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 Friday at 11:04 AM 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 yesterday at 03:20 AM by Emerald

[Alexop]

5 hours ago, BlessedLion said:

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. 

Fine, it is just that so many times this attraction discussions go in the wrong direction. Dissecting women like they are some aliens. 

[BlessedLion]

11 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

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. 

What is the Gen Z stare? That made me laugh

On 9/11/2026 at 3:08 PM, Alexop said:

The problem is more systemic than "guys suck nowadays".

But that's kinda what youre saying when you say any guy who learns attraction or dating skills is "undesirable as a person"
It's not so easy, especially for some guys, to learn those skills, even if they are cool and kind guys

On 9/11/2026 at 5:48 PM, Alexop said:

The work should be about how to become a guy who is irresistible.

Even the most developed man on the planet can sit at a bar in los angeles alone and can sit there all night alone without one woman approaching him. They have no clue that is he is a great guy (unless he is famous) so he has to start from complete scratch with every woman, as they immediately are skepetical of any new man. 

People say social circle but i don't think that's viable. It's too limited and the stakes are quite high. Learning attraction that you can implement anywhere is superior. 

[BlessedLion]

6 hours ago, Alexop said:

Fine, it is just that so many times this attraction discussions go in the wrong direction. Dissecting women like they are some aliens. 

That's true, but honestly, given how pathetic and dire the situation has become it's better men do this than just sit at home and jack off in solitude. I agree, being a pick up psycho is not the healthiest option and can easily go down a bad road, but it's better than isolation.

[BlessedLion]

10 hours ago, Emerald said:

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. 

Fair enough. Very Tier 2/Integral of you to look at it from a layered perspective  

 

Honestly, i've spent so much time mastering and studying the domain of consciousness (worth it, don't get me wrong) and now I'm moving into this world of relationships, sexuality, attraction and dating because it feels like time. I also want a woman in my life in general, so i'm moving my focus here. Right now, i'm only studying attraction, i know that isn't the whole cake of this domain but I want a solid foundation and to truly understand all this. So i'm not rushing anything. Next, ill study sexual energy and the ways different traditions relate to it along with sexual practices like tantra. Next ill go into relationships and i'm sure that's going to go very deep. But i plan to master these domains over the next 10 years and already i do quite well. I'm pretty impressed with how quickly i learned attraction skills and what works in terms of attracting women, this is not as easy as you might think, women especially when you are a stranger are like deers in the wild- every movement, eye contact, voice tonality, is being filtered by her and you have to be on point. It's been a fascinating process, and i don't see it as shallow in any way. In fact, every man should learn this stuff. It's made me so sensitive to women and i actually feel more love and compassion for them, it must be hard to constantly have men desiring and approaching you, and manage that with kindness and skill. I don't blame women for being picky, they should be. I also feel for men too, it's hard to navigate these things "is she interested?" "Am i disturbing her?" "Is this creepy?" "What does she see or not see in me?" and also having this wildly aggresively high sex drive that is telling us to fuck everything moving which we didn't neccesarily ask for. Also, always having to be the initiator and having that expectation placed on you can be draining. Women might think "why don't any men approach me?" yet from a mans pov we have no idea if you are open to it, a bitch, married, working/busy, or actually interested, it's really just a pull of the card. 

 

But i agree with you that these frameworks like The Red Queen, Orion Taraban (psychhacks) and others are wildly cartoonish and play on mens insecurities. The core theme plays on the insecurity "you're not man enough", although women can be pretty brutal about it irl, i hear lots of women complain in bali about how feminine the men are here and it kinda proves what those authors are saying. In those books/frameworks, there is some truth in it, but it doesn't account for what i would call "actual love". They try to just reduce everything down to evolution or psychology. 

 

Yeah, i'd say couples irl cannot be reduced down to heady models like that, there is something more human and simple about it. But there is still some truth in the models, it's just not the whole picture, so i'm fine taking in different perspectives as i learn and i want no stone unturned even the red pill sexual evolution stuff. I don't want to get locked into any one model or way of seeing this multifaceted complex domain. 

[BlessedLion]

@Emerald And i definitely don't think being unnattractive serves any women in any way. It's something they just have to make peace with and do the best they can with. Not saying they can't find true and deep love, but the idea that they are somehow advantaged is just wrong. The dating market is a real thing, and it's fucking cut-throat. 

 

If being average or below average looking was an advantage, then women would strive for that, but they don't, they optimize as best they can to be as beautiful as possible not because they are stupid or narcisistic, but because there are real world advantages to that including finding a partner. 

 

An ugly woman is just as suseptible to some creep who just wants her for sex as a beautiful one. 

[Alexop]

3 hours ago, BlessedLion said:

That's true, but honestly, given how pathetic and dire the situation has become it's better men do this than just sit at home and jack off in solitude. I agree, being a pick up psycho is not the healthiest option and can easily go down a bad road, but it's better than isolation.

Yeah, the pathetic situation forces guys to learn all this shit. You have to learn how to meet girls, even if you are a cool guy, the average day to day activities will give very little opportunities to meet a cool girl.

[BlessedLion]

17 hours ago, Alexop said:

Yeah, the pathetic situation forces guys to learn all this shit. You have to learn how to meet girls, even if you are a cool guy, the average day to day activities will give very little opportunities to meet a cool girl.

Yep, i see it as empowering and fun, i love going out and meeting women it's interesting and fun. It feels masculine too, like im taking the situation into my own paws rather than being a passive observer. Also, learning attraction is important. Attraction is the glue that holds a relationship together. 

[Alexop]

@BlessedLion

I think we hold two different concepts in our heads. For me attraction is the initial phase where you lock the woman, not the "glue" that holds the relationship together. 

Attraction happens fast, based on superficial factors. Like the opener (than can be aped), the game (that can be aped), the charisma (that can be more or less learned with time), what to say and more important what not to say (also learnable). You learn all these steps and you lock the woman. That is attraction for me. 

Relationships skills are a whole different beast. This is why all these pickup scumbags fail at maintaining a healthy relationship. 

Attraction is important, but it has to be taught as a part of how to be a real man, not just a bunch of skills, like learning how to swim.

Edited 3 hours ago by Alexop

[Miguel1]

22 minutes ago, Alexop said:

Relationships skills are a whole different beast. This is why all these pickup scumbags fail at maintaining a healthy relationship. 

Attraction is important, but it has to be taught as a part of how to be a real man, not just a bunch of skills, like learning how to swim.

Well said.

I call it healthy game.

[Lucasxp64]

I realized that it doesn't work that well when I have a women that I'm talking too much about intellectual topics.

What I mean, as much as she might be enjoying and she likes me, at least for myself, it creates a weird dynamic where I feel like I'm just dumping on her information, she quickly can't follow up.

It creates this trigger where interacting with her becomes being intellectually puking on her.

When I do, it has to be highly measured and strategic, to create this meta layer of appearing intellectual and that I'm having deep conversations with her, but in the back of my mind I'm actually being strategic to what she would like to hear from me to keep her fantasy about me.

It's important to have a chick that I have same communication style.

It's important to keep the communication still signaling desire and break off before she gets bored.

Most women will swear to me that they are intellectual because they look up to me, but they can't handle it if I go too deep.

I can't quite put this into words, it's not exactly their intellect, it's their attitude and communication style. They have to be good conversationalists, not necessarily keep up.

When they say they want a smart guy, they don't really know what to do with him!

WOMEN WANT THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING SMART WHEN THEY ARE ATTRACTED TO YOU. NOT ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK.

Why do we see most new age women being all woo woo with spirituality, but not actually be hardcore about? Not just women, but other guys as well, in being social.

Edited 1 hour ago by Lucasxp64

[Lucasxp64]

On 10/09/2026 at 5:31 AM, Alexop said:

I stopped theorising about attraction.

Theory for most things makes us go crazy, there are too many unknown variables, too many assumptions, it leads to this combinatorial explosion of variables in our head. Also, we don't even have enough working memory to keep all of those variables all at once. The real world tosses it at us for free, we don't need to simulate in our heads.

We can simulate at best a few variables at a time, but not all of it. 

[Lucasxp64]

On 11/09/2026 at 3:08 AM, Miguel1 said:

No but it’s true, I know my looks and because of that I find most girls not ”worthy” of my looks, and they can sense that.

BIG DICK ENERGY OOZING.

I know of my SUPERIOR INTELLECT and most women can sense my might and crumble under the weight of my industriousness.