Emerald

True. It's honestly just carbon-copy projection of their own tendencies onto women. Literally every accusation is a confession. They are like, "All the women that I like are sleeping with the top 10% of guys." Meanwhile, it's like the top 10% of women looks-wise that they want. So, of course these women are with the top 10% of guys because those guys are their match attractiveness-wise. And because they want the top 10% of women, but they can't get them. They might settle for a more average-looking girl who they are with begrudgingly because the top 10% of women won't have anything to do with them. Then they're like, "Women only like the top 10% of men. And then they just settle for the average guys when the top guys won't have them." And then they're like, "I wish I could be promiscuous and screw all the hottest girls!" Meanwhile they're like, "Damn these women! They're so promiscuous and screwing all the hottest guys! How dare they!?!?!?" And then they're like, "I want to find a way to over-inflate my value in the eyes of women, so that I can get more women!" And then they're like, "Hoe-flation! How dare these women over-inflate their value in the eyes of men!" It's projection 101. They're really just mad at themselves for being shallow and blocking themselves from real connection.

That's just not an accurate reflection of how average men and women actually relate together in real life, at all. And you should be more responsible and let young men know that those statistics are false. You're just making all these young nerdy guys lose hope that a woman will ever prefer and love them, when the reality of male/female relationships is actually much kinder to average men... as long as they don't make themselves anti-social through all this man-cult propaganda brainwashing. And these men only become un-dateable only because their mind has been "ran-through" with internet propaganda. You need to go into a Walmart sometime. Then, you'll see how people really operate if you can look past your filters. Look around at all the husbands in the world. Do you really think they're the top 10% of men?

Exactly my point. Men often have this notion that they have to max out their level of Masculinity to be attractive to women and become some stoic machine of a guy. But women are attracted to more subtle expressions of Masculinity than they are overt ones. The same is true for men... but even though men tend to be most attracted to softer and more subtle Feminine expressions, men can also enjoy hyper-Feminine expressions like the lady with the big boobs and lips. Men are more responsive to hyper-normal visual stimuli than women are, so this is probably why. So, while women might be put off by the image of the bodybuilder above as hyper-Masculinity is unattractive.... most men might be able to find some level of attractiveness in hyper-Feminine expressions like huge lips, fake breasts, BBLs, etc. Now, of course Sydney Sweeney and Brad Pitt are ideals.... they are Hollywood's beautiful people. But everyday men who are attractive tend to have this mixture of hard and soft qualities... and that's what makes them attractive as you can see their personality more coming through in their gestures and expressions.

What women think of as very Masculine is more subtle and is a mixture of hard and soft qualities... like the image of Brad Pitt above. (Of course, Brad Pitt is a more ideal expression of this... but most men have this mixture. And if they have confidence, there will be women who find it attractive.) And it's very different than what men tend to think of as Masculine... where they might image body-builders or MMA fighters as very Masculine and as the standard to match up to. But women aren't as attracted to that, generally speaking. But men often think women are interested in hyper-Masculine guys with no softness to them whatsoever. And they often fall into the trap of thinking they have to be as hyper-Masculine (though usually not quite as extreme as the body-builder guy from the pic). Men think they need to be King Leonidas from 300... when Tyler Durden is actually a lot more popular with women.

An hourglass is just Femininity... not hyper-Femininity. Hyper-Femininity is an exaggeration of Femininity... just like Hyper-Masculinity is an exaggeration of Masculinity. It would be like if every woman were trying to model themselves after women with too much lip filler and gigantic breast implants... and believing they had to look like that to be attractive to men. Here are some images that show the contrasts that I mean in starker terms in terms of whether a person presents in a more moderate or more exaggerated was relative to the Masculine/Feminine expressions.

It's exactly like that. And it's really sad and frustrating because I can see how these online echo chambers fool young men into "improving" themselves in ways that are actually counter-productive to them developing into high quality men. It's like if women were all being brainwashed that women are only attracted to bald women... and that the men will deny it because "Don't ask a fish how to catch it!". So, these women are constantly shaving their heads because they are convinced that men will be repulsed to see hair growing on their head. Then, when men try to tell them that they don't actually prefer bald women and like a woman with longer hair... the women are like, "Look at this deluded man. Never listen to a man about what he likes because he lies about it. Scientifically, men are wired to respond more to bald women because in nomadic times... blah blah blah. And you can tell because men like it when women shave their legs... so men are repulsed by women with hair on their heads." And because it has that cult-like dynamic, you just can't even communicate to them or get through as they relate it to "secrets" of self-improvement that "women won't tell you they respond to." And it feels like 2 steps forward... on a treadmill that's constantly pulling them backwards into worse versions of themselves. They need to do a study where they have a bunch of guys who are exposed to a lot of Masculinity echo-chamber self-improvement content AND a bunch of guys who seek out more neutral self-improvement solutions. Then, see how well each group does when it comes to both how well each group does with long-term relationships and the percentage of men in each group who never have sex with women. And I'm quite confident that the latter will have a lot more success with women.

Well said.

Number one, these things have been studied. And the studies do reflect what I've experienced in my subjective experience relative to how women respond to male attractiveness... both generally and towards a particular man. Number two, if there was a uniquely minded man who was more mature and spiritually aware than most men, would he find women with Feminine features and an hourglass figure unattractive? If not, consider that my perspective is one that's quite average for women to have as it comes to what women find attractive about men. I am perhaps just able to communicate it more thoroughly than most women who might not tend to analyze their instinctual and emotional responses as much as I do. I wish I could turn you all into heterosexual women for like a year... and then you'd organically develop really intense romantic and sexual feelings for some regular guy you happen to work with who's more subtly Masculine, and you'd be like, "Ohh!!! We've been being so stupid about this topic. We're sorry Emerald."

Yes, Cavill and Hemsworth are attractive men. And Brad Pitt is handsome in this as well.... but he's more attractive with more a more subtly muscular body. It's just that these body types don't tend to be the most highly rated body types among women as a whole group. That said, a handsome guy is a handsome guy. These guys are all Hollywood heartthrobs, mind you. So, even if his body type isn't the one most women consider to be ideal, they will likely still respond positively to it because they are just such handsome guys. That said, most women would probably find this leaner and subtly muscular version of Brad Pitt more attractive than the one above where he looks totally jacked...

Yes, I have worked with clients who have had some of these patterns. Really, it comes from an obligation to meet some arbitrary standard of Masculinity and feeling inadequate relative to that expectation as the expectation is unrealistic... and then trying to push all signs of Femininity and softness away from one's self in order to be "the kind of guy that women want." And then, because the man disconnects with the Feminine in himself, he develops both an obsession and an aversion towards women who he wants to have fill the hole that was left where his Feminine side should be. And it creates a dynamic where women feel all-powerful and that women's opinion carries this external validation currency in this projection. And this creates a simultaneous pedestalization and goddess worship towards women... coupled with a jealousy, hatred, and bitterness towards women who he likes better than he likes himself. And men who are in these patterns will police each others' level of Masculinity... and these same men will project the Masculinity policing that men do onto women as a whole group and assume that women are similarly policing men and prefer the standards that men expect other men to reach up to. These are common patterns... and come from shame at its core associated with being saddled with arbitrary and unrealistic standards of Masculinity to match up to. And this shame dynamic leads through to Anima issues. But with my sessions, I ask a lot more questions and make a lot fewer statements... as it's far more effective to help someone get to the core of where certain beliefs come from. It's an unfortunate drawback of the context of the forum, as it's people sharing statements... instead of questions. But I also would not be interested in interacting on the forum if it were to only be me asking a lot of questions. It's more interested to share perspectives in this context. And I keep hammering away at this, because I have a front-row seat to what women really like about men. They tend to go "Yeah, but you're an unusual woman." But I am genuinely not unusual in this way. Men just have a hard time believing that women will like them for who they are as people. Really, all a guy has to do to have some women attracted to them is to generally develop themselves as people, learn to socialize in a variety of contexts, and get more comfortable being themselves. None of the shenanigans that these online echo chambers are espousing is necessary.

This is exactly the reason why I'm making posts like this, as there's just so much internet male brainwashing going on relative to what women like. And they're trying to use it to get better with women and trust in it so much that they don't realize how much less attractive it makes them. You can't even connect with a guy who thinks this way. He just gets so swallowed up in his insecurity narratives from internet echo chambers that he makes himself repellent in the eyes of most women. But he has learned things like, "Never listen to women about what they want." And so, he gets locked into these narratives that make him less and less and less attractive to women that would otherwise like him. When men buy into these narratives, they become like petty porcupines that barb women and Feminine whenever they get too close. So, it drives women away. And then, when women don't like them, they go... "She would like me if I were more hyper-Masculine. Let me double down on these narratives." That's the problem of mistaking the antidote as the poison... and the poison as the antidote.

Who is a specific example of a woman that you know personally who overvalues what they have to offer and demands too much? And who is a specific woman that you know personally who has gone through the process of being "ran through" and then sour graping about having to settle for a "beta man"? And it can't just be "there was a woman on the internet who was saying it" because it's very lucrative for women to feed into these male insecurity narratives. I literally can't think of ANY woman that this describes. I've only heard men who are sour-graping about women being able to get easy sex espouse this narrative. And I have known plenty of women... with some of them being very promiscuous women. Mind you, hyper-promiscuity doesn't tend to lead to good places. But the promiscuous player guys that promiscuous women go for early on are similar to the promiscuous player guys that promiscuous women go for later on. But it doesn't really change with her body count. It's more of a character compatibility thing. But if you personally know a woman this describes, do share. Or are you just watching too much red pill content?

This is just a projection of the anti-social narratives that men are being brainwashed with at large. And it's causing men to get bitter and repel women... which is causing the male loneliness epidemic. Go interact with real actual women... and you will find that they like real actual men. Why is it surprising to you that women are attracted to men?

Of course Brad Pitt is Masculine, but he isn't hyper-Masculine. That was one of the points that I'm making. Men will tend to think women are interested in guys that look like He-Man because that's what they like in terms of male aesthetics and they think maxing out on Masculinity is the same thing as maxing out on attractiveness. But women will tend to rate as most generally attractive guys that look like Christian Bale or Brad Pitt. But that's just the most generally attractive guys. Women will also aesthetically prefer more averagely strong guys to super buff hyper-Masculine guys even in more average men who aren't Hollywood sex symbols. But just consider who gets to be a Hollywood sex symbol and who doesn't, as this will tell you a lot about women's aesthetic preferences... and Masculinity preferences regarding men. Like, even in his prime... I guarantee you that very few women had pictures of Arnold Schwarzenegger on their wall. He's hyper-Masculine... but most women would say that it's too much Masculinity to find attractive. But I'm sure lots of people had Justin Timberlake on their wall... who has a mixture of hard and soft qualities.

This narrative does not apply to most women as most women don't have a lot of sexual partners... nor do they desire them. It may not even apply to any women at all (even promiscuous ones), as it just seems like a dynamic that's purely the brainchild of men who feel bitter and jealous about women being able to get laid more easily than men can... and who feel insecure about their own attractiveness and Masculinity. Like, "Haha! You let all the other men fuck you and now you're ran through. And now you'll be sorry because you have to settle for a weak little simp (like me ). Should have been purer and kept your legs closed... and then you'd be able to get married to a real manly man that you ACTUALLY want (because I know you prefer that guy to me ). You know what they say, a key that unlocks a lot of locks is a master key... but a lock that's unlocked by many keys is a shitty lock. And now those super high value sexy hot hyper-Masculine alpha player guys with the rippling abs who are the prize don't want you. And it's TOO BAD for you that you're stuck with little weak bitch men (like me ). And now I'm offended that you're attracted to me because obviously you're just settling because you couldn't get Chad. Stay away from me! Your attraction to me is HUGE insult to me! How dare you?!?!?!?!" But if women tend APPARENTLY be attracted to these hyper-Masculine "alpha" guys, how do you explain that I've never been interested in hyper-Masculine "alpha" guys... and have always been interested in men who have a mixture of hard and soft qualities? And how do you explain that, even in my experiences hooking up in my early 20s, that I did so with regular guys who weren't hyper-Masculine alpha player types? And how do you explain the fact that the men that most women find attractive (like Hollywood actors), don't tend to be hyper-Masculine and that women tend to rate more averagely muscular body-types as more attractive (which they are, imo as well)?

The bolded part is the very thing that I'm dismissing about what he said, as it is a fundamental misunderstanding of female attraction that frames what women value in terms of what men value. Men value short terms hook-ups and want to be promiscuous... but women generally do not. And probably half or more of women probably would never even engage in a short term hookup nor desire to be promiscuous. And no... you'd be wrong in assuming that women prefer the short term guy for a relationship and just settles for the long term guy because the long term guy is open to a relationship and the short term guy isn't. That would be like saying that men prefer promiscuous women for a relationship over non-promiscuous women, but just can't get them to get into a long term relationship with them... so they settle for the non-promiscuous women. But the reality is more likely that a man will enjoy sleeping with a promiscuous woman for short term hook-ups, but will usually have deeper feelings for a woman who is not as geared towards short-term hook-ups. It would seem to me that, if women who value short-term hook-ups (in the way that men generally do) are more interested in hyper-Masculine guys for hook-ups but are more interested in regular guys for relationships... these promiscuous women might be seeing these hyper-Masculine guys in a similar light to how men who are interested in short term hookups tend to see promiscuous women. Like, perhaps these men are fun to have sex with for a woman who values short term hook-ups but they aren't someone that they'd want to make a life with or bring home to their parents. That's the only thing I can guess as to why the statistics are that way. But because I don't value short-term hook-ups, the idea of being attracted to some hyper-Masculine guy that you just fuck-and-go and have some emotionless sex with is abstract to me. Maybe if I were more geared towards the physicality of sex and I was motivated to sex more by the desire for orgasm rather than emotional elation that can only be achieved with deeper levels of intimacy, I would be able to relate better. But I'd wager that most women (even women who have had short term hookups before) are uninterested in the short term guy and aren't even that interested in having short terms guys as it's just not that emotionally stimulating. I suspect that this could be where the short-term preference for hyper-Masculine guys comes from and why I can't relate to the attraction... and why most women also don't pick that kind of guy as the most attractive guy.

That does make sense that you'd attract Puellas if that's the case. But the advice still stands to be careful with much older partners (especially immature ones), as it's easy for young people to be taken advantage of or controlled by older partners. Or even if not deliberately, being with a much older partner can cause you to skip out on the developmental phases characteristic of people in their 20s... which also wouldn't be good.

I was just thinking about how, according to the video, women statistically go for more hyper-Masculine guys if they're hooking up and having one night stands.... and I had mentioned earlier to someone that perhaps more promiscuous women who value one-night stands tend to go for more hyper-Masculine guys. But most women aren't that motivated towards short-term hook-ups and don't value them much.... even if they have them from time to time. And that's because these experiences focus far more of the physical experience of sex rather than the emotional experience of sex... which just isn't as interesting for most women, as women are mostly motivated towards sex for the sake of emotional stimulation. There's just so much more emotional stimulation from being with a guy you have a deeper relationship with where you can experience a far greater range of erotic emotions flowing through you. To give an analogy, let's say women are like stoners. And more most women are like really discerning stoners who 99% of the time won't even get high unless the weed is some special strain of it as she is aiming to have a very specific kind of high that's way out of this world. But some stoners just enjoy the act of smoking weed and are focused on the act of smoking the weed itself and are less interested in experiencing the high that comes with smoking the weed. So, they're willing to smoke dirt weed even if it doesn't get them that high because they just like smoking weed regardless of how "meh" the high feeling is. They just enjoy smoking... or perhaps they can't quite connect to the high feeling of the former group. Women who have a strong attraction to averagely Masculine guys are more geared towards the former... which represents the more profound levels of emotional stimulation associated with a deeply intimate sexual dynamic... and will tend to pine for guys who seem like better longterm partners who they can envision having those deeply intimate emotional dynamics with. And perhaps, if more promiscuous women are women that enjoy the physicality of sex more than the emotionality, they might be more drawn to more hyper-Masculine guys who are more likely to have a lot of physical prowess and would themselves be more focused on the physical elements of sex.

But the original video is about women preferring a guy with a more averagely strong looking build versus his more shredded after picture. He doesn't have an Arnold build. But he's worked to make himself more shredded. And it's the difference between what men find aesthetically pleasing about men versus what women find aesthetically pleasing about men. And men tend to find more shredded and jacked men more aesthetically pleasing, and assume that's what women like. But women tend to find men who look strong in a more lean or average body more pleasing.

You can learn all those things. But you can't change your level of Masculinity as the Masculine and Feminine are more innate to the person and are baked right into the personality.

A regular guy is a guy with an average level of Masculinity with either a lean but strong body type... or a more average but strong body type. And it's a guy who's got a mixture of Masculine and Feminine qualities. At its most attractive, think of a Hollywood heartthrob guy who's like Ryan Gosling or Brad Pitt or Timothee Chalamet or someone like that who aren't hyper-Masculine but are Masculine with some softer qualities. And in its more average expression, it's most men that exist on the planet. The "alpha" guy is a super jacked and shredded guy who's hyper-Masculine and doesn't have much softness to him. Think of guys with a physique like Dwayne Johnson or Arnold Schwarzenegger... but minus the warmth of personality. And it's men who tend to have smaller eyes, more angular faces, and a lower body-fat percentage. And these are men who tend to have a more stoic and domineering way of coming across.

I'm not an outlier. You just don't understand how women actually operate. Just look at the data... and you will see that women don't prefer hyper-Masculine guys. Men prefer hyper-Masculine guys and find them more attractive. But women tend to prefer men who are Masculine but not in an extreme way. This is also why Hollywood heartthrobs are more like Brad Pitt types rather than Dwayne Johnson types. Here's some videos that reflect this...

Because they have social status. I mean regular guys in terms of level of Masculinity and muscularity... not in level of social status. Plenty of musicians and club promoters are not hyper-Masculine guys. Some musicians are quite sensitive and Feminine. But they get a lot of female attention because of their talents or status. Also, regular guys have women in situationships all the time. That's not reserved for hyper-Masculine guys... just low-investment guys. Also, the CEO guy in the example is attractive to women because he's tall and he's a CEO... and probably has a strong looking body... not necessarily a hyper-Masculine one. Usually when I think of the successful CEO type, he looks more like Patrick Bateman than he looks like He-Man. Plus, it's on a dating site... so the women only have photos and information to go off of. They can't vet for vibes.

You should price for how much value that your customer will get from your work... not for the time you've spent. I would just specify in the future that your process will involve AI and will be a shorter window of time to get completed, that way there's transparency. But if the client is getting the same results, but it took you a shorter period of time to create it, there is no issue there. In fact, it's more valuable to get it to them quicker.

But it's not just that "focusing" on the unfairness is a losing mindset. It's believing in the narratives you've proposed in the first place that will be your own downfall because it so thoroughly misunderstands how women as a group tend to operate. And this misinterpretation of women's nature will create bitterness in you and repel women who would prefer you.