That's the not the double standard. The double standard is that women want men to be emotionally vulnerable, but then also tough, icy, and stoic.
And men want women to be hot and feminine, but then also logical, calm, and rational.

Here is it the mother load of all double standards
She wants you to be emotionally available for her but doesn't want to be emotionally available for you or else she losses attraction. ?
A Primal hard wired double standard of the feminine-masculine polarity. All of attraction is a double standard. 
To be in the position of the opposite end of any polarity is to hold double-standards to the opposite side. 

@Tyler Robinson to give up judgement you need to experience ego death, there's no other way to go about it. 

We want to embrace spirituality but we don't want to give up judgment. 
 

Banning man titties is the first step in hyper sexualizing
them!!!!!

men with man titties should have to cover them whenever women do.
 
It's okay to say men must act less sexually assertive to non partners than women do because of the physical difference. But it's not okay to say it's okay men in general get paid more at certain jobs because of the physical difference
Women don't correct other women for saying something inappropriate or sexist but crucify men if they do

What makes a good man?
To answer the above Question we need to define what we mean by 'man' because different people interpret this differently. One could argue, that the biological gender is what counts, other that it is the sociological gender what counts. To make this easier we go by the sociological concept of gender. Further I define that we are talking about relatively liberal but still somewhat traditional roles for men (and woman). Let's call this practical and propose that the vast majority in the west (tm) is living like that. I can't make any realistic Ideas about other Cultures or groups of Cultures in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Oceania - at least not without researching in depth on the topic.
Next thing to ponder is what 'good' even mean. 'Makes' implies that a man can do certain things to make him more good relative to other action. There are likely bad actions, neutral ones and good ones and all in between. But what can 'good' mean as in 'being a good men'? It could imply a very relatively code of honor, a set of rules like the ones that are instilled upon men in religions like Islam. It also implies a moral. We can delve into this and make a set of actions a man often fulfills (earning money, raising children, be social in a group of men, be a role model to other men...) and think how one would need to act to be morally 'good'. I don't do this right now, but we can collect some things from this thread.
It could also mean something that is not in the realm of morality, most notably being good in survival. Every ability and sub-skill is a means for survival if you think about it. The better a man is in a valuable skill, the more 'good' he is for a given group. Let's say you are somewhere in the middle of the US in some giant forest a Park Ranger which guides you would be very beneficial to you. He is 'good' at what he does. Of course - doesn't that applies to women and other who don't identify as men? Can't they be 'good' in that sense? Of course they can. However it is implied that through the male body, tradition and psychology they are more suited for certain tasks. Most notably men cannot near children and are not as likely to raise them as women. In a Society where we division the Labor a man is more likely to have a time advantage compared to the average woman. So the answer of this is: A man is 'good' to the degree that his skills make him and other he cares for able to survive and thrive.

Can't forget to have all the strength of a raging fire and be mysterious as the dark side of the moon lmaooo 

Masculinity is a role given to men to uphold and maintain society. Therefore traits that maintain the social fabric of society and uphold collective unity are desirable in men. 
Desirable traits in men are:
Dependability. Honesty. A sense of honor. A diplomatic mindset around conflict resolution. Courage. Strength. Selflessness. Perseverance. The ability to forgive. The ability to cooperate. Trait may vary from culture to culture in order to suit the environment.
 

There are many points ,but main point that drives all others of being a good man is :being in control and influence of himself, not being influenced and controled by outside forces...from there comes understanding of yourself your path etc. This is a deeper topic of its own, its not just the normie advice control your emotions and yourself ,you dont have foundation for it , so in the end it will turn into passive agression and boiled up emotions etc.

1. Have a penis.
2. Be a good person.
.......3? Identify as a man.
What makes a good person?
Well-developed spiritually, mentally, and emotionally. No denial or repression of “undesirable” characteristics. Physically well-developed is a bonus. Has a good balance of masculine and feminine energies and knows when a situation calls for more of one or the other. 

You already know this, but an adherence to and operating in accordance with what one has discerned as true, even when it’s difficult. This includes both ‘inner’ and outer actions. 
 

I could be a lot more developed.
I feel the pain from my lack of development every day.
Good!
Well, there's a lot you could do, but in a nutshell I would boil it down to this:
1) First, prime your mind with reading and studying a wide array of sources and perspectives, like by reading the sources in my book list and watching my videos. You need some basic theory as grist for your contemplation mill.
2) Then, after some years you will have a solid theoretical foundation and the real work can begin. Now you stop reading and learning theory, and you start doing serious contemplation. 1000s of hours of thinking everything through for yourself and deriving every answer for yourself from scratch from first principles and direct experience.
3) And then you turn your attention to observing your ego-mind at work, and become a master of your own self-deception and egoic reactions.
You don't have to complete one step before doing the others. In practice you should be intermixing them.
Of course practices like meditation and psychedelics become really important after a while.
Perhaps most importantly, have an insatiable curiosity and passion for understanding reality at the deepest levels, and never settle for beliefs or the words of humans. That's really my only secret. All I do is just rentlessly pursue pure understanding by derviving all of it for myself from direct experience and intuition. This is what I've called Pure Philosophy.
The doing of Pure Philosophy leads to the highest wisdom. That's it. See my episode: An Intro To Serious Philosophy. That's my process.

@Leo Gura What is your purpose, right now, currently, for using a big knowledge/note self-made database, how are you using it nowadays? I know many years ago you used to use it as basically offline version of Wikipedia, but now that you don't really care that much about remembering things, and you're not firmly focused on chasing and hoarding knowledge, then what's the reason?
Is it just purely journaling tool, a way to collect your thoughts, the way to collect all your awakening experiences?
How much has common place book contributed to your overall success in life?

You are onto something. But I think it's not just about alleviation of pain, but good humor also has to have a tint of realism within it. So it's more about pointing out painfull truths, or at least what you/collective considers to be true, in a lighthearted and funny way. Notice how jokes that you cannot really relate with, are not that funny. And the reason you cannot relate with them, is that you don't consider the story to be true.
For example, for a anti-feminist right winger, feminist jokes that are bashing white men may not be funny, and vice versa what right winger considers to be funny, would never be funny to SJW types.

Be careful being too demanding in relationships. Relate to the person at the level they are at, not where you need them to be.
You're not gonna find a perfect girl. She doesn't exist.

Realize that is nothing to know. Go into "i know", and it will make sense and the mind will stop to search so much out there. 

Let me give my 2 cents on this. Just my opinion. Read it at  your own risk.
Beauty is such a double edged sword , it is at the same time the most precious thing in the world and also the most deadliest thing. It has the potential to make you feel absolutely great, like in a cloud 9 , and at the same time it can crumble you into pieces, beat you down into a bloody pulp. I have seen boys going tooth and nail for pretty girls, and girls fighting viciously over handsome boys. It is obvious why beauty is good, because it is a statement that says you are worthy of  love , it basically says that- I am a valuable person. I am an important person , not only to others but to yourself.  It is an avenue to acquire love and admiration, sense of  worth, which is a need which every living being and every creature on earth aspire to have, live for , die for , the fundamental basic need of their life. When this need is fulfilled, one feels  great. 
So how does beauty become a living hell? It is when you start to increase your standard. When you think that this person is more  beautiful than me. She is  more curvier, has bigger eyes, has smoother skin.And this is all just a game of genetics, statistics and chance, it has nothing to do with your being, you have no responsibility, it's  not like you get bigger eyes, symmetric faces, smoother skin because you are a deserving. It's all about the bell curve.  You have pretty eyes, blonde hair, smoother skin all right, but we ave 9 billion people  on this earth, there is a good chance that there are thousand others who have slightly better facial symmetry, slightly better curves, slightly bigger eyes, and another 1000 who are better then them, and then comes another 1000  who are better and so on it  doesn't ever end. And if your emotions are  dictated by such comparisions, then  you have a disastrous emotional life. By that  logic  all the people in asian countries , who have black hair instead of blonde, who don't have as much whiter skin , have brown eyes instead of blue, should be  mentally and emotionally crippled and handicapped  for life. But this doesn't happen. I have seen far beautiful people living absolutely miserable lives and far homelier people living the  greatest life ever. The beautiful people  start to raise their standard and get into a comparison game, which basically means a pathetic miserable life. Once you get  into that mindset, it's just pathetic, they are so like a slave just hopelessly attached to their beauty, and in few years they start to get into their 40s and start to see their  vibrant beauty disappear and become jealous of  other  younger people who are beautiful then them just like in that snow white story. Then you have got more suffering, more pain, more misery. It's pathetic. Life should be about appreciating what you have, loving yourself, doing what you love, and finding beauty in small things, . It's not  about being beautiful but feeling beautiful.  The art of  life is in appreciating the absolute, in finding the divine beauty in nature and godliness in the miracle of being alive and having lived. When that happens , even if you are 100 years old, you will be the most beautiful human being on earth. You'll become God's  favorite child.

It would be cool if on the homepage there's a button next to forum that says dating. And if you click on it then you're asked a bunch of questions that determine your level of consciousness. And then you get matched with people who are on the same level as you.
 

"All truth is relative" <<< Is this a relative truth?
To answer your question directly, not really.
Practically speaking, what is truthful is just how accurately you can describe or perceive reality. If you believe in inaccurate perception, it will eventually collapse like a house of cards, because it's based on something that's not real. It's unsustainable.

I love Leo's spiritual advice, but I hate his extreme political leftism that he shows off in this forum, so I pick the info that ressonates with me and discard the bullshit. Zero problems.
The problem becomes when the reader has no critical spirit and swallows everything.

The thing that makes us human is highly complex social structures, language and culture, i.e. the ability to participate in distributed cognition (which is cognition outside your own mind). Chimpanzees actually have a stronger working memory than humans (the ability to hold numbers in your mind), but we're miles ahead in terms of intelligence for exactly those aforementioned reasons. If you don't take advantage of distributed cognition, you're essentially a chimp. 
Distributed cognition can be thought of as a form of collective intelligence (collective generalized problem-solving ability), but intelligence is not wisdom, as what makes us intelligent also makes us prone to self-deception and "bullshit". A big component of wisdom is the ability to take different perspectives; the balance of integrating and breaking frames and getting unstuck from these self-deception mechanisms. Likewise, if you don't participate in distributed cognition, you'll have a hard time gaining wisdom.
As for its relevance to democracy, again, when the integration and breaking of frames (which is analogous to Wilber's "transcend and include") gets out of balance, we get the opposite of wisdom (foolishness). When integration becomes too strong, we get things like group-think. When breaking frames gets too strong, we get too critical and exclusionary. These things are characteristics of the culture war. As democracy is a collective intelligence, our job is to get it to collective wisdom. That is only possible through honest and open dialogue; not debate, but "theologos". Only then, we can arrive at a balanced collective frame integration and frame breaking.

@Goldzilla I agree in a roundabout way.
The Teaching I informally follow places a good deal of importance on the belly center to be vitally connected with embodiment.
@Zion If these excerpts have any appeal You might find the YouTube about Karlfried Graf Durkheim interesting.
Distinguishing Physical Sensation from Essential Substance
The capacity to sense oneself must become so refined that the individual can discriminate between physical sensation and the sensation of essential substance. It is not enough that the mind be quiet. It is also necessary for the body to be sensitive. The mind can be quiet while the body is deadened. The body has to be awakened so that the center of sensing, the belly center, can be activated. The belly center, or what Gurdjieff called the physical center, is the center of sensing for all parts of the body. Its deepest function is the subtle sensing, the sensing of essential presence, that the Sufis call the organ for touch. Touch is, in a sense, the most intimate of the physical senses. The skin must be directly against an object to touch it. There is no intermediary medium, like sound for hearing or light for seeing. So this subtle capacity is a very intimate one. Accurately speaking, it is sensing essence by being essence. It is the most direct way of perception. This capacity of touch, connected with the belly center, is very intimately connected with the embodiment of essence. It is the body center; its mode of perception is embodiment. Here, perception as touch, and being, are the same act. So this capacity is the most important one. 
Essence with the Elixir of Enlightenment, pg. 130 
Functioning of the Essential Self in the Belly Center
Yes, usually the belly center has to do with embodiment, with the capacity to sense oneself. However, the belly center is also the will center. In a sense, the ultimate function of the will is to surrender to what happens, surrender to the now. And surrender to the now means not to hold on to something. The true function of the will is complete surrender to what’s happening without holding on. That is will. The essential self, like all essential aspects, can function in any of the subtle centers. When one is being the essential self its location is usually the heart center. However, when the essential self is functioning in relation to identifying or disidentifying from any content of experience, it becomes associated with the belly center. The essential self is more like a potential for experience, and it also manifests as a capacity for identification. One of the results of that capacity for identification is embodiment. Embodying something means you are identified with what’s happening. An essential state is present. You are embodying it if you are it. The true self has the capacity to identify with something you are experiencing, but it doesn’t have to. It has a choice; it has the freedom. 
Diamond Heart Book Three, pg. 79
From https://www.diamondapproach.org/glossary/refinery_phrases/belly-center
 

It helps a lot to visualize yourself speaking correctly, as you want to sound.

I like her too, but still think she's a bit too Neo-Advaita for my taste. This whole "you are enlightened, there's nothing for you to do"-schtick is not helpful in most cases and mostly just creates delusion and suffering in beginners. 
 
If you want to find, you must seek. You must even seek when your very seeking is what prevents you from finding.
Because only by realizing that you can't find, you will find. 
 
What she says is of course true and you can't find what you've never lost. But you think that you have lost something.
So what "finding" means in this context is not "regaining what was lost", but realizing that you have never lost anything to begin with!
But you must find that out!!