions–wealth, power and athleticism. And such needs can be provided by men or not, it’s just historically and biologically men shoulder the burden.

What’s interesting about this topic is feminism.

The rise of feminism can see that women start to slowly gain control of money and power over the patriarchal system. And men cumulate these things from day zero. It’s interesting how the west functions like this, they put emphasis on money far over power. And money, has much more fluidity than power. 

Somehow, incidents during a woman’s life can have traumatic impacts if the woman was emotionally attached to them.

Let’s study the case of bad boys. To me, bad boys are portrayed as rebellious and condescending characters. But I think people forget the fact that how much security a woman can have, from her contact with a “bad boy”.

The rebellious trait gives women a sense of freedom from the social norms. And the condescending manner gives women a sense of authority.

Before delving deeper into this, we have to recognize the fact that women are inherently emotional. They don’t come from a factual basis, but an emotional basis.

So for a woman, whoever can give them a sense of security wins the role of her partner.

Before a woman enters adulthood, her sense of security mostly comes from her parents, specifically, her father. And a woman usually would map the image of her father to her future lover, because her father has been always providing security for the family, and ultimately herself.

The societal norm is fairly simple to see–alpha males take over a huge chunk of women because of their aggressive manners. Not because they are douchebags and women like douchebags, but because their aggressiveness gives them a sense of security most men can not offer.

So you see a lot of dating advice, and the most common one people would as a man to be is…. what? Confidence.

The reason is quite obvious right? Viola, your confidence gives your woman security that she doesn’t necessarily have.

It’s more of a biological thing than a mental thing.

All women want attention.

If this idea is reputed, I would say bullshit to everyone who disagrees.

When a woman is choosing her partner, her idea of a partner is somebody who gives a damn.

When a man is choosing his partner, his idea of a partner would be a debate over long term disadvantages and advantages.

This permeates the dating scene as how men bail out in the middle of a date, or women reject men who they don’t recognize with.

She wants the attention, a partner means attention. And if the attention flow is stopped, she’ll also stop loving back to you.

I once read this idea that:

Women desire being desired.

It can’t be truer. Female sexuality is the desire to be desired.

If you can not give them the attention they want, they will ditch you and move on.

That’s why sometimes dating scene can be very cheesy:

Imagine a stage where a woman is looking at multiple potential mates. Every man is trying their best to grab her attention. And they are constantly doing so. The ones who lose in the competition fade away, and the ones who prevail eventually get the girl.

Attention grabbing is never a part of rationality realm, as it has no intrinsic value behind it.

It’s more of a tactic, than a product.

So a lot of times women just fall for the fancy tactics men laid over well ahead for them.

Women are prone to lie.

Frankly, from my experiences, women have more incentives, and they do lie more than men.

Men usually don’t lie is because we don’t necessarily have the need to lie. We use lies to circumvent problems and protect ourselves.

Women lying, might attribute to the fact that their desire of reputation. It’s a matter of ego.

Women lie because they want to protect their egos.

Most times, unless a woman is already well established, she will lie for the sake of her reputation, and her ego.

Women are inherently emotional.

As I previously discussed, women are emotional beings, and this never changes.

The problem with emotionality, is that it’s never rational and logical.

Emotions can basically just come out of nowhere, and it is one of the reasons why women are hard to deal with.

Because emotions come and go, like wind, like storm. They emerge out of nowhere and disappear unseen.

When things come from an emotional basis, it’s hard to determine its essence being “right” or “wrong”.

Emotions arise when we map ourselves onto others. We feel as how others feel.

From what I observed, the intelligence of a woman is still based on her emotionality. Men’s intelligence is well rounded on rationality–intelligence is built from zero, to a well shaped form.

So when you stack rationality on top of emotionality, interesting things happen. One thing I would attribute, is women’s capability of utilizing rationality with emotionality so it produces positive feedback from the masses.

Historically speaking, great female personalties have this extremely unique trait that no man can ever achieve–benevolence. 

And I think it is somehow an innate trait of women, and if utilized well with rationality, such benevolence can benefit most people.

When men rule, it’s hard for them to back from the competition for more. And usually men lack a sense of sensibility to consider their actions’ effects for others, repercussions and consequences.

But if you look at the historical great figures of women, from Catherine the Great, to Elizabeth I, Wu Zetian, Joan of Arc…… And let’s not even forget Cleopatra, as she’s usually described as a scorpion beauty, but she utilized her beauty to achieve goals to protect her country.

This perfect balance between emotionality and rationality is what makes a great leader with infinite charisma that constantly gathers more followers.


In the end, it’s not hard to understand women, but hard to feel for them. As men never live inside women’s bodies and don’t think and feel like a woman.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.