This sums it up. Women love men who provide controversy. And if it isn't provided, they'll for damn sure make their own.

I have several close relationships with male friends. Some, I consider as close as a brother. I can insult, belittle, berate, cut down, verbally abuse and otherwise destroy them with words, and they laugh heartily at my sense of humor. I can forget to call them, forget their birthdays, forget to spend time with them, and they shrug it off.

But, I've said the most benign things to women; things not at all meant to be personal, sometimes things even meant to be complimentary, only to have the whole conversation explode in a hellish conflagration.

These confrontations don't take place because women are mad about what you said. They're upset because things are getting too predictable. You're being too nice, so they have to provoke the aggressive side of you in order to re-establish their own sense of security.

Women suggest that they are mysterious and men simply don't understand them. True. To understand something, it has to have a logical pattern to it. What's mysterious to us is how an otherwise intelligent being...one capable of absorbing four years of college and graduating with honors, can sometimes revert to a childlike ball of tears or hatefulness at the drop of a hat. But, when you understand the real motivations behind such episodes, it becomes relatively easy to figure out.

How many times have you done or said something in front of a significant other and had it be perfectly fine, and then, under almost identical circumstances, had the same comment or action draw a holocaust of anger and dirty looks?

Think about this...how many times have you seen women reward The Cretin with a wild night of passion because he bought her a wilted rose and a box of stale chocolates from the 7-11, while you spend all day preparing a lovely and thoughtful evening complete with candlelight dinner, fine wine, and romantic music, only to have her get angry because she thinks you're trying to get in her pants?

It is because she doesn't have to provoke controversy from the cretin that she treats him so well. It is natural for people to have problems getting along with people who are aggressive, and perhaps a bit selfish. You, however, are a different story.

You are the nice guy...the contemplative, intelligent guy who tries to listen, to get along and smooth things over. You try to avoid controversy by placating, by bending, by accommodating. You treat her as an equal...rarely ever imposing your will, almost never giving resistance, even on things that are very important to you; you are the one ignoring your own principles and sacrificing what you hold dear in hopes that she'll see this and appreciate you all the more. You're also the schmuck who's barking hopelessly up the wrong tree, Sparky. It will never work.

Why? Because she doesn't WANT you to shy away from controversy. She's CREATING that controversy to see how you will respond. She doesn't want to be able to bend you. She wants you to be in control. How else is she to know unless situations arise that allow you to demonstrate this?

Women, as a matter of genetics, are nurturers. By nature, they aren't hard-wired to be providers. To be a provider demands an aggressive disposition. Since most don't have that quality themselves, they seek it in you. If you don't show it, then she'll either provoke it in you, or go looking for it elsewhere.

If you, as a nice guy, are accommodating, she sees this as a threat to her own security. If you don't stand up and call the shots, she perceives you as not capable of fulfilling your role of provider. Her instincts are that you're not going to take care of potential problems that arise. Secretly, unbeknownst even to herself, she's thinking, "What if he's this flexible when it comes to standing up for me?" In effect, almost every confrontation you have is a test, designed to see if you respond in the correct ways. No, gentlemen, she doesn't really care that much about you staying up too late, or forgetting the dishes, or anything else, for that matter. Conflict is a way to provoke you into displaying that you are in control. When you are in control, she feels more attracted to you. If this were not so, and the conflicts were real, then there would be no such thing as make-up sex!

In the old days, natural aggression was easily demonstrated in stereotypes such as the mighty hunter, the tough cowboy, and so on. Social mores also required women to subordinate themselves to men, so the power struggles never really materialized. Male aggressiveness was taken for granted, as was female subordination. But, it is more difficult to show your aggressive nature from behind a desk here in the 21st century. It is also more difficult for a woman to be comfortable with subordination, because society pressures them so much to do everything they can to prove that they are the equal of men. So, in order to satisfy her desire for a man who can take care of business, she demands that it be made obvious to her, even if she has to make herself the object of your aggression.

In order to comfort herself, in order to assuage her own fears, she has to make you demonstrate that you are aggressive enough to be a good provider, if you haven't done so already. She has to trigger that resistance in you, because that is outward evidence that you are in charge of the situation. The more you accommodate, the less secure she will be in the relationship. This is why many women are attracted to aggressive men in the first place...it is less risky to hook up with a man who already clearly displays these traits. This is also why women rarely ask men out, even though in our day and age, everything is supposedly equal. Men are supposed to be pursuers, because men have an aggressive nature.

Women will never admit to you that this is why they pick fights. After all, this is the 21st century and they wouldn't want you to think they were operation under such primitive motives. Sometimes, you might get a tearful, bewildered response, such as "I don't know why I act like this..." Sometimes you'll get the "PMS" excuse (bullshit, by the way), but you'll rarely get the real answer - sometimes women require "manhandling".

"Nice guys need to be more aggressive, then", some women might say.

Yup. That's it exactly. Women are slaves to their genetics, so most of the time, they simply won't be attracted to the cowering wimp who comes out of his shell only to genuflect before her. If you're doing this, she's already got you, and the challenge is over.

You can complain that women need to be more intelligent about differentiating between the aggression that makes one a womanizing asshole and the aggression that makes one a knight in shining armor. But, you're fighting DNA and not mere irrationality, so it doesn't do any good to whine. Women often refuse to evaluate honestly how they are being treated. Discussing what is going on in their own minds requires them to examine their own behavior and thinking, thus coming face to face with their own stupidity. And remember, when a women concludes that she's stupid, she'll become insecure. Since most women spend their lives seeking security, self-evaluation is a big step backwards, because they will see who they are.

If you doubt, think of the signs that you have see, which are often clear. One woman I know remained with her guy even after he pushed her, causing her to fall and hurt her back. Several have tolerated cheating. If it isn't obvious that these men were bad for them, I don't know what is. But, often, the obvious is pushed to the side, and women continue to evaluate their man with their heart instead of their head.

You can capitalize on this if you're willing to do so.