Challenging Leo on women

[Alexop]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

I'm here for that  🔫

Good luck buddy! Don't listen to me.

I theorize about masculinity and femininity instead. I learn how to be a man. Maybe what I theorize about you call attraction theory. I call it healthy masculinity.

The work should be about how to become a guy who is irresistible. Not about learning some cheap tricks that will trick the girl. So many guys need to learn this pick-up shit is because they suck as people. They are undesirable. They have to fake a likable persona.

Edited 17 hours ago by Alexop

[Emerald]

14 hours ago, BlessedLion said:

Fine. But because women are more attracted to internal qualities, i can't help but think Joe is less of a great option. If Joe spent a decade building his confidence, wealth, status and social skills, he might have been sleeping with women who are way hotter than Sarah, but since he didn't, Sarah is the best option he can get.

If Sarah doesn't care about confidence, status, financial stability, social skills, charisma, then good for her, this works out then.

As I said, statistically, romantic partners tend to be each-other's looks-match.

But also.. romantic partners tend to statistically have equivalent levels of education and socio-economic success... and have similar values.

There also tends to be a relative equality of age among partners... where the average age difference between male and female partners is 2 years.

And I feel like all your theories are looking at romantic relationships unrealistically where there are these huge imbalances that are very uncommon in real life... where the woman is hot, young, and poor and the man is old, average/ugly looking, high-status and rich.

But somehow magically, this is the most desirable and satisfying arrangement for both partners.

That's why you were like, "Why aren't all the 20 years olds with 50 year old men?" which indicates to me that you don't have a realistic picture of how human beings actually tend to pair bond.

So, if we're taking an actual realistic non-fantasy perspective on human dating/relationships/marriages... 

If Sarah is an average looking educated women with a good job and good social skills... she's quite likely to find an average-looking educated man with a good job and good social skills.

And if Sarah is a kind person with high self-esteem, she will likely be attracted to and attract a kind man with high self-esteem. 

And while it's true that women are attracted more to personality than looks, that doesn't mean that looks isn't her initial filter.

If I'm a 6, there's no world that exists where I'm attracted to a 3 in looks... even if he's perfect 10s across the board in all other areas. So, looks is a hard stop for most women... even though women are generally slightly looks-hypogamous.

So, what's realistic is if Sarah and Joe have about the same level of attractiveness... and he'll probably have similar values and qualities to her, whatever they happen to be.

If she sucks or has low self-esteem... her partner will probably suck.

If she's awesome and has high self-esteem... her partner will probably be an amazing person.

Also, women are attracted to personality first... and accomplishments second.

So, if there's a guy who has "confidence, status, financial stability, social skills, and charisma" but he has a terrible personality or doesn't treat her well, if Sarah has high self-esteem and is good at sorting, she's going to throw him in the trash pile where he belongs.

 

[BlessedLion]

15 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Very difficult issue though - adapt to a horrid courtship environment and potentially  learn maladaptive relational strategies that can translate to poor relationship skills. 

Previously when apps weren't a thing, there was more opportunity to learn many of these relational skills though socialisation. And real, face to face feedback from others would give you something to reflect against that would encourage the fostering and growth of good, healthy social dynamics. You didn't tend bring along maladaptive habits from a digital environment - because it wasn't as big of a thing. Think gen z stare 

Losing our connection to normal, daily socialization has really been the downfall of people. Especially the ones growing up without socializing, i can't imagine how unhealthy that is for one's mind. 

 

16 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

But don't just give in to your masculinity to please others isn't attractive and you wouldn't want to be attractive for something you aren't anyway; so you might as well just surrender to its dictatorship.

Interesting post, but what do you mean by this?

[BlessedLion]

15 hours ago, Alexop said:

This kills the magic, the romance. It becomes a cat and mouse dynamic. A lock to be picked. A problem to be solved. And many women could simply be manipulated and tricked by guys who learned "the tricks".

It's important to learn the basics, the problem is most of the material out there is garbage and not correct. 

 

It's always been a cat and mouse dynamic, and these factors have always been going on unconsciously. What "Game" and "attraction theory" are doing is bringing it to the conscious mind.

 

consider; that just like birds have a mating sequence and ritual, so do humans, and it would benefit men to know those "mating dance steps"

That said, men can and do absolutely abuse this dynamic just to get what they want, which is where something like sexual ethics would come in. But being dangerous in your attraction skills is much better than be a fumbling high school goofball who "might just get so lucky to have a date with Cindy Loo"

 

Also this video reminds me of what you were saying about the dating market (although i slightly disagree, as independent as we might become we have not transcended needing feminine or masculine companionship and it's wise not to think you're above this): 

 

[BlessedLion]

15 hours ago, Alexop said:

The work should be about how to become a guy who is irresistible. Not about learning some cheap tricks that will trick the girl. So many guys need to learn this pick-up shit is because they suck as people. They are undesirable. They have to fake a likable persona.

I think it's about developing yourself into a great person, then having the attraction skills to at least get your foot in the door. Really it's mostly just a few low hanging fruits for some guys. But even if they have developed themselves with great character but cannot escalate physically, hold eye contact, and just know some of the basics of female psychology then they will struggle with dating more than they need to. 

 

I feel like you aren't really appreciating how for many guys, if they don't take care of this head on, they remain celibate. 

[BlessedLion]

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And I feel like all your theories are looking at romantic relationships unrealistically where there are these huge imbalances that are very uncommon in real life... where the woman is hot, young, and poor and the man is old, average/ugly looking, high-status and rich.

That's true, and i blame The Red Queen book for mostly brainwashing me with that framework. 

I do think there is some truth there but it's not neccesarily high status and rich. It's something else, but what that something else is changes for every woman depending on her values, environment, social circle, but there still is sorta filtering of "this guy is low value in our eyes, this guy is high value" which is mostly agreed upon by the women in that group. A Stage orange woman will find a stage green man too feminine but maybe a stage green woman will see him as highly desirable. And if the guy is really locked in to female attraction he can go to a stage orange envirnoment and still do well. Because there are core pillars of attraction that transcend levels of development.  

 

But yeah, i'm open to being somewhat wrong. Honestly i hope i am, that would be more fair if women and men of all types of looks could find their match and find love, regardless of what they look like. I just think it's unwise to devalue how much men truly care about physical beauty and that most men optimize their lives to land a beautiful woman. And to say "uglier women have an advantage in the dating market", is a slap in the face to the millions of ugly women who are truly struggling out there regardless of how high self esteem, intelligent or independent they are becuase they are valued less solely because of their looks. 

 

A man will only open an intimate relationship container if he feels attraction, which is why i said earlier, if a guy is going for an ugly woman it's not like he's doing that out of great character or because he likes her personality so much , it's much more likely that he just has no other options, or relative to what he can get, she is beautiful. From there if the personalities click, then great. 

 

Also, if your theory was true, most women would wisen up and gain 300 pounds, so they could enjoy the advantage of being less attractive. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, BlessedLion said:

Losing our connection to normal, daily socialization has really been the downfall of people. Especially the ones growing up without socializing, i can't imagine how unhealthy that is for one's mind. 

I agree.

It is a difficult issue - some of the younger gen learn attraction mechanisms based on a toxic online environment.

These "skills" then do not directly translate to face-to-face attraction. They actually tend to retard development. 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, BlessedLion said:

That's true, and i blame The Red Queen book for mostly brainwashing me with that framework. 

I do think there is some truth there but it's not neccesarily high status and rich. It's something else, but what that something else is changes for every woman depending on her values, environment, social circle, but there still is sorta filtering of "this guy is low value in our eyes, this guy is high value" which is mostly agreed upon by the women in that group. A Stage orange woman will find a stage green man too feminine but maybe a stage green woman will see him as highly desirable. And if the guy is really locked in to female attraction he can go to a stage orange envirnoment and still do well. Because there are core pillars of attraction that transcend levels of development.  

But yeah, i'm open to being somewhat wrong. Honestly i hope i am, that would be more fair if women and men of all types of looks could find their match and find love, regardless of what they look like. I just think it's unwise to devalue how much men truly care about physical beauty and that most men optimize their lives to land a beautiful woman. And to say "uglier women have an advantage in the dating market", is a slap in the face to the millions of ugly women who are truly struggling out there regardless of how high self esteem, intelligent or independent they are becuase they are valued less solely because of their looks. 

A man will only open an intimate relationship container if he feels attraction, which is why i said earlier, if a guy is going for an ugly woman it's not like he's doing that out of great character or because he likes her personality so much , it's much more likely that he just has no other options, or relative to what he can get, she is beautiful. From there if the personalities click, then great. 

Also, if your theory was true, most women would wisen up and gain 300 pounds, so they could enjoy the advantage of being less attractive. 

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. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Emerald