Emerald

That's interesting. The way I was interpreting it as a defense where you're trying to get the last word and "win" the interaction. And I would typically think of it as a sign of insecurity, and a fear of showing weakness. But I guess I was wrong.

The titles says it all. If you tend to use pick-up as a means of getting your sexual needs met whilst avoiding building actual friendships and acquaintance-ships with your peers... that's going to cause you problems. If you do decide to do pick-up (or even dating apps), it should be a supplement to your social circle... not a replacement.

Why do you always do this?

Silly reaction. There are women with boyfriends, you know?

Have fun being pretending to be someone else so that women will like you, then. But women will pick up on the neediness and lack of sovereignty behind the act... and the fact that you're taking her lead to determine how you should behave and socialize. Women don't tend to like it when men aren't independent-minded enough to act according to their own will. And it's quite repellent when a guy is trying to follow her lead on how he should behave just to earn her validation.

Don't start larping as a douchebag to try to get women to like you. That's just another way of being desperate and needy and saying, "What kind of asshole to I need to pretzel myself into to get women to like me?' The reality is that the woman you talked to had a boyfriend. And she probably enjoyed the flirtation and didn't want it to go further. So, she tried to diffuse it with a compliment because she didn't want you to get the wrong idea. And "You're sweet" is definitely a compliment. So, don't interpret this as "If only I were a douche, I'd get women". because that's not true. The woman had a boyfriend either way. Instead, just stop trying to mold yourself into what you think women want you to be... and just be yourself.

I'm not just talking about serial murderers. Probably half or more of people have been in a relationship with a toxic and abusive partner. And it's more often women who are on the receiving end of abuse... though many men also experience abuse. The statistics are the 1 in 3 women have been in an abusive relationship... and 1 in 4 men have been in an abusive relationship. So, when I'm talking about being predatory... I'm not just talking about the extremes. I'm talking about the mundane guy who will drag a woman's life down into the ground. And for an attractive woman, she will attract a lot more opportunistic men who are just trying to prove themselves good enough by getting her validation. They won't actually be interested in her. Honestly, probably around half or more people are going to be terrible partners. And women (and especially beautiful women) have to ruthlessly sort out those options... or she'll end up with a partner who will be a drain on her life. And that's not the extremes like serial murderers... as serial murderers are rare. It's more like avoidants, bread-crumbers, moochers, guys who can't keep a job, emotionally abusive guys, physically abusive guys (this sometimes actually does end in murder... it just doesn't make the national news), guys with anger issues, impulsive guys, misogynists, cheaters, gamblers, addicts, petty criminals, sex pests, beauty diggers, immature guys, irresponsible guys, dead-beat dads, power abusers, and other common types of negative partners. And these are very mundane examples. Most women have had a relationship with a guy who has qualities on this list. And probably half or more of guys fall into the categories on this list. (Half of women are often shitty too, just sometimes in other ways) So, women are very wise to be ruthless in their selectivity. And attractive women are especially visible to men who want to use her for sex, status, and validation without caring about her. And this tends to lead to many of her "leads" to getting into a relationship simply looking to extract value... and not just have a good relationship. So, the more beautiful a woman is, the more she needs to be able to protect her time, energy, and focus from predatory guys.

That's also a good point. If humans were put in a situation where agency was completely removed but all necessities were provided, there would probably be some really negative effects of that.

Those aren't common patterns in humanity though. It's very rare that a mom kills her kids. And it's rare if a man is only interested in grooming himself and not in having sex. Most men are deeply interested in sex.

You're not getting my perspective AT ALL. I literally said that all murderers should default to life sentences. So, I don't understand why you're talking about releasing a mass murderer.... as that's the opposite of my perspective. What I'm saying is that the philosophy needs to shift behind how we conduct the justice system to where we ONLY focus on justice... and not revenge or punishment. And the death penalty doesn't fit with that philosophy. Do you understand what I'm saying now?

That's not exactly true. While a less attractive woman can absolutely be targeted by a predatory man... attractive women are FAR more likely to be targeted simply because they draw more attention in general. Being an attractive woman can be a bit like being the goose that lays the golden eggs. EVERYONE and their father wants a piece of you. Also, predatory men are often very misogynistic and deeply resentful of beautiful women's power over them. So, there can also be a revenge driver that bitter men can have SPECIFICALLY for very beautiful women. That's why attractive women have to be EXTRA good at sorting and shielding their time, energy, and attention from those who just want to use her beauty for their own selfish purposes. It's also why women who have been assaulted can tend to dress down and gain weight... as attractiveness can feel and be very unsafe. It's genuinely safer to look plainer as a woman, as it draws less attention to you. Honestly, think about who's most likely to be sexually exploited and brought into the sex trade... young attractive women without a solid social circle. Also, when it comes to predation... it doesn't necessarily always mean being predated upon by some other species trying to eat you. For humans, there are common predatory social dynamics where a sizable minority of men will try to extract value from a woman without any care about her wants, needs, safety, or anything else. As apex predators... the main threat to the women of this species doesn't come from outside of the species, it comes from the men of the species. And attractiveness doesn't keep a woman safe at all. If anything, women who are more Feminine and attractive can tend to be less respected than a plainer woman who's more Masculine. That's always what I experienced anyway. The more Masculine you look and behave, the more respect or indifference you get from those kinds of men. The more Feminine you look and behave, the more those men see you as an object and want to exploit you for their own purposes. They see you more as a symbol for their own validity or sex drive than as a person.

That's definitely not true. Even in nature... blandness and drabness are actually great evolutionary strategies, as they help to avoid predators and ensure that the animal will go on to reproduce. For example, in a stream with few predators... the fish with the very attractive bright colors will be more likely to survive and reproduce. But in a stream with many predators... the blandest fish will be the most likely to survive and reproductive. And funny enough, the same logic applies with women. The more attractive you are as a woman... the more men you will attract. And many of those men will ONLY be interested in predating upon your beauty for their own selfish benefit. And the most attractive women are the most susceptible to predators... just like the very colorful fish are the most susceptible to predators. And the less attractive you are as a woman... the fewer men you will attract. But a lower percentage of that pool of men will be approaching you from a predatory mindset... as you don't have much beauty or status to be siphoned off of you. And that dodges a bullet. So, many women actually do dress themselves down... as it can be a repellent for predatory beauty diggers. So, plainness and unattractiveness actually serve great benefits. Also, if you look around at the world, probably only 20-30% of women really doll themselves up. Most women tend to feel more comfortable blending in a bit more. You just may not notice them as much... and it may feel like all women doll themselves up because those are the only women you're focused on. And I've only met one unattractive woman who struggled to attract and meet men. And hers was more of a self-esteem and not putting herself out there issue in combination with her appearance. But I've known MANY unattractive women. And all of them have had boyfriends and husbands. (I've also met plenty of uggo guys who never struggled to find a partner) But even beyond human beings, natural selection always sorts for the fittest in the environment... and sometimes the fittest will be the most attractive and other times the fittest will be the one who repels predators the most.

I once heard that the death penalty actually costs more for taxpayers than lifelong incarceration. Double-check that... as I only heard that once in passing. But I think the source was legitimate. Those are exactly my thoughts. The issue is that people mix-up the concept of justice with the concept of revenge. And those are two different values. And if the justice system serves the value of revenge, it mission drifts from the actual pursuit of justice. And that's how we end up with the very rudimentary and corrupt justice system we have. Instead, if we kept our eye on the prize, which is 'public safety' and 'taking away the burdens of freedom away' from murderers and others who use their freedom to commit life-altering violence... then we're actually on-mission. And I think the justice system that would result from that would be a lot more well-developed and nuanced. Right now, our justice system basically functions like a trash can that we throw any criminal into... and we mix drug users in with child molesters and killers. And it makes zero sense. So, I think there should be different types of sub-institutions for different types of crimes. Like for drug users, they shouldn't have to be locked up at all... or to pay probation. Instead, they should just be required to seek help for the addiction... and have resources given to them. For small-time drug-dealers, there should be short periods of time at a holding facility with non-violent offenders... where they have to learn about the harm that their drugs cause to people, to try to get them to reconsider what they're doing. And then, of course, mandatory confiscation of their drugs. For violent non-lethal crimes and more established drug dealers, they should have their own holding facility that's heavily focused on rehabilitation. Then, there should be a totally different facility for intentional murderers (excluding manslaughter), rapists, child molesters, and other crimes where the default understanding is life-imprisonment... except in rare cases where there's a clear change in ethos for those who murdered because they were involved in gangs and other things like that. And these facilities should all be built in a way that is less stimulating with calming colors and is going to be less likely to lead to agitation and conflict... as that's a better environment for rehabilitation and will reduce violence somewhat. Then, I think most of the budget for the justice department should go to researching the true root causes of specific types of criminal behaviors... and (where possible) to proactively put resources to preventing the external circumstances that are more likely to produce that kind of behavior. For example, if we know that poverty tends to lead to a greater likelihood of engaging in crimes like theft, drug dealing, and gang violence... then some of the justice resources should go to remedying the issue of poverty. Right now, because we think about justice and revenge as the same thing... we're only thinking about prison, probation, and fines as the source of justice. But those are just punishments... and they don't actually prevent criminal from committing crimes. They just deter non-criminals. So, our focus needs to be totally different to actually have an effective justice system that actually optimizes for a safer society. And the death penalty doesn't belong in that paradigm... unless there is a region where there's literally no maximum security place to keep a dangerous criminal.

You're deeply misunderstanding and strawmannirg my perspective. I'm not advocating a light sentence at all. I think that murderers and rapists need to be permanently sequestered away from society (life sentences)... not as a punishment, but as a means of keeping society safe and as a means of taking the burdens of freedom away from the criminal for their own good. So, I'd say that my perspective is actually a harder line than those who have a more punitive view of justice. The only exception to the life-sentence rule is if the person shows clear signs of rehabilitation... like a young gang member who kills someone and then genuinely grows past that phase in their lives. So, I'm advocating for changing the principles that the justice system operates off of by removing an ethos of revenge and punishment.... and instead serving the ACTUAL value of justice as a means of doing the right thing by the victim, the criminal, and society at large.

The reality of relationships is definitely more fair and beautiful than those hyper-sexed fantasy paradigms. The issue with those kinds of paradigms is that it focuses solely on truths that feel hot and sexy and hyper-polarized... and doesn't focus on what actually sustains a relationship. Let's say that there are several layers of how relationships and attraction operate... The compatibility layer The friendship layer The community layer The resonance layer The romance layer The animalistic layer And the paradigms that young men learn from often have to do with the animalistic layer. And on that layer, everyone is nothing more than the sum of their parts: women are only beauty and men are only power. .And everything is one giant transaction of mutual usery. And it's hyper-objectifying where beauty is exchanged for power. And it's something that tends to make men both aroused and empowered... as men tend to "win" the animalistic layer because men are stronger, taller, and have an evergreen reproductive cycle. (And women will tend to sort men who over-index on this layer because of that) But that layer is also disturbing for men.... because it leaves them with the question, "If there are stronger, more successful men... why don't all the hypergamous women just join his harem?" or "Why aren't all the hot 20 year olds with 50 year old rich men?" But that's not how people operate. And it jut creates a confirmation bias loop where the man will only seek out evidence that seems to confirm those paradigms... as he's turned on by them but also dehumanized and objectified in them, and his worth is challenged in them. It's honestly brilliant marketing on the part of such authors and coaches. It definitely pushes men's emotional and sexual buttons. But it tends to leave men in a bind where they're not actually understanding what women really see in him when she sees him in that more holistic way. And they're trying to hyper-optimize themselves along objective lines because of that misunderstanding to try to increase power and status to prove themselves worthy of beauty. But women tend to be more holistic in the way they view a man... seeing him as greater than the sum of his parts. And she can intuitively feel for each of the layers listed above... with the animalistic layer being just one ingredient. But that ingredient is meaningless and gross if the rest of the "dish" isn't good. The animalistic layer is like butter. In small quantities, it enhances the quality of dish. But you don't want to eat butter by itself. And there's definitely such a thing as too much butter. Honestly, if you want to understand how people really pair bond, you just have to look at ordinary people, and you will tend to see an equality among spouses. And it's not novel or hot or sexy. Of course, you might go "Well those are average people. I don't want to be average." But we are all average people, at the end of the day. We're all very ordinary. And that's where the magic is. And you can find very attractive people in awful relationships... and uggos in wonderful relationships. You just have to look more at real people's relationships and marriages... and less at over-sexed paradigms that are heavily focused on excitement and hotness in the initial dating phase.