• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Emerald

  • Rank
    - - -
  • Birthday 04/26/1989

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

23,564 profile views
  1. It’s statistically improbable that she would never share a mutual attraction with a man she likes. Male desire is very abundant and eventually she will find a match. But my point is that, if a woman is fretting about whether some facet of herself is attractive to men in general, that it isn’t a winning mindset and she’s leaving a lot of power off the table. If a woman has the mindset, “How do I become attractive to men?” and not “What attracts me to a man?” then she’s got the cart in front of the horse. A woman doesn’t need mass appeal in the eyes of men in order to find a compatible partner. She just needs to be unapologetically herself and be intuitive and selective about who she chooses.
  2. You'd be much wiser to be asking yourself, "What kind of guys do I like?" Women don't have to worry much about attracting. There will always be men who are attracted to you. The big thing is standing empowered in your own intuition and being selective about who you choose. And to worry about if you are generally attractive to men or not, will shift you into masculine attractor/pursuer mode as opposed to feminine selector mode. And the feminine power sits with being the selector.
  3. What was wise in the time that your grandfather came of age, is foolish in the time you're coming of age. His advice is good for making it in his time. It will hold you back if you listen to him. There are times to listen to people in older generations. This is not one of them.
  4. The point is that Leo (as an influencer) is really unwise to just say a one-word “lol” at someone’s post about suicidal ideation. And he did change his post shortly afterwards because he probably realized the same thing. Really, anybody would be unwise to do that... but especially someone with influence. Also, you don’t know this person and what they’re going through. For all you know, the person has attempted suicide before. People commit suicide ALL the time. So, don’t be so sure that a person won’t actually do it.
  5. Leo had just written “lol” at first. And since Leo has a lot of influence on certain members of his audience, he would be wise to orient to people’s suicidal ideation in a more sensitive way. Really anybody should... but especially Leo within this context. But I firmly disagree with you about laughing at someone’s body dysmorphia, self-esteem issues, and suicidal ideation as an effective way to deal with that. Tough love can and often does backfire in these cases... most cases actually. There are people out there who are thin as a toothpick and starve themselves to death because they genuinely believe that they’re fat. Why wouldn’t there also be men of average height that believe they’re short?
  6. My husband is 5’8” and I’m 5’2”. To me, he is very tall. He’s like half a head taller than me. You have to understand that, while most women have a general preference for taller men, short women will have a different way of defining tall. Honestly, most women don’t get too hung up on that, as long as you’re taller than they are. But even some women will date shorter guys. So honestly, you just have to work on self-esteem stuff and just keep trying. You’ll have success eventually.
  7. Don’t just lol him. He’s considering suicide. Obviously you’re loling him because you know that he can be successful. But that’s not how a suicidal person will interpret that.
  8. It's a chart about who is more likely to be vaccinated. It isn't a chart about men and women. That's just one of the demographics they tested. But it's structured in a confusing way. It's saying that the average Biden voter is 20% more likely than average to get vaccinated. And concurrently it shows that the average Trump voter is 10% less likely than average to get vaccinated. So, the average Biden voter is 30% more likely than the average Trump voter to get vaccinated. So, the statistics about men and women are the women tend to get the vaccine at a rate that reflects the national average (no more, no less), whereas men are 5% more likely than average to get the vaccine. This means, that men are statistically 5% more likely to get vaccinated than women. Honestly, it's kind of a margin of error thing. That means, the chart is probably pretty accurate... albeit structured in a confusing way. But the meaning that the OP derived from the chart is coming from a misunderstanding of the chart. I think he read it to mean that women don't get the vaccine at all because there's no arrow on their statistic. But the arrow just shows deviation from the average.
  9. Do you mean because men are 5% more likely to get vaccinated than women? That's what the chart shows. Does a 5% difference actually mean that?
  10. Okay, that's pretty much what I would anticipate. That's about the dynamic I would like if I were in a dating situation. On the practical level, a lot of it has to do with sussing out if a guy is lazy/unwilling to invest or if he's hung up on small things like a few bucks here or there. Both of these can be a bad sign. So, if he pays for the first couple dates, and then we alternate from there on out, that would be normal. And it wouldn't send up a red flag.
  11. @flowboy Sorry... I don't "go Dutch" No Dutch guys for me. j/k I do understand cultural differences. That said, it does create a certain atmosphere about the date when the guy assumes those roles that I associate with traditional courtship. And I like that vibe. It creates more polarization, which adds to the attraction dynamic. But if I had already developed a platonic relationship to a guy and already knew him and had developed an intimate friendship with him, it might be too formal. It would all depend contextually. With that in mind, if I were on a dating app, I'd probably have a lot more boundaries around things like that. Like, the man not paying would definitely be a red flag. And I would be looking out for more signs of why he didn't. If it's cultural, that's okay. If he's an uber feminist, that's okay. If he's tight on money, that might be okay as long as he has a job and is a stable person. If he's cheap. That's not okay. If he's trying to have as much fun with women as he possibly can without paying a dime. That's not okay.
  12. And that's okay if a guy really believes that. But courtship-wise, I prefer a more polarized mating dance where I am the receiver and he is the giver. That's why I like for a man to be the one that pays. I like it when a guy is in his masculine energy and pays on the first few dates, holds open doors, drives, puts in the order for us, etc. It just feels better to me as it makes me feel taken care of. Now, in terms of dating a guy who's very resistant to fitting any gender norms, it's not like I'd immediately disqualify him from my consideration. But it would probably decrease the polarity and attraction a bit. I really respond to the polarity as those elements of the traditional gender roles really resonate with me. But I can also empathize with the viewpoint that gender roles should be dismantled.