Emerald

This feels like a coping mechanism for feelings of disconnection and a sense of powerlessness to solve that disconnection.

I saw some statistics on this a year or two ago. The average age gap in the U.S. is 2 years where the man is 2 years older than the woman. In poorer countries, that age gap increases with the biggest average age gap being 6 years (if memory serves).

When I was 20, I experienced a huge shift where I suddenly got unattracted to men in their 20s and was only attracted to guys in their 30s up to early 40s. I can look back now, that this was a desire for what I perceived as a symbol of stability and maturity. And I was dealing with a lot of chaos and disconnection at the time. I really didn't have a support system. I would say beware someone in that 30-40 age range that would date a 20 year old as they are often lacking in maturity. And I would look to see if there are any reasons why these attractions might be arising as it may indicate things like feeling unsupported and/or a lack of a support system... and a desire to find a maternal figure to provide what is lacking. I understand however, that that heart wants what it wants. When I was 20, I was so deeply entrenched in these feelings about older men that I was literally incapable of being attracted to anyone under the age of 28. I would just say that it would be wise to seek to understand this on an emotional/psychological level and to be careful who you allow into your life as you would likely find immature women of that age who are looking for a totally different dynamic than what you're likely looking for.

I think I've heard Jordan Peterson talk about the "tame the animal" idea before. He talks about how a man shouldn't seek to be harmless... but dangerous and in control of his dangerousness. There are angles with which that is true, and I have worked with men who repress their more animalistic side and their aggression. I actually have a close friend of mine who grew up in a very patriarchal Mormon town. And he had lots of issues with his dad. So, he had/has this whole dynamic around wanting to avoid being "like the other guys" who he sees as too aggressive. I talk often with him (and mostly male) clients of mine about a dynamic that I refer to as the 'lion and lion-tamer' dynamic. And this has to do with integrating both aggressiveness and self-control. This is an issue that afflicts men who try to declaw themselves because of shame they have in their aggressive side as they don't want to be "like those other guys". But this lion/lion tamer dynamic is very subtle when it's done correctly. When a man integrates his lion, the spark of his instinctual aggressive vibes show through his otherwise warm-hearted and interesting personality like a glittering light. And it makes a man very magnetic. And that's part of what I find attractive about the men that I mentioned, because I can see the lion and lion tamer in them dancing together. Men who are too much lion tamer and no lion aren't interesting. But men who are too much lion are also not interesting. When those two elements are integrated, you get a brilliant and unique expression of the Masculine. And it's a personal tendency to be attracted more to men who are a bit more reserved with their lion as it creates mystery and intrigue where I feel like I can unveil the hidden lion in him. Kind of like the male equivalent of "lady in the streets and freak in the sheets." For example, young Mr. Rogers is on my list. And what I find appealing attraction-wise about him is that he was such a caring and warm-hearted person and he gave this speech back in the 70s or thereabouts that shows this very fatherly energy where he cares deeply about children's well being. And he doesn't wear his sexuality or aggression on his sleeve at all. He is so fundamentally wholesome and high vibrational. But I also know that he's still a human man with male instincts. And the thought of rousing the lion in that sort of a man (who has tamed his lion) is intriguing to me in ways a heterosexual male might not understand or appreciate. But some women may also have the opposite preference where she wants a guy who is a bit more ostentatious with his lion. That's also a preference that many women have. But there is no dichotomy here of "fake men" vs "real men". All men are real men. They are just different.

That's exactly true. The issue is really that the shame problem presents symptomatically as a problem meeting women/getting women to like them. Sometimes it presents itself as a need to improve one's self in other ways as well. So, because of this misdiagnosis, they try to solve the problem on the level of the symptom and not on the level of the root. The problem is that it's tricky because there are also practical reasons to want to improve one's self and get better with dating/sex/relationships, so it can be difficult to parse the distinction and notice the shame motivation that partially undergirds these motivations. And it's usually some mixture of practical motivations and motivations to get away from feelings of unworthiness that is instilled into boys/men by telling them that they are not enough as they are. So, it isn't as clear and obvious in more subtle cases with men who are less afflicted by the collective shame or who are able to cope with that collective shame in other ways. But we can look towards groups like Incels and other Manosphere groups to see more obvious expressions of coping mechanisms to that collective shame wound that generally impacts men as a whole group. The issue is that the expressions of these coping mechanisms sets off women's collective wounding around powerless. So, it's difficult for women to exercise compassion and to view these behaviors beyond a surface level.

And once those "real" men left, I'd be going to bed with that man that I'm actually attracted to and feel connected with. Women don't get attracted to men solely on the basis of who can whoop the most ass. That quality might be attractive to some women but not others. I am much more attracted to men who are creative, warm, intelligent, authentic, and who possess a high degree of sensitivity. This is what I need in a man to feel compatible and connected with him. And it's also what I tend to get inspired by in men even when I'm not attracted to them. I need a warm-spirited man and not a cold-spirited man to feel good in a relationship... which is why I listed the men that I did as they are all warm-spirited (except Bo Burnham who is kind of a mixture of warm and cold) So I'll leave the ruthlessness to some other woman who finds that sexy.

You're clearly not understanding my point of view and just want to be combative and nitpick everything to death. So, I'm not going to attempt to engage anymore.

You're doing that thing where you're arguing with me for argument sake again. This women being decisive/exercising agency topic is the discussion you were (and still are) trying to shoehorn in to the conversation I was having with someone else on a barely tangentially related topic. So, I haven't even attempted to engage/debate with you on this topic at all.... but you still say that I'm engaging with you incorrectly about it.

Do the men that I mentioned not come across as men who have tamed their inner animal to you? First off, all of the men that I mentioned are highly intelligent and highly competent in their respective fields and they have risen to the top in those fields. So, I don't understand why you think they wouldn't be able to handle things if things got difficult as they've already shown they're highly resourceful and ambitious people. But more importantly than that... I don't live in some lawless context where my best chance of survival as a woman is to be concubine #57 to some ruthless warlord with ASPD. I live in the 21st century with a whole civilization built up around me with police officers, fire fighters, military, etc. and all sorts of other workers that are specifically tasked with protection. And there's tons of infrastructure built for safety. So, it would be a very rare occasion that I would be facing directly with some kind of danger from outside the household. (Side Note: Violence towards women usually comes from inside the household from abusive partners) And it would be even rarer that my partner would be the one that needs to protect me. And because society has developed to the point it has, I can afford to seek safer and more fulfilling relationships with men who are less ruthless and who have a more human touch.

Thank you! Yes, I had mentioned pickup more as a community that has elements of shame but that it's more of a mixed bag because there is also a practical efficacy to it that has more to do with seeking experiences/relationships with women. So, pickup is more of a community that has some elements of that shame... because of some men who feel heavy amounts of shame engaging in it in an attempt to fix the shame by seeking female validation... and in some part because the majority of men tend to experience shame in a milder way. So shame will be an element in the pickup community, but it isn't the primary coalescing factor.

It feels like you're just trying to argue with me for argument sake. None of what you're talking about even remotely pertains to what I'm talking about. And I wasn't even talking to you in the first place. I was just talking to @Princess Arabia about how the narrative that another person on the thread (also not you) was spinning is something that misrepresents women and thus strips us (conceptually) of our own agency within the context of their narrative. So, they're not saying "Jeez! Women have no agency and are so indecisive. Why can't they ever just choose what to eat?" That's a totally different stereotype that's relatively harmless and has elements of truth to it. They're saying, "The innocence of women is under attack by pick-up artists and the divine feminine wants me to protect the purity of women." And this narrative paints women as ultra-pure and helpless and lacking our own agency. It views women as sexless victims of male sexual predation even in consensual sexual dynamics. And it projects so many false assumptions about female sexuality onto women that has historically led to some pretty awful stuff that there are still echoes of. And when these types of narratives are superimposed onto us, it's frustrating at best and powerless feeling at worst because a person who thinks that way will never be able to see or hear you as a real person. But you keep bringing up random dynamics about your girlfriend being indecisive and expecting you to pick the dining place. And it's so entirely shoehorned in and off topic. So it just feels like you're trying to argue with me for the sake of arguing. It sucks to be projected onto and misrepresented in ways that are infantilizing. And if you were a woman, you'd hate it too. Just let us talk about how we feel about this (unfortunately common) dynamic without trying to bust into the conversation and argue us out of and invalidate our feelings with whichever cudgel you think you have.

Healthy men are mostly attractive to women who are healthy themselves and who are fairly self-aware about what they want and need in a relationship. Otherwise, it is like casting pearls before swine. The unhealthy will prefer the unhealthy. The healthy will prefer the healthy. In actuality, most unhealthy attraction dynamics come from underlying trauma patterns that happen to magnetize people to one another. So, it doesn't even have to do with anything positive that makes someone attracted to someone. This can shed some light on your question of how some destructive men attract women. The key is that they attract women who are destructive themselves... or that have inverted or analogous issues with trauma or self-esteem. It's also important to keep in mind that there's also the factor that different women will find different guys attractive on that level. For example, I can recognize that Will Smith is attractive and that he has many admirable qualities. But he's not the type of guy that appeals to my sensibilities. But truthfully... the main thing that would be helpful for you to focus on is the shame itself. And the way to heal from shame is to practice unconditional self-acceptance and self-love. But this will be challenging until you you find 1+ people to connect with on a friendship level who accepts you for who you are since we are a social species. And we will only feel safe coming to accept ourselves if we have people we're socially connected to who accept and value us. And all you need is 1 person that accepts you to start embodying yourself more.

Along the same lines as the last post... When I was in elementary and middle school, I was very unpopular and I got made fun of really often. And for years, I would try to formulate plans to get popular so that I could be accepted and get out of being such a social pariah. And in middle school, I found a group of other outcasts to spend time with. And for about a year or so, we were collectively viewed as untouchables and highly unpopular. But during this time, many of us really started to lean into what made us outcasts and what made us different. And this became part of the basis for our positive identities. My friend Joe coined the term "nerd pride" and it really captured how I felt about it all. So, instead of thinking about what caused me to be rejected as an indicator of my undesirability... instead I turned the tables and began viewing myself as different in a good way and that my nature is actually more interesting and cooler than the "normal people". And this was a good first stepping stone into a positive self-concept. The main thing is to take what you like least about yourself and to learn to celebrate it as what makes you special. Then you can be the phoenix that rises from your own ash.

That's all just the shame talking. It's only your beliefs about yourself that stem from those feelings of shame that make you feel like you're meant to be alone and that no one would want you. The first step is to fall in love with who and what you are. Start to prefer your own qualities. And example of this would be like this... When I was a little girl, I wanted to be pretty. But most pretty women in the media at that time were blondes... usually with blue eyes. And all the songs that people would sing about beautiful women would usually have blonde or red hair and blue or green eyes... with the exception of "Brown-eyed Girl". So, I was always thinking I was boring looking and unattractive when I was a kid. Add on top of this that I'm very pale, and being tan was/is seen as more beautiful in the eyes of society. But as a teenager, I started leaning into my darker features and my pale skin. And it worked really well with the goth look that I was going for at the time. And I began to genuinely prefer looking the way that I do. This is what you would need to do with your looks and your personality traits. Come to prefer the way you are and celebrate the way you are.

They all have really interesting unique vibes about them. It's what self-actualization really looks like when someone individuates to the point where no one else on the planet is even remotely like them because they have embodied and developed themselves so deeply. It's why I usually find all the attempts to be more Masculine to backfire because the attempt to do that often subsumes what's really brilliant and attractive about a given man into a paint-by-numbers model of manhood.