something_else

I mean… yes? I feel like that’s quite a reasonable thing to do.

It is definitely balanced in favour of women. Men do some pretty horrific shit to women on average, worse than what women do to men on average. Not to say women are innocent in gender wars, of course not, but it definitely isn’t one of those cases where both sides are equally bad.

@Emotionalmosquito Nice dude!!! It’s normal to be nervous, try not to overthink, don’t go in with an agenda, don’t go in with expectations. Vibe with her and have fun. Regardless of what happens, this is personal development and more experience, so enjoy that feeling. If there is flirty energy then you can invite her back to yours, some girls are down, some aren’t. Just don’t be too pushy about it, and try to slide it into the convo smoothly rather than just directly inviting her to yours. Good luck!!

Weirdly, this is pretty much just our arguments flipped. I'm arguing for Transcend and Include for Orange -> Green, your argument seems to be transcend Orange to Yellow and bypass Green. My follow up point is that Green's effectiveness comes in different forms from Orange, forms that when evaluated under an Orange value structure seem ineffective when they are actually not. Well, the US now has a massive democratic majority that will likely lead to the end of the Iran war. Or at the very least make significant progress towards ending it. This massive majority was largely possible because of a change in the cultural zeitgeist, created by collective awareness. I think Stage Orange is very valuable when it's healthy. I've never had any interest in bypassing it, most of my life has been spent on Orange values tbh. Exactly, but without that potential energy an individual cannot act as the lightning bolt that sparks change. Green is all about creating this potential energy at a cultural level through shared value systems. Again, this is evaluating Green under an Orange value structure. Green's methods of producing change in the world don't live at the level of the individual, they live in the shared culture of a society of individuals. Red vs Blue is a good analogy, again. Red's method of effectiveness is individual violence and power, Blue's is in the collective authoritarian regime that everybody follows. From the perspective of Red, emerging Blue is useless because it creates weaker individuals. However the shared values of Blue across an entire culture produce a cohesive unit that is more effective than Red as a whole. Orange to Green is similar. Green doesn't necessarily produce more individually successful people according to Orange's standards, but its shared values can produce forms of collective effectiveness that Orange alone struggles to achieve. For example, Scandinavian countries.

Firstly, most people operate in level 1 and level 2. It's not specific to Stage Green. Secondly, you are applying a Stage Orange value system to a strawman of Stage Green and wondering why Stage Green doesn't hold up. This is vaguely analogous to someone who is Stage Red using number of people killed to qualify somebody at Stage Blue. Yes, Stage Blue is often fine with violence but it wants the violence to serve a higher collective purpose and so it doesn't really value the act of dominance and murder in and of itself. The same is true of Green, it may climb the corporate ladder or achieve personal success, but personal success is not at the pinnacle of its value system anymore and so it is somewhat unfair to qualify Green strictly on Stage Orange values. One of Green's fundamental tenets is "it's not about you". I don't disagree with you on this. People like this can certainly be annoying, depending on how much they complain and how little action they take. But I think you're overlooking the value of collective awareness itself. An individual becoming aware of systemic flaws in their government or society can contribute to societal development without taking extraordinary personal action. When millions of people undergo the same shift in perspective, the resulting change in the collective zeitgeist can be enormously powerful. An entire country becoming dissatisfied with its government can create the conditions for far greater change than even a particularly effective individual could achieve alone. I think there's a tension here between your personal values and Spiral Dynamics itself. You seemingly place enormous value on individual achievement and personal responsibility, all of which are characteristic of Orange. But Spiral Dynamics doesn't inherently regard someone who excels according to those standards as more developed than someone whose primary concerns have shifted towards collective welfare. In fact, somebody who lives a relatively unremarkable life by Orange standards but who has developed a collectivist worldview could be considered further along the spiral than an exceptionally successful Orange individual. My sense is that this frustrates you because you're evaluating developmental progress according to the standards that Green exists specifically to transcend.

Do you have examples of people doing this? I don't doubt it happens, but the 80-90% figures you were quoting earlier don't match up with my experience. Again, identification of systemic problems, discussion, and awareness are a large part of healthy stage green. They are a feature, not a bug. Perhaps it bugs you because you're so oriented towards individualism and the individual solving their own problems, but that is not really what stage green is about. It's a collective stage. It seems like inaction when everybody is just sitting around complaining and talking about issues without necessarily doing anything, but this still collectively improves the development level of society over time. Most issues Green feels strongly about are not things an individual can do a whole lot about anyway, it requires large scale mindset shifts in society to fix those problems, which is achieved largely through awareness, identification of problems, open discussion, and yes, crying about them.

The moment you see healthy + effective Green you reclassify it as Yellow, because it doesn't fit your conception of Green. But every stage can function effectively. Post-war America was a highly effective expression of Orange, just as great historical empires like Rome were effective expressions of Blue. Why should Green be the exception? Spiral Dynamics describes overlapping value systems with a centre of gravity, not rigid categories. Rome had elements of Red and Orange, and post-war America had elements of Blue and Green. Likewise, Scandinavian countries have Orange and Yellow characteristics, but their centre of gravity is distinctly Green. This is a developmental model. Healthy Green doesn't need to reject Orange's achievements. It can retain markets, productivity and individual competence while prioritising equality and collective well-being. Using Orange mechanisms to serve Green values doesn't automatically make a society Yellow. I think you're overlooking the value of those Green "talking points". Awareness, empathy, fairness, dialogue and community aren't substitutes for development, they're developmental achievements in and of themselves. Orange emphasises individual achievement and action. Green recognises that many problems are systemic and require collective solutions. Raising awareness, changing public attitudes and building shared understanding are part of how Green produces change through democracy and collective action. What you dismiss as "just talking" can actually be the groundwork for societal progress. And without that expanded awareness of different cultures, perspectives and systems, how could the genuinely systemic thinking of Yellow emerge? Of course unhealthy Green can get trapped in moralising, virtue signalling and endless discussion. But that no more defines Green than corporate greed defines Orange or authoritarianism defines Blue. Most left-leaning Western people centred at Green are ordinary, functional people with careers, relationships and responsibilities. They're not all stereotypical online activists. And if the people you're criticising aren't even centred at Green, why use them as evidence of Green's dysfunction? Ultimately, my question to you is this: If you classify Green as ineffective whenever it fails, but reclassify it as Yellow whenever it succeeds, what would healthy, effective Green actually look like to you?

More LordFall than you, to be fair. But “most green are ass at orange” conveys the same sentiment indirectly.

@LordFall @Ulax You’re both stereotyping green as activist hippies or like the stereotypical SJWs of old. Most people with a centre of gravity in stage green just come across as fairly normal well-educated people with careers, hobbies and goals like everyone else. The average left leaning westerner is firmly stage green, but most are not activists. Think of Scandinavian countries for example, they’re some of the most stage green places on earth yet it hardly makes sense to say “Scandinavian countries are useless at coming up with solutions to problems” because it’s simply not true. One look and you can see that they’re some of the most effectively run countries in the world, yet they would be classified as having a centre of gravity that’s firmly green. The way you’re applying spiral dynamics is quite flawed to be honest, you’re using it like a personality test instead of a developmental model.

I pretty much only ever bring up spiral dynamics when other people do. I like the model and I think it models human development well, but it’s often used more like a personality test than a development model

Sprezzatura The art of looking put together without looking like you're trying too hard

I think you're stereotyping green a bit. There are plenty of stage green people who try to find solutions for problems. Don't forget that in order to properly integrate green you have to go through orange, and orange is very solution oriented. Yes, some stereotypically stage green people resent orange, but most stage green people are not like that. Awareness, open discussion, and community are usually the mechanisms by which green tries to solve problems, and those are not terrible solutions for the problems green likes to grapple with. It's limited, but to say that green never provides solutions for problems is a touch strawmannish.

This is fair, but both men and women had incentives to have casual sex in the past too, and plenty did. Men to have as many children as possible, and women to get the best possible genes for her children.

What is coming?

Daddy in a sexual context just makes me laugh. I can't take it seriously. Calling a girl mommy as a joke is pretty funny though, I've done it.

As in it ignores the physical strength differential between a typical man and woman? Yea, perhaps I should have specified big burly bears I think it’s still one of the easiest things for most men to imagine that conveys roughly the kind of emotional state that women often experience with strange men approaching them, but yes it does miss out on the power differential.

It sucks to be born into a country where you have little control or freedom. I understand that, and the irony of how harsh I’m being about his lack of empathy is that I lack a degree of empathy for his situation myself. So you’re right in that I’m probably being too harsh. At the same time, it’s hard to excuse the amount of shit talking towards women. Calling them dumb animals and whatever else. Look dude, I know you’re frustrated and I’m being quite harsh on you, but nothing you’re thinking or doing right now is going to help your situation. It’s only making it worse. I know you want someone to tell you that you’re right, that all women are evil and dumb and that’s why they don’t want to date you. But that’s unfortunately not true, no matter how comforting it would be for you to hear that. And I’m not gaslighting you by telling you I enjoy talking to women. I have more female friends than male friends. Women are great company, but they are inherently distrustful of strange men for valid reasons. Denying that reality is only going to dig you into a deeper hole. Accept it and find ways to work with it. Pickup is sub-optimal dating strategy in many ways, even more so in a highly conservative country. If you don’t have a solid social circle of friends and a decent social life, I’d start by building that before focusing all of your effort into solo cold approach pickup. If you’re out with friends a few times per week in social places you’ll naturally meet women who will be far more trusting of you than the random girls you’re talking to when you’re on your own. Hopefully that will improve your view of women, which will in turn help you connect with them and date them much more easily.

I was asking you to imagine how you’d feel if they did violate your boundaries regularly, because that’s what many men do to women. I’m not saying gay men are actually like this 🙄 I find women very enjoyable to talk to, in fact often more than men on average. So this might be a you problem rather than a woman problem. And seeing how you’re talking about women here just makes me think it’s a you problem even more.

@Majed The bitterness is not helping you. Fix your life situation, build up your social circle, drop the bitterness surrounding women, and you’ll be doing much better in the dating department.

You lack empathy for women. Imagine that throughout your life a total of 20 gay guys had come up to you randomly and started touching you. Or aggressively hitting on you, not taking no for an answer. Making you very uncomfortable, telling you they want to pound your ass after talking to you for 5 seconds. Are you going to trust the 21st gay guy? Probably not, you’d probably be understandably cautious. This is roughly what women experience. Women are bombarded with unwanted and unexpected sexual advances from men their entire lives, so the risk to reward ratio calculation her brain is doing when a random dude starts talking to her is not in your favour. To balance that out, you need to build trust and show that your reward is worth her risk.

Everybody is different. Some people like casual sex, some don’t. Sometimes people are for or against it for the wrong reasons, like repression. But many just have preferences one way or the other.

You don’t really. The vast majority of men will never approach 100 women in their life, let alone 1000. Yet the majority of men will still find a partner. Because most women don’t have any reason to trust a random man trying to talk to her on the street, but many reasons to fear him. You need to put yourself in women’s shoes to understand why they act the way they do instead of taking this bitter attitude and claiming they’re all wrong or rude or disrespectful. The exact inverse of your point here would be a woman saying something like….. “And honestly these days men are just so disrespectful. Like you’re just going about your day and they pester you and won’t leave you alone. Like just why?” Now notice the emotional reaction you have to that, and imagine a woman reading your comment. She is probably having almost exactly the same emotional reaction.

It's a systems thinking model, it's theoretical by nature. My point is very practical though, embodied Stage yellow understands why people act the way they do and realises that other stages are necessary for human development, hence feeling compulsive frustration towards them should start secede. If that isn't happening, someone claiming to be Tier 2 should reflect on why that is.

I'm just stating one of the defining characteristics of tier 2 under the spiral dynamics model. By its definition it's quite a flexible system and there are always exceptions to the rules. I'm sure stage yellow people still get frustrated with others sometimes, it's natural. But I think if you find yourself being constantly irritated by people you consider of lower development, it may be time to re-evaluate how Tier 2 you really are, and whether being Tier 2 is just something you identify with rather than something you actually embody. It's quite easy to look at a description of Stage Yellow and think "yes, I think this is correct and represents my values and ideals therefore I am tier 2" without actually doing the work to embody those values. If fully embodied, under the spiral dynamics model, you shouldn't really be feeling frustration towards those from stages further down the spiral, as the whole point of tier 2 is that you understand the whole model and why people of certain stages act the way they do. Frustration and anger become Stage Red tools you can call upon when necessary rather than something the world or those in it make you feel regularly.

One of the defining characteristics of being tier 2 is that people lower on the spiral don't trigger you that much, because you understand why they are acting the way they are. If you're being severely irritated by behaviour that's characteristic of lower stages, say stage green, it's possible that irritation is not coming from a Tier 2 place.