Treat Women Like Children

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Emerald said:

you were in a toxic relationship.

Lack of responsibility.

The only reason to be in a toxic relationship is because it gives you something you need.

Edited April 6 by Leo Gura

[MsNobody]

@Leo Gura yes, both sides need to master feminine and masculine traits, being more logical is integrating the masculine. 
 

I’m suggesting that instead of treating us like we are children, maybe step up in your communication skills, learn about emotions, kids don’t have their frontal lobe fully developed to be able to put things together, but we of course do, not only that but we are highly intuitive, super connected to nature, we birth children into reality, we are a bit far from being children..

We are talking about the issue of men not being able to meet us emotionally and instead of addressing the issue, you fire back criticizing us as a defense mechanism, instead of talking about the thing itself. I agree with both sides, men and women need to put more effort into understanding and meeting the other where he/she is at. 

I also see many more women in workshops and retreats than men, curious what you think about that. IMO and from what I see is that there are more women working on themselves than men. Men tend to only work on themselves to pick up women, not for personal development purposes of knowing themselves and becoming more whole, take you for example, your awakening most likely started after you got involved with the pick up community. 

Edited April 6 by MsNobody

[Emerald]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Lack of responsibility.

Or you didn't know until you knew... as most people don't.

It's not helpful for you to judge yourself.

[Someone here]

Uh-oh ..seems like Leo is getting himself in trouble with the ladies 😂..now you understand that women are not children haha 

[yetineti]

Saying you are bisexual and your attraction to men is typical is oxymoronic and really dismisses any bias.

Most women’s attraction to men involves also not being attracted to women.

Nonetheless, I think what @Emerald is saying is imperative. It is the guard rails to Leo’s work, which can be greatly abused. Arguably more than not.

I will say this, however.

Leo’s work, when properly understood, cannot be found elsewhere; priceless.

Also, I’d make a further distinction, hopefully for clarity, on what he mentioned:

“Gender equality in the political sphere is being confused with gender equality in the relationship sphere, where it does not belong.”

I think some can be added to this.

I graduated in 2019, have older references and a clear understanding of the social equality that is taking place— particularly at an age where dating and relationships become apparent.

Gender equality cannot be confused with political equality or relationship equality when social equality out weighs all other social concepts.

This leads to dilution of the very idea of a relationship, the need to have one, etc.

All of the debate in politics, relationships, etc. is just the merging and dilution caused by ‘Stage Green’ and any one ‘prior to Stage Green’ trying to make sense of it.

’Stage Green’ is not the hippie go lucky lovey dovey it seems. It is a direct response to the hyper-individuality of ‘Orange’ creating its own purpose, its own social justifications, etc. 

‘Green’ says it’s easier to forget most of the constructions and fall into your social positioning than it is to actively reconstruct.

Hence, after thousands of years, we’re debating ‘relationships’ something that has been extremely straight forward.

We must recognize the idea of ‘relationships’ actively changes as we speak.

And men and women, today, struggle with understanding where new social equality plays a role in the interdependent nature of men and women as friends, lovers, companions, etc.

 

 

Edited April 6 by yetineti

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Or you didn't know until you knew... as most people don't.

Every bad thing reduces to ignorance.

Children are ignorant.

Quote

It's not helpful for you to judge yourself.

I don't judge myself, just explaining how stuff works.

Edited April 6 by Leo Gura

[Princess Arabia]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Abusive relationships happen to irresponisible people who allow themselves to get boiled alive like frogs.

One of those truths you should not tell women.

This part isn't true. It can happen to anyone. You said "happen", there's a difference with that and "staying in". Most male abusers start out as being very charming, respectable and likeable; they usually show their true colors afterwards when it's sometimes too late and now the female has to strategize a way out. With children it's even harder; not to mention live-ins and marriages.

Edited April 6 by Princess Arabia

[Princess Arabia]

4 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Uh-oh ..seems like Leo is getting himself in trouble with the ladies 😂..now you understand that women are not children haha 

You're hilarious. 😅

[integral]

55 minutes ago, Emerald said:

It is true because it's true. We just over-focus on our differences because differences are more note-worthy than samenesses.

And it is helpful because of what it does to men's ability to relate to women when they believe men and women are so different. They miss the foundation of sameness that's necessary to have a real intimate relationship. And they suffer because of it.

The goal post is not moving...

There are very clear biological differences in how our minds work, we have different needs, and when you treat a woman the way a man wants his needs met, it goes wrong.

A man will treat a woman the way HE wants to be treated. -> AND ITS WRONG.

What I'm talking to my guy friends we're throwing philosophy shit at each other or laughing like crazy at each other, poking fun at each other, there is no limitations what we can say, we take nothing personally.

A woman takes everything personally, the words she says represent her identity. And when you have a logical conversation with a feminine mind you are attacking her identity and she's unable to separate it, so it's a huge mistake. Her beliefs are part of her identity and she can't separate it.

A woman is speaking with her Identity On the Line, which is why her whole domain is an emotional language. Which is why women speak to each other indirectly. Men men will just say the facts right to their face and that's what they want to hear, a woman will literally avoid the truth as if her life depended on it in the middle of a social scenario, because she rather die than experienced the emotional burden of conflict.

YOU do not do this. You are able to have a debate =>  enjoy that debate => and take nothing personally. This is masculine energy not maturity.

There is no emotional burden for you... Besides the challenge which you enjoy! which is pure masculinity!

 

A feminine woman who is mature could have a debate but she certainly would not enjoy it and at the end of the conversation she might even have to take a nap and get away from society, because there was an emotional burden there for her.

Debates are exhausting for the feminine mind. Cuz it's an emotional burden she has to bear.

It's not about maturity. It's a completely different language and how the mind works.

[Princess Arabia]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Every bad thing reduces to ignorance.

Children are ignorant.

So are adults. So are responsible people and so are men about women and so are business owners. Everyone is ignorant to something. It's not just children.

[Emerald]

10 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

I find most feminine, attractive women lead with good vibes and emotional spikes. She's typically not screening for a guys level of integrity, maturity or moral development--at least in the initial attraction phase.

I've made the mistake plenty times over trying to attract women with my "resume"- metaphorically speaking, none of this matters up against the guys that know how to give out vibes / emotional spikes.

Note: Integrity is still important to healthy masculinity

That screening should ideally happen before giving the guy the time of day, as you don't want the feelings to set in before you've gotten to know about him without the rose-colored glasses.

That's why I only ever go for guys that I've already known platonically for some time. 

That way, when the good vibes and emotional spikes happen, they're happening with a guy who I can be happy with longterm... and not just in the honeymoon phase.

I've made the mistake before of choosing a partner based on purely chemistry and feelings... and it's no good.

Now, I don't recommend coming into it with "checkbox mentality". You just need to get a clear-headed idea of if he will be a suitable and compatible longterm partner before getting attached.

Ask, "Could I live with this person for my entire life and be happy?" and "Would he make a good father?"

Like you can have chemistry with guys that would be a solid "no" for both of these questions.

And that's why it's important to only let yourself flirt with and buy into feelings for guys that you would say "Yes." to both.

[Princess Arabia]

Give a man his adult toys (cars, video games, sports) and see who acts like a child then. 

[Emerald]

7 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Every bad thing reduces to ignorance.

Children are ignorant.

I don't judge myself, just explaining how stuff works.

I've been in an abusive relationship, and I've learned from it without judging people who are still stuck in them.

Learning and taking responsibility for what's in your control is very different than judging yourself and from victim blaming.

[aurum]

36 minutes ago, Emerald said:

That's only fun for me (and most women) when the guy actually relates to me as his equal 90% of the time. And I'm sure that that's the case for your female partners.

They probably feel safe to play to those sub/dom dynamics with you specifically because you're not ACTUALLY seeing them as children you must govern.

Personally, I wouldn't even put myself in a position where I'd be calling a man "daddy" who literally saw me as a child he needs to emotionally manipulate to regulate my emotions for me.

If I were in such a relationships, it just sounds like I'd be living my life inside of a bad bdsm porno... which is like the 7th circle of Hell.

There just wouldn't be anything interesting there for me... and it would be stifling.

That is NOT the case for my past partners.

The more we had an egalitarian dynamic, the less likely we were to have that sub/dom relationship.

It's the ownership that creates the safety and polarity, not lack of ownership.

How much I feel the need to govern her behavior usually just naturally adapts to how mature she is. If she's very responsible and capable, I feel the need to do less. If she's not, I feel the need to do more.

IRL it's not nearly as authoritarian as it might sound . Respecting her sovereignty is part of positive ownership. Being a slave owner is not my thing.

[Princess Arabia]

3 minutes ago, Emerald said:

That's why I only ever go for guys that I've already known platonically for some time. 

Unfortunately, this "lesson" can only come from experience and age. Not that the opposite doesn't or will never work long-term, but for a woman it feels more comfortable and safe.

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Emerald said:

without judging people who are still stuck in them.

You keep saying I'm judging people but that's your interpretation of my words. I just stated how stuff works.

Irresponsibility and ignorance are defining features of children, which is why I brought it up.

Edited April 6 by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, aurum said:

Being a slave owner is not my thing.

That's precisely what I mean. You're not actually viewing her in a truly subordinate position or like she's a child.

[samijiben]

I think the truth is that I Am a Child

I am a Fool

I am a Blabbering Mouth, just like the WaterFall

 

Insert waterfall gif

[Emerald]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

You keep saying I'm judging people but that's your interpretation of my words. I just stated how stuff works.

You were originally... and only softened your stance and re-explained it to sound more neutral when me and someone else called you out for victim blaming.

You said that people in abusive relationship are irresponsible frogs in boiling water. 

Can't you be honest and admit that that's a judgment?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

54 minutes ago, gambler said:

Until the environment confuses you with so many conflicting things and you begin to go down rabbit holes.

Absolutely - corruption on so many levels