mr_engineer

Then why are you trying to discredit what I'm saying?! This is not just about me, this is about other men reading this. We will not be taking this anymore and we will be calling it out when we see it. It's because yall aren't doing what you should be doing to fix the situation. This calls for an escalation of consequences for your sexist behavior. We will be calling out creep-shaming from this point on.

@Princess Arabia More attempts to regulate men's behavior. The standard arguments of 'he's weak, he's wounded, he's not loving himself', blah blah blah. If I said something sexist towards women, you said 'this is wrong' and then I make it about 'your specific traumas', it would validate your opinion of me as 'sexist', right?! Same deal.

Yeah, I know how much you care about women's feelings. Women's feelings are of paramount importance, aren't they?! Men can't have one conversation about themselves without worrying about how women feel about it. How about 'Be yourself, no matter what others think of you'? That'll work. By the way, it's the opposite of what everyone here has been saying to OP. Everyone here wants to control OP's behavior, just because he's a man.

The fact that the word 'creepy' is even being used, implies that you do care about it. You're already making an attempt to regulate my behavior when you use the word. We have to stop using that label for no reason. In fact, we have to stop using it, period. The day you stop using this word, is the day I'll believe you telling me that 'you don't care how I behave'.

Men have to stop putting up with over-regulation of their behavior. Those of you who think you can regulate us - who do you think you are?! And who are you to speak on behalf of third-parties?! Who decided that you're more socially calibrated than us?! You're not. All of you put women's 'feelings' on a pedestal and are willing to change your entire personalities accordingly. What you don't know is that the women who blame you for their feelings are unpleasable, you will never feel good enough with them. That's the reality. So, focus on finding someone who will accept you for who you are, instead of changing your behaviors to suit people who won't.

If he seems okay with what you've said, doesn't mean that you're right and doesn't mean that your solution is going to work. It's an oversimplification of the problem at hand. Just admit that you don't give a fuck and you're being a simp right now. You think that if a woman feels uncomfortable, it's everyone else's fault but if a man feels uncomfortable, that's his fault.

No, the problem is not 'solved', this is the start of a new problem. Which is this - because of this, he is less likely to meet a woman who will accept him for who he is. When he asked to see her family, that was authentic! Now, we're teaching him to be inauthentic by creep-shaming him.

All of you need to let men be men and not regulate men's social behavior so much. The 'toxic masculinity' rhetoric has gotten way out of hand and we need to bring back some appreciation for masculinity. We need to appreciate the fact that he approached her at all. Being a man is just incredibly thankless these days and we can do better for men. So, please take your bullshit social rules and shove them up your asses.

By 'cases', I mean, with which women. The same behavior will come across as 'creepy' to some women and an escalation of intimacy to some other women. I think you didn't read the first sentence, where I said 'whether the behavior comes across as 'creepy' depends on the other person'. Let me repeat that - 'creepy' is a name that other people call you, it's not something you choose to be.

Whether it comes across as 'creepy' or not, depends on the other person. Now, here's the real question - in which cases will it come across as 'creepy' and in which cases will it come across as an expression of intimacy? That's what I was answering.

Come on, you were defending fearful actions. Don't deflect. Everyone else on this thread has been calling his behavior 'creepy'. Okay, Ms. Mind-reader. How am I feeling?! And what am I blaming women for?! Complaining about what?! I'm giving OP dating-advice! Everyone else here has been name-calling OP, calling him 'creepy'. And I'm telling all of you that this is wrong and explaining to you why it's wrong.

As I've said previously, if her goal is to end up alone and tell everyone who approaches her to 'fuck off', I have no issue with that. But, if we're assuming that she also wants to end up with someone, which we are, when we're dating, that's what our standards of behavior are going to be based on! I'm not saying that my standards should be superior to anyone else's. I'm saying that the standards of behavior that bring people together should be superior to the standards of behavior that separate people. That's all. I'm saying this again - note that her response had nothing to do with what he actually did and everything to do with the 'uncommunicated intent' she projected onto it. Meaning, she would've responded like that at some point, no matter who he was or what he did. So, the real solution, is to figure out whether she's going to do that or not to begin with by testing for her attachment-style.

Indeed, there is nothing wrong with being fearful. The problem starts when this fear distorts your worldview, it makes you suspicious of everyone who behaves a certain way. The problem with fear, is that it makes you come up with the wrong 'uncommunicated intent', which is why you then label other people as 'creepy', you blame them for your fear. That's demonization of a person right there. That is disrespectful and unacceptable. Men should not be putting up with this in their dating-lives. And men should be vetting women for this kind of avoidance before asking them out. Other people are not to blame for your fear. You're feeling fear because of your own trauma and conditioning. Why should a man put up with someone who makes him responsible for her feelings? In which 'he can make her feel fear, he can make her feel happy'? Why should a man put up with someone who doesn't take responsibility for her happiness in life?! Who blames external circumstances for how she feels?! This is why my advice to OP was to vet for attachment-style.

Here's the ground - you asked me to do the same thing, I didn't want to do it. But, instead of calling you 'creepy' and reporting you, I made a joke of it. Why didn't she do the same? What was stopping her? Her own fear. All of us really need to not have sticks up our asses. Everyone is not going to meet our standards of 'social appropriateness'.

My point is, you don't have to get scared when someone doesn't perfectly fit your standards of 'social appropriateness'. Whether you want to share the pictures or not is still upto you, but understand the actual intent at play. Don't project an 'uncommunicated intent' that wasn't communicated. I think it was not a valid reason to cut contact with the OP. The cutting of contact didn't happen because she was asked to do something she didn't want to do. It happened because she wasn't comfortable with getting approached in general, because she was avoidant.

This is me, This is my family, And this is my bedroom.

@Rishabh R About what she said to you - the reality of most Indians who are dating, is that they're dating with the mindset of arranged-marriage. What this means is that for Indian women dating Indian men, dating is equivalent to betting in a horse-race. You evaluate which horse is the fastest and you bet on that horse, so that when this horse wins, you benefit from it. (It's not as bad as 'standing at the finish-line and picking the winner' like redpillers say, but it's still pretty transactional.) Most people on this planet are not looking for love, because they don't value love. They do not even know what 'love' is! So, if you want to find loving, feminine women, you have to go where they are. Which means, you have to cultivate some sort of artistic hobby/artistic endeavor. There, you'll find them!

Alright. Now, who makes the rules of what's 'socially appropriate' vs 'socially inappropriate'? Are these rule-makers loving individuals, who wish the best for us, who want us to have good relationships?! Nope. These people are fearful individuals, who operate from a space of fear in relationships, who want to hold us back. Always notice that there is no textbook definition of 'social appropriateness' but there is always a contextual definition of 'social inappropriateness'. It's always 'don't do this, it'll make her feel X' or 'don't do that, it'll make her feel Y'. First of all, how do you know that? Are you able to read minds? Just because this is how it worked with one person, does it have to work the same with someone else? Secondly, these dumb standards of 'social appropriateness' vary from culture to culture. In some cultures, female sexuality is shamed to the degree that you can't ask women whether they want to have sex to their face. Whereas, in some other cultures, women are a lot more open with their sexuality. Ultimately, these bullshit standards go back to what the dominant religion of your culture believes. And, if you take on a more spiritual approach, a lot of it can be bypassed.

@sda If you're still worried about 'making her uncomfortable' or some BS like that, I've made a thread about 'creepiness' explaining what it really means. So, if you want to waste your time figuring out what it is that's making her uncomfortable, figure out what 'uncommunicated intent' they're projecting onto you when you do something that you know to be harmless. Figuring this out will not get you any closer to finding someone who loves you, it'll just help you make sense of what's making them act in weird/strange/crazy ways (aka, why they're running from you). In general, you shouldn't be wasting your time with women who are operating from a space of fear with you. Because fear is the opposite of love.

Now, here's the real question - why are you uncomfortable with it? Does it have anything to do with him?! Nope. It's because you are operating from a space of fear in relationships. A fear of your boundaries getting violated because 'he knows too much information'. That's textbook avoidant attachment-style. Look, if your goal is to break up with whoever comes to you and end up alone, that's on you. You can work on your break-up style all you want. But, those of us who want to end up in happy relationships, we're going to work on our attachment-styles. This is a typical justification for illogical behavior. Just make an enemy of logic itself.

The excuse she gave shows that she doesn't prioritize relationships and/or has an avoidant attachment-style. Don't take it personally. Have a way to evaluate someone's attachment-style before you ask them out/decide to date them. That way, you won't run into walls like this.

Oh, buddy, the distinctions between 'real' and 'virtual' are going to get murkier and murkier as time passes. You cannot ignore the fact that people are getting sucked into the virtual world more and more. In fact, what I think you can do for the 'real world', is to help people break out of the virtual world! For that, you have to understand how the virtual world works. Then, you can help people break out of it. I don't know that much about finance or pharma. What I do know, though, is that if you want something that's logic-based and creative, programming is the way to go. Once you learn to program, you will be invincible in our technocratic world. You can apply those skills anywhere, for anyone. That's what you need to succeed in Computer Science. It's the right personality-type for a programmer. College is the time where you have lots of opportunities and lots of time to follow your passion. So, that's when you tackle the material that would require you to have a high learning-curve! If you want to learn anything that's hard and technical, college is when you do it. Don't slack in college, don't screw around in college. I had friends who screwed around for 3 1/2 years in college and then in the last 1/2 year, they were struggling to get jobs in placements. The world is more competitive than ever. You, being a conscious individual, are already on the leading-edge of thought. All you have to do is to take opportunities to be productive when you have them and to not waste your time. This will take you from being on the leading-edge mentally (but being laid-back and relaxed in practical reality), to being on the leading-edge of your field in practical reality. I'm not saying that you should change the world or anything, but I will tell you that it is an insane feeling to be on the leading-edge of your field.

It's the biggest, highest-demand application of mathematics in today's world. Your future is secure if you go in this direction. If you're interested in learning about hard sciences with the intention of applying it to solve problems, this tells me that you have the personality of a researcher/expert. So, if I were in your position, I'd look to get into industrial R&D in big tech companies first, then if I see a problem that nobody is solving, I'd look for business-ideas of new and creative products. AI is going to be a very big deal in the future, there are going to be a lot of opportunities for developers to develop the virtual world. Be it virtual money, virtual navigation, virtual characters, etc. Now, if you also know about epistemology, you can use that knowledge to not get lost in it yourself and to help those people lost in the matrix to break out of it! I'd suggest ML and data science. The reason is that it will give you a deep technical foundation and it will help you face your fear of technical complexity. Just work your ass off in college, build a diverse skill-set right now. Now is the time to do that so that you get a good job 4-5 years in the future! This will also land you good summer internships. It's the bold option, for sure. Focus on being a formidable competitor in the marketplace. Take the option with the higher learning-curve right now so that you have the confidence to do what you want to in the future.

I got into simulation software-development, where I was working on an earthquake-simulator. The lifestyle didn't really go with me, though, it was very lonely. Then, I got more interested in philosophy/epistemology and I saw a whole bunch of problems in the education-system. The fundamental problem being that the 'epistemology' or the 'definition of knowledge' of the current education-system is that 'knowledge=words'. This leads to a high emphasis on memorization and regurgitation in the exams. Which is why the exams grade you on your ability to regurgitate the system's narrative (which is disgusting, if you ask me). When I saw this, I saw a big gap in the test-prep industry in India. The test-prep industry here is huge, it is worth $70 billion. And, most of them are wrong about the right way to prepare for the toughest engineering entrance-exam in the world, IIT-JEE. So, I applied my superior knowledge of epistemology, metaphysics and Spiral-Dynamics ('superior' compared to the existing institutes) and devised a new prep-strategy for students for this entrance-exam! Now, I'm launching a new portal. You sound like you have potential as an engineer. Here's my definition of an 'engineer' - someone who solves technically complex problems using technological innovation. Therefore, I'd suggest that you go into engineering. More specifically, Computer Science/AI/Machine-Learning. Even if you don't plan on working in a big tech company long-term, even if you'd like to start your own business, my diagnosis is that you're the type of entrepreneur who would be very good at the R&D of the product. So, I'd highly recommend becoming technically proficient before thinking of entrepreneurship. If your interest in philosophy is application-oriented, you absolutely must get into engineering. Because, science is also 'philosophy' So, if you apply that 'philosophy' to do technological innovation, you're an engineer! No, any kind of math is not 'much needed'. There are some branches of math that are purely in the philosophical domain right now. Especially pure math research is purely philosophical right now. I'll give the branches of math that are in descending order of importance in the marketplace right now: Statistical analysis, data science Numerical Methods, Numerical Analysis Analytical Calculus, Real/Complex Analysis Number Theory Don't think you can just wing it with your course-choices in your undergrad and then magically land a job in the future, don't take your job-prospects for granted. I suspected that the B-Math degree, as enticing as it was at the time, would have put me in a precarious position in the job-market because of the high emphasis on analytical math. I was right. You college kids need to really get in touch with real-world marketplace demands as soon as possible. Your career is on the line here, this is no joke. The competition is stiff.

@Abe27 When I was to enter college, I had a similar dilemma. I was very interested in math, I was getting admission into one of the top math-universities of my country. It would've been a B-Math degree. (No tuition, they would've paid me a stipend). The other option was to go into Mechanical Engineering and get a B.E. in it. (High tuition, no stipend). I chose the B.E. The reason was very simple - I didn't see how I would apply math-knowledge in a competitive job-marketplace. Engineering felt more secure, financially. And, it felt more grounded in reality, I didn't want to lose myself in the weeds of philosophy. Later on, when I saw the application of math in applied science research, I went for an M.S. in Applied Math and I got into those kinds of research-projects. If you're taking a student-loan, please take accounting. You need to in order to find a job in the future. If you're not taking a loan, even then, you need to be thinking about what you're going to do for a living. Now, I'm not saying that you shouldn't get into philosophy, by all means, study it. But, college costs serious money these days and you need to have something to show for it in the future.