Etherial Cat

Attraction changes with maturity and this goes as well for men. As I mentioned it earlier, they will still appreciate a young woman's beauty but their experience and wisdom significantly tame a potential drive for actually seeking sex with incompatible partners. Beside, a man who already had multiple sexual experiences is usually seeking for something deeper than some rather shallow sexuality. So they screen out women with additional filters. No, I am not confusing anything. A man needs to be attracted to a woman for sex. But men are able to still be attracted to women past their prime. The maturity of the woman does count for mature men, because as long as there is a sufficient base for attraction he's going to be more fulfilled with her than a woman without it. A man is happy as long as he finds the woman attractive enough. The resonance on the subjective level is far more important than maximizing looks. Men are attracted to attractive, young girls on a superficial level. But there are other dimension that men values with experience and as the superficial lose its shine in life. And attraction is the main trigger for sexual desire. This attraction is possible beyond youth and conventional attractiveness. And this is especially easy when a man is mature, open-minded and is genuinely love driven towards women. From your gaze, a young big pair of tits might be irresistible not to sexualize. It depends. I'm certain that there can be as many reaction from highly conscious men as they exist. There has been zen masters who were highly sexually frustrated and used to grope women. Adyashanti said in one his talks that consciousness doesn't grant the development of all lines which include the sexual development one. But I'm pretty certain that if a 20 year old woman with big tits would show them to him, Eckhart Tolle, Rupert Spira, or whatever, none of them would consider sleeping with her. They are too satisfied with their 50+ year old wives who have got a depth that no 20 year old can give them. ?

It depends what you mean by primarily attraction? In terms of appearance, I would say that it is safe to say that humans are attracted to health in general and youthful attractive women certainly look the healthiest and the best physically. But if you are talking about attraction in the broader sense, conscious men are primarily attracted to conscious women. And what happens is that young women while being physically attractive are significantly less conscious. And generally speaking, I would say that conscious men are able to see beauty in the not so perfect (like in wabi-sabi) and appreciate the wisdom and knowledge of self an older woman can have. No. The problem is when the youth and the attractiveness becomes the primary/sole reason for the attraction. This would be some sort of fetishization. Also, recently I've been finding myself more and more attracted to maturity. While I appreciate and love young people, I'm thinking more and more that youth is a liability in term of relationship material (inexperience, a sad gradual loss of innocence, immaturity). The two comes together. Youth is physically attractive, but an annoying rather undesirable state on the personal level.

Quality men do not see women as mere youthful, beautiful bodies to fuck. ? Surely, very young women (Emerald was talking 16-20 years old?!) tend to have beauty on their side, but a grown man has nothing in common with them. Decency commands even to refuse to engage romantically with young females until they reach a certain form of maturity. Success and quality are relative notions. The point is that what you perceive as a desirable successful man can be totally undesirable to someone else. Or someone who you perceive as low quality can be of higher quality to another person. For instance, to me a quality man is mature to the point he is not seeing a freshly minted adult as a potential partner. And that's because he's at a different place in his life and enjoys someone who has enough maturity to share with him perspectives and experiences. Also a quality man to me would be the type of guy who would be protective and non-predatory to young women. He's not the type that would think of them as some sort of living sex dolls. As I have matured, I have been less and less prone to equal a man's worth with outside achievements, and to favor instead his ability for emotional and intellectual intimacy as the primary driver. And the men I judge as interesting have the same pattern. They look for a partner they resonate with. It is true that men who chose women for their sexual value tend to lose interest as women grows older, but women lose interest in these men too. So the attraction potentially falls from both side. So it's not that women who grows older are sobbing at losing the 10% Chad squad, and are finally lowering finally their standard because they lose value. This narrative if anything seems to emanate from people who are resentful towards women and enjoy a potential downfall of the pedestal from the almighty picky bitches and laugh at a potential punishment and situation reversal. What happens is that women are looking for men able to love them and that with experience, we are better able to see what a man's real affection is like. And this means loving all part of the female experience and of this woman's subjectivity. Courting a 22 years old Taylor Hill is easy. But Taylor Hill is more than a body and youthful model, she's a person and being youthful is just a state. If someone's love is contingent on these features, his love is uninteresting as the element in which it is anchored is transient.

? Maybe it has to do with the fact that parents are archetypal figure of the two polarities and the first "love" providers. The two notions- parents and lovers of the opposite sex- could be then mixed as there are some common denominators. Like, kind of re-using an old blueprint that doesn't fit.

I'm not totally sold on the procreation explanation, though there is definitely something going on with dominance and parenthood. The daddy seems more archetypal/symbolical than a concrete vision of an actual father. Perhaps more like daddy as subconscious crave for a patriarchal feeling somewhat (as in patriarchy- male domination). It's interesting to note how in the west, God is referred to as the father. There is something almighty in the father figure.

I've always thought this was weird as fuck. When I was 14, I dated a Latino and he'd keep on calling me Mami. The thing is, in french, "mamie" means grandma (and it's pronounced exactly the same). And "papi" means grandpa. That's not very sexy. @ivankiss @Emerald There seem to be really an incestuous thing going on. And it's not so far fetched due to the fact that well, kids go through an oedipus phase. I've been fascinated with collective sexual leitmotiv in society, and I remember reading once that some eastern european country I can't remember had as their number 1 gulty porn pleasure "mom and son" porn. Also, the story is a bit gross, but one of my ex-coworker got very sick one day. He ended up at the hospital and was given medicine. As a very good friend of mine visited him, he kept on telling him about his fantasy to fuck his own mother. So, I'm thinking this might come from wishing some kind of psychological reintegration by symbolically physically merging with the first person who's been in your life the living allegory of masculinity or femininity.

You guys are all being softies. Just bring back the comfort women and be done with it.

I get what you mean there. It's like the difference between a bee and an asian hornet flying around a flower. With one, you know there might be some honey. With the other one... absolutely nothing ! Maybe even the destruction of the whole ecosystem if they keep proliferate.

@Harlen Kelly Also, feel free next time not to quote me, if you'll answer me by "I don't discuss this point with women". I just don't get it. ???

Surely a lot of people reading this post will be as amazed as I am with the coincidence. Fixed it for ya .

Don't you have any thoughts of your own or are you just interested in parroting my latest discussion with Leo? First off, I am not an "unaware" woman. I've got knowledge about pick up far beside the average woman and 10 years of experience in self-development and spirituality. Also, I've had multiple relationships including a LTR that exceeds most of what people my age ever had. So it's very difficult to write me off as unaware. But you can keep claiming that I am unaware if it please, especially if your aim is to discredit me by trying to stick on my head a large "must not be listened to" in bad faith. I'm just going to point out that It comes off as practical to put the burden on me to explain why my perspective is legit. I could also frame you as untrustworthy and let you explain me in the next 5 posts to come why your opinion is as worthy as mine. I'll spare you that bs. So what makes you more of an "expert in construction or a professor, an expert in teaching" as I am? I'm curious about hearing your arguments on why your experience is more valid than mine? You say that you've got a large amount of experience with a significant amount on women. Well, I do also have a significant amount of experience with men. And actually, I have probably more than you do, because we are the ones getting approached. Not to mention that I've heard feedback from my gfs, male friends etc. And I've been reading this forum for almost 2 years... So I get well the paradigm here. -- I hear a lot of men claiming that they are stud who "knows women". And the reason why I know that they do not master attraction is simply because... I do not react in the slightest to their energy. And often, it is the same as for the other women commenting. So it's a very good benchmark to know whether yes or no you're dealing with a stud. When you face a stud "who knows women", even through the internet, his energy comes off as attractive. It's a question of behavior and talent to address women. No amount of pick up trick can bypass the fundamental energetic incompatibility ?.Logic is not what creates attraction. And when a woman is astute and well trained like I am, I can also sense the compatibility and dive in him to know if he's got what I want.

Feel free to show me your arguments and tell me where I am wrong, then . It's way too easy to state such platitudes with a condescending tone, passing them as right. What makes you an expert in women? Also explain me why you believe you know better than I do what makes women fall for a man.

Shame is a plague. It's probably one of the worst feeling one can feel. While feeling it, the ego is trying to bury a deep sense of inadequacy. For that, it withdraws these emotions and thoughts from absolutely everyone and its energy can fester for years. And of course, there is very strong identification going on there as well.. I have a few books on the matters that are really worth the read. We could create a book list/ content list by pooling resources in order to share and offer it to those who are interested in such matters.

I'm loving this idea.

I'd love to see such a section arise. We already have "I'm smarter than you" and "emotions are silly". It won't make much of a difference. -- So, what is Leo's stance on all of this? Seems like he's not interested in addressing it or ignoring the request, as for now? Maybe he's taking some time to think about it. Idk

There is a lot of theoretical understanding, but a real difficulty when it comes to incarnating the teachings. Obviously, thinking them is not enough. You've got the be it. And emotions are one of the most important subset of beingness. Emotional issues are as dangerous as intellectual misconceptions for the world. Giving here tools and a space for emotional alchemy could really do wonders.

Concepts needs embodiment. Emotions energize thoughts. Love is the highest teaching. Let's release the Goddess and give her the place she deserves!

Because the crowd is deluded so the wise enjoys and needs the withradwal. And it's also to avoid suffering the consequences of the many foolish behaviors he sees.

That's how it is. Two energetic polar opposites looking to merge back in oneness. It's just a beautiful expression of unity in the relative. -- There are some people that we meet and we have this intuition that if we were to come together and express this shared being, that every part of our body and mind would be touched by the relationship, that no part of us would remain unseen or closed. So that kind of relationship has a much greater power to permeate every aspect of our lives. So the shared being is expressed intellectually, emotionally, physically, in every way that sense of our shared being touches every aspect of our lives and that there is a kind of dance that goes on intellectually, emotionally and physically in which that one's entire body mind is opened up to the love that is shared. That you can't do with everybody. - Rupert Spira And once you are fully incarnating non-dual consciousness, and realize oneness, whenever you are making love to your partner there is nothing as such as two. You become one, all separations are broken down. The end game would be to find a partner who is equally as conscious. Here consciousness would be making love to itself in the world of form in full awareness and energetic synergy. But hey- not easy to arrive at this end game!

@Leo Gura Have you thought about reforming the serious emotional problems sections? I would suggest you rethink maybe your forum's structure by creating a section dedicated to the integrative path, as opposed to the spiritual transcendence focus that a lot of people have in here. Maybe having a section dedicated to emotions, emotional intelligence, shadow work and who knows would 1) act as prevention by offering resources and perspectives on these matters 2) help attracting and maybe retaining individuals who are more abiding towards this type of spirituality which would maybe benefit the whole ecosystem of this forum. I think I see a lot of people here who might benefit from such a section. Spiritual work is often used as a way to bypass emotions and repress them by "transcending the suffering" but at the end of it can pretty unhealthy. -- Other than that. I would have helped you, though the task is just over my current emotional resources and I'm not sure if you'd think I'd make mod material. I hope you'll find yours mods, regardless!

@Forestluv I also share your pain. I have a lot of appreciation for your work and your approach. You make this place a very humane place. I hope you're okay ?.

I'm embarrassed because I can only agree that this member is sometimes difficult. Both externally and internally. But that person seems to benefit so much from the environment that one can also argue that this is what this forum is for. Nobody here is a representative (except maybe Leo and the mods whenever they are operating through their pseudo) nor has actualized.org forum member as its identity as the end of the day. I'm certain there was. I haven't finished the video yet. The sensitivity and the emotionality around this topic makes it hardly the moment while considering all interest, which is why I've judged creating a video on this subject now as selfish. This has been derailing attention and adding salt on the wound while there was already a lot of fragility. Anyway. I'll leave this discussion there.

It has nothing to do with an ad-hominem. I issue this criticism of clickbaiting with newspaper all the time, but in this case the information comes from a person. What can I do if the dynamic is the same but there is not a team of journalist but a single person behind? All actors have an agenda. He's got all the right to create content and express himself. I have no problem with that. What I am taking issue more is to come here on this thread and complain that some people got triggered by his videos, when the very nature of the subject is emotional. Simple cause and effect. On this specific point, he's not having my sympathy, nor by calling this effect "cult like". And this misrepresentation is quite problematic. Even though, I agree that some individuals who are using the forum on the regular have been particularly problematic. Also, I've said that it was a 1-in-2. I don't say that growing his community is the sole concern, but my personal take on that matter is that Soonhei's suicide is a private event and not a public one that should be discussed on the public sphere, in order to respect his family. If I had my own channel, I would have chosen not to discuss it. It's the first time that I issue any type of criticism over critiscism of Actualized.org. By no mean would I not want it to stop. But anything which is putting fuel or potentially firing up this story pandering on the cult narrative or Actualized.org responsability from far or close will not have my support.

By posting a video on youtube, don't you wish for views? Beside, I'm not saying that this is his sole motivation. I'm just saying that its guaranteed attention so it is at best a two-in-one. And of course, this "story" is particularly juicy material in terms of eyeballs. He's got a long story of poking actualized.org and he knew very well that there would be a reaction. Leo's got a million subscribers. That's all I am saying. Also, I'm not at ease with anyone who co-opt a suicide and feels appropriate to give an opinion on the matter on a freaking youtube channel, when after all he doesn't have all the elements to judge. But that's just me. That's why I called that move opportunistic, but you're free to disagree.