Emerald

Again, you keep saying I’m in denial but I am not. In fact, I’m the first to admit I’m attracted to the capacity for aggression. Yet you keep acting like my argument is that the capacity for aggression is unattractive, and that women don’t respond to it. As I’ve said, many women do. You speak a lot about projection. But if you look back at our conversation, you’re the one projecting an entire argument onto me that I’m not even claiming. My argument is that the capacity for aggression when unfettered is attractive to women who are dealing with trauma and dysfunction in themselves. Otherwise, it’s easily identified as a weakness... specifically weakness of character. And it becomes naturally repulsive.

@Harlen Kelly Here is my response to an earlier poster that said Leo and I are saying the same thing... No. He’s arguing that all women are attracted to aggression regardless of whether it’s expressed in healthy or unhealthy ways as a natural feminine instinct. And he’s also arguing that men with the capacity for violent behavior will have more narcissistic and sociopathic behaviors by default. I’m saying that men who express aggression in dysfunctional narcissistic ways are repulsive not attractive. And that women who are attracted to these kinds of guys are dealing with trauma. And that it’s trauma and layers of dysfunction in herself that lead into this attraction. And that a healthy woman will be repulsed by a barbaric man who has no self-control as it is weak behavior (though Leo sees this as strong behavior). Also, I’m saying that men with the capacity for aggression and violence aren’t more narcissistic or sociopathic than a guy who lacks in that department. You can find plenty of men with the capacity for aggression/violence who have strong character. And you can find plenty of wimpy guys with weak character.

Awesome! I think when a man gets over the fear of women’s judgment and codependency on women’s POV, then this leads him into a space where he can grow himself into a more exalted version of himself. If there is a fear of women, it tends to lead to lots of dysfunction and misogyny. But once the fear of judgment and the projection of the “pedestaled judging woman” onto women falls away, this enables a man to be a better person and by extension a much better lover.

@Leo Gura and I don’t have the same POV on this matter even if we share many crossover views. And we both explicitly state our points of contention with the other’s POV. Go read the conversation. There are several very important divergences in our claims. Though it seems that people are missing the nuances and believe we’re saying the same thing a different way. But we’re not. Also when you say “This is what women like.” to a group of men, it may not be consciously prescriptive... but the effects will be prescriptive. So, portraying an incomplete or distorted view of feminine sexual attraction dynamics, will glorify to men whichever traits are indicated. And that’s true even if you don’t intend it. And I do know that’s not your intention. So, even making the claim (as Leo did) that aggression, narcissism, and sociopathy are a sign of strength and thus inherently attractive to women, is to glorify and prescribe it. This is especially true because he has an audience of impressionable men who will try to emulate that behavior... without the lion tamer to channel the aggression into positive expression.

But I’m a woman. So, uploading a photo of an average looking guy would be the control factor. If I did the experiment with the image of a male model, it wouldn’t be a fair experiment. Perhaps on dating sites, it’s true that average looking men don’t fair as well as they would in life. So much of a man’s attractiveness ONLY comes through in person. But I’m still confident that I could get 5 dates set up before the allotted time elapses.

I was saying I think I'd fair well on a dating app. If I had a picture of an average looking guy on my dating profile and I was engaging with the app as men typically do, I think I could find five dates in the time allotted. But to get her to respond, I'd have to come up with an opener that piques her curiosity and sets me aside from other guys. And I'd have to look for context clues on her dating profile to figure out what she might respond to.

That’s the issue. Men are too influenced by women’s assessments of them. This creates a cap, where men don’t develop themselves past a certain point because they are codependent upon the average women to reflect their worth back to them. And so, their muses aren’t inspiring them to higher ideals but are acting a delimiting factor for personal growth. But I can tell you that this attraction to men like I described started at age 20. Lots of very young women are tuned in to these qualities.

But men have control over this quality. On a personal development forum full of men trying to improve themselves... why would they choose a shittier form of masculinity to develop themselves into? Why is that the hill to die on? If you want to know what women respond to, this is what it is. Men respond to a perfect face and body in the ideal. And they talk about that often. Doesn’t matter if it’s .5% of the population. And women respond to men who possess these lion/tamer qualities... even if it’s .5% of the population. When you have the capacity to develop these virtues and become more universally attractive, why wouldn’t you?

The problem is that they’re not saying the same thing as I am. Most men on this thread (including Leo) are believing that only the beast is attractive to women. They’re discounting the role of the tamer in the attraction dynamic. And they will emulate a shittier version of masculinity because they believe that it will be more attractive to more women than integrated masculinity. But they are dead wrong. Raw instinct by itself isn’t attractive. Raw instinct tamed and channeled up in the form of pro-social behaviors is.

Women will be very attracted to it. It stands out. It’s rare like a woman with a perfect body. Again, it’s universally attractive because it’s great for survival of woman, child, and tribe. But you have to go back and read our discussion. I’m not saying the fuck boy won’t get success. There are plenty of traumatized women who will respond to it as the fuckboys might remind them of their womanizing dad or something. But that success that behaving in low consciousness ways can get a man is because of layers of dysfunction in these women as opposed to being a reflection of feminine instinct. So, I’m saying that there is a distinction between what will work for your own agenda versus what is actually true.

It depends of if the woman has analogous traumas that make her attracted to men who posses these qualities.

No. He’s arguing that all women are attracted to aggression regardless of whether it’s expressed in healthy or unhealthy ways as a natural feminine instinct. And he’s also arguing that men with the capacity for violent behavior will have more narcissistic and sociopathic behaviors by default. I’m saying that men who express aggression in dysfunctional narcissistic ways are repulsive not attractive. And that women who are attracted to these kinds of guys are dealing with trauma. And that it’s trauma and layers of dysfunction in herself that lead into this attraction. And that a healthy woman will be repulsed by a barbaric man who has no self-control as it is weak behavior (though Leo sees this as strong behavior). Also, I’m saying that men with the capacity for aggression and violence aren’t more narcissistic or sociopathic than a guy who lacks in that department. You can find plenty of men with the capacity for aggression/violence who have strong character. And you can find plenty of wimpy guys with weak character.

Well, I’m not much of a troll anyway. And I wouldn’t get bored. I’d really give myself to the process, which would be interesting all by itself. Also, I am attracted to women, so it wouldn’t be boring from that angle either. But it wouldn’t hit me in the ego, because any rejection I experience wouldn’t be rejection of my actual personality. There would be no stakes.

It isn’t about being a word-smith. That’s not why I think I’d fair well. I already mentioned some of the reasons.

I don’t think it’s easier to be a man. I definitely think it would be more challenging in this context as I would be the one that approaches. But I do think it would be a bit easier for me to get dates on a dating app than a man would for several reasons. 1. I would have no fear of rejection because I would be pretending to be someone else. 2. I have been approached by many men in my lifetime and I know exactly what doesn’t work. So, I’m less likely to accidentally communicate turn-offs and red flags.

What I’m telling you about women isn’t just me. It’s universally attractive because it’s good for the survival of woman, children, and tribe. And even women who go for a ruthless man tend to do so under the misconception that she can tame him with her love. And that’s because women who are attracted to the dualistic ferocious beast and beast tamer qualities I describe. And because there are so few of these men who embody both of these qualities, women will get into a relationship with a man in hopes of “fixing” him. But that’s the form that they’re trying to “fix him” into.

Men who have integration in themselves are much more universally attractive than men who are dysfunctional with their masculinity. And every woman recognizes a gem when she sees one. It’s just that women with certain types of unresolved trauma will attract and be attracted to men who aren’t integrated in themselves... which may manifest as unfettered aggression and temper tantrums. But despite being an attraction point for problematic men, that doesn’t mean she won’t recognize a catch when she sees one. So, if given the choice between integrated masculinity and disintegrated masculinity, choose integrated. Also, this is a personal development forum. Don’t die on the hill of aspiring to underdeveloped intonations of masculinity. Your personal development with regard to masculinity can’t happen when it exists only in relation to the lowest common denominator of a subset of society... in this case, women. Tailoring your masculine development to the average woman’s dysfunctions is like setting a cap for yourself based on how others will react. Too caught up in the opinions/reactions of others to own your personal sovereignty.

He does disagree. Go back in the conversation and look.

You’re not understanding what I’m saying. Women are attracted to the capacity for violence at the level of pure raw sexuality. But if a woman is only orienting to her dating prospects through the loins and not the heart, then it’s because of layers of dysfunction in herself. This dual orientation that healthy intuitive women have is why the most attractive men have the capacity for aggression and violence but the discipline, character, and principles to tame it and channel it into pro-social means. A untamed man who is purely aggressive is not attractive to such a woman. He lacks in the department of other masculine strengths. He is weak in character... which is an equally dangerous form of weakness to the inability to protect from a female survival standpoint. But take a man with lots of character and virtue... but with all that raw instinct underneath. Then that’s a very sexy man. And when you see a man who’s cultivated that masculine grace, it really stands out because it’s very rare. And I know this because that’s what my body responds to. These types of men really stand out. But I’m in no denial about being attracted to aggression in a man. I like to take a very submissive role in sex. But men who are purely aggressive with no virtues tempering their aggression are repulsive. An attractive man is like a very ferocious lion with an expertly skilled lion tamer. And most men nowadays are either only lion or only tamer... which are both unattractive without the other. So, when a man embodies both in an integrated way, he really shines. But it’s a very rare quality. And the reason why it’s rare is because men have so many misconceptions about female sexuality and polarize themselves too far in one direction or the other. That’s why I’m adamant about this. You guys are leaving lots of potential off the table and glorifying a denigrated form of masculinity.

Because it’s a misrepresentation. I dislike it when men believe in misconceptions about what naturally attracts women. Men who have a healthy relationship to their masculinity and capacity for violence are in scarce supply. And these misconceptions motivate men to have an unhealthy relationship to their masculinity and capacity for violence. And this makes it harder for women to find satisfaction in relationships, as it makes men less attractive and more dangerous. If women were under the misconception that poor hygiene made them more attractive to men, you’d probably want to correct their misconception too.

I genuinely do think I would do well, as I’d have no ego in it. And I have a lot of control over my words if it’s in written format. I’m bisexual, so I do appreciate the difficulty of attracting a woman. I’ve never been particularly good at it because of fear of the woman not being attracted to women. I just don’t want to creep women out. But if I were play-acting as a man, it would take the pressure off. I’m wishing now that I could try it. But I really don’t feel comfortable lying.

I'm not going to do this because the cancelling the date/lying thing would bother me. But I think I'd have good success... especially because there would be a degree of removal. There would be no fear of rejection because she'd be rejecting Jim Bob... not Emerald. So, this would give some liberty to take risks.

You missed the context. Look back in the discussion.

It’s okay. I thought I was responding to the person who made that claim.

I asked you to provide me the source for where women are being advised to act as bitchily as possible to attract a man... because that’s what YOU said you’d seen. I haven’t seen any such forums full of women trying the “be a bitch to get a man” method, as you claimed is common. Where are the links Peter? Just admit you were bullshitting and that women aren’t doing an equivalent thing to what men are doing en masse.