Dominating behaviour is a losers' game

I can never stop being dismayed that people don't realise what they intend as "dominating" behaviour can often come across as expressing insecurities.

Dominating behavior is concerned with emotional responses and so a person intent upon dominating another usually doesn't register much of the intellectual content of what anyone is saying. He actually hears less and understands less about the other person when he is intent upon dominating them, than if he were to see the other as an equal.

I suspect that this approach works enough of the time, at a simple, reflexive level, for it to seem to pay off. After all, some people are, indeed, duped by emotional posturing, which tries to do away with intellect.

But this bluff spoils any further discourse in due course. Even the instigators are bound to register to this emotionally at some point. If they happen to score hits by getting others (mostly women) to temporarily defer to them, they still have to endure an anxious feeling that others could always see through their disguise. Those subjugated would then see very clearly that having genuine ability did not play a significant part in the dominator's understanding of his identity.

It would become transparently apparent that investing in the emotional reactions of others is always a loser's game.