Emerald

It's very interesting that you read my tone as "triggered" as my emotions were pretty flat-lined when I read your post, though honestly I did roll my eyes a bit because it didn't seem like sarcasm... it just seemed like you were saying dumb things that only made sense if you were in favor of pettiness and tyranny. I was like, does he really think all this petty stuff is good for the country? And that's specifically why I asked. I was just confused and genuinely curious about what you were trying to convey. But I've heard so many things of a similar vibe (ironically and un-ironically) before that I've gone metaphorically nose-blind to all of that. It's not really shocking because it's just a common part of culture now, especially on the internet. It's just like, "Eh... people think like that sometimes. Oh well... hopefully this fad falls out of vogue soon." It's a bit like how I used to be afraid of cockroaches as a kid before I lived with a cockroach infestation. I dealt with cockroach infestation in my early teen years for a year or so, and because of the "exposure therapy" I literally have zero emotional response to cockroaches. It's the same with hackey socio-political opinions and tired "edgy" jokes for similar reasons. I can't find anything in what you wrote funny or offensive, so the sarcasm doesn't really read nor does your opinion make much sense. Also, I'm still confused because your meaning is still not clear. Were you being sarcastic about Trump being awful and serious about the "#MakeAmericaGreatAgain"? Or were you being serious about Trump being awful but being sarcastic about the "#MakeAmericaGreatAgain"? If it's the former, it's a really dumb take because clearly what you said about Trump is true in terms of his background, and he does empirically embody those qualities. So, it again, opens up this conundrum of "Do you think pettiness and tyranny is what makes a country great?" Hence the confusion. If it's the latter, okay. That makes sense in relation to the facts you presented. But it nullifies a lot of the other things you said as well. Hence the confusion. Either way, I think the eye-roll was warranted.

If Donald Trump is as awful you yourself said, why did you hashtag it out with the phrase "Make America Great Again"? Shouldn't you have written out #KeepAmericaPettyandTyrannical instead if you truly think that way about Trump? Or do you genuinely think that being petty and tyrannical is what makes this country great? So, "Make America Great Again" is just another way of saying "Let us be assholes because that's the natural way of things"!

Actually, though it's true that cultural conditioning has a way of getting us to color certain things as feminine and masculine arbitrarily and keep things in boxes like that, it's very important to recognize that femininity and masculinity are real subtle energies that imbue all living and non-living systems... and often do so in ways that are recognized in esoteric texts, cultural customs, and myths across eras and cultures. Basically, what I'm saying is that femininity and masculinity (as subtle energies) are not conditioned but innate. We all have a unique energetic signature that is an interplay between the feminine and masculine... as does everything in existence. That's the meaning of the Yin/Yang symbol. And if you've tuned your sensitivity enough, you can actually pick up on these energies as themselves instead of as their culturally understood expression. Think of the feminine and masculine energies like a light and our cultural conditioning like a lens that that light refracts through in a particular way according to our conditioning and environment. And most of the time, women will have more feminine than masculine energy. And most of the time, men will have more masculine than feminine energy. But there are plenty of exceptions and people who have an even mix of both... or men that are more predominantly feminine and women who are more predominantly masculine. Now, I'll tell you why it's so important, especially now to recognize the existence of these two energies instead of ignoring their existence. Our world in many many ways is built so that Yang is valued over Yin. The masculine is valued over the feminine. And this needs to be fixed, otherwise our technology (masculine principle) will overwhelm Mother Nature (feminine principle)... and we will not survive as a species. So, I used to believe the same thing that you do, that masculinity and femininity are just social constructs. But then, I experienced directly the Divine Feminine and could no longer deny its existence. And ever since then, I've been working on re-integrating my feminine side... which was being repressed. But because I didn't believe that masculinity and femininity were real, I kept labeling everything that was in the masculine principle as good and everything in the feminine principle as stupid or trite... thus exacerbating the imbalance that already exists in greater society. So, if you have any stakes in wanting gender equality, there has to be a recognition that femininity is different than masculinity in order to realize how much our society is in a state of masculine imbalance and feminine repression... which is also causing huge global scale problems, like global warming, exploitative wars left and right, extreme income inequality, and so many other ways where the shadow masculine has taken over because the feminine is not valued. So, while human beings are mostly the same, we must also honor those differences and recognize the realness of Yin and Yang. Otherwise, we remain in a state of thinking of things as neutral... but neutrality is really just more masculinity in disguised. You ever notice that gender neutral clothing just looks like men's wear? That's one small tell that our vision of gender neutrality is still being influenced by patriarchal thinking, which sees the masculine as default.

Orange has a really hard time with emotions and the feminine because Orange has a lot of emotional stakes in its own ability to compete. And men especially have a hard time leaving Orange because men are socially looked down upon more than women for being in touch with emotions and expressing anything that would get in the way of their ability to compete. Manhood is fetishized and looked upon as an ideal all the way up until Green, and Female-ness is seen as lesser up until Green as well. So, it's harder for men to abandon that story where there is hope to meet the ideals of manhood from Orange and below... and that's true even if most men will never experience those ideals. It's a carrot on a stick... but very few can let go of the desire for the carrot and will keep coloring in the lines of social expectations to mitigate their feelings of unworthiness. And that is done through Orange's achiever nature who wants to be the best with women too. So, it really comes down to the man's ability to experience himself as a complex emotional being as opposed to a stoic achiever and/or failure who doesn't live up to that expectation. So, it's about a man being aware and honest with himself about his emotions and reading them in a more nuanced way. The masculine orientation toward emotion tends toward detachment and distance which simplifies things... but it insulates them from experiencing the full complexity and high definition resolution of their emotions. But if a man learns to integrate his feminine side, he will be able to see his emotions clearly for what they are in a way that's closer up. And with a little skill, he will both perceive and be able to articulate his boundaries and feelings. And this will paradoxically make his masculinity shine through in a more brilliant way. So, it's really about the ability to see yourself in a radically honest light, and to honor your feelings and boundaries. Sinking into being more and allowing yourself to let go of extreme attachment ambitions to be at the tippy top of the hierarchy... to which emotional awareness and honesty is antithetical.

I spent a long time repressing my feminine side earlier in life and made it wrong to be feminine in anything other than appearance. So, I basically lived as a female on the outside but a male on the inside since later childhood in that I held myself very tightly to the ideals of male social norms around stoicism especially. So, I have a very well-developed masculine side because I've exercised it a lot. But I've spent the last 10 years getting back in touch with my feminine side, which is actually more natural to me... though my masculine side is genuine to me as well. It just carried the show for so many years, while the other aspect of me was locked away. But I find articulation and communication to be about integration of the feminine and the masculine. So, you need an integration of both sides to have the capacity to make people understand you... especially those who are of the opposite polarity. You need the feminine to have an intimate intuitive awareness of emotions. You need the masculine to understand them with logical thought and articulate them. So, a woman (or man) who has a dis-integrated masculine side may feel their emotions deeply, won't be able to articulate their emotions and will unconsciously resort to manipulation to get their point across. So, it most likely isn't a choice to not seem masculine. Women usually don't mind having an integrated masculine side because masculine values are smiled upon in both genders in our society. And a man (or woman) with a dis-integrated feminine side will have a very limited awareness of their emotions and won't be able to intuit other people's feelings. They'll be able to express general emotions (happy, sad, angry, etc.) but will miss all the nuances and details of emotions. So, when a woman can't articulate her more detailed and complex feelings to a man who can't understand or relate to them, it causes a lot of tension. To the masculine emotions are simple and clear cut and are as easy to read as Clifford the Big Red Dog. This is because the masculine has a birds eye view of the emotions and they don't see (or get lost in) the details. This enables men to make quick and detached decisions. But it also makes men with a disintegrated feminine terrible at emotional understanding, empathy, and intuitive thinking. To the feminine, emotions are complex and nuanced and it takes some know-how to read. It's like the street view of the emotions that the masculine has a birds-eye-view of. So, the feminine is like reading War and Peace and picking up on different themes and textures of the text. It takes some skill to do so... which comes from the integration of the masculine side. So a woman with no integration of the masculine side is trying to read War in Peace in a foreign language that she doesn't know. And then, she tries to communicate details from the text and themes from the text to a man with a disintegrated feminine side who has only ever read Clifford the Big Red Dog and thinks that's the only kind of book to read. And she gets frustrated by not understanding her own emotions and the fact that the man (who she hopes will stand in for her masculine side) can't understand either because he never learned that there is more nuance to the emotions than the complexity Clifford the Big Red Dog. And he goes, "Why can't she just tell me how she feels. Reading Clifford the Big Red Dog is so easy! See, happy, sad. I want this. I want that. Super easy!"

Trust me. They know that you're approaching other women. They deal with 10 guys a day approaching them ever since the beginning of puberty. So, that 23 year old, already had over a decade of experience with men approaching. So, obviously she knew. So, it stands to reason that the guys that are approaching them (and obviously only based on arbitrary factors like age/appearance/gender) are also approaching a ton of other women. By the time a girl hits 15 or 16 years old, they're already onto the numbers game because they are directly privy to the numbers games that men play... since they were like 12. That's what I'm telling you. They can smell it on you... and it's a bad smell that any woman with a shred of self esteem and life experience finds repulsive. And all the other stuff about Spiral Dynamics level and not being a PUA was irrelevant to the points I was making. I was merely telling you that, from the female perspective, you were coming off as creepy and immature for the reasons I mentioned. So, you aren't doing a very good job with social acuity. Like, I'm literally giving you pick up advice about how you're coming off from the female perspective. I'm just not sugar-coating it.

I don't necessarily think the judgment is toward you being attracted to young women in general... though the way you talk about it is very off-putting and will make literally every woman's legs clench up very tightly. And I'm not trying to be judgmental here, but I'm not sugar-coating it either. The problem comes about when you approach a woman based on number (age-wise) and numbers (in terms of approaching a bunch of women), in that particular context. It feels from a woman's pov, as objectifying and creepy... and I'm sure that's why you got the reaction you did. Women are very intuitive and are approached often by TONS of guys. So, they could probably intuitively feel your mindset and see it right on you. After a while, you can almost smell it on a man. That coupled with a 17 year age difference can feel very weird. But to speak to your thought that some women like older men... that's true. But it's still creepy even for the ones that prefer older guys. I was actually really into older men when I was in my early 20s (usually by a decade or two, even). But I also knew that if the older man approached me at random that he wasn't worth my time because he wasn't considering my feelings. That would mean that he didn't have the social acuity and maturity to know that it's probably received by me as creepy. I wanted a guy who would be wise and caring enough to try to make me feel comfortable. I was looking for a fully mature 30-40 year old guy at the time that acted like one. I wasn't looking for a middle aged man who still behaved like the guys my age that were so tiring to me. And thus, if a middle aged man would try to run game at me or see me as part of numbers game, it would just feel like dating a 20 year old guy in a 40 year old man's body... which is not the sexy, warm-hearted, emotionally stable older gentleman that I was looking for at that point. The fact of the matter is that it feels creepy when random middle aged men approach young women in a random setting. And that's true no matter how much you're attracted to older men. It's not the same dynamic as when a guy approaches a woman in his age range, at all.

He is being emotionally abusive to you. He feels weak and so he feels that he needs to put you down and suppress you and put out your light. So, he will find every opportunity to cut you down. Leave now, or you will eventually grow accustomed to the abuse and will suppress so much of yourself just to exist in a small space for him. You will become a shell of the person you once were. He will not change. He does this because he has a lot of problems to work out, and most people do not change. He needs to see you small. So, if you stay in the relationship, you are agreeing to smallness.

The vibe I get is that he's has some narcissistic and self-aggrandizing tendencies, and is maybe using you as a person to bring into his narcissism to support it. Basically, he's looking for a co-dependent to control and boss around. And now he's saying nice things like "You're a blessing" and that kind of thing, but soon it may turn into disparaging thoughts and trying to change/control you. So, don't take his openness or niceties as a sign that he is good for you. Often times, manipulators will share of themselves openly just to engender a sense of trust in their victims to get them hooked.

The itches and white tongue thing reminds me a bit of Scarlet Fever. I know you said it was a reaction to the anti-biotic. But that's what popped to my mind reading this. Here are some symptoms... https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/176242.php#symptoms

Joker is definitely a movie depicting a mentally ill man's transition from struggling and falling through the cracks in Orange to becoming a shadow-leader in Green. It is Green in its critiques against wealth inequality and how society negatively impacts vulnerable groups, since the Joker comes from a the working poor class and also has a mental illness and was raised by someone with a mental illness. So, it deals directly with the theme of systemic inequalities and how they impact individuals living within the system that is Gotham City and also the mental health care system within Gotham City. It's a story about how some people fall through the cracks in our society and don't get the support they need, while everyone who excels in Orange just expects them to be like everyone else and compete in the rat race... even if they are like Arthur Fleck. So, once Arthur Fleck starts out trying to conform and "be good" and fit into an Orange Capitalist society that Gotham City is a caricature of. And this doesn't work for him. He can't fit. The social structures aren't evolved enough in this Orange society for him to fit or be accommodated to. He is oppressed and therefore suppressed... An no one REALLY sees him. And he feels it. There is no place for him to exist as himself without struggling or being ostracized or just generally misunderstood because of his mental illness and the ignorance of the people around him to the reality of mental illness... especially when poverty and mental illness intersect with one another. Those in more privileged positions are quite tone-deaf to Arthur Fleck's struggles, and so life is hell for him. And he lives a life of isolation. Then when he starts to journal and contemplate on things and experience contrast (through killing the rich guys on the subway and being celebrated as a hero of the working class) he becomes more empowered. But that empowerment comes in an unhealthy way. He becomes the leader of a systemically oppressed group of poor people that encompasses most people in Gotham City. So when he is empowered he becomes the Joker, and he is using unhealthy Green to empower himself and create fairness through chaos and a destructive leveling of power. There is no space for him to exist in society, so he takes on the space of the archetypal clown (aka trickster) and embraces his place as an outsider who seeks revenge on the powers that be. And his goal is to create anarchy where those at the top fall down, and he undermines the social structure that they've been thriving off of to turn the tables. And he rallies other similarly outcasted and vulnerable people to his cause, which starts a chain reaction against the rich... in a similar fashion to the French Revolution's leveling of power structures via public violence, rioting, and guillotining the powerful. So, he is inviting corrupt Green into a corrupt Orange society where economic oppression is the way of things (because, in this move, Gotham City is an ever-so-slightly more openly corrupt city than the average American city is in reality.)

It wasn't alcohol. It was Clonazapam (better known as Klonopins), an anti-anxiety drug that was prescribed to him by a doctor when his wife was going through cancer treatment earlier this year.

Certainly, there would be a struggle for a huge percentage of people in terms of feeling normal and having social acuity. It takes a while to learn the ropes. And I know from experience that it can be easy to feel awkward and abnormal. It's a feeling that I'm very familiar with. But even with that withstanding, take the most awkward (and even genuinely abnormal) person you can think of, and that person will still be able to get one date out of a hundred. That's why I said that I don't believe Leo's 400 approaches number.

400?!?! How?!?! This has to be an exaggeration. You could look like Quazimodo and have the social skills of a middle schooler and still get a date with like one in every hundred women you'd approach. Honestly, I could approach like 20 women, and at least one of them would give me a phone number... and I'm a woman. I get that you're trying to ramp up motivation for guys to approach lots of women by setting the expectations high for what success will mean. That way they don't get discouraged by not getting success within their first few approaches. But a lot of guys will see that and go, "Oh man. If Leo (who I look up to as a mentor) had to do it 400 times before he got any success, then I'm never going to get success. And what if it never gets better than a 1/400 chance?" You have to make the game seem winnable too... which it totally is. For the average guy, probably 1 in 30 approaches will work out. Are you really being honest about the 400 approaches number?

Stage Green is all about noticing how various groups are impacted by different systemic forces, including cultural appropriation. So, it's not that Green is hyper-focused on identifying dogmatically with a group like Blue is. It's that they recognize that the social system impacts people differently depending on which group people are in. And Green also recognizes that Orange's "everyone is an individual" perspective, glosses over and creates a blindspot in awareness toward many systemic social problems. And that's because Orange is (on some level) pretending that different groups don't exist and that they aren't impacted differently by cultural forces. It can often be difficult for people from the dominant culture in a region who are in stage Orange to understand the impact of cultural appropriation on minority groups, as they don't have any frame of reference in terms of being impacted by cultural appropriation by a more dominant social group. So, it can be abstract to understand for white people living in a white majority multicultural region why cultural appropriation would be a problem. So, Orange with its individualistic focus that has transcended Blue's hyper-focus toward absolutist group-identification and maintaining the ingroup, can confuse Green's awareness of collective dynamics and how they uniquely impact certain groups with Blue's social dogma around group identities. The difference is undetectable from Orange, usually because Orange fails to look from the collective perspective and thus can't shift into the proper perspective to see what's happening on that level. But there is a world of difference because Blue is about hyper-focus toward just one group that's seen as the best, and Green is about adopting a collectivist group-focused lens to notice macro-societal patterns and have an understanding of various social groups and trying to alleviate problems that those social groups are facing that may be in the blindspot of the dominant social groups. And you can't do the latter if you pretend that differences in social groups don't exist, like Orange does. You need to evolve to Green to see these larger dynamics play out on the global scale... which is also 100% a pre-requisite for Yellow as well.

@Raptorsin7 I'm a life-coach, and I've made between $1500 to $3500 per month doing it, depending on how busy I am. But I also have a moderately successful YouTube channel with about 30,000 subscribers, where I get about 60k views per month. So, I get all my clients through my channel, without having to do any dry marketing tactics where I try to pitch myself to acquaintances and strangers. I basically just release a bunch of free content, and then let them know that I also offer life-coaching. I would say it would be quite difficult to be a life-coach if you don't have a built in following. So, if you create a following first, you can definitely make ends meet and more doing life-coaching. You also don't need a perfect life or anything like that. You don't need to be a Tony Robbins. What you do need is the ability to meet the client where they are and facilitate inner exploration and growth in them.

@Himanshu The 8 Cognitive Functions are a really interesting topic for sure. And MBTI-wise, I'm an INFJ. And even though the type is quite rare as are the others you mentioned, the internet has a way of gravitating like-minds together toward the same content. So, there are a bunch of uncommon types here, and thus those types become common in this context. On the positive side, we get to actually interact with others like ourselves in ways that most people aren't... but there's still the trap of being an echo chamber. Basically, in a nutshell, we're in Leo's target market. My cognitive functions are as follows... (Dominant) Introverted Intuition - Discovering intuition internally, and seeking to know one's self and emotions deeply (Auxiliary) Extroverted Feeling - Reaching out to others and cultivating relationships and the ability to understand others' emotions. (Tertiary) Introverted Thinking - Having the ability to put feelings into words and organize thoughts in a way the mind understands them internally (Inferior) Extroverted Sensing - Being present with the sensory world. Funny enough, I just found out about a week and a half ago, that the Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior functions have a time-scale. My biggest hang-up personally, has actually been on my Auxiliary function. I've always been big on Introverted Intuition and Introverted Thinking, of which having my channel has really helped with my Introverted Thinking the most. But I have had some wounding relative to Extroverted Feeling, so I've been doing my best in recent years to really reach out which can be difficult. I used to make friends easily and invest in relationships easily, but now there is always kind of an arms-length wedge that I find between myself and connecting with others. As far as my inferior function of Extroverted Sensing, I definitely have some issues because I'm so internal with my focus. Intuition and thinking are both very internal, and I get caught up in a loop referred to as the Ni-Ti loop where I'm always trying to process my intuition and make thought-based meaning of it... but some things can't easily be processed that way or can't be processed that way period. Given that Jung was also an INFJ, I'm sure he was probably well aware of this loop, as his main hang-up was about finding meaning to communicate. But it's all very internal, so it can be difficult to reach outside when there's so much going on internally. As far as my Inferior function goes, in certain activities, like when I learned to paint realistically, it's really helped me get in touch with my Extroverted Sensing function. That said, it's difficult to have that meditative focus in a way that's ongoing and not just activity focused, so I still have a lot to integrate there. Also, all fo this is helpful to understand internally for yourself. But be careful in trying to map others, especially those who you just know from their public persona. They're only ever showing 1% of what's going on with them by nature of the medium. For example, Robert Moore (the Jungian guru responsible for writing "King, Warrior, Magician, Lover") killed his wife. And with the insights he shared, which are solid, you can see that the public persona doesn't exactly capture the full depth and breadth of that person. Heck, for all you know, I might have some bodies in the basement. Just kidding... I keep them in the attic. There are no basements in Florida... Too much groundwater.

Thank you

I'm quite sure that, like Warren, Bernie would support adding gender reassignment surgeries to his Medicare for All plan. The only things I've heard him say would be part of supplemental plans would be things like cosmetic surgery. But given that gender dysphoria is an actual medical diagnosis, it makes sense that gender reassignment surgery be covered under his plan. Even Obama, who is arguably center right in many respects, sought to lift the ban that was established that blocked gender reassignment surgery from being covered under medicaid plans. Also, it's 2019 now, and people are more informed about politics. In terms of policy substance, Hilary and Obama are both corporate Neo-liberal centrists that fundamentally would want to keep the status quo. It's not that type of politician that will excite the base, which is looking for progressive change and for someone to address the corruption that was before just accepted as norm. And nice personality skills aren't going to cut it. People actually want real change. And if they don't get it, many of them will skew toward liars and demagogues like Trump because they're just hoping for change at all costs.

That's totally true... It's three-breasted aliens or nothing for me.

TMI, but when I was 11, I used to sneak and watch the VHS of Total Recall when my parents were away and I'd fast-forward to the part with the alien with the three breasts. That was sex-ed for me back in the year 2000.

Warren is not left of Bernie. She's quite a bit more toward the center, by comparison. Also, an Obama-like figure would just be Hilary part 2. The base is really skewing more toward those with progressive policies, and not someone who will try to target this non-existent center and capitulate to the Republicans and the establishment.

When I was in my early 20s, I used to have a kind of fantasy image around the idea of being sexually desired by a wealthier middle aged man like in his 40s. Not super wealthy, but like middle class to upper middle class to my working class/ working poor background. But it didn't really have to do with the money or some idea of gaining upward mobility. It had to do with this fantasy I had around being desired a certain way with a certain setting that I appreciated at the time. And there was a certain type of music I associated with it, like Sade's "Smooth Operator" or some old vaudeville music. And I'd always envision that he would be surprised and grateful that I took interest in him because of his age, so he would value me. And it was really indicative of the type of persona I was trying to adopt at the time. I was working hard to fit in as a school teacher, which is a job that my personality isn't very well suited to. And I always felt like I was a square peg in a round hole in the work setting around all these middle class folks. So, I had these dreams of being able to vanillify myself and blend in as socially acceptable. And I wanted people to see me as a professional young woman who was well-put-together. And somehow, this played into this fantasy a lot. But really, this fantasy was more of an outgrowth of trying to fit a place in society that was inauthentic to me. And I'd always imagine in the fantasy, that this rigid middle-aged man with trouble expressing his sexuality was set free by me who brought back his youth for a time. And that he would open up only to me, and I'd be like a manic pixie dream girl for him. But it occurred to me, at some point, that this uptight wealthy man was really a representation of myself and my self-imposed limitations set in place by the type of persona I was trying to occupy that wasn't fitting for me. I was always trying to be a 40 year-old woman in terms of maturity in a 23-25 year-old body. And in trying to set him free in the fantasy, it was really a metaphor for trying to set myself free. But truly, the money was only one accessory to the whole image I was trying to embody. So, money might equal out to you as simply what it is. And it could indicate some desire for upward mobility. Or it could be some old reptilian-brain thing that lights up your pair-bonding response in relation to a man who is capable of providing. Or if you're like me, it could be that the money is just one symbol associated with an entire inner dialogue. And it will fall away, as mine did, upon integrating other aspects of yourself.

The dearth of positive masculine role models is one of the biggest problems I see for young men's development now-a-days. If a man wants to own his masculinity and be empowered in that way, there's not much healthy material out there readily available. At least, nowhere near as readily available as the toxic and half-toxic masculine role models that are harkening to the juvenile, domineering, and disintegrated masculinity of the past. Namely, the kind that suppresses the feminine at all costs. But who can blame them? Just like a son with an abusive father (or absent father), they know no other model of masculinity but the shadow side of it. And they come to hold up the shadow masculine as an example of the healthy masculine to be aspire to. Or, half-toxic role models like JP, will mix the healthy and unhealthy masculine... which leads to conflation of the negative with the positive and just thinking masculinity itself is inherently positive with no dark side to it. And this is very dangerous because degeneration will feel like improvement, which is one of the reasons I go so hard at JP. Now, I'm certain that healthy masculine role models do exist somewhere on the interwebs. But by and large, you'll find regressive masculine role models that men can actually feel the sense of masculine empowerment that they're looking for. Then, you have other guys that are healthy but not as masculine (or sometimes not healthy and suppressing their masculinity), and men who want masculine empowerment are put off by them because they don't embody the masculine archetype enough to stir their interests and needs. Also, most men already have a script in their mind about what masculinity entails. So, many men may miss positive examples of the masculinity by conflating them with femininity because their definition of the what constitutes masculinity has been corrupted... with very high social stakes applied to men who deviate from the masculine. That, compounded with the fact that most men just want to be masculine because they put far too much stock in women's opinions of them, it's just the witches brew for disaster. Because these men will flock to the toxic and half-toxic role models and become angry and resentful to the women they previously felt powerless to. And they tend to stay stuck in Orange thinking if they make it there. I agree with what Leftist Youtuber Natalie Wynn said about this at the end of her most recent video, in terms of men needing to create a new model of manhood and masculinity. It's a great video to watch... She's also trans-gendered, so she's lived both the male experience and the female experience, and has lots of great first-hand insights on gender.