zazen

Men speak more directly, women indirectly. When men give advice to other men it can hurt women's sensibilities. It is how men communicate with each other, even to the point of insulting each other jokingly, for women looking from the outside in they would think men are stupid for this lol. Now men and women share the same space in discussion forums, gyms etc and men have to police their communication as to not offend (maybe a factor in modern cancel culture as we have become weaker/overly feminised as a society?) It is a testament to mens empathy and self -restraint that he doesn't speak as freely around women as women do around men. Men forego some of their natural way of being to make women comfortable. Evolutionarily women needed the approval of the social group to ensure their survival more so than men, they relied on social ties rather than their own muscular strength that men possessed to survive in the wild. For this reason they try not to offend as easily and are more socially savvy. For men to be strong enough to allow women to be their feminine selves, men need to communicate about truth objectively (even if it hurts feelings) and develop and push society in a better direction. Unfortunately discussion is being diluted and stalled under the banner of 'toxic' 'misogynistic' 'hateful' when its just how men communicate, also known as locker room talk. Women in their sensitivity appear to be more empathetic and they are, however mans relative insensitivity allows him to be more empathetic in the sense that when you're not easy to offend, you're better equipped to cater to others, when you're self consumed with emotion this is harder to do. Men and more so women trust their emotions and act mostly on emotion. For an emotional person if it feels right then it is right and although some things don't feel good to hear or believe they may in reality be sound and correct.

This! A lot of what made us naturally more sociable has gone from society. Tech, screen time, isolated living, weaker bodies (from modern lifestyle) and thus weaker psychology and mental health. A healthy person is a vibrant person, a vibrant person is a sociable person. I guess pick up is attempting to remedy the symptom as the root causes are too big to tackle. We aren't getting rid of the internet, big city living any time soon, now the meta verse in development only furthers us from reality. Essentially our biological evolution hasn't kept up with our technological/cultural evolution and its wreaking havoc on our biological instincts unless we'r very conscious of modern tools affects and live accordingly.

Women are more socially savy than men and thus even have the capability to be more manipulative by nature, that was their mode of survival and is evolved in their hardwiring. Their means of power/strength was covert (social) where as mans was overt (physical). In todays world we have moved from brawn to brain, and women are running circles around men in the social sphere. Men need way more socialisation time to keep up or even attract women. Beautiful women manipulate men all the time and get perks, power corrupts and absolute power can corrupt absolutely. Beauty is power to women. It isn't the tool (beauty, pick up skills, power) thats bad but the hand that wields it. Biology is hardware, and psychology is software. We are human animals by hardware, but human beings by software, it is layered with psychology. Our biologies draw us to be attracted to certain traits (base survival needs) but our psychology also plays into it. We may be aroused instinctively to certain people, our psychology is what can help us decide if we want to stay with a certain person based on mutual interests values etc. Our biology and emotions are very strong and can over ride our psychology, you could be attracted and aroused by a guy who may not be good for you and you logically acknowledge this, maybe after the fact, but in the moment if he does the right things and your emotions are high people find it hard not to act on them especially paired. Men have generally gotten softer, and the few strong men around are strong in the negative (jerks/bad boys). Still, women will say they aren't attracted to them (its politically correct and in the moment their being logical) but in the presence of such men and flooded with emotions its another story. Other guys see this and wish to emulate these guys. The nuance is that men need to learn to be strong in the positive and make women feel emotions as the jerks would, but still be respectful. A lot of guys are now growing up fatherless, and the school system is predominantly female so they don't get to see how men should behave and pick this up by osmosis. Hollywood and media is a poor substitute for this.

Many guys are willing to give women real affection, but those guys are invisible or looked at as creeps as they lack strength. For women to experience affection and enjoy it, it has to come from a place of strength and respect. Lust is the foundation from which romantic love grows, that lust is predicated on strength and power in its many forms (physical, social, status, financial, emotional etc). Conscious survival means be conscious to the fact women are over looking you and go learn and do something about it, but to also be respectful and not abusive with the new knowledge you may gain. Love and consciousness is for everyone, but in the domain of romantic love animal biology has its own laws we must learn to live by. We aren't just spirits interacting with each other but spirits incarnate into biological forms with their own biases interacting with each other. When we speak to someone, we speak to their spirit, their biology, their past experiences/upbringing dictating their current psychological biases and ours to theirs. Spiritual people create an ego on the other side of the coin to act like their above fundamental human needs, a holier than thou attitude of anti pleasure, anti life, asceticism. As long as we are bound by flesh we must live by flesh, but consciously.

If pick up just changed its name to socialising a lot of bad connotations would go away from it. A sub section of the pick up industry was toxic and that got the limelight unfortunately. A thread was just created on how its very hard to transcend sexual desire, even Ram Dass didn't manage, even Leo is still pursuing relationships, so what makes us think the average guy can. The path to relationship has changed in todays day. Workplace romance is off due to me too (don't dip your pen in company ink), social circles aren't as prevalent due to the rat race of big cities, people tucked away at home behind screens etc and picking up in your social circle risks destroying the little community bond you have as people don't live in big familial communities anymore also. So people resort to pick up. Spiral dynamics integrates the lower, sexuality is the stepping stone and lowest rung of the ladder to higher things. Without it how does one climb to higher levels. As Osho even said, spirituality is a rich mans game, the hungry will only care for satiating their hunger, people likewise must satiate their sexuality and intimacy needs. Once sexuality's grips via testosterone declines in middle age this need goes away, but people still have the need for companionship. Intimacy is a survival need, mostly psychological survival to be healthy mentally but this also extends to impacting your physical health as has been studied extensively.

Great video. Think of hypergamy/biology as hardware, and psychology as software. Hypergamy is hardwired biologically, but it is layered with psychology. Although women's biology drives them to get the best they can get, their psychology and self esteem over lays this. Women are more emotional but they aren't devoid rationality completely either, they know they can't just leave a guy as they are ageing and expect to find another man that easily so they prioritise and appreciate their current partner. Also, people's self esteem can feel intimidated being with people too much higher than them so they seek around or over above their level but not so much. Top performers come with certain mindsets habits etc that women will feel too pressured to keep up with just in order to maintain that man, it will cause too much anxiety and insecurity.

https://twitter.com/TellYourSonThis/status/1385261351866675206 Heres the link.

Society / environment nurtures a certain nature out of us, hopefully a healthy sociable one, thats lacking today. If a baby was just to be him/her self and not emulate society / parents it would stay a baby. Manipulation has a bad connotation but everything is being manipulated, I'm manipulating my hands to type this rite now, usually the word is used in a negative way to trick someone, its the place its coming from. If a child is learning how to speak another language and they go practice with someone, do we say their manipulating the other to speak to them back in that language? What is our authentic self? There is a greater self in everyone thats waiting to come out. The potential yet to be made potent, action is what sprouts that seed of potential. People when trying new habits are bound to make mistakes but eventually the BEhaviour starts changing the Being and it becomes them, thus no longer an act. Being can change behaviour as can behaviour change being. When in the past only 40% of males got to reproduce, then agriculture / monogamy came around and every one got partnered up finally men could be themselves even if they were effeminate, soppy romantics, average earners they'd still get a mate. Now that women don't depend on men and can choose the strongest genes, telling men to just be authentic is a disservice and the past patterns of history may repeat where a large cohort of society don't ever get to partner up and reproduce. This is now the wild west. Women are bound to have a natural instinctive repulsiveness to pick up because evolutionarily, if they mated with weak genes thinking they were strong due to a front or act that would mean death. Men are made valuable, women and children are naturally valued by society for their life giving ability, with out them there is no society. Men build their value, women preserve it.

Hope this helps. ''Hypergamy is overstated and used to explain everything to the point its almost reductionist. Whilst hypergamy certainly exists, there are many relationships in which the woman could clearly do better (marry richer or smarter or better looking) but hasn't and won't. Women value the emotional attachment they have with their man. If she can easily discard you, that's not because of hypergamy, it's because you aren't very masculine and never made her feel like a woman under your masculinity so she sought to have that void filled elsewhere. Stated another way, a man smarter, better looking & richer than you could show interest in your woman. But if you've been having good sex, bonding with her, leading her and taking care of business, she's never gonna leave you. You're her world. She doesn't care about that dude. Sure he's better than you in a bunch of ways, but why would she care? You make her feel like a woman. She has history with you. She's bonded with you. She knows fuck all about that guy. He could be a piece of shit. They have no history. She isn't unhappy enough to "try him out". She's happy she's with a committed guy as her looks fade and she has younger competition for those same guys. A man only need reach a certain threshold of competence and emotional connection with a woman for her to be loyal to him and feel like she's his. Be passive and lazy as a man and sure she might cheat, but is that hypergamy, or just leaving a guy because he's a lazy loser bum? Believing women are constantly optimising hypergamy to get the best potential man at any given moment means they are being hyper rational. It suggests they're hypervigilant opportunists, when really they're too emotional to keep breaking pair bonds like that. There is also the sunken cost effect of not wanting to lose out on what you've invested so much into, the shared history created with some one. Really broken women don't trust men and don't pair bond easy. They in actual fact, hate men. So they want to use them. They're predatory, and money driven. They see men as wallets & never truly connect. These gold digging types do optimise their hypergamy.'' Practical point of advice, choose well and older. Women in their early 20's are still maturing and don't know what they want, they change and want to see what else is out there whilst they have youth on there side. Generally late 20's realisation sets in of ageing, someone is more set in their ways values and being and you know what your getting into, plus them not getting the same attention their younger selves used to get and that they need to settle, appreciate who their with, want a family before the biological clocks ticks out all improve odds of a longer relationship. Theres a reason younger marriages have the highest divorce rates.

Low quality women wait at the finish line for the winner. High quality women see potential in their man and help him reach that winner position. A man will far more appreciate a women who was along with him for the ride than the one who met him at his peak as the winner. Part of personal work is developing oneself and to do this having open discussion and getting to truth. Then when men do this ie Leo's comments or video on pick up it's deemed toxic by women. Men speak more directly, women indirectly in order to not offend. Evolutionarily women needed the approval of the social group to ensure their survival more so than men, they relied on social ties rather than their own muscular strength that men possessed to survive in the wild. Women are more socially savvy for this reason. Men are in general more logical and women emotional. When you see Leo giving advice to men it comes across 'toxic' or 'hurtful' when in reality it could be just helpful and what men need to hear to solve their problems. But seeing how men talk hurts women's sensibilities and triggers an emotional response, hence men need men spaces to talk or what is referred to as 'locker room talk' the way they do. We can't place everything under the banner of misogynistic or distasteful. It is a testament to mans empathy and self -restraint that he doesn't speak as freely around women as women do around men. Men forego some of their natural way of being to make women comfortable. Women in their sensitivity appear to be more empathetic and they are, however mans relative insensitivity allows him to be more empathetic in the sense that when you're not easy to offend, you're better equipped to cater to others, when you're self consumed with emotion this is harder to do. Men and more so women trust their emotions and act on their emotions almost entirely. This can lead to failing to question, analyse, check and hold their emotions to account. For an emotional person if it feels right then it is right, and this person does not consider that perhaps although some things feel good to hear or believe, they may be logically unsound, false, outright incorrect or otherwise verifiably false.

Better for men to spend money with women (shared experience) rather than on women (gifts, shopping etc) , until they get very serious into girlfriend territory. Everything in life is transactional, the difference is in quality and degree. The man transacting with a women just for her body, and a women with a man just for his money is a superficial transaction and based on the most lowest of maslows survival needs. This would be the case of a prostitute and the customer. A higher relationship would be to transact with the heart mind and soul of each individual and share that with each other. Transaction is still taking place, but its on a deeper level and of a different quality. It's no longer animalistic and for survival of base desires ie mans need to have sex and woman's to survive. Higher needs are met of emotion connection etc. Men speak more directly, women indirectly in order to not offend. Evolutionarily women needed the approval of the social group to ensure their survival more so than men, they relied on social ties rather than their own muscular strength that men possessed to survive in the wild. For this reason women are more socially savvy then men also. Men are in general more logical and women emotional. When you see Leo giving advice to men it comes across 'toxic' or 'hurtful' when in reality it could be just helpful and what men need to hear to solve their problems. But seeing how men talk hurts women's sensibilities and triggers an emotional response, hence men need men spaces to talk or what is referred to as 'locker room talk' the way they do. We can't place everything under the banner of misogynistic or distasteful. It is a testament to mans empathy and self -restraint that he doesn't speak as freely around women as women do around men. Men forego some of their natural way of being to make women comfortable. Women in their sensitivity appear to be more empathetic and they are, however mans relative insensitivity allows him to be more empathetic in the sense that when you're not easy to offend, you're better equipped to cater to others, when you're self consumed with emotion this is harder to do. Men and more so women trust their emotions and act on their emotions almost entirely. This can lead to failing to question, analyse, check and hold their emotions to account. For an emotional person if it feels right then it is right, and this person does not consider that perhaps although some things feel good to hear or believe, they may be logically unsound, false, outright incorrect or otherwise verifiably false. @Etherial Cat @Preety_India @Tangerinedream Would you rather have men be stronger and embody positive masculinity and social skills ensuring better quality men around for women or rather them not learn social skills (which Leo's latest video is trying to teach and help men with) and grow stronger. The reason for women needing to step into masculine traits at the expense of their femininity which comes more natural to them is because of weaker men in society (various factors for this, modern comfort, food lifestyle etc). This creates insecurity in women that if the men don't take up their positions to ensure a secure environment they'll have to. Hence the unease and women starting to dislike men for letting themselves go in the modern day. Men need to be allowed to discuss and improve, for women's sake and for societies sake and not be labelled toxic or misogynistic when they do. Of course it exists, but when most points are labelled with that, it stops discussion and growth.

Yes, there is nothing casual about sex (especially for women). People sleeping around and getting into emotional turmoil with baggage end up traumatised and less likely to fully trust / function healthily in future relationships unless a lot of work is done. Everyone has baggage, but is it carry on or excess. This leads to family breakdown which leads to further consequences. See the quote below: ''Individuals deprived the bonds of family by outcome of immutable social factors are often at odds with civilization. Such individuals give up on community, opting for a more parasitic survival strategy. They are the shameless narcissists, the angry barbarians and each and every shade of dysfunction there between. Scarcely do such people care for civilization. And how can we expect them to care for something as grand and abstract as civilization when such individuals were never fully subject to the bonds of family? Familial estrangement manufactures apathy. This is how promiscuity and divorce undermine social progress, and in turn, civilizational progress. The effects of such action cause pain, which in turn, promotes excessive individualism and a disdain for collectivism. And so the cosmic recurrence that is a need for balance is tipped too far in one direction. That is, an obsession with the self (individualism, narcissism) and a disregard for the whole (collectivism, abstraction.) Naturally, this is bad for family. And what is bad for family is in turn bad for civilization. Each family represents a building block in the construction of civilization. Families (in the traditional sense of the word) contribute more value to society than lone individuals. Generally speaking, they have better mental health, a higher sense of civic duty, are more productive, and pay more taxes than broken homes or one person households. And this seems only rational. Family is bound by blood, civilization forms around the desires and needs of such bonds. People work harder and produce more when they care for and are cared for by others.''

Mating in captivity by Esther Perel

@gettoefl Know what you mean man. Im no expert and have to learn a lot but think Leo's is doing gods work teaching men pick up in a healthy manner. In his video he said whats more creepy than a guy who's at least trying to improve and gets better is a guy who doesn't know pick up / social skills at all. From my female friends and seeing how guys can be this is true. Pick up (a term with negative connotations now unfortunately) super charges mens social skills by putting them in many interactions which the modern day lacks. Dating in the work place risks me too, in social circles if they even have a social circle risks ruing those social circles and friendships if rejection happens. Gaming, entertainment, work from home further saps us of social experience we naturally had access to in past times. He's going to go into ethics of pick up in next videos, look forward to that but don't think the intention is to bed as many women. This is an adaption to modern times, in the past you courted without sex, settled in and married a virgin / stayed together. The community, morals, religion, economic dependance kept that relationship intact even if the guy lacked 'game'. In the modern world, lacking societal pressure / community / religion to keep the relationship together, women no longer depending on men financially, and with internet / social media and big cities we giving access to many options you need 'game' or to learn how to relate with women to keep get them, even more to keep them.

From what I can observe in society men are actually lacking positive masculinity or masculinity at all. Where can boys learn about masculinity when broken homes lead to single parent households of mostly mothers, then the education system where teachers are mostly women (70%), then the culture which is more feminised and about inclusivity, compassion etc which is good to an extent although lacking positive masculinity becomes imbalanced. In fact masculinity as a whole is looked down upon or called toxic now, leading boys to be confused and hate their own nature rather than embrace its positive side and work on integrating its shadow side, its nuanced. Weak masculinity leads to women feeling more insecure and needing to step in and embrace masculine traits for survival. If not done in a balanced way this is at the expense of their femininity which is what men are attracted to, leading men to be unwilling to commit to women for they offer no more than just sex, which leads to women further having to survive solo, leading to more masculine traits to be embraced, leading to further imbalance. There is great nuance/awareness needed in todays world to balance the polarities for both men and women. What we see now is weak men, and the ones who are strong and get the limelight are strong in the negative masculine ie jerks / bad boys. The girls gravitate towards them sexually which leads other men to want to be emulate those negative masculine traits, and pop culture / music only confirms this further. The negative masculine is strength in its negative form but is still strength and so gains some attraction / recognition compared to a meek nice guys lacking any strength at all. This is the obsession with heroes and the rise of marvel / dc movies, the positive masculine is greatly lacking and we are starving for it now more than ever.

The same laws that limit your freedom, limit another's freedom to harm you. Anarchy (above rule) would lead to chaos as people have different rules they live by and would head butts, the other extreme is tyranny (total control. The middle would be minarchy, minimal rule of government to what is essential which is not so much to govern as it is to protect the borders, civilians, and property / peoples rights. If people ruled themselves by Love than law it is technically possible, but probable?

To add to this thread. Quote: ''The worst men take on traits of the negative feminine, and the best women take on traits of the positive masculine, whilst the best men take on traits of the positive feminine, and the worst women take on the traits of the negative masculine. Men with negative feminine traits are petty, scheming and entitled. Men with positive feminine traits know gentleness and nurturing. Women with negative masculine traits become willful and arrogant. Women with positive masculine traits use logic and hold themselves accountable. Whilst it is a woman's nature to view things emotionally, a highly developed woman can engage reason to act with more fairness. Whilst it is a man's nature to view things practically, a highly developed man can engage compassion to tend to the pressing emotional needs of others. The highly developed woman who can engage reason will never be as logical as the typical man, but she is more so than her sisters. The highly developed man who can engage compassion will never be as emotionally sensitive as the typical woman, but he is more so than his brothers. A woman without emotion would cease to be a woman, and therefore we would not want her to be completely rational, in much the way a man who is very emotional would become too meek, and therefore cease to be a man. Neither's consumed by the other. They possess a helpful fraction. A man who complains women aren't logical enough would not be attracted to a cold logical woman devoid of feminine warmth, in much the way a woman who complains men are too unemotional would not be attracted to a fragile, easily upset sensitive man devoid of male stoicism. The optimal balances or ratios are thus something akin to the pareto principle, with your core nature comprising 80% of what you are, whilst the learned positive attributes of the opposite sex that did not come naturally to you comprise the remaining 20%.''

'' You make your first commitments, and happily give up a little bit of freedom in exchange for a little bit of stability. You create comfort through devices—habit, ritual, pet names—that bring reassurance. But the excitement was bound to a certain measure of insecurity. You gained excitement from the uncertainty, and now, by seeking to harness it, you wind up draining the vitality out of the relationship. You enjoy the comfort, but complain that you feel constrained. You miss the spontaneity. In your attempt to control the risks of passion, you have tamed it out of existence. Marital boredom is born. While love promises us relief from aloneness, it also heightens our dependence on one person. It is inherently vulnerable. The tension between security and adventure is a paradox to manage, not a problem to solve. It is a puzzle. “Can you hold the awareness of each polarity? You need each at different times, but you can’t have both at the same time. Can you accept that? It’s not an either-or situation, but one where you get the benefits of each and also recognize the limits of each. It’s an ebb and flow.” Love and desire are two rhythmic yet clashing forces that are always in a state of flux and always looking for the balance point. '' - Esther Perel

Men have a lot more to lose in marriage so don't initiate divorce (women do 70%). For this reason men are less likely to get married seeing/hearing the previous generations divorce stories and weighing up the cost/risk. To add to that, men get sex and relationships without committing to marriage. If theres no incentives for couples to stay together ie marriage dis-incentivises men to leave as they lose out a lot (yet women still do being more emotionally driven and having the gain of custody, alimony, assets etc) then what else will help couples stay together in raising children. Children need a stable family home to be raised in a healthy manner, in the past in tight communities the tribe raised the children but we don't have that any more in our isolated big rat race cities. No more nuclear family = unstable children = unstable society? Chemistry now trumps character in relationships. The chemistry that brings people together doesn't last usually, and lacking character people don't stick around for the sake of children, family society. In smart startups they hire traits over skills, as traits are imbued in a person and skills can be learned, where as to have a skill full person with bad traits can cause issues in the company. In the same way, character outlasts chemistry. Not to say chemistry isn't important, but it is an art to maintain chemistry long term. In our more selfish consumerist society we value the short term feeling of chemistry, and what makes us feel alive ( the getting to know stage of a new romantic partner, or honeymoon phase ) and the consumerist shopping mentality is exported to dating and continuos shopping for the next best thing (partner). In order to stay together, people need to do be spiritually developed / self actualised to the point they are able to feel alive themselves, and so can stay in relationships long term more easily as biology only makes us feel alive to the point of pro-creation, thereafter the sexual spark that drew to humans together starts to dip, along with the many other factors of raising the kids, tiredness etc. @Harlen Kelly The nuclear family had its flaws, but it was functional to a extent, whats the alternative for a healthier society in particular for raising kids.. conscious relationships..I'm trying to figure it out myself also.

Maybe they feed each other. Competence increases confidence increases competence in a upward loop. Courage gets your started in the first place as we all start with little to zero competence.

If a man is to marry, there is reasonable fear the fresh legal supremacy his woman enjoys will disrupt the balance of power that previously maintained their relationship. The informed man is all too aware the legal privilege of the modern wife can be used to force him into domestic servitude, and that legally speaking, the marriage hangs on a thread tied to a hovering sword that follows him wherever he goes. If man fails in his capacity as husband, or is at least perceived to have failed, he loses everything, by contrast if his woman is an abysmal failure of a wife, she gets a pay day and a fresh chance. In today’s society a woman’s marriage risk is minimal, and of course, this comes at the expense of man’s being astronomical. Women do not fear marriage because they have no reason to, men do because they have every reason to. A marriage’s odds of success are merely improved, but still mightily unfavourable for man even when the potential wife is of considerable quality. And so although it is not impossible to become a patriarch, it is a dangerous affair regardless of who is involved. This danger is neither explicitly the man nor the woman involved’s fault, but rather, the fault of a judicial system that makes marriage so costly to men. Bottom line: marry but not legally or with a prenuptial agreement, choose wisely. Chemistry isn't enough, compatibility and character need to be there also.

This thread begs the question of how to maintain a long term relationship, would love Leo's insight on it. As the saying goes, familiarity breeds contempt, and living together only accelerates the time until this occurs. Space, and letting the other miss you is important in keeping a relationship healthy and the spark there. Novelty, and creating new experiences to bond over. Showing your partner you are valued through social proof, or her seeing you interacting and being treated well by other people, could be your friends/family, or waitresses/store clerks etc. We become blind to what we have, and need to be reminded of it by 3rd parties. Fear of loss kicks in, or competition anxiety which is healthy to a certain extent. If you push it too far the level of insecurity it causes will backfire and she'll end up leaving, its a balancing act. Value (your strengths as a man financially, socially, emotionally, physically) has to be balanced with comfort (your commitment and connection to her , that she has access to that value and can feel safe). In relationships and in giving your commitment to a woman never lose your value which is what she wanted to secure in the first place. You can relax a little bit as once theirs emotional buy in and a history, women don't want to lose that (sunken cost fallacy) but it can't drop so low. What is promised / committed to in courtship has to be maintained and delivered in relationship.

The promotion and increase in status could explain it, this could translate to her feeling higher than you in a certain way and not satisfying her hypergamy although you have to provide more than just financial strength. Be strong emotionally, lead her, create novel experiences, make her feel like a woman, dominate in the bedroom and make her orgasm. Men aren't just there for financial security but emotional, and sexual also. Combined with working from home, theres no clear delineation of the work version of her and at home version of her. The persona associated at her work place is brought home and she's unable to switch it off to be with you as a woman to man. Maybe create a ritual at the end of work to signal the work day is finished, go for a walk or run, change the environment or dance to music. The clingy/neediness etc which happens naturally as men get taken off the dating market into relationships, and so she becomes the only source of sexual comfort for you, its harder out there in the dating world for men to get sex than women so women have a certain sense of ease and abundance that they can get it whenever they need. Men are more in scarcity in this regard. You being putt off by her turning down sex only further's this fact and shows she's either weaponising it to get her way or just no longer feels the attraction for you. She may have affinity towards you or love you, but isn't in love with you, romantically. My advice would be you have to demonstrate to her she's with a real man and make her feel like a woman. Step into your strength, hang out with guy friends, hit the gym hard, be in a positive mood, don't get your validation or good feelings from her or any woman ever for they are emotional and loyal to how you make them feel, not to you. You have to be the sun emitting light, she's the moon absorbing it. Don't initiate sex for some time, flirt/tease her like you did when you first met and pull away, just drop the comment and leave it. Give her space to work for it, miss your presence. Make her feel pressure that your improving and could get another girl. Remember you are the prize. Quote '' It is unhealthy for a man to live his life in dedication to a woman, for better and more stable dividends are reaped from creation and commerce. It is within the busyness of productivity a man acquires the distance necessary to be more craved by his woman, a boon rather than detriment to the relationship despite her protestations to the contrary. A woman will always complain when a man has a mission greater than her, for it deprives her the flow of attention she requires to optimally function. Yet in the presence of an indentured man, she will complain of a lack of ambition, an absence of mission. A woman’s complaints bear little if any merit, for in much the way crying is the way of babies, complaining is the way of women. An unambitious man elicits complaint just as much as an ambitious one, for dissatisfaction is emphatic and characteristic of the feminine psyche. If you can’t create and manage your own happiness, how can you be expected to inspire hers? A man must look after himself before he takes it upon himself to look after a woman. The express responsibility that comes with romantically associating with a woman all but demands it. Foolish men in their naivety rally to placate the unending demands of the boundary pushing woman, whilst wise men concentrate first and foremost on pleasing themselves. They do not pedestalise the needs of the woman above their own. A man who is pleased with himself is in the position to give the woman with whom he associates the option to accept how he does things or to take a proverbial hike and take her chances out on the dating market. Often, out of sheer respect for “putting his foot down” and the sensationalism of the tingles that such assertiveness elicits, she chooses to do things his way. That ladies and gents, is the basis of “make up sex.” For men, in relation to women, there are few needs other than ensuring a promise of sexual exclusivity that cannot be otherwise provided by an inner circle of male friends. Relational intimacy and emotional closeness with women does indeed have a certain appeal to various men, but it is hardly the necessity for men that it is for women. Rather perhaps much to man’s own romantic disappointment it is simply something to be indulged in from time to time, much like alcohol consumption and recreational drug use. A man who indulges in such vices too often gets irreversibly fucked up. Indulging in too much emotional closeness with a woman is likewise a vice, for it has the propensity to make man weak. This makes him pliable, and from there on we encounter the slippery slope of female contempt for male weakness which begins to manifest and ultimately undermine the health of the relationship. Based on this line of reasoning, such activities should be indulged in sporadically to assure her of your emotional fidelity rather than form the basis of your relationship. For women, association with men is necessary, for they derive much of their self-worth based on the man (or men) they are publicly associated with. Their life is but one continuing stream of social media updates which pertain to their relationship status. A single woman is an unhappy woman, looking for a new man to fill the void in her insatiable appetite for high value male validation, whilst a single man is simply looking to get his end away and nothing more. For women, emotions come before sex. For men, sex comes before emotions. ''

The honeymoon phase of relationships people put on their best selves. Once this fades the true self comes out. Besides that, maybe she's taken on a new job or has new stresses in her life causing her to take on masculine traits, or she's reading/exposing herself to new knowledge on being a strong independent woman and trying on a certain way of being. Coming to yourself, have you weakened in some ways where she feels she has to wear the pants in the relationship? Men can become comfortable and slowly lose the attractiveness that got the woman attracted to you in the first place. To maintain romantic love polarity has to be maintained. When guys get into relationships, it is a battle for we become injected with oxytocin and various chemicals that weaken us, evolutionary this is so we would stick around to provision/protect children. Just be aware of this and maintain your strength as a man. The spark gets lost around the 3 year mark. Long term monogamous relationships are a lot of effort and work on both parties. Average relationships last 2-3 years on average, people just get bored. This could be biological, as past this amount of time if the woman hasn't conceived a baby which is what her biology is drawing her to do with your biology, her body/hind brain checks out of the relationship and seeks to make babies elsewhere. Sexual love fades and is hard to maintain, it has to be turned into spiritual love which is an art form both partners need to be open to learning and living through. Quote on women and femininity ''Women are taught to debauch their femininity in pursuit of power and social acceptance under the rule of feminist dogma. They all too unwittingly realise not what they give up by capitulating to feminism. Much to woman’s detriment, adhering to the feminist roadmap results in a vitiation of her desirability to the kind of man she yearns for. Of specific note in regard to this is the contemporary culture. The current economic model and prevailing social-programming of the time push women towards masculinity by framing it as “liberation.” Feminism sells women the lie that to masculinise is to become free. It convinces the feminine to divorce herself from her nature and to aspire to be that which she isn’t. That her desire to nurture, support and mother is weak. She should become more manlike, fierce, assertive, a conqueror! Indeed what banal trite, there is no man of worth breathing that wants to commit to the fabled feminist “real woman.”

Russell brand isn't creepy because he's attractive, physically and non physically. Most men trying to emulate/act that way would get rape whistled at as it signals to the woman a man with weak genes is trying to reproduce, abort abort! Men have to be attractive, not act it. Attractiveness to women is essentially strength in its forms (physical, emotional, mental, spiritual). Strength on these levels translates to the traits : Appearance/Animality, Assured/Assertive, Attentive/Abundant, Aliveness. These 7 traits also are in line with the 7 chakras. These are traits in your control, because of these traits you will gain value from things outside of your control such as social proof, status, wealth etc. These traits are who an attractive person is, not what they have outside of themselves or what their attractiveness translates to / gets them externally, although the external achievements can re-inforce those traits. Physical / Root/Sacral chakra: Appearance (looks/good genes,protective strength) and Animality (in touch with sexuality/primal) this is what causes you to flirt, lets her know this is a man speaking to a woman. Emotional / solar plexus/heart chakra: Assuredness (of your self worth, value, life and that of others giving rise to compassion, can be an emotional rock for the woman, your not emotionally weak or unavailable but emotionally resilient and hold space for her emotional storms) and Assertive (trust in your ability to act rather than be acted upon by life, you ACTtualise your vision, purpose, potential through ACTion). Mental / throat/third eye chakra: Attentive (towards her, social calibration, you have value but she has to have access to that value, if not caring of her needs with your attentiveness towards them theres no security for the woman) and Abundant (in your vision/view of life and what it has to offer). Rational (attentive) optimist (abundant). Attentive towards life and truth, yet optimistic / abundant for you see beauty inherit in life despite its suffering, and see life for what it could be. Rationality devoid human emotion/vision/spirit is nihilistic. Optimism devoid rationality is destructive. Spiritual / crown chakra: Aliveness (in touch with the spirit that animates life, become full of life/energy others want to bask in, playful, share loving energy, compassionate as you realise the essence in you is shared by the essence in others) The nice guy vs jerk debate Nice defined ; from Old French, from Latin nescius ‘ignorant’, from nescire ‘not know’. Be good, not nice or a jerk. Those are both extremes. What is the nice guy ignorant of : of himself, being in touch with himself or his true nature of which there is the lower and the higher, the animal and the divine, the beast and the bhudda. When you lack integrating your nature, you don't know who you are, what you want and have no boundaries against things that go against who you are and what you want. Women essentially seek strength, great strength comes from integration within ourselves. Jerks are in touch only with their animal self (their balls), however they still signal strength on a primal level which is why they get the girls and why girls end up in bad relationships as their bodies instinctually/emotionally react to these guys. Nice guys are too in their mind and cutting themselves off from their lower nature and so no primal strength is there, only intellectual strength. The good guy is in touch and integrated with all, the balls the head and the heart and so signals the most strength. Women don't like the guy to be the jerk, they like the strength and power that comes with it. You can show strength and power in a healthy manner. Don't be nice, don't be ignorant, become aware of your true self and embody yourself in all dimensions.