Why Men and Women Pick Friends Differently | Jungian Sexuality | CS Joseph

Why Men and Women Pick Friends Differently | Jungian Sexuality | CS Joseph

 

Why Men and Women Pick Friends Differently. CS Joseph explores more Jungian Sexuality.

Transcript:

Hey what’s up ego, hackers. Welcome to the CS Joseph podcast. Today’s episode, we’re gonna be discussing how masculine on masculine versus feminine on feminine relationships, basically friendships, how they seem to work from a Pareto Principle perspective. Because we noticed that there is a bit of a pattern psychologically when it comes to how men and women organize their relationships from a compatibility versus a camaraderie point of view, among the 16 types, which is completely fascinating, also, potentially supports a very controversial viewpoint that I have in regards to relationships, and I stuck.

So from that perspective, it just lands into what we’ve been saying. And like a previous video talking about how, you know, our genes, our evolution, as human beings ends up having like some protections put into place based on some of our natures, which then lends itself to specific behaviors. And I ultimately find this utterly fascinating, quite fascinating. So we’re going to be doing a little deep dive on that.

But there goes the ash, I had a, I had a pretty good one there, but finally killed over. So anyway, the point is, camaraderie and compatibility end up becoming something that is a shadow of a phenomenon that’s happening between people and their friendships. When men are friends with other men, for example, they behave in a very affiliative manner. And this is this is regardless of their alpha or beta or whatever interpretation of the red pill, you may have sigma male who cares, it doesn’t matter, man, or man, or men in the way of man is ultimately the same when you put a bunch of men together in the same place.

And guess what? Well, women have a similar approach as well, when it comes to having other women in their lives, women that they have close relationships with. And the reality of the situation is, is that men being basically affiliative with their relationships, how that actually manifests like some examples. It’s like, you know, Hey, man, don’t break the bro code, you know, the bro code, the bromance, the bro ham, you know, broken out, you know, that whole, the whole dichotomy, that whole way of behavior that men have when they come together as a collective, towards a common goal. The red pill writers call this you know, women talk but men do, right, they do things together, they take action together.

That’s, that’s important, that’s very necessary to understand. Because at the end of the day, they’re all about doing the right thing to each other, or for each other. So one of the reasons why, you know, the 10th commandment out of the 10 commandments is Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife. It’s because the number one unspoken rule of the bro hand, the bro code or the bromance is never screw another man’s woman without his permission, basically, you know, and that’s a very affiliative concept.

Men who do not follow that rule. I mean, in ancient times, they were exiled, they’re executed, they’re murdered, you know, like, like, when men cheat, not very much happens. But when women cheat cities burn, basically, because, you know, there’s an aspect of vengeance when it comes, you know, from from a male point of view due to their masculine idealism. And they often take their masculine idealism with them when it comes to relationships with other men, as much as they take their masculine idealism with them anywhere they go.

Because men together are very affiliative. And they’re always it’s ultimately how teamwork regardless of their pragmatic or affiliative, you know, individually, but collectively, they’re ultimately affiliated. This is why you can have a group of 300 Dudes stand against a 20,000 man army and basically win or hold them back for long enough for all of the other allied city states of Greece to come together and fight at have, you know, fight, fight the enemy and unite and push back the Persians and repel the invaders from lands. All because 300 Spartans were affiliative, one day willing to sacrifice their lives and, quote, do the right thing for not only their own nation, but the other nation states, within, within Greece, essentially.

And they were ultimately successful, which is a really big deal. But it was, it was made possible because of how affiliative men aren’t. Women are a lot different women, however, come from the perspective that, you know, they’re very, they’re very pragmatic. This is one of the reasons why like, you know, when men look at life, they see life as this big pie, and they’re just trying to get their own slice, they’ll even help their brothers get their slice out of life.

That’s a very affiliative point of view. But when women look at life, and they see it as this big pie, and they each get their slice, they look at each other, it’s like, Well, why do you get that slice? Why is your slice better be your slice has, has more fruit in it, or it has a frosted flower on it? Why didn’t I get a frosted flower, you know, that kind of what makes you so special. Women are inherently pragmatic, they’re very pragmatic towards one another. And their relationships with each other are based ultimately, on pragmatism, they have this unique independence about them.

That’s why women suffer from things like competition, anxiety, they’re very afraid that other women would basically take what they have. And they should be afraid, because due to the pragmatism that women have, collectively, women oftentimes are unscrupulous about poaching the men from their fellow female friends, that happens all the time, it’s actually a very common phenomenon. And that’s an example of how pragmatism ends up working or working for women, when they come together collectively. This is one of the reasons why women choose or elect to talk instead of do because when women are doing and doing things together, they can’t really decide on who should be the leader, because in the affiliative, area of male space, male space can easily understand what the hierarchy is, who is the alpha, who’s not Who’s the strongest, who should be in charge.

And it’s just very instantly known who’s running the show as a result, but from a female perspective and female space, they don’t know. This is why when women come together, they often elect to talk, that’s why they have something called Stitch and bitch, basically, instead of doing because in order to do something, there would have to be some kind of hierarchy, they would have to decide, you know, who’s going to have the torch, and women have a hard time when they’re together to, you know, deciding who the leader is. And oftentimes, they pass the torch of leadership amongst one another, whereas men, the established leader is established. And that’s it.

That’s it. And it’s because women are pragmatic, they’re very independent when they are together, whereas men are very interdependent when they are together. And it’s always fascinating to see this workout. This is one of the reasons why like one of the biggest regrets of my life, even though it’s technically not mine to regret, per se, but it is ultimately an area of my life that I feel has been lacking, I never had the opportunity to have a brother.

And I wish I really, really wish I did have that opportunity, it’d be really nice to have that opportunity, you know, to like, go back in time to my childhood, and, you know, grow up with what it would have been like to have a brother or brothers to have some of that, you know, affiliative male space among my brothers and even take that, you know, into my adulthood, you could say that I’m definitely envious of Andrew Tate’s relationship that he has with his brother Tristan, that’s something I’ve always wanted my whole life. And I’ve never really actually been able to have that level of connection or male space affiliative within, you know, blood relatives, it just hasn’t happened with maybe the exception of my male cousins, Mike and Nick. 09:12 Probably, you know, if there is anyone in the world that I really consider my brother, who is a blood relative, that would definitely be my cousin Mike. He’s always treated me like a brother.

And he’s always been there for me. And that’s why I go out of my way to be there for him today, if he calls me I answered the phone. And that’s just how it is, you know, because he was there for me and my time of need. He also helped mentor me in a lot of areas.

And he made me better as a result. One of the reasons why I’m even able to actually be here today talking to you folks and doing this channel and whatnot, is literally because of my cousin Mike, for example. So at least he was able to take on that figure of being a brother to me. And you know, maybe I wouldn’t have ended up as a UD UF aka Graham, you know from that perspective, had I actually had a brother, you know, like, that’s certainly a possibility, you know, but But yeah, like, that’s just something I wish I had, you know, and men deep down crave this affiliative perspective, when it comes to, you know, male space, the problem is, is that society has gone out of its way to make sure that male space is not allowed to exist.

And the reason why is because we’re male space exists, masculinity will grow and where masculinity grows, then masculinity will ultimately challenge the system, and it could eventually lead to revolution, men will start to realize one of two things that they have nothing to lose, and then they’re willing to fight and put their lives down to change the system, or they’ll realize they have everything to lose, and there’ll be willing to lay down their lives and revolt and change the system, basically, but the elite are, and those who control the world would never allow that to happen, like ever. So based on that, they have to you know, they have to resort to other means, like, for example, in Washington state, it’s illegal to smoke tobacco inside, right? That is a direct assault on male space. And that is one way with which masculinity can be reduced. Just on that alone, I’m very thankful that the state that I live in, smoking tobacco inside is actually legal.

So you know, it’s so it just ends up, you know, being up to the bar owners were the owners, the bars, like Yeah, you could smoke or no, no smoking, etc, it leaves that up to the decision of the owners of the bars to make that decision. And it’s nice, you know, right after I film this, actually, I’m gonna be going to my favorite speakeasy or at sometimes film as well, and going to be enjoying myself at that bar, and I will be smoking cigars with my friends, you know, with our male space, at that bar, it’s gonna be it’s gonna be great. So, but that’s, again, that’s just that’s just one example, ultimately, but men ultimately crave that that male space because that affiliative nature, because it all it all goes down to like, you know, the family, you choose, versus the family, you inherit, and a lot of men out there, you know, they end up creating a brotherhood and that brotherhood becomes a family, ultimately, a masculine family, and it’s that masculine family that can challenge the system, it can win wars, it can survive in the trenches, when one of them is down, you know, the other guy can pick them up, you know, in a triple braided cord is not easily broken, according to King Solomon, as he was describing, you know, ultimately, the benefits of male space. In that passage, I think it’s Ecclesiastes chapter seven, or Ecclesiastes chapter nine, if I remember correctly, I could be wrong, I could be misquoting the citation there.

But it is in some of his writings in the Old Testament. So from that point of view, we have to understand, you know, these these male differences in these female differences, when it comes to how they manage their friends. So pragmatism rules, female space and the affiliative rules, male space ultimately. So understanding these two concepts is very necessary because then you’re able to actually look at another phenomenon that’s happening because male space is affiliative.

Because female space is pragmatic. And that is ultimately how men and women are different when it comes to choosing friends. Now, I was I was reading a book by Matthew Hussey recently, and a lot of people in the manosphere in the red pill groups absolutely hate Matthew Hussey Matthew Hussey is an INFJ. I wrote the book Getting the guy just finished reading it, had these in the discord community highly recommended to me, so I decided I’d read it.

And so I did. And I found it, I found it ultimately fascinating. But one of the things that he said in his book was that if you give like 10 women to a man, he’ll play but if you give 10 men to woman she will choose, you know, and this is extremely, extremely important, because what I realized as a result of reading this book is that that directly applies also to male on male friendships and female on female friendships, right? Because if you notice something, a huge difference between men and women. And it’s this, when men choose their friends, they value compatibility with their friends, more so than they valued camaraderie.

But with women being that they’re pragmatic, you know, they actually end up valuing camaraderie higher than they value compatibility. The reason why, and I suspect this is the reason why and I believe this is true, but probably gonna need a little bit more time in the field to verify but I play in plenty of time in the field already to verify but I mean, the jury could still be out So I’m just admitting it right now, but I don’t think so I really don’t think so i think i think this is the truth. That women, you know, like from a Pareto Principle perspective, 80% of their friends are typically, girlfriends who are high camaraderie them with 20% of them being compatible, whereas it’s the other way around with men, 80% of their friends are compatible with them, and only 20% of them have camaraderie, which is very, very fascinating. If you think about it, you know, like, you know, one could argue like, you know, from a New Testament perspective, where, you know, the apostle Peter basically claims that, you know, women are the, quote, weaker sex, etc.

Well, it would make sense under that context, because they have all these camaraderie based relationships with fellow women, and camaraderie exists, ultimately to serve as sources of personal growth. So it gives women the opportunity to personally grow and, and help facilitate their pragmatism when they are with each other between their girlfriends, they’re very, very pragmatic, oftentimes to the point of being so pragmatic, they’re actually willing to poach each other’s men off each other, sometimes even in secret, or in covertly and even sometimes on a rare basis, overtly, you know, from time to time. And that can be that can be a major issue. But ultimately, the camaraderie is there to help improve, you know, to help improve women, you know, whereas the affiliative is bringing about compatible relationships with men.

Why is this happening? It’s because men do not have their emotional needs met, and having compatibility amongst their male friends, allows men to actually have an opportunity to experience unconditional love, within the Brotherhood within this life, because men don’t experience unconditional love from women, they just don’t, they really don’t. It’s not about unconditional love. With women, they don’t, they don’t experience it, the one woman in their whole life that they could, and they have the highest opportunity of experiencing unconditional love is between their their mother and themselves. But the thing is, is that that’s not entirely true either.

Because even to this day, you know, most women out there have abortions. So, that’s not exactly an example of unconditional love towards their children, basically. So, you know, and also, you know, collectively as women enable each other, they enable each other to be more pragmatic and enable them to be empowered women and, you know, for empowerment, and the women’s movement and those types of things, right. Feminism, ultimately also known, you know, from a biblical perspective, as the spirit of Jezebel, the spirit of Jezebel, that the prophet Elijah basically annihilated.

So, it was kind of interesting, because Elijah’s ultimate purpose, according to the Prophet Malikai, is to turn the hearts of sons, their fathers, the hearts and fathers to their sons. So the prophet Elijah is the most anti feminist prophet of the Old Testament, basically, you know, from that perspective, and you can actually even see an example that playing out within the first and second chapter of the Book of Esther, were the advisors to King Xerxes who actually lost to kingly and itis and won’t be killed Lee Unitas technically but lost to the to the Greeks, and then ended up, you know, running a right way, like a little bit back to his Citadel in Susa in Persia, basically, when he failed US invasion, and then just basically was with his harem for the rest of his life, feeling empty and whatnot. But 18:43 from that perspective, you know, you can see how these men are, you know, complaining about feminism and complaining about the dangers of the spirit of Jezebel, ultimately, which is what Elijah was sent to ultimately destroyed, which is fascinating. And also, Elijah is only one of two people in the Bible that was actually spared from death, which is also fascinating, if you think about it, completely preserved.

Right. You know, I mean, even Jesus died. But Elijah didn’t, you know, Enoch didn’t, you know, so. So like, from from that perspective, like a lot of people just don’t even understand, you know, what, ultimately, that purpose was, and Elijah’s purpose was to destroy feminism.

That’s really what it was, you know, call me crazy for saying that, but that’s just reality. You know, it’s proven in first and second Kings. It’s also proven in Molokai as to ultimately what His purpose was because of how he was involved in the Jezebel incident and also turning the hearts of sons, their fathers and hearts of the fathers to the sons, I’m being repetitive so forgive me. So, from that perspective, we can move on and move forward from that.

The affiliative nature of men basically allows them to have causes them to desire compatible men in their life because through the brotherhood of the affiliative nature of the mature masculine and ultimately male space gives men the opportunity to experience unconditional love, through their relationships with each other. Unconditional Love is not really available to them, with women, and at most it could be there between their mothers. But even then, that’s a crapshoot, technically speaking, you know, it’s not it’s not a guaranteed outcome, but it can be a guaranteed outcome, more than likely outcome. When it comes to, you know, participating, the Brotherhood, women have a different perspective, women, it’s just not that way, you know, they’re not really exactly loyalty each other, they’re all very pragmatic to each other, they’re all very independent.

And this is all and if you notice, like, they don’t really allow very many pragmatic relationships, or very many compatible relationships with people in their lives. And what ends up happening is that you notice that women end up saving their most compatible relationship ultimately, as you know, between them and their man, you know, them and their lover them and their husband, them and the father of their children, basically, because just as Matthew Hussey said, his book, get the guy, he said, quote, you know, give 10 women to a man and he’ll play, but give 10 men to woman and she will choose, right, because women, ultimately, due to the fact that their beauty, and their fertility ends up expiring over time and decaying over time. And they have to work really hard to preserve their beauty as long as they can, throughout their life, they really only have time to really invest into really just one man at a time. Because if they try to have multiple men, then you know, technically their value goes down.

And that can be a problem. You know, ultimately, because high value, men are not going to commit to a woman with such a high body count, as we’ve discussed before on this channel. So that ends up being interesting. They, they, they, they do seek compatible relationships, but it’s really only in a deep sexual relationship that women are seeking us.

Now, that’s not to say that they don’t have compatible female friends. But when you actually look at their friends in large, and they’re not miss typing themselves, or not miss typing their friends, all of a sudden, they’ll realize, Wow, I actually do prefer camaraderie amongst my girlfriends, and save compatibility for that one deep, committed relationship that I have with a man ultimately, right. Whereas it’s kind of interesting when it comes to men and men seek out camaraderie or compatibility from each other, with not as much camaraderie and then also seek out they also the, they ended up seeking out, you know, also compatibility with a woman, you know, men, men can’t get enough compatibility basically. Now, I’ve, I’ve heard some women, you know, within the community talk about how well that’s just men, enabling men, et cetera.

And you know, while that can necessarily be the case, you have to understand is that without men enabling men without the mature masculine without male space, society would have never even existed without male space, male space is, is everything male space is entirely important. And this society is against male space, because everyone just assumes male space exists to destroy female space. But if you actually end up watching or participating in female space, you’ll see that it’s pure chaos, because every one of these women are trying to like, be the queen of her own little hill. And it’s like having too many chefs in a kitchen basically.

Whereas men, that’s not necessarily the case, there’s eventually always going to be an established hierarchy and established pecking order when it comes to when it comes to things, you know, because even women understand that just because you’re the queen bee today, doesn’t mean you’re gonna be the queen bee tomorrow, right? But with man, it’s different. It’s a that established pecking order can last a very long time. And they’re completely okay with it, because at least they’re getting their uncover potential unconditional love needs or emotional needs being met by their fellow men, because those emotional needs are not necessarily being met by the women in their life, no matter how compatible they are, right? With those women, it’s just so it’s just it’s just a fascinating phenomenon. If you think about it, it’s a really, really fascinating phenomenon.

Women prefer to have more camaraderie amongst fellow female friends. And men prefer to have more compatible relationships and friendships with men. And it’s, it’s unbelievable if you just see how life is structured this way. Now, here’s the kicker.

Here’s where it gets super controversial. Why? Why does this happen? Why is what is happening from an evolutionary point of view? What is happening, you know, to help facilitate the pro generation as well as the procreation of humanity as a species, why is this phenomenon happening. And I would state that the actual reason is is ultimately for reproduction, and for protecting the future and the longevity of the race itself. Because, if you think about it, with men being preferring compatible relationships, they enable each other, which means because of that enablement that they put among each other as they’re seeking, that higher level of potentially unconditional love, and deep rooted brotherhood relationships, the family you choose, not the family you inherit when it comes to fellow men, the risk is, is that because they’re enabling each other, those men may not actually challenge each other to grow, which means high value, men are an even more scarce resource by default, because of the enabling nature of male space.

Male space does not produce as many high value men, as potentially female space could potentially create high value women, that’s what the mature feminine was for, you know, the mature feminine doesn’t exist anymore, because the mature masculine barely exists nowadays. And that’s, and that’s a fact. That’s a fact. So what is the man to do? So based on that, we know that production of high value men is much lower.

And I guess that would make sense because, you know, there’s only you know, according to Rollo Tomassi, in his book, rational male volume five, the player’s handbook, within that book, he states is a very crazy statistic, that women will only initiate with only four and a half percent of men out there, they might be, you know, whereas with 20% of men, they’re just like, not just by default unattracted to those men, but then only there’s four and a half percent of the men out there that a woman would actually be willing to initiate with them herself, right, they find them that attractive that they’d be willing to initiate with on their own. Right. That’s, that’s, that’s very small number for high value men out there, four and a half percent, that’s extremely small. So less than one out of every 20 men out there is potentially a high value, man, that’s, that’s, that’s really low, that’s extremely low.

But I think one of the reasons for that is because male space, because men have this affiliative point of view, they’re not really male space does not necessarily actually produce high value men. So it’s really a high value man, like, because you know, As iron sharpens iron, so one man to another. So when you bring a lot of men together into like, one place, as it were, you know, they’ll ultimately become, you know, the average of the men that they are around. So that’s why a hot bunch of high value men need to like screen other men joining their group, so that those men can actually, you know, grow with each other, and not allow any lower value men in their group to kind of like cramp their style.

That’s where the whole saying Chris Hayes cramping, my style actually comes from, that’s where it comes from. 28:26 So So that ends up becoming an issue. But why? Why is this matter? Why is this happening? What is the conch the very controversial point of view that I’ve been able to extract as a result of knowing these dynamics when it comes to how women choose and structure their female friends versus how men shoes and structure their male friends men preferring compatibility among their male friends and women, preferring camaraderie among their female friends? Why does that matter? Well, again, reproduction because 100 men and one woman could not repopulate the earth, it can’t happen. But 100 women and one man can repopulate the earth.

Okay? This is why so the concept of Sister Wives in a polygynous situation and in polygynous relationships are there’s one man with multiple who has multiple sexual relationships with multiple women. And those women only have sexual relationships with just that one man. The fact that that man is able to have sexual compatibility with a bunch of women at the same time and even if those women are aware of each other or know each other those women who are potentially Sister Wives wouldn’t necessarily be evolutionary Lee okay with it because they already organized their female friends from a camaraderie point of view. Because if you think about it, if a man is sexually compatible with for example, eight women, affection and affection woman, a companion woman, A Natural Woman, an intrigue woman, a respect woman, a trust woman, a refinement woman, a kindred woman.

If he has relationships with all eight sexual compatibilities with eight different women, for example, they’re going to have high camaraderie with those functions. But women already organized their life when it comes to having girlfriends in general with having camaraderie, which means women are already pre programmed to facilitate polygynous relationships based on how our evolutionary psychology actually works. From a collective point of view. They’re already pre programmed psychologically, to allow for this with a high value, man, basically.

And as that high value man increases, his affiliate is with other high value men, and he ends up growing and growing them and they grow grow with each other within their bromance their bro ham, their brotherhood, he gets to enjoy a bunch of women who are potentially Sister Wives, but they don’t mind so much. And there’s not very much conflict because women already are used to choosing their girlfriends and potentially their sister wives based on camaraderie to begin with. And it’s already there. It’s already there.

It’s already built in. Fascinating perspective, if you think about it, it just goes to show that evolution backs up my point of view when it comes to polygynous relationships. You know, it doesn’t it doesn’t serve the feminist perspective of monogamy. And don’t get me wrong, folks.

monogamy is feminist. It is monogamy is feminist. And the reason why that is the case is because ultimately the elite does not want us making babies because the elite is Oh crap. If man all of a sudden realized that they could be having polygynous relationships, then the population would be getting out of control.

And then that would be really bad. Because if there’s one thing the elite does not want, they do not want people creating bloodlines, and having bloodlines that they’re willing to fight and die for in wars that could potentially take power away from the elite themselves. That’s literally why everything in our society in Western society is as toxic as it is. It’s why we have fluoride in our water.

It’s why it’s why, you know, pharmaceutical companies are not here to cure you. They are here to give you a bandaid and send you on your way. They’re here to ease your pain. And it’s why they push painkillers so much instead of actual cures.

That’s literally how it works. That’s why you can’t trust the white coats, you really can’t you have to do your own research, you’re better off looking at PubMed and trying to come up with your own conclusion, or hiring people like John Brison, for example, or Dr. Barbara Mack out of Seattle, or maybe Dr. Tammy Morelia instead of like, you know, you just you just really can’t trust the general white coats out there, you just can’t, you know, because they don’t even realize it.

But everyone’s kind of been brainwashed by the elite brainwashed by the matrix, and to defend the matrix because their ego investments are all based on the matrix, you know, and if you guys want to read an fantastic book about it, although it’s very Christian, Frank violas book, insurgent or insurgents, is a is a fantastic read, because it talks about how people’s ego investments often align with society because society has conditioned that to them to be this way. It is the matrix. Okay. So yeah, you know, if the elite had his way, they would never, ever, ever allow masculinity to take full form because if masculinity took full form, not only would there be a lot more babies, because with the mature masculine returning all of a sudden, when man to multiple women, relationships will be happening, and tire bloodlines would be exploding out of nowhere.

And those bloodlines would eventually become strong enough to challenge their power. Oh, sucks, really sucks. So they go out of our way to institutionalize monogamy and condition everyone in terms of monogamy in order to keep the population low so that there is no bloodline that would be big enough out there to actually challenge theirs and challenge their power. So welcome to how the world really actually works.

So yeah, me folks. Thanks for watching and listening. Hopefully you enjoyed this interesting perspective. I’ll see you guys tonight on the discord