Challenging Leo on women

[Emerald]

24 minutes ago, Joshe said:

To me, what seems like casual sex with no strings attached is mostly an unconscious evaluation phase to see if you're someone worth pursuing. And when they figure you don't make the cut, they "casually" part with "I wasn't looking for anything serious, it was just casual fun, no hard feelings".

To me, it's a weird idea for two people to be mutually attracted, repeatedly have sex, spend time together, joke around, become comfortable with each other, anticipate seeing each other multiple times, and that just remains "casual".

Strong immediate sexual attraction + little further interest
→ one-night stand / brief fling.

Sexual attraction + continued interest, but discovers disqualifying characteristics
→ casual arrangement may persist, but he's effectively excluded from the serious-partner category.

Sexual attraction + continued positive discoveries
→ increasing intimacy and attachment → relationship becomes increasingly desirable.

So, if it truly is just casual sex for her, then FWB is basically: "I like having sex with you, but I've already determined that you aren't my ideal"

I'm moreso talking about one-night stands, when I was talking about that "sizable minority of women want casual sex".

It's like... "It's a wild night at this concert/bar/rave/party... and I want to have sex with someone." Many women wouldn't do this. But a sizable minority of women would just to go with the excitement of the party. Probably half of women have done that at some point in their lives.

But I don't think that very many women at all are actually looking for FWB or repeat casual sex or situationships. It's maybe a longterm solution to loneliness or a desire that things will become more serious over time.

The issue is that that doesn't happen with men who are looking for FWB and casual sex. So, a lot of women can end up in a situation/FWB situation and hoping that he develops feelings for her and wants to commit to her. But that hardly ever happens.

So, I tend to find that many men and some women can be open to casual sex on a one-night-stand.

And I find that men tend to like FWB, because it gives him consistent, low-effort, easy-going access to sex and the girlfriend treatment with a woman he's friends with and is physically attracted to... but who he isn't interested in pursuing in any kind of serious romantic way. So, it meets many of his needs without requiring commitment and vulnerability from him, as he's not in love with the woman and he knows he never will be.

But for women in FWB situationships, it's often, "If I like him enough to repeatedly have sex with him, I love him and want to be his partner and I want to be mutually in love." But she may lie to herself because she doesn't want to admit that the dynamic is going nowhere, and say, "FWB is what I'm really looking for. So, I'm totally cool with this." 

So, usually women will not repeatedly have casual sex with a man unless she just loves sex, is very lonely,... or (most often) is wanting something deeper with that particular guy and just hoping the sex means something or that he'll eventually fall for her.

And this is one of the reasons why sorting is VERY important for women. There are a ton of men who would be very open to FWB... and can contently stay for years and years in that dynamic because it meets many of his needs. But there are almost no women who thrive and feel held in that kind of dynamic.

So, it's important to sort out guys who "Aren't interested in putting labels on anything" or who "Aren't looking for anything serious" or any of the other indicators that he's open for FWB but not open for anything deeper.

[Asayake]

21 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I'm moreso talking about one-night stands, when I was talking about that "sizable minority of women want casual sex".

It's like... "It's a wild night at this concert/bar/rave/party... and I want to have sex with someone." Many women wouldn't do this. But a sizable minority of women would just to go with the excitement of the party. Probably half of women have done that at some point in their lives.

But I don't think that very many women at all are actually looking for FWB or repeat casual sex or situationships. It's maybe a longterm solution to loneliness or a desire that things will become more serious over time.

The issue is that that doesn't happen with men who are looking for FWB and casual sex. So, a lot of women can end up in a situation/FWB situation and hoping that he develops feelings for her and wants to commit to her. But that hardly ever happens.

So, I tend to find that many men and some women can be open to casual sex on a one-night-stand.

And I find that men tend to like FWB, because it gives him consistent, low-effort, easy-going access to sex and the girlfriend treatment with a woman he's friends with and is physically attracted to... but who he isn't interested in pursuing in any kind of serious romantic way. So, it meets many of his needs without requiring commitment and vulnerability from him, as he's not in love with the woman and he knows he never will be.

But for women in FWB situationships, it's often, "If I like him enough to repeatedly have sex with him, I love him and want to be his partner and I want to be mutually in love." But she may lie to herself because she doesn't want to admit that the dynamic is going nowhere, and say, "FWB is what I'm really looking for. So, I'm totally cool with this." 

So, usually women will not repeatedly have casual sex with a man unless she just loves sex, is very lonely,... or (most often) is wanting something deeper with that particular guy and just hoping the sex means something or that he'll eventually fall for her.

And this is one of the reasons why sorting is VERY important for women. There are a ton of men who would be very open to FWB... and can contently stay for years and years in that dynamic because it meets many of his needs. But there are almost no women who thrive and feel held in that kind of dynamic.

So, it's important to sort out guys who "Aren't interested in putting labels on anything" or who "Aren't looking for anything serious" or any of the other indicators that he's open for FWB but not open for anything deeper.

That's insightful and a bit sad, and aligns with what I've seen. I think a lot of pickup & red pill basically preys on women's desire for  a long term relationship, safety, a future, a wedding, a marriage, etc. If you pay attention a lot of pickup is about making the girl fall in love with you basically, and a lot of guys go in with the intention that as long as they themselves just want a one night stand or a FWB and get what they want, it's totally okay as long as the girl doesn't say not. But how it often seems to play out is morally wrong just like getting an intern to work on your business under the spell of believing you'll one day hire them is wrong and a form of exploitation, often times regret & feeling used happen later, in the case of exploitation one is usually not aware of being used until it's too late. It might not be that the guy literally says one day I'll marry you, but sometimes they do, sometimes they just start thing off with a softer frame and then ignore or are unaware when the girl is developing deeper feelings, things can get messy and a lot of guys play it dirty if they know they can get sex.

It has gotten bad to the point that in pickup & red pill circles, men literally pursue women, often with pure intent of "pump & dumping" them regardless of what the woman's desires are and they'll do anything to make that happen including emotional manipulation, lying & other dirty tricks. To make things worse especially western culture as seen in the US and also increasingly in Europe has normalized this type of dating. This has also been fueled by economic interests of business like Tinder for whom one night stands are more profitable than long term relationships - if they just matched everyone with their perfect long term partner then their user base would churn, one night stands are recurring paying users, also political ideologies are hijacking hookup culture and aligning with it, because it's a force a wave you can ride on, not because it's necessarily a good culture. I'm starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist at this point, but I'm just pointing out that multiple incentives currently are pushing the culture toward hookups & one night stands, even if this is not what women, or frankly even a lot of men want.

To dive deeper on the last part, I think a lot of men don't like the idea of FWB & one night stands, they often like it as a fantasy more than as a reality, it's more so something that's pushed via hookup culture & red pill & pickup artists who are trying to sell courses in my experience, and it's a status game for many guys. Most women will not brag about having had a ton of one night stands (there are always exceptions to the rule), but there are many guys who believe that them having slept with more women makes them so called higher value men. You'll notice they'll casually drop they've slept with many women without trying to make it sound like a brag, but often times it's a childish status game, hate to say it but a lot of guys are this immature. When it comes to actual mature men they don't overtly try to display sexual value in this way because dropping details about girls you've had sex with or bragging about past sexual experiences you've had not only comes off desperate but is also disrespectful to those women, did they consent to you sharing details about your shared sexual experiences for example? 

[Joshe]

 

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

But for women in FWB situationships, it's often, "If I like him enough to repeatedly have sex with him, I love him and want to be his partner and I want to be mutually in love." But she may lie to herself because she doesn't want to admit that the dynamic is going nowhere, and say, "FWB is what I'm really looking for. So, I'm totally cool with this." 

Yeah, I've seen that a lot as well. 

This one girl was head over hills for one of my friends and she kept having sex with him anytime he'd call, which was once or twice a month. She acted like she wasn't interested in a relationship because she didn't want to scare him off. Of course, she got tired of him calling just to come have sex, leave, and ignore her the rest of the time. So when she finally started complaining about it, my buddy would tell her "I don't want a relationship and if you don't want to have sex, then I won't call you anymore". So she continued having "casual" sex with him and he thought he was in the clear because he stated his intentions. And he told himself that if her feelings got fucked, it's not on him.

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

So, usually women will not repeatedly have casual sex with a man unless she just loves sex, is very lonely,... or (most often) is wanting something deeper with that particular guy and just hoping the sex means something or that he'll eventually fall for her.

Exactly. It's rarely an emotionally detached transaction like it often is with guys. If she keeps coming back to have sex, unless she's a nympho or something, she wants something more from you, or is seeing if there's anything worth pursuing, and you're bullshitting yourself with all this talk of clearly stated boundaries and healthy casual sex.

Edited 9 hours ago by Joshe

[Joshe]

23 minutes ago, Asayake said:

But how it often seems to play out is morally wrong just like getting an intern to work on your business under the spell of believing you'll one day hire them is wrong and a form of exploitation

perfect analogy 

[LordFall]

6 minutes ago, Joshe said:

This one girl was head over hills for one of my friends and she kept having sex with him anytime he'd call, which was once or twice a month. She acted like she wasn't interested in a relationship because she didn't want to scare him off. Of course, she got tired of him calling just to come have sex, leave, and ignore her the rest of the time. So when she finally started complaining about it, my buddy would tell her "I don't want a relationship and if you don't want to have sex, then I won't call you anymore". So she continued having "casual" sex with him and he thought he was in the clear because he stated his intentions. And he told himself that if her feelings got fucked, it's not on him.

So you believe you know what's best for other grown adults better than they do? That is fascinating psychology.

Sounds like your friend was 100% transparent. He laid out the reality, didn't lie, and didn't lead her on. She made an autonomous adult decision to keep participating. Refusing to respect a woman's agency just because feelings can get complicated completely infantalizes her.

When you operate from true abundance, you treat people like adults who are responsible for their own choices, boundaries, and emotional outcomes. You don't play savior and pretend women are fragile children who need you to manage their feelings for them.

[Asayake]

41 minutes ago, LordFall said:

So you believe you know what's best for other grown adults better than they do? That is fascinating psychology.

Sounds like your friend was 100% transparent. He laid out the reality, didn't lie, and didn't lead her on. She made an autonomous adult decision to keep participating. Refusing to respect a woman's agency just because feelings can get complicated completely infantalizes her.

When you operate from true abundance, you treat people like adults who are responsible for their own choices, boundaries, and emotional outcomes. You don't play savior and pretend women are fragile children who need you to manage their feelings for them.

He knew she had deeper feelings for him and wanted a relationship then gave her an ultimatum to keep having sex with him or sayonara, that’s him trying to extract what he wants from her without caring about what it does to her. He should have been the bigger man and said you have developed feelings but that was not my intention with this arrangement, im sorry but its probably best for both of us if we part ways. Thats not infantilising her it’s being responsible for the impact you’re having on other human beings.
 

 

[Joshe]

44 minutes ago, LordFall said:

So you believe you know what's best for other grown adults better than they do? That is fascinating psychology.

Sounds like your friend was 100% transparent. He laid out the reality, didn't lie, and didn't lead her on. She made an autonomous adult decision to keep participating. Refusing to respect a woman's agency just because feelings can get complicated completely infantalizes her.

When you operate from true abundance, you treat people like adults who are responsible for their own choices, boundaries, and emotional outcomes. You don't play savior and pretend women are fragile children who need you to manage their feelings for them.

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation. See where others have already labored to articulate how the ego justifies it's bullshit in this domain. 

[LordFall]

47 minutes ago, Asayake said:

He knew she had deeper feelings for him and wanted a relationship then gave her an ultimatum to keep having sex with him or sayonara, that’s him trying to extract what he wants from her without caring about what it does to her. He should have been the bigger man and said you have developed feelings but that was not my intention with this arrangement, im sorry but its probably best for both of us if we part ways. Thats not infantilising her it’s being responsible for the impact you’re having on other human beings.
 

 

That's not the definition of an ultimatum. Telling someone "hey I don't wanna date you but if you want to keep fucking casually we can do that" is not an ultimatum, it's being honest and transparent. Sometimes people get hung up on you and it is indeed better to break it off and sometimes people can take the truth and keep sleeping with each other casually. A lot of women prefer this branch swinging method of dating where they aren't single for that long and are serially monogamous instead. 

44 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation. See where others have already labored to articulate how the ego justifies it's bullshit in this domain. 

I think it can sometimes be the case, but it's just as likely that sexual hangups are the issue here. I went to a Catholic high school and they would separate couples making out and tell them "leave room for Jesus!" I don't think that helped anyone understand healthy boundaries and sexual relations and probably caused more harm than good.

I don't know what happened with your buddy but my guess is they kept fucking for a few months, it ran its natural course, she moved on to a boyfriend, and nobody was victimized.

Edited 7 hours ago by LordFall

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Asayake said:

That's insightful and a bit sad, and aligns with what I've seen. I think a lot of pickup & red pill basically preys on women's desire for  a long term relationship, safety, a future, a wedding, a marriage, etc. If you pay attention a lot of pickup is about making the girl fall in love with you basically, and a lot of guys go in with the intention that as long as they themselves just want a one night stand or a FWB and get what they want, it's totally okay as long as the girl doesn't say not. But how it often seems to play out is morally wrong just like getting an intern to work on your business under the spell of believing you'll one day hire them is wrong and a form of exploitation, often times regret & feeling used happen later, in the case of exploitation one is usually not aware of being used until it's too late. It might not be that the guy literally says one day I'll marry you, but sometimes they do, sometimes they just start thing off with a softer frame and then ignore or are unaware when the girl is developing deeper feelings, things can get messy and a lot of guys play it dirty if they know they can get sex.

It has gotten bad to the point that in pickup & red pill circles, men literally pursue women, often with pure intent of "pump & dumping" them regardless of what the woman's desires are and they'll do anything to make that happen including emotional manipulation, lying & other dirty tricks. To make things worse especially western culture as seen in the US and also increasingly in Europe has normalized this type of dating. This has also been fueled by economic interests of business like Tinder for whom one night stands are more profitable than long term relationships - if they just matched everyone with their perfect long term partner then their user base would churn, one night stands are recurring paying users, also political ideologies are hijacking hookup culture and aligning with it, because it's a force a wave you can ride on, not because it's necessarily a good culture. I'm starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist at this point, but I'm just pointing out that multiple incentives currently are pushing the culture toward hookups & one night stands, even if this is not what women, or frankly even a lot of men want.

To dive deeper on the last part, I think a lot of men don't like the idea of FWB & one night stands, they often like it as a fantasy more than as a reality, it's more so something that's pushed via hookup culture & red pill & pickup artists who are trying to sell courses in my experience, and it's a status game for many guys. Most women will not brag about having had a ton of one night stands (there are always exceptions to the rule), but there are many guys who believe that them having slept with more women makes them so called higher value men. You'll notice they'll casually drop they've slept with many women without trying to make it sound like a brag, but often times it's a childish status game, hate to say it but a lot of guys are this immature. When it comes to actual mature men they don't overtly try to display sexual value in this way because dropping details about girls you've had sex with or bragging about past sexual experiences you've had not only comes off desperate but is also disrespectful to those women, did they consent to you sharing details about your shared sexual experiences for example? 

I definitely think it's important for men to be aware of these patterns... and not kid themselves.

But it's also something that women have to learn to actively sort from consideration.

The main thing is that, from an inexperienced woman's perspective, men's sexuality can be very confusing and seemingly contradictory. 

For a woman, sex and love tend to be linked inextricably together.... as sexual options are more abundant, we have more skin in the game with pregnancy, and our gametes are more scarce and short-lived. For these reasons, women generally have more sexual firewalls up than men do, and our sexuality automatically filters out guys that we might find mildly physically attractive but are not that into. 

But for men... who have scarcer options, have no physical consequences for sex, and whose gametes are abundant and last their entire lives... it's fine if sex and love are separate. And while that separation can cause problems where he will have sex with women he's mildly attracted and doesn't have romantic feelings for to and potentially lead her on... it actually works well for longterm commitment. When love and sex come separately for a man, he can commit to loving his wife in a way where his sex drive takes the backseat... and it's more about supporting her and cultivating the relationship.

But it's very confusing when a guy is very excited about sex but isn't motivated by love, from an inexperienced woman's perspective. It took me a long time to really understand how it worked.

And it takes a bit of understanding to get, "Just because he repeatedly sleeps with me and wants to spend time with me, doesn't mean that he's interested in progressing things."

So, while men do need to understand that most women who get involved in FWB situations are lying to themselves about it being casual...

The main responsibility for learning that is the woman who must learn how to sort better. And that means realizing that 99 times out of 100, things never change. And then asking and answering honestly, "If nothing ever changed about this relationship dynamic, would I be able to be content longterm?" 

And if the answer is "No"... it's time to break it off.

It's also why I recommend that women not do anything to try to "earn" his affection. Just do what feels good to her... not because she's trying to "sweeten herself up" to make herself easier and more appealing the guy.

So, I'd tell women... don't ever try to deliberately woo a man. 

That means, don't cook for him, clean for him, please him, have sex with him, dress up for him, impress him, stroke his ego, or anything like that for the sake of wooing him.

Instead, only do what's pleasing to yourself and pour into yourself... and then give him space to pour into you and earn your affections. 

This will sort out low-investment men who aren't looking to love her, as they will fall away. But it also gives high-investment men who are really interested the space to woo her and get the satisfaction of earning her admiration.

So, yes... men are somewhat responsible here. But it's also on women to say no to low quality male attention.

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Joshe said:

Yeah, I've seen that a lot as well. 

This one girl was head over hills for one of my friends and she kept having sex with him anytime he'd call, which was once or twice a month. She acted like she wasn't interested in a relationship because she didn't want to scare him off. Of course, she got tired of him calling just to come have sex, leave, and ignore her the rest of the time. So when she finally started complaining about it, my buddy would tell her "I don't want a relationship and if you don't want to have sex, then I won't call you anymore". So she continued having "casual" sex with him and he thought he was in the clear because he stated his intentions. And he told himself that if her feelings got fucked, it's not on him.

Exactly. It's rarely an emotionally detached transaction like it often is with guys. If she keeps coming back to have sex, unless she's a nympho or something, she wants something more from you, or is seeing if there's anything worth pursuing, and you're bullshitting yourself with all this talk of clearly stated boundaries and healthy casual sex.

100%

And it usually takes women a while to learn to sort these guys out. And it's a hard lesson.

Most women do eventually learn. But there are some women who end up in these patterns again and again. And it's a shame.

It makes me think of Carrie from the show Sex and the City. If you're familiar, she had this on-again-off-again situationship with this guy she calls Big. 

And Big is very avoidant and just not that into her... but he strings her along for the entire run-time of the show. And she just keeps ending up in this cycle of taking the breadcrumbs and fantasizing about him finally choosing her, only for him to abandon her and reject her (even at the altar).

That's the problem with falling in love with the fantasy of how things could be... instead of realizing that things will almost always end in the exact same way they start.

So, it's important that a woman not fill in the blanks of the confusion/mystery of how men operate with how she operates and how she want things to turn out.

It's also important for women to develop a very high sense of self-worth so that she doesn't feel like love is something that she has to earn by impressing the guy... or having sex with him... or being hotter for him... or cooking for him... or cleaning for him... etc.

That can lead to a dynamic where the woman is trying to woo the man instead of allowing him space to woo her.

[LordFall]

12 minutes ago, Emerald said:

That can lead to a dynamic where the woman is trying to woo the man instead of allowing him space to woo her.

I don't think this is an optimal strategy. It's hard to say truly, I'm not sure tbh. Recommending women not try to put effort into the men they are dating is pretty interesting take though and is basically Red Pill from the female perspective. I remember reading similar takes on the female dating strategy subreddit.  

I think it comes down to self-awareness, dating around and seeing what you personally enjoy in your life. I think some women enjoy chasing a man as long as their energy is matched. The definition of simping in my book is putting in more effort than what you're getting out so being a simp is not a good strategy for either gender.

Edited 5 hours ago by LordFall

[Emerald]

27 minutes ago, LordFall said:

I don't think this is an optimal strategy. It's hard to say truly, I'm not sure tbh. Recommending women not try to put effort into the men they are dating is pretty interesting take though and is basically Red Pill from the female perspective. I remember reading similar takes on the female dating strategy subreddit.  

I think it comes down to self-awareness, dating around and seeing what you personally enjoy in your life. I think some women enjoy chasing a man as long as their energy is matched. The definition of simping in my book is putting in more effort than what you're getting out so being a simp is not a good strategy for either gender.

I don't recommend a woman ever chase a man... or try to woo him. Men really don't respond well to being woo'd even if they find it pleasing.

Chasing a man and wooing him tends to lead to women ending up in situationships with low-investment men.

Also, I'm not saying "never do anything for a man". Longterm relationships and marriages should be a place for mutual love and support.

What I'm saying is, "Never do anything for the purpose of wooing him."

But at the outset of a relationships especially (during the dating phase), a woman should give a lot of space for the man to show that he's invested... and not be so easily won over by him.

And that's not meant to be a logical tactic of playing hard to get. It's actually about developing higher standards for what kinds of relationship dynamics you're willing to entertain... and which ones you're not available for.

And it comes from loving and respecting yourself deeply... and being willing to choose yourself over the relationship, if the relationship is impacting your quality of life negatively.

And this creates a dynamic where you will not be very easily impressed and will take some consistent evidence over time that a man is invested and will be a good partner, in order to be willing to decide to jump into a longterm relationship with him with both feet.

Contrast that with a woman who gets involved with a man who's not that into her and is very sure that he's the one she wants... and she feels like she has to chase and woo him to win him over. 

And she never once asks, "Am I okay with the way this relationship is?" Instead she only asks, "How do I earn his love?"

When she chases him, she basically polarity-flips the dynamic so that she's taking on the Lover role... and putting the man in the role of her Beloved and giving him the princess treatment to woo him.

But women tend to only feel loved in the Beloved role... and feel anxious in the Lover role.

And men only tend to fall in love in the Lover role... and feel pleased but indifferent and uninterested in the Beloved role.

Edited 4 hours ago by Emerald

[Joshe]

40 minutes ago, Emerald said:

It makes me think of Carrie from the show Sex and the City. If you're familiar, she had this on-again-off-again situationship with this guy she calls Big. 

And Big is very avoidant and just not that into her... but he strings her along for the entire run-time of the show. And she just keeps ending up in this cycle of taking the breadcrumbs and fantasizing about him finally choosing her, only for him to abandon her and reject her (even at the altar).

Haha. I was just thinking "this pattern exists everywhere, you can even observe it in TV shows and movies". Like, it's not something hidden. The nature of women is right there!

Edited 4 hours ago by Joshe

[Emerald]

21 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Haha. I was just thinking "this pattern exists everywhere, you can even observe it in TV shows and movies". Like, it's not something hidden. The nature of women is right there!

Yes, exactly.

What's interesting is that, back in the 90s, people were apparently rooting for the relationship between Carrie and Big to work out. And there were a lot of tropes about a woman winning over a man who's hard to get... probably because that's a common fantasy for women with low self-esteem.

And I think that the lack of understand of male/female relationships in the general populace... and a romanticization of "winning over the avoidant" led to a lot of women selling themselves short.

But people watching in the 2020s are a bit more savvy, and don't tend to romanticize their relationship... and see it for what it is.

Here's an interesting reflection from a therapist about how a couples therapy session might go between them.

 

[Ulax]

You guys are turning codependency into a hero complex

[Emerald]

4 minutes ago, Ulax said:

You guys are turning codependency into a hero complex

Can you explain what you mean?

[LordFall]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

I don't recommend a woman ever chase a man... or try to woo him. Men really don't respond well to being woo'd even if they find it pleasing.

Chasing a man and wooing him tends to lead to women ending up in situationships with low-investment men.

Also, I'm not saying "never do anything for a man". Longterm relationships and marriages should be a place for mutual love and support.

What I'm saying is, "Never do anything for the purpose of wooing him."

But at the outset of a relationships especially (during the dating phase), a woman should give a lot of space for the man to show that he's invested... and not be so easily won over by him.

And that's not meant to be a logical tactic of playing hard to get. It's actually about developing higher standards for what kinds of relationship dynamics you're willing to entertain... and which ones you're not available for.

And it comes from loving and respecting yourself deeply... and being willing to choose yourself over the relationship, if the relationship is impacting your quality of life negatively.

I find what you're saying very fascinating because it's power dynamics 101. I think your advice is probably correct for most women. 

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

But women tend to only feel loved in the Beloved role... and feel anxious in the Lover role.

And men only tend to fall in love in the Lover role... and feel pleased but indifferent and uninterested in the Beloved role.

I don't know if this is fully accurate but it's worth exploring deeper. I think what you're describing is close to putting women on a pedestal and submitting to the divine feminine ideal. I think this can work sometimes for men but it can also spectacularly backfire. 

This is actually quite high level in terms of dating dynamics because I don't think any science that mankind has done so far can conclusively answer this one way or another. The best I can say is that self-awareness and knowing what your wants and needs is very mandatory for a peak dating life. If I was paid to do dating coaching for women I don't think I would deviate from the advice you've given in terms of female POV. In terms of consulting for men though I don't think that being in the chasing dynamic is optimal. You are also correct though that if you are the one being chased it can lead to being indifferent or jaded. So it's a tough nut to crack. 

It also boils down to what this falling in love means and often times from the male POV it does mean submitting to the woman and being at her mercy so to speak. I will say that I do truly believe this is a weak form of love and there is a more powerful one that can be achieved that benefits both the man and the woman but I will need to test that for myself and report back in a few years instead of speculating.

Me and @Inliytened1 were just talking about this in the other thread though. It truly is a fascinating discussion and I think its good to deconstruct love and relationships as much as we can.  

Edited 3 hours ago by LordFall

[Ulax]

@Emerald For example, this is textbook codependency.

5 hours ago, Joshe said:

Exactly. It's rarely an emotionally detached transaction like it often is with guys. If she keeps coming back to have sex, unless she's a nympho or something, she wants something more from you, or is seeing if there's anything worth pursuing, and you're bullshitting yourself with all this talk of clearly stated boundaries and healthy casual sex.

 

[Emerald]

4 minutes ago, Ulax said:

@Emerald For example, this is textbook codependency.

 

It's definitely codependency. 

But how did you mean that the people on the thread are turning it into a hero complex?

That's the part that I didn't understand.

[Ulax]

Just now, Emerald said:

It's definitely codependency. 

But how did you mean that the people on the thread are turning it into a hero complex?

That's the part that I didn't understand.

Codependent fixing gets reframed into saving women from the bad guys.