Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Leo Gura]

20 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

For me, a fundamental human tradition is pre-patriarchal and more egalitarian.

That simply does not apply to modern civilization. You are talking about some mythical pre-civilizational past which is long in the rear-view mirror, if it ever even existed. Once civilization came online, everything forever changed. You can't undo civilization or act like it isn't a thing.

Civilization is patriarchal because everything hinges on winning wars. Women can't win wars. There is no negotiating this. Wars need to be fought and won if you wish to live.

Edited April 13 by Leo Gura

[Natasha Tori Maru]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't mean chasing, I mean orbiting.

It's a subtle but important difference.

No one should really be chasing because it comes off as desperate. But if a woman really likes a man, she will chase him and that dynamic is not the end of the world for her. He will still be interested in her. But if a man ever chases a woman, he is cooked. No woman will ever sleep with him. It is more acceptable for a woman to be needy than a man. In a woman it's cute, in a man it's gross.

You are defining terms differently is all.

I personally think insecure women think being persued by a man is gross. I've never been turned off by this. Neediness is something else entirely. I am not speaking about neediness. 

[gengar]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

It is ironic that feminism and liberalism has created our current casual dating situation. Women these days treat sex casually and get hurt by it. That is the foolishness of liberalism.

Catharthic to hear Leo bring this up.

Women (as a group) love to strengthen the game of capitalism and fascism by rewarding the most competitive, selfish men.

A self-collapsing system.

The beautiful women who orbit clavicular are literally destroyers of society just like Andrew Tate and other horrific men.

Once you see it your innocence is gone.

You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

[gengar]

16 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

For me, a fundamental human tradition is pre-patriarchal and more egalitarian.

Yo do realize that female hypergamy increases the less patriarchal a society is, right? the idea that only an Alpha men gets women and the rest nothing was moreso true in a non-patriarchal hunter-gatherer society.
 

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

You are defining terms differently is all.

I personally think insecure women think being persued by a man is gross. I've never been turned off by this. Neediness is something else entirely. I am not speaking about neediness. 

Chasing comes from neediness.

[Lila9]

33 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

I think this is explained by that in sex for example, people tend to get excited from completely different things than they want from their partner in other times. Sometimes the ancient brain is in charge and some other times another emotional needs are more important.

I don’t believe harm to oneself is arousing for a healthy person raised with a healthy view of sex, because it implies destruction, the opposite of sexual energy, which is creative.

If someone is aroused by destructive acts (to themselves or others), they have likely been traumatized or shaped by a society that views sexuality in a violent way.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Chasing comes from neediness.

Only if you are attached or overly dependant on outcome. If you aren't defining the outcome as a reflection of yourself or abilities in any way it's not neediness. It's not that clear cut imo. 

This is the essence of confident persuit from a masculine man. It comes from want, not need. 

[gengar]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Chasing comes from neediness.

You never defined your narrow definition of chasing; I think she means that men should be the ones going up to ask her number etc, in most cases. But maybe I misinterpreted.

[Lila9]

2 minutes ago, gengar said:

Yo do realize that female hypergamy increases the less patriarchal a society is, right? the idea that only an Alpha men gets women and the rest nothing was moreso true in a non-patriarchal hunter-gatherer society.
 

In pre-patriarchal societies, there was no concept of purity or control over women’s sexuality. Women slept with as many men as they chose and did not necessarily know who the father was. The concept of alpha and beta has been debunked. 

[Nivsch]

7 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

I don’t believe harm to oneself is arousing for a healthy person raised with a healthy view of sex, because it implies destruction, the opposite of sexual energy, which is creative.

If someone is aroused by destructive acts (to themselves or others), they have likely been traumatized or shaped by a society that views sexuality in a violent way.

I don't mean to destructive acts but to things that men do that show agency in a playful healthy manner. This is nuanced of course, and only in certain moments.

Edited April 13 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

1 minute ago, No1Here2c said:

We all know a fun trick or two.

I edited to "Agency"

[Natasha Tori Maru]

3 minutes ago, gengar said:

You never defined your narrow definition of chasing; I think she means that men should be the ones going up to ask her number etc, in most cases. But maybe I misinterpreted.

I don't really think it's solely on a man to do that. Only that persuit and chasing definitely doesn't mean neediness. I think striving, chasing and persuit are masculine traits (if we want to split the typical traits to masculine / feminine). 

Tbh I think Leo and I are using different terms 🫪 perhaps negative connotations with the word 'chasing'

[gengar]

Just now, Lila9 said:

In pre-patriarchal societies, there was no concept of purity or control over women’s sexuality. Women slept with as many men as they chose and did not necessarily know who the father was. The concept of alpha and beta has been debunked. 

Yeah, they slept with whom they wanted, namely the alphas, and if other men tried to get with women the alpha would smack the shit out of them. This is how it goes with Chimps and all dimorphic mammals. 

Do you really, genuinely believe pre-civilizational human tribes were not absolutely hardcore, but instead egalitarian and soft? Then you are really self-deceived.

I'd love to see your scientific evidence debunking of Alphas. like "alpha" is such a hardcoded concept to begin with. It just means the strongest men in a tribe who get laid the most.

It's in evolution's benefit for women to only breed with the top males, and not the other way around. Your idea of precivilizaitonal tribes is cartoonishly childish and false.

[Lila9]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That simply does not apply to modern civilization. You are talking about some mythical pre-civilizational past which is long in the rear-view mirror, if it ever even existed. Once civilization came online, everything forever changed. You can't undo civilization or act like it isn't a thing.

Civilization is patriarchal because everything hinges on winning wars. Women can't win wars. There is no negotiating this. Wars need to be fought and won if you wish to live.

This doesn’t change the fact that modern civilization is not in alignment with our human needs and nature, this is why there are so many problems. It is dysfunctional.

This is why the problems can’t be solved on a shallow level within the structure, but only on a deep level with the destruction and reconstruction of civilization. This will happen automatically. We are just in the period between its slow decline and the formation of a new civilization, which naturally is very confusing for everyone.

[gengar]

Patriarchy -> Stability but oppression of women -> Men become more spiritual -> They ease on patriarchy -> Women can now choose their mates
-> They choose the least spiritual, more competitive and selfish men -> Men are incentivized to be less spiritual -> War -> Patriarchy

I hope this cycle breaks at a point in time.

[Terell Kirby]

“When in doubt- shut up and socialize.”~ says any guy who’s had dating success 

[gengar]

@Lila9 Can I see your scientific evidence of the debunking of "alphas" and "betas"? I'm genuinely interested.

[Nivsch]

12 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

This doesn’t change the fact that modern civilization is not in alignment with our human needs and nature, this is why there are so many problems. It is dysfunctional.

True. We are not neurologically wired for the modern world that has only existed for 100 years.

Edited April 13 by Nivsch

[Lila9]

4 minutes ago, gengar said:

Yeah, they slept with whom they wanted, namely the alphas, and if other men tried to get with women the alpha would smack the shit out of them. This is how it goes with Chimps and all dimorphic mammals. 

Do you really, genuinely believe pre-civilizational human tribes were not absolutely hardcore, but instead egalitarian and soft? Then you are really self-deceived.

I'd love to see your scientific evidence debunking of Alphas. like "alpha" is such a hardcoded concept to begin with. It just means the strongest men in a tribe who get laid the most.

It's in evolution's benefit for women to only breed with the top males, and not the other way around. Your idea of precivilizaitonal tribes is cartoonishly childish and false.

The guy who coined the terms “alpha” and “beta” later debunked them himself.

But if you insist on using these definitions, what is perceived as alpha in a patriarchal society would be considered beta in an egalitarian society, and what is considered beta in this society would be considered alpha in an egalitarian one.

Men have a lot of power in shaping their own attractiveness.

The "top males" are self made, not born. 

 

 

[gengar]

@Lila9Okay, thanks, I'll check that video out.

"The "top males" are self made, not born. "

Mountains of scientific evidence in both humans and other mammals suggest that this is only partially true and that genetics plays a huge role, so that is really unscientific of you to state.