Etherial Cat

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Etherial Cat

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender
  1. I hear you, but you've managed to make it happen with your business even to the point of abundance And actually, what makes you so popular is that you're selling to people authenticity and higher consciousness material. I'm adamant that you could reiterate the same thing with your sex life. Obviously, not by clubbing in Vegas, but by meeting women in circle mirroring your interests. There should be plenty of them around where you live, or nearby in California. At the end of the day, how attractive is really a woman for whom you've got to stoop to a lower level? Isn't this not compromising the piece you cherish most about yourself: truth and consciousness? And isn't it likely to cause a split in yourself, if you pursue ? Self-love would be probably commanding you not to do so. Self-love would tell you to get yourself a woman who authentically resonates with you AND that you find attractive. All the rest is actually coming out of scarcity.
  2. Aren't we all? Well, this is where I don't get your way of thinking . You are literally stating one thing and it's opposite. If the women on the forum do not represent the general population of girls (assuming we are more "developed" or wired towards spiritual matters), why do you keep addressing us with the same generalization, assumptions, or with the same characteristics? You keep on framing women through a particular monolithic prism which isn't accurate and give us a hard time stating how it actually is for us. Both agenda can converge. It doesn't need to be a thug of war. There are easier ways. Just not through that framework.
  3. I see what you see there. Being beta is associated with danger and a low quality life, as it means being at the bottom of the hierarchy. For this reason most men overcapitalize on masculinity and reject some parts of themselves because they are afraid it will make them less competitive, which begets an infernal vicious circle. I think men also wants acceptance and safety from one another as much as they want it from females. A lot of the masculinity need to overcompensate for their lack is found in their relationship with the masculine itself.
  4. Why make this suddenly about me? I don't think I have been talking about my experience in a significantly different way than the other girls on this forum. If you are stating assumptions about female sexuality and then directly address mine, I think it's only fair that I give you my own experience as a woman. I am also not that special. If anything, I have just spent more time introspecting and learning about self-help than the average woman, which makes me also more attuned to what is truly attractive or not to female. I get the place you are coming from, and I think this aspect is great. I'm just concerned about a few particular points, as such as what I see as an excessive focus on survival, and a few misconceptions about female attraction, which ends up being actually disempowering to both genders. I see pros and cons in it, and I don't believe it is per se mutually exclusive with relationships. ... I've been attempting to give a reply to this, but I'm just gonna give up and not drag it further .
  5. You should have registered yourself on the forum as Chad.
  6. 👀 That's it, @Nahm must be starting Game too!
  7. Yo. Are we invisible to you?
  8. It's not so much about your girlfriend than the wound you've got in your relationship with other men and the masculine hierarchy, then. You compare yourself to other men in relation to her. She's the proxy to that feeling and you project the resentment on that poor girl. Maybe try to do some shadow work in that area. How much of an emotional reaction do you have when hearing the word beta? What is behind it? These sounds like great questions for some private introspection.
  9. The advice and the position he holds are not very distinctive. My suggestion to Leo was to tone down on necessarily framing things between men and woman as a survival game where love and consciousness is impossible because women are too unconscious. He's just attracting his own self-fulfilling prophecy. And by focusing on this mindset, he doesn't give women the opportunity for more consciousness and better quality affection, which is a pity. He doesn't believe its possible and we've got the skills for it. Which is a false belief.
  10. There is for sure a sweetspot between discussing, cristalizing insights and losing your time debating. But I think you are right and I should stop all together as what I want to say has already been said. I'd just wish I had not several tags, because I feel bad not replying once someone replies me.
  11. I'm talking about what comes after.
  12. Survival can be pursued consciously or unconsciously depending on the person doing the pursuing and their levels of consciousness. <- That's exactly my point What's the rest about, then? And lol at your 4 @Gesundheit I highlighted it in bold in a previous post.
  13. You're not portraying a developed individual showing high consciousness traits. For others elements on how I conceived things, you can maybe read my earlier entrances on this thread. There is nothing wrong with exploring sexuality. The things discussed here are a bit more contextualized than this simplification.
  14. Hum yes, they do. They are link to my emotional system, and I don't get wet for low consciousness guys as they only trigger in me indifference or annoyance. I am as attracted to low conscious guys holistically as I am let's say intellectually drawn by Donald Trump. Most customers in the self-help business in general are attracted to low consciousness behavior, yet you're focusing on attracting a specific audience who can stomach your actual development. But you're using a smart combo of consciousness and survival, which works well for you. You could do the same with girls. Imagine if you had spent your whole career on making clickbait self-help video on stage Orange subject, because "this is were most people are at". What's the difference?