A few days ago, Scott Adams was talking about how Trump could fix a nonexistent problem with women by apologizing, which would somehow cleverly bait Hillary Clinton into having to force Bill Clinton to apologize, which she wouldn't, which would just prove that she was a hypocrite.
Or something like that, anyhow. To be honest, I quit paying attention not long after reading "Trump" and "apologize". It reminded me of how, after the Megyn Kelly affair, Michael Medved was going on and on about how it would be a brilliant move for Trump to "break protocol" and present Kelly with flowers on stage.
Trump, of course, did nothing of the sort, and instead blew off the debate entirely. He then proceeded to blow the doors off the rest of the Republican competition.
Now, Medved is an idiot, but Adams isn't, so what accounts for the similarity in their goto fixit strategies? I suspect the answer is similar socio-sexual rank; the Gamma always feels the urge to seek emotional relief from women through apologizing to them.
I asked Delta Man, who is a recovering ex-Gamma, about this, and he said that Gammas constantly want to reconcile with everyone to a fault, and that it's a sort of martyrdom when the pressure gets too great. The risk of failure and loss starts to look attractive in comparison with bearing the emotional pressure.
I don't know about that. But what I do know is that apologizing for something for you you feel no genuine contrition, apologizing for strategic reasons, or in order to relieve pressure on you, is not something that any man should do.
If it's not broken, don't try to fix it. You may break something else.