mr_engineer

Stop crying, then. Stop whining. Take some responsibility for your feelings!

Looks like you like to hate on men. You're using crying-emojis when I appreciate equality.

This issue is very nuanced. I agree that mockery does nothing to help them. However, to 'pity' them, would mean, to agree with the black pill ideology. And I don't think that's a good idea. I think the word you're looking for is 'empathy'. You can put yourself in their shoes without necessarily agreeing with them. If you put yourself in their shoes and look into the black pill, you will realize very quickly that it is heavily based on online-dating stats. Meaning, it is the dating-ideology of someone who doesn't leave their house, who only relies on online-dating and social-media DMs. I think that the root-level solution is to make the internet a safer space for men. If you want to help them, that's how you help them. Here's why. It is true that the issue is that they're not going out and touching grass. But, the more you tell them to do that, the more invalidating it's going to feel to them, because they're subscribed to the blackpill ideology. So, the more resistant they'll be to doing that. And, the reason for holding onto the blackpill ideology is not necessarily that they're 'lazy' (or that the blackpill ideology is true - it's NOT), it's that the media and internet-spaces have waged a PR-war against men. Men are being sent a message through the internet/media that women don't need them, the world doesn't need them. This is what makes someone want to sit in their room and play video-games all day, living in a nihilistic funk. It's not that 'life is too hard and I'm too lazy to deal with it'. So, how do you make the internet a safer space for men? Very simple. Moderate man-hate and have zero tolerance for it. The more people you see do that (because let's face it, the internet is run by real people), the more hope they'll feel and the more likely it is that they'll go out and touch grass.

Now we're talking. This is some equality.

Buying low and selling high would happen even in long-term investing, right?

@teraflu It is not true, fundamentally, that women are meant to be receivers and men are meant to be providers. However, mothers do need to receive and fathers do need to provide. And, if as a man or woman you don't accept this, you will struggle as a parent. Because men have a physical advantage over women, the conditions of society impact women more than men. And men have more of a responsibility to protect society in general than women do. So, in careers that require you to be territorial, men will be favored. This part is fundamental and it probably won't change. Also, there are a lot of cultural factors that make some careers very competitive. This favors men more than women. This could change as the world develops more and becomes more conscious.

Dude, the point of cryptos is that people use them, but the point of pissing in the sea is not to raise the sea level. The more people use them, the more people use them.

The more people use a crypto, the more the crypto gets promoted.

Here's my answer - it's when you figure out what you uniquely have to offer to women. This will be your competitive edge against other men when it comes to getting hot women. The advantage of figuring this out is that you can edge out the white-knights and simps. You can use some brute-force and edge of personality to accomplish this, if you know what you have to offer to women. You will be confident with women and in dealing with simps, especially, if you base it on this. The simps are the crabs in the bucket when it comes to improving your game/being yourself with women. They try to set the rules of the dating-game for you. They're not playing by the rules, they try to undercut the genuine, authentic guys in various kinds of underhanded sneaky ways. For example, being male feminists, having positions of power that they use to favor women over men, etc. This is how you successfully deal with them.

I think there are two biggest factors. Whether or not the man is willing to do everything in his power to ensure her well-being or not, i.e. whether he's ready to commit (This is the definition of 'readiness' according to me, by the way, is whether or not you're willing to do it), and Whether or not there is compatibility between what the man wants to do for her and what the woman wants from him. There I said it.

A lot of the semantic gaps in dating between men and women stem from this difference. Men define 'commitment' as - What you 'do' for someone. And women define 'commitment' as - The level of responsibility you take for a person's well-being. So, what is the real definition of 'commitment' in a cis-het romantic-relationship? My definition is - It's a combination of both. Commitment means - to do everything in your power to ensure the other person's well-being.

Doing it online is alright, it's not too bad. In order to really resolve this, though, you have to do this face-to-face. There are a couple of reasons for this. Your fight or flight response will go to a whole another level in real life, maybe because you were bullied in the past for being 'sensitive'. And you must face that. You could actually make good friends in real life by doing this in real life. Your dating-life could actually move forward by doing this.

If you need help being vulnerable in front of others, have you tried group therapy? I would go to this meetup in which we played this card-game called '100 meaningful questions'. We would just go there to be vulnerable and share ourselves with the group and they'd be present. That's what it took for me to have a breakthrough on this front. If you don't have some such opportunity, I'd highly recommend group therapy.

For a long time, this idea of 'creepiness', in which men are randomly labelled as 'creepy' didn't make sense to me. I had a number of questions, like Why do women feel fear in response to this behavior? Why do women blame men for their fear-response, instead of looking at themselves and figuring out why they feel that way? Most importantly, why do men have to change their behavior, instead of women being told to change their mindset around the idea of 'creepiness'? Here's the explanation. There are too many women in the world who don't believe in direct communication. Meaning, not only do they not directly communicate their desires and expectations and not only do they think it's okay to not communicate directly - they think that it's the right way to communicate, to have uncommunicated expectations. And, they think that this is how everyone communicates. Now, when they see a man behaving in a way that is 'weird' or 'out of the ordinary' or giving them attention that they don't understand, they project this lack of direct communication onto the man. Meaning, they project an 'uncommunicated intent' onto him. This projection of the 'intent' is what 'creeps them out'! Because you triggered these feelings, they have already demonized you, on a rational level. Now, they're just going to look for reasons to destroy you. (And not bat an eye in doing so.) They're going to call on their army of simps and then the army of simps will take you out. This is the problem. The army of simps will believe whatever story they make up and then you're toast.

I think I will consider this idea of 'creepiness' debunked. Mods, you can lock the thread now. Male sexuality ftw!

That's what intellectual-honesty means. You are logically sound. It is a value of the forum. I'm not trying to control the forum's value-system, it is Leo's biggest value here.

Thank you. Buddy, I am dealing with it. I'm testing the integrity of your solutions here first, then if I don't like them, I'll experiment with other solutions. Relax.

Buddy, I have done all of the shadow-work and the OP was the result of it. It's very insightful, if you really have a close look at it. The solution to the problem really is to debunk this idea of 'creepiness' altogether, using logic and facts. They have to answer it in a logically sound way.

Do you agree, then, that being 'creepy' isn't inherently bad? The judgement just doesn't make logical sense. That's all I'm saying. Last I checked, the guys who are getting laid don't give a shit about how they come across or about others' feelings. And, this works out for them. So, if I'm not 'taking responsibility' for 'not making women feel creeped out' or I'm not agreeing with your opinions, that shouldn't hold me back with women, right?! The forum does have to live by intellectual-honesty, because it's Leo's top value. It's healthy to hold each other to this standard.

Yeah. So, what I'm saying, is that if they have these feelings, it's their responsibility and they don't get to blame men for the feelings and call the man 'creepy'. And, men shouldn't have to change their behavior around women's triggers. Does that make sense to you? Or, are you going to paint that as '@mr_engineer not taking responsibility'?

No, I'm looking for answers that make logical sense. So far, they haven't made logical sense. That's the reality.

When women say 'I feel creeped out', is that them expressing feelings, or stating facts? You want to earn the respect? Answer this question.

This entire thread is me working with the trigger. The trigger for me, was that the idea didn't make sense. So, I came to the esteemed forum to see what explanations yall had. And, I have not been impressed.

I thought the forum also had a commitment to truth and intellectual-honesty. Make it make sense. Then, I'll consider 'improvement' by your program.

At least, you're thinking about what I'm saying. That's a good sign.