Tuesday, August 24th, 2010
You're at Gary James Blogs
Someone has discovered that there is a very specific Starting Point where all relationships connect, begin, and end. Over thirty years of research went into discovering an existing Law of Nature (similar to gravity), only this law applies to human relationships and it's now known as The Mammalian Way.
So if you desire to have a wonderful relationship(s) with lots of happiness, and little if any pain, then first you need to read The Mammalian Way. It will improve your ability to have a a happy fulfilling love life.
Because of his dedication to finding the TRUTH of why so many relationships fail, and his continuous efforts in creating and perfecting this theory, I am a survivor today. Mr. James' unique understanding of both Men and Women has finally brought to light the deepest nature of how human (mammalian) relationships work.
Once you read The Mammalian Way, I guarantee that you will come to have a clearer, more precise understanding of who you are as a Man/Woman and how your very nature plays the biggest role in every relationship you've had, or will have.
Become a relationship survivor with me, and get your own copy of The Mammalian Way. You can have more Happiness, with far less Pain, and understand how to keep your relationship on track by following this simple Law of Nature.
Copyright (C) Gary James - 2010 all rights reserved
Friday, March 26th, 2010
You're at www.garyjamesblogs.com
OK, Big Ben Rothliesberger is the youngest NFL quarterback to win a super bowl. In fact he's has two Super Bowl rings. But amongst 20 year old women, who do you think they are most apt to recognize, Ben Rothliesberger or this other guy?
And this is a perfect example of how "The Mammalian Way" instincts influence human behavior. Rothliesberger has learned a little bit about the swager of an Alpha male. and he is considered so because 1) He's a successful jock and 2) All the other men who surround Ben see him as an Alpha male. These facts and others like it are what lull men into a "Perversions of honor" mind set. Meanwhile, I doubt that any of the women in the Atlanta club the night Ben Rothliesberger was accused of sexual assult (for the second time) by a 20 year old woman knew who he was.
What men do not get yet is the rules that constitute "The Mammalian Way" is not up for debate. It is a law of nature the same as Gravity. The number one rule is…WOMEN PICK MEN FOR SEX…MEN DO NOT PICK WOMEN. And that also goes for who is an alpha male. That is, if she does not see you as an alpha male worthy of sex with her it does not matter who YOU think you are….YOU ain't crap!
On the other hand, if the other guy (Robert Pattinson star of the Twilight Saga) would have walked into the Atlanta club behind Rothliesberger that night I would bet mortgage money that in less than a minute the 20 year old women would have recognized him…In less than five minutes Pattinson would have been surrounded by women like bees to honey.
Ben Rothliesberger has been bitten in the balls twice now because he either does not know or chooses to ignore the powerful influence "The Mammalian Way" instincts have over the social behavior between men & women…especially where sex can become a factor. And just like gravity, if you violate a law of nature you will usually pay the price even if you don't know the law exists. Ben (and millions of men like him) face many issues with women and they desperately need to read my book. In short order it can teach men how to treat women with the dignity they deserve without the risk of women seeing you as a clueless, classless, ass…or a whuss!
And when that happens men do not have to worry about how to meet women. Treat them right and women WILL pick you. That's "The mammalian Way". It's the unwritten communication between men & women…But that's another blog
I do not encourage comments here. If you wish to communicate with me try email, email@example.com I am the only one who reads mail sent there. I will answer back
copyright (C) Gary James 2010 all rights reserved.
Saturday, March 13th, 2010
You are at www.garyjamesblogs.com
In the process of reading their work I discovered the professional sexologists confirm and validate the theory known as, “The Mammalian Way”…. It’s a theory, a book & a curriculum that teaches men and women how to obtain what each of them in the relationship truly desrie from the same relationship especially if you’re the type who “wants it all”… So,
photo courtesy of Ryan McGinley
Sexologist Meredith Chivers
“WHAT DOES A WOMAN WANT”? SEXOLOGIST MEREDITH CHIVERS, LISA DIAMOND, AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS STILL STRUGGLE WITH SIGMUND FREUD’S PROVERBIAL QUESTION: From an article by Daniel Bergner, author of the book, “The Other Side of Desire”.
It’s a journey and for Meredith Chivers a sexologist and well respected social scientist, Freud’s question, “What do women want” prevails in her life’s research because within the world of relationship issues where sex can become a factor, Chivers admits she still struggles to make sense of the data she collects with respect to women’s actual responses to sexual stimuli vs how women say they respond.
One report I read about her work seems to indicate Ms Chiver’s data supports the notion that regardless of what women say, and since there is a tendency for women to become wet between the legs whether they view sexual encounters between women & men, men & men, or women & women, that Ms Chiver’s therefore concludes, “all women have homo-sexual tendencies”.
Of course such a ridiculous statement only adds to the confusion about what women want and it does not come from Meredith Chivers or her peers. It’s merely journalists doing what they do best, that is, to report facts completely out of context with the truth.
What Chivers data actually turned up was that women regardless of what they predicted about how they would feel (behave) had a tendency to be aroused (as opposed to desire) by the connections depicted (perceived) between an amalgamation of two people in various visual images that were shown to women participating in Chiver’s study.
Be that as it may, still, as a professional Social Theorist I can understand the confusion journalists, sexologists, and plenty of other social scientists have with regard to what Ms Chivers along with a number of her colleagues have discovered. That is, women can be physiologically aroused by any number of stimuli (not just sexual) where a connection between two people seems to convey some sense of warmth (security) that reaches deep down into a woman’s physiological self and touches her insatiable need for safety.
However, such an arousal does not necessarily point to her true desire, let alone her true sexual desire. (such as homo sexual tendencies despite saying she is straight)
The story I read about Chiver's study was also used as a basis for the Daniel Bergner article I found in the New York Times magazine, where Bergner is a contributing writer.
Meanwhile, Chivers uses a device called a plethysmograph that attaches to the genitals and measures men’s erection and blood flow as well as a device that measures a woman’s secretions and blood flow. Chivers collects the data and then weighs the actual responses of the participants, against the subjective opinions from the same people who type their response on a key pad. The stimuli used to induce responses are various visuals of sexual content.
The overall results of the study:
For men, the results were painfully (and for me & my research as well) predictably standard. Men’s minds were in agreement with their genitals. Men actually got an erection when they typed that they got an erection on the keypad (subjective).
However, with the women, “mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad weren’t in much accord”. In other words the women reported (subjectively) less excitement than their vaginas indicated;
To which I say No kidding. No offense to my colleagues or the journalists but anyone who has even a modicum of understanding of my theory and book titled, “The mammalian Way” could tell you the responses that were recorded in the study are the typical responses to expect from each gender to produce, so long as we live in an imperfectly safe world. (See the book, “The mammalian Way” for further explanation)
Accordingly, it’s also nice to see that the academic world’s findings also hold the tenets of my theory to be true and accurate. Meanwhile, the Daniel Bergner interview of Meredith Chivers and others in her league such as Lisa Diamond, have once again validated much of my theory and frankly I am glad because it also gives me a number of recent studies to refer my readers to as a cross reference for further understanding of how “The Mammalian Way” operates and exercises great influence over even moment to moment decisions humans make in dealing with daily relationship issues, especially where sex can become a factor.
Out of sheer professional interest I suggest the following consideration with great respect for the challenges my colleagues face. The issue Chivers et. al. seem to face is,…While in the process of comparing arousal & desire in order to obtain predictable patterns of behavior, they all seem to have thus far completely failed to factor into their body of work (and studies) the other instinctive factors that often dramatically affect social-sexual behavior in addition to sex or sexual content. There are a number of instinctive needs to consider but the two that can be most volatile for social-sexual behavior are safety for women and honor for men.
Or, to put it plainly, women’s innate need for safety and men’s innate need for honor greatly influence and at times even control sexual arousal and desire in a human being far more often and intensely than do mere visual cues of various types of sexual content. (Reference the book, "The Mammalian Way" for further understanding)
Lisa Diamond bottom line:
Similarly, Sexologist Lisa Diamond conducts studies similar to Chivers. Diamond’s conclusions concur with Chivers for the most part. However, it is interesting to note that during Bergner’s research for his book and the article I found in NY Times magazine that lead me to Chivers, Diamond, et al., at one point in Bergner’s interview with Diamond, in an effort to exemplify the physiological issues that Diamond believes still exist between men and women she showed Bergner “a photograph of two control panels, one representing the workings of male desire, the second, female, the first with only a simple on-off switch, the second with countless knobs”. If either of Chivers. Diamond, Bergner or the others of the group of professionals, were to read my theory chronicled in the book, “The Mammalian Way” where I describe men’s sex drive as, “SWITHED ON WHEN THEY WAKE AND AT FULL INTENSITY AND THEN OFF AGAIN WHEN MEN ARE ASLEEP (MAYBE)”, they could see there is no in between for men’s innate sex drive and this fact is the major reason why men are able to consistently view women as sex objects first and remain focused on behavior that is predictably the same during the studies conducted by Chivers, et al.
As for women’s “countless knobs” attached to their sex drive my theory sets forth that, “UNLIKE MEN, WOMEN ARE ABLE TO DIAL DOWN THE INTENSITY OF THEIR SEX DRIVE OR DIAL IT UP TO FULL INTENSITY OR PLACE IT ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN, AND KEEP IT AT HER OWN DESIRED INTENSITY INDEFINITELY”. This fact I also theorize is because just like other female mammals, Women instinctively pick men for sex men do not pick women and this inequality alone could therefore make it necessary for the genders to possess the precise sex drives they do, calibrated such the way they have been described in the Chivers, Diamond, et al. studies (as prime examples) that humans receive as part of a gender specific package of instincts given them at birth.
This I realize places "The Mammalian Way" theory squarely in the face of decades of accepted presumptions in the social sciences, one of which is that men and women's sex drives are basically the same. That notion could not be further from the truth.
Meanwhile, since women instinctively pick men for sex, a woman only needs to dial the intensity of her sex drive up when she is ready for sex, and men must have their sex drive on at full intensity all of the time when they are awake because they need to be ready for when they are signaled that she’s ready for sex. This is but one example of how “The Mammalian Way” instincts actually operate within the human species.
And once again my findings have been validated by the works of several colleagues’ third party study conclusions.
Conclusions that until my theory hit the streets are/were somewhat of an enigma for many social scientists, psychiatrists, etc. And this includes the late Sigmund Freud. My theory provides the world of social science with a more complete paradigm of “behavioral psychology-sociology” that helps to provide better care and understanding of our physiological and psychological selves such as, "What Women Want"! But that’s another blog…….
The importance of why you need to know the tenets of "The Mammalian Way" is embodied in the theory, the book, and curriculum by the same name. Learn to have more control over yourself & your relationships and achieve much more pleasure and far less pain in your quality of life. That's a given… Best to you…..Gary James…..
I do not encourage comments or questions on this blog. However, if you wish to contact me direct, you can email me at firstname.lastname@example.org I am the only one who reads mail sent to that location so privacy and your anonymity is far less an issue.
© Copyright Gary James 2010 all rights reserved.
Thursday, February 25th, 2010
You’re at www.garyjamesblogs.com
….Tiger Woods is a phenomenon. And he is about to become a “larger than life” persona of what it means to be a man of means. Meanwhile, it’s the women who would love to see Tiger’s testicles tied to a golf Tee…..
“HEY EVERYBODY, HAVE YOU HEARD THAT THING ABOUT TIGER WOODS YET”?
And then, on top of the scuttle butt, Tiger Woods decided to display a vulgar use of his power by standing in front of a camera to make a national apology. Apologize to whom?
His sponsors? It’s not necessary. Tiger’s sponsors know very well that the sport where he’s a super star appeals mostly to men and in case you’re wondering, men could give a flying “fc’k” that Tiger Woods has relationship issues because he has had sex with 20 plus girlfriends despite the fact he also has a wife and kids.
The fact is, Tiger’s sponsors and the men who follow golf simply want his a@@ back on the course because he’s the best thing to happen to the game of golf since they invented the 19th hole. And as soon as he gets back on the course and gets through the media frenzy that will be a part of the show everyone (which includes his detractors) will see for themselves, Tiger Woods is a phenomenon. And relationship issues or not, he is about to become a “larger than life” persona of what it means to be a man of means.
Meanwhile, it’s the women who would love to see Tiger’s testicles tied to a golf Tee. And then let every duffer in sight take a swing. However, as for apologizing to the women, the cold reality is, since I seriously doubt anyone can produce an appreciable amount of women who have NOT been cheated on, the women in our culture therefore, know very well that all women can do in a situation like dealing with a Cad is to sue for money….and that’s assuming she has genuine cause to seek remedy. (Having consensual sex with a superstar is not necessarily such a cause).
The only thing that has happened thus far is that Tiger Woods has shown his true stripes, and that’s it….And this includes the fact he has now rammed the point home by standing in front of a TV camera and make spew. Tiger Woods as a man is a “Cad”….a squeaky clean p*@@y hound who got caught with his hand deep inside the honey jar who is also currently in the state of denial about what everybody else seems to know.
However, as for Tiger’s children let’s be thankful they are being protected from the plethora of reports published about “what daddy did”. They seem young enough that barring some other sinister element revealed,… this whole thing will blow over by the time they reach puberty, the age where they could have the capacity to relate to “what daddy did” all on their own.
Elin, on the other hand, was perhaps blindsided by this saga in that Tiger was involved in not just an affair but a juggernaut of self indulgence deliberately perpetrated by Tiger’s own hand… and it would take the power & prowess of someone the caliber of Hugh Hefner to match.
Anyone with the slightest understanding of “how things actually work” on planet earth knows and even expects such behavior from men of power such as a Hugh Hefner or even a Bill Clinton. NO.
What caught Elin off guard is the fact that Tiger was the rare phenomenon who calculatedly was set upon high as an image as though it were priceless. (Anyone who knows good business knows that such an image is usually an illusion and not to be trusted. Whoever put money into Tiger Wood’s career based upon such an illusion and lost money because of his antics with women deserves to have lost money.)
To be fair, that error in judgment is perhaps one of only two real issues I can find to come out of all the reports on Tiger Woods antics with women. The second issue is the fact I doubt that Tiger or any of his close advisors have read my book, “The Mammalian way”.
This is something that if Tiger OR Elin had done as they were growing up or before they got married could have given them the insight into men & women that would have helped them handle Tiger’s monstrous mammalian urges to pervert his honor and to dispense with those perversions on their own terms and without the need to get caught as an adulterer or other such relationships issues…as well as, handle Elin’s extreme sense of insecurity that could account for why all she’s got to show for life with Tiger thus far is a couple kids and a “hole” lot of money.
I do not know Tiger Woods. If you do and could get this blog post in front of him he could surely use the help. I realize what I say here is presumptuous. However, quite a number of people who have already read my book or use my curriculum has mentioned to me, that people like John Edwards, Mark Sanford, Tiger Woods, OR their wives OR mistresses, etc. REALLY, REALLY need to read my book. If so, they would likely not be in the crap pile they ended up in. But that’s another blog…..
I have written new, original, and useful material for the social sciences. Within that material are answers that can help you in all of your relationships. Remember: You cannot escape “The Mammalian Way”. You deal with it moment to moment everyday of your lives. It doesn’t judge. It can help or hurt you and it is not forgiving when you make errors in judgment especially if you do not know what “The Mammalian Way” means……
I do not encourage comments here. If you wish to contact me direct try email@example.com or simply search engine my name.
Gary James – Professional Social Theorist
© Copyright Gary James 2010 all rights reserved
Monday, January 11th, 2010
You’re at www.garyjamesblogs.com
Since I began to promote my book titled, “The mammalian Way” I have been asked for advice on just about every category of personal relationships, from dating to divorce as it were. Even though I can give a reasonable answer to most questions based on my experience as a social science researcher, the fact is, I have uncovered the bottom line reasons WHY humans behave the way they do in personal relationships, especially when sex* can become a factor. So I also typically take time to emphasize the importance of knowing WHY humans behave the way they do in personal relationships.
Knowing why is extremely important because it opens a psychological pathway for humans to routinely benefit by one of the most basic principles in all of mammalian society. Namely, the principle of acquiring less pain – more pleasure from virtually all personal relationships. And when you read my book you will find as human mammals go this includes the more cognitive influences on human behavior as well.
*(Sex, you see, is a most poignant common denominator between human social behavior and the social behavior of all the other mammals on the earth. I maintain that directly or even very IN directly it is sex, the potential for it (or lack of it) that plays a role in most issues that arise in human personal relationships.)
Meanwhile, it is your own common sense, a reasonable level of reading comprehension, and at least some interaction with the opposite gender as well as follow the support venues I produce that will provide most of what you need in order to understand, apply, and otherwise benefit by the tenets (secrets) revealed in “The Mammalian Way” as to what you might do (and not do) to improve the overall quality of your life in personal relationships.
TO THAT END: Allow me to be your guide as you enjoy another segment of PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP THERAPY.
Keep in mind I am a Social Theorist not a therapist. Much of my research is centered on innate or instinctive human behavior and my theory was initially constructed to support those who administer therapy to others such as psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and the likes.
Moreover, unless they have read my very simple work that contains a truly original theory of why we have much of the issues we do within “Love Interest” type relationships between the genders, the professors usually stop short of explaining the question, WHY.
Meanwhile, the material I share can be quite therapeutic because I have uncovered the bottom line root of WHY most of the issues between men & women exist.
From my research I eventually constructed a theory that was gleaned from direct interaction with thousands of people (in small groups as well as one on one encounters.) over a relatively long period of time (approx. 30 years).
In that time, I sometimes gave advice in the form of suggestions as to what might be done to improve a particular person’s situation(s) that they were in. I kept low key and only made suggestions where I knew I could follow up. I did this for two main reasons.
One, most of the people I discussed my research with are/were licensed therapists who specialized in one area of psychology-sociology or another. Two, most of the people I researched data from HAD NO IDEA I WAS TAKING NOTES ON OUR ENCOUNTER.
This methodology turned up some amazing things. For example, one thing I discovered was, most “people” ask questions, give opinions, and then display behavior that was most often in direct conflict** with what they told me. **(In other words, most people will lie to themselves, usually to satisfy the more cognitive or semantic influences of human behavior, including romance, then proceed to act out typical mammalian behavior often to the full as if drawn to it.)
The conflict occurred most often and regardless of their socio-economic-cultural or educational background and whether it was a part of one on one encounters or a mixed gender group. This is also how I knew I was on to something huge and something viable although early on I was not intent on an entire new theory that provides all professional therapists et. al. with a more complete paradigm of behavioral psychology.
I constructed a theory that is based upon one assumption and takes into account all or nearly all of the encounters that heterosexual human men & women can experience. Given the diversity of human encounters and their potential for peculiar behavior any theory that proposes a collective answer is at least an ambitious undertaking. This is why it took decades to complete.
The segment titled “Relationship Therapy” is an exercise area where personal relationship issues are shared and then we discuss the issue with respect to the many tenets of the theory I constructed that is part of what you will find when you read my book titled, “The Mammalian Way”. In order to receive the full value of the relationship therapy you need to use my book as a point of reference. You can buy the printed cover version for only $19.95 or the PDF file version of the book for as little as only $5.00 US Go to www.themammalianway.com
I do not encourage comments on this blog. However, if you wish to contact me use firstname.lastname@example.org or tweet me @garyjames
Copyright (C) Gary James 2010 all rights reserved
Monday, November 9th, 2009
You are at www.garyjamesblogs.com
“The more in love we became, the more dangerous we became to each other”.
This sentence spoken on the show 20/20 by Pop Star Rihanna is an accurate summation of what the instinctive behavior known as “The Mammalian Way” can do to you, your relationship, and others, IF & When you do not know that you and others are being massively affected by instinctive behavior patterns over which you have very little direct control. This is especially true if you have no idea that “The Mammalian Way” exists. And so it is for Rihanna and Chris Brown. Their relationship ended because neither of them are aware of how deeply “The Mammalian Way” can influence presumed loving behaior and create issues in a relarionship.
Photo by: Lester Cohen / WireImage
The fact is, everyone who is human must contend with the tenets of “The Mammalian Way” or you can satiate the forces that drive it, especially if your relationship entails an element of sex & romance.
However, you dare not ignore “The Mammalian Way”. Otherwise, you can end up like Rihanna and Chris Brown…..Or worse. For example, Steve McNair and Sahel Kazemi. Steve & Sahel’s relationship issues also emanated from “The Mammalian Way” of things but it ended in extreme violence, namely, murder-suicide. SO, the issues between Rihanna and Chris Brown could have been worse.
Rihanna was also quoted as saying “There was no person when I looked at him” during the fight they had where Chris admitted he physically abused Rihanna.
This stands to reason. It is a well documented fact that when men are in love with a woman as beautiful as Rihanna men can get very possessive, very quickly. That is the typical portrayal of the everyday behavior indicative of “The Mammalian Way” (TMW). But when possessive behavior is coupled with fame (for him and/or her) it further ferments both major tenets of my original theory. 1) The male “Perversions of Honor” (POH)* that persist in our culture in men and 2) It further exacerbates a woman’s massive sense of insecurity called “Pendulum Swing of Insecurity” (PSOI)*, a polarized condition that continually resonates between a woman’s cognitive emotion and the primal. Again, when coupled with fame she is liable to seem well under control (cognitive) but is prone to eventually engage in most any type of dangerous and destructive behavior (an aspect of “TMW”) because this behavior feeds the female mammalian instinct to be protected & dominated by the dangerous male.
Frankly, I am reasonably certain this is the precarious position Rihanna now finds herself in. Rihanna is on the brink of self destruction.
Meanwhile, when men feel the affects of “Double Dis”* compounded by the influences that fame brings him in his relationships his primal instinct to have her simply cease the overt behavior to challenge him and to submit to him becomes quite acute.
Since submitting (in our current culture) is unlikely to happen it is best for people in relationships where the mammalian way becomes a factor which is almost always the case where sex can become a factor, it is best for people in relationships to realize what instinctive forces they are dealing with and abate them as much as possible. Prior knowledge of the forces is the key.
This way a couple involved as deeply as Rihanna & Chris Brown were, can more easily and consistently make a resolve then they can go straight to the make up sex. Also, this way, relationships have a better chance of survival without the assault and battery that has become so pervasive in our culture.
(* For further explanation read the book “The Mammalian Way”)
Head your relationship issues “off at the pass” by reading my book “The Mammalian Way”.
Meanwhile, look for more on Rihanna and Chris and other sub similar subjects.
I do not encourage comments on this blog. You can email me at email@example.com I am the only one who reads that email so feel free to lament.
Copyright © Gary James 2009 all rights reserved
Wednesday, October 14th, 2009
You are at www.garyjamesblogs.com
SHE IS A MEN’S ADVOCATE in the dating world and goes by the name “DT”. She has been a featured guest on many relationship talk shows including mine. DT will soon release a book called “The Formula”.
Click here to visit her web site dating tips for men
Monday, September 21st, 2009
You are at, www.garyjamesblogs.com
What does the late Yale student Annie Le, Raymond Clark, and “The Mammalian Way” have in common? Tons of instinctive behavior that’s what.
A recent comment made by one of my readers about my book titled, “The Mammalian Way (TMW)”™ was, “It’s a ground zero for everything in relationships”. And as word spreads about the merits of applying this knowledge into the everyday lives of an earth wide population I see now that is a great way to sum up “TMW”.
Unfortunately, no one told Yale student Annie Le or her alleged murderer Raymond Clark. Had either of them known even the least of the tenets of “TMW” that tend to control human instinctive behavior as they interact with each other throughout life it is more than possible that Annie Le would still be alive and Raymond Clark would not be headed to trial for murder.
How do I know this? Let’s take Raymond Clark as an example. In my book I maintain that all heterosexual males have a very powerful instinctive need to be honored. This need is not something that can be controlled only dealt with through some sort of satiation of the need. This only becomes an issue because we live in a world that is imperfectly safe to a great degree and this also makes it near impossible for men to receive adequate honor to satiate the drive.
If a man happens to be in an environment not conducive to honor satiation he will automatically and instinctively deploy a psychological defense mechanism I call *“Perversions of Honor”. That is to say, a man will do things that might otherwise be deemed dishonorable in order to receive a form of false honor that will somewhat satiate his otherwise insatiable need to receive honor. And, if he does not get even a “perversion of honor” over a long enough time he can easily become a walking time bomb of pent up frustration.
So what is it that can set off this bomb? Why an untimely “dis” to his honor. And if that untimely dis comes from a woman it is tantamount to a *”Double Dis” and if there is even the slightest animosity between he and she at the time, this can easily send a man into a brief torrent frenzy of extreme aggressive behavior.
*[For a complete understanding of “Perversions of Honor” and “Double Dis” see the book titled, “The Mammalian Way”™]
Had Annie Le knew of these facts or if Raymond had been taught the type of circumstances that could occur that might make him susceptible to such aggressive then she/he could have instituted the simple measures outlined in the book to avoid & diffuse such situations in the first place.
There are many advantages to knowing “The Mammalian Way”. I recommend that everyone who routinely interacts with other people read my book and use the information there as a point of reference to optimize the benefits of every relationship you encounter no matter how insignificant that it may seem.
Meanwhile, I maintain that unless something changes in the way that men are currently being socialized and/or rehabilitated in our culture we can all expect a dramatic increase in outbursts of extreme aggressive behavior in relationships from men. CAVEAT!
I do not encourage comments here. However, you may email me privately at, firstname.lastname@example.org I am the only one who reads that mail.
copyright (C) Gary James 2009 all rights reserved.
Sunday, August 30th, 2009
You are at, www.garyjamesblogs.com
He’s moving too fast, he constantly talks about an ex, he’s reluctant to be seen with you in public. These are elements of a distinct pattern of social behavior in relationships between men and women that could lead to the cognitive conclusion, HE’S NOT THE ONE”!….But, then again, these behavior patterns might mean that maybe he is. Why the conflict?
It’s because these behavior patterns in a man* could mean he’s on the rebound (and you’re the re-bounder, and that alone could be a good or bad thing.) Or, it could mean he’s cheating on someone and using you as the cheating device. OR, it could be perfectly normal behavior for him as a part of his process to become socialized into another or even a more committed relationship. (*The same behavior patterns in a woman, often means something entirely different.)
So if you are a woman and the evident love interest of a man with such a pattern of behavior and you’re trying your best to discern the psychology of men or of women, does this mean you just shrug your shoulders, hope for the best and go along for the ride? Well, that is certainly one way to go. However, there is a much safer alternative.
Now days it is vital for someone who values their own heart & self esteem, who wants more pleasure and less pain out of everyday life, that they necessarily need to be able to drill down through the cognitive and be able to read a man or a woman’s instinctive behavior patterns known as, “The Mammalian Way”™.
The importance of this is because human instinctive behavior patterns, once you know how to read them are the ones that reveal the “truest” picture of human behavior, including gender specific issues, communication differences in interpersonal relationships, and the likes, for what they actually mean.
From Sigmund Freud to Dr. Phil, most people who use psychology as a part of their career will tell you that instinctive behavior has a tendency to be at the root of what controls human behavior. “The Mammalian Way”™ points out how to discern such behavior and what it means from the gender specific perspective, especially when it comes to social behavior between men and women in relationships.
In other words, the information conveyed in the pages of, “The Mammalian Way”™ will provide women with a tool to really get a sense for if the one you’re with or the one you want to be with, is he the one or not?
copyright (c) Gary James 2009 all rights reserved
Friday, August 28th, 2009
You are at, www.garyjamesblogs.com
….when a woman verbally or even non verbally disses a man in the instinctive behavioral areas such as his sex drive and his drive for honor simultaneously, she can be putting herself at serious risk….
The circumstances between model/actress Jasmine Fiore and the reality show contestant Ryan Jenkins are a prime example of how instinctive drives related to “The Mammalian Way”™ can work against the human condition when it fuels rage. However, in the case of behavior as extreme as murder-suicide, it always has a cognitive (learned behavior) connection as well. But it is also mostly due to a huge lack of understanding about “The Mammalian Way”™. Such is the basis for most of the conflict known as, “The War of the Sexes”.
Other than humans, all male mammals would never murder his female and then kill him self. Rather, he would run off all the other males who are after his female, and in the process he might kill one of them.
That is normal male mammal behavior. The drive to behave that way is wired into each and every human male born. Men can be quite volatile when some other guy tries to move in on a female he sees as “his own”. It’s natural mammalian instinctive behavior to do so. But to kill her in the process of running off the other males, that’s strictly learned behavior, and this volatile behavior is not uncommon between men and women in relationships, when they deal with relationships issues, although it usually does not end in death.
Meanwhile, the psychology of women, especially those who see themselves as “empowered women” tends to negate the fact that men are instinctively wired to behave very different than women when it comes to social behavior in relationships.
Unless you’ve read my book titled, “The Mammalian Way” it is easy to assume that a woman in a relationship can dis a man to the same degree that she might accept a dis and that her behavior is socially acceptable. And perhaps this is so. Believe it or not, like it or not, when a woman verbally or even non verbally disses a man in the instinctive behavioral areas such as his sex drive and his drive for honor simultaneously, she can be putting herself at serious risk. Case in point is the Jasmine Fiore-Ryan Jenkins matter. We’ve heard the psychatrists and other professionals analyze the behavior of the couple and even draw some conclusions.
But what if the professionals are all analyzing such behavior as murder-suicide using the same incomplete paradigm? What if the behavior between Jazmine Fiore & Ryan Jenkins, or, Steve McNair-Sahel Kazemi could have been predicted and/or averted? What if either one in either of the pairs knew how to discern the difference between a lovers quarrel and potential disaster, as well as where & how such behavior emanates? It’s very much about human psychological defense mechanisms (one for women, one for men) designed to protect us from harm, but because of certain circumstances the defense mechanism that helps us to contend with our instinctive behavior somehow goes awry. What then?…
You truly need to read the book “The Mammalian Way”. Do not be deceived. Know how to see the danger OR the love. Be safe AND happier.
copyright (c) Gary James 2009 all rights reserved