Challenging Leo on women

[Alexop]

Leo, I remember you saying that if a woman becomes "too mature", "too technical", "too logical"... she becomes less attractive to you. She basically becomes a man so to speak.

https://youtu.be/v08NV8wN3zY?is=n4MxeZTJtIA-2Pvy

But think about this. For example the woman presented above: Mariana Mazzucato; is IMO a true Tier 2 woman, and we can find many such examples (maybe a younger, physically attractive Tier 2 woman). Women that have such a high intelligence that they  easily can learn about femininity and masculinity, learn how attraction and relationships work, and therefore learn how to "switch sides" so to speak. 

With switching sides I mean, when they interact with their partner, they are going into their feminine side. They let go, relax, and let the man be the brain, while she is taking a break from all her intellectual efforts. Such a woman is tired of all the time being in her masculine, so she will happily and naturally feel the need tot take a break. Not just for the relationship's sake. And the other feminine qualities that we, men, love can also be easily learned: e.g. playful and cute behaviour.

Now the big challenge for such a woman is to really find a man that matches her maturity and intelligence. But think about this: what if you, Leo, meet a young, attractive equivalent of Mariana Mazzucato? Supposing that she also is strongly educated about attraction and femininity/masculinity, what would be the reasons you wouldn't find her attractive?

Personally I am am more attracted to a mature, technical woman that can discuss ideas and can appreciate my intellectual value. Such a woman can deeply see my value, such a woman can be such a fun companion. Such a woman can offer me much more than sex. The big IF is that if she will be able to trust my lead and competence instead of reversing the polarity. If not, then yes, I would lose attraction.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Alexop

[aurum]

People do not switch between core orientations and temperament. Does not matter how much polarity theory you read.

If her core orientation leans more masculine, it's going to stay that way.

People are just ultimately not that flexible.

 

[Alexop]

55 minutes ago, aurum said:

People do not switch between core orientations and temperament. Does not matter how much polarity theory you read.

If her core orientation leans more masculine, it's going to stay that way.

People are just ultimately not that flexible.

 

This is the counter-argument I was expecting. i am curious if Leo agrees.

It cannot be an absolute conclusion anyways because we are talking about attraction, which is subjective. There are people who get attracted to horses.

Ultimately, I would say for sure that you have to be genuinely more developed and mature than her, otherwise she won't trust your lead. And women are attracted to power, if she senses she has more power than you, she loses attraction.

[Spiral]

In my experience people are actually quite flexible over long periods of time. As in if I almost exclusively hang out with feminine people I become more feminine myself, this takes time, months usually. Although in the moment there is not much flexibility.

 

Edited 16 hours ago by Spiral

[Alexop]

44 minutes ago, Spiral said:

In my experience people are actually quite flexible over long periods of time. As in if I almost exclusively hang out with feminine people I become more feminine myself, this takes time, months usually. Although in the moment there is not much flexibility.

 

Or they manifest masculinity because they were hurt in the past, and when they heal themselves, they go to their natural feminine personality.

Edited 15 hours ago by Alexop

[Inliytened1]

6 hours ago, Alexop said:

Leo, I remember you saying that if a woman becomes "too mature", "too technical", "too logical"... she becomes less attractive to you. She basically becomes a man so to speak.

https://youtu.be/v08NV8wN3zY?is=n4MxeZTJtIA-2Pvy

But think about this. For example the woman presented above: Mariana Mazzucato; is IMO a true Tier 2 woman, and we can find many such examples (maybe a younger, physically attractive Tier 2 woman). Women that have such a high intelligence that they  easily can learn about femininity and masculinity, learn how attraction and relationships work, and therefore learn how to "switch sides" so to speak. 

With switching sides I mean, when they interact with their partner, they are going into their feminine side. They let go, relax, and let the man be the brain, while she is taking a break from all her intellectual efforts. Such a woman is tired of all the time being in her masculine, so she will happily and naturally feel the need tot take a break. Not just for the relationship's sake. And the other feminine qualities that we, men, love can also be easily learned: e.g. playful and cute behaviour.

Now the big challenge for such a woman is to really find a man that matches her maturity and intelligence. But think about this: what if you, Leo, meet a young, attractive equivalent of Mariana Mazzucato? Supposing that she also is strongly educated about attraction and femininity/masculinity, what would be the reasons you wouldn't find her attractive?

Personally I am am more attracted to a mature, technical woman that can discuss ideas and can appreciate my intellectual value. Such a woman can deeply see my value, such a woman can be such a fun companion. Such a woman can offer me much more than sex. The big IF is that if she will be able to trust my lead and competence instead of reversing the polarity. If not, then yes, I would lose attraction.

 

I think if you're looking for a long term partner then intelligence should be at the top of the list.  If she isn't at your level there will be issues.  Or I should say if you're both not at equal levels intelligence wise and development wise.

[BlessedLion]

4 hours ago, Alexop said:

And women are attracted to power, if she senses she has more power than you, she loses attraction.

What is your definition of power?

[BlessedLion]

I kinda feel for women in this regard, becuase we live in a society where being feminine isn't really rewarded, certainly lot financially (unless your in some niche, or a prostitute or porn star) so women are in a bit of this pickle of "do i make money, take care of my shit and lead my own life?" (risking their attractiveness) or "do i stay in my feminine energy but sacrifice my own autonomy and financial independence?"

 

The problem is that on an evolutionary level, men will not find a woman who is leading her own life and ship a certain way to be very attractive, because there can only be one captain of a ship, the direction of their relationship and lives need to be lead by someone, the idea of steering the ship "together" is cute but will inevitably reach power struggles and head-butting. 

Ideally, you want a woman who finds your ship and where it is going to be very powerful and inspiring and she hops on board. But i can see why woman would find this to be bullshit.

[Alexop]

1 hour ago, BlessedLion said:

I kinda feel for women in this regard, becuase we live in a society where being feminine isn't really rewarded, certainly lot financially (unless your in some niche, or a prostitute or porn star) so women are in a bit of this pickle of "do i make money, take care of my shit and lead my own life?" (risking their attractiveness) or "do i stay in my feminine energy but sacrifice my own autonomy and financial independence?"

 

The problem is that on an evolutionary level, men will not find a woman who is leading her own life and ship a certain way to be very attractive, because there can only be one captain of a ship, the direction of their relationship and lives need to be lead by someone, the idea of steering the ship "together" is cute but will inevitably reach power struggles and head-butting. 

Ideally, you want a woman who finds your ship and where it is going to be very powerful and inspiring and she hops on board. But i can see why woman would find this to be bullshit.

That is very true. As soon as she acts bossy and mothery to me, I lose attraction. And we wonder why guys use such women only for sex. Because only the body is feminine, so they only want to body. 

I think there exists a balance in women that we, self-improvement nerds find attractive. A woman who is passionate about ideas.and self-improvement but also soft, flexible, and feminine. Maybe not as brainy and nerdy as most of us guys but enough that she fills us with joy.

[Alexop]

1 hour ago, BlessedLion said:

What is your definition of power?

Power is relative. I see power as leverage over something/someone. For example if she sees that she can find a guy that is better than you in all possible ways, then we can say that she has more power than you. Guys do the same if not mature enough, they will just fuck the whole city instead of committing to one woman. Just because they can. 

This is why dating apps suck. Women have waay to much leverage over guys there.

Women are attracted to power because this is how they survived for millenia. By seeking protection from a strong man/group of men. Men care more about beauty/femininity and often are repulsed by power in women.

 

Edited 12 hours ago by Alexop

[LordFall]

I agree I think intellectual and competent women are very hot. I dislike the clueless princess archetype, I want competent queens to rule my empire with me type of energy.

7 hours ago, aurum said:

People do not switch between core orientations and temperament. Does not matter how much polarity theory you read.

If her core orientation leans more masculine, it's going to stay that way.

People are just ultimately not that flexible.

 

Why are you so confident in being wrong? What makes you say this?

I have met many confident women that operate in their logical mind all day that a lot would consider masculine and controlling in their day to day life and a lot of them just became super girly and submissive behind closed doors. 

One girl I knew was a stage technician like with work boots screaming at people to disassemble the behind the scenes of theater productions and would get coffees at the cafe I worked at. I asked her out one time and she ended up back at my place and she had these pink pyjamas that she brought and was literally the most sweet cuddly girl. Completely different from the girl I saw from her at work or even when she came to the cafe.

In Toronto they have the Cyattie archetype which are women that talk like hood mans and act pretty aggressive and curse all the time. I think that's mostly a sociological adaptation to fit in with the street culture we have here and I haven't slept with one yet but the girl like that I worked with was super nice and sweet once you got to know her but kind of aloof and standoffish otherwise.

That's only two examples but it's so common, even a lot of dominant men are known to enjoy letting go of control behind closed doors and a lot are attracted to dominant women and literal femdoms due to this peculiar psychology. 

 

Edited 12 hours ago by LordFall

[enchanted]

Just fuck whoever you want. Don't listen to Leo. The best type of love is radical and breaks all the rules. Even the rules Leo suggests. 

Leo is great if you are lost. If you aren't lost than live your life the way you want and ignore what some random YouTuber says. 

Edited 12 hours ago by enchanted

[aurum]

7 hours ago, Alexop said:

This is the counter-argument I was expecting. i am curious if Leo agrees.

It cannot be an absolute conclusion anyways because we are talking about attraction, which is subjective. There are people who get attracted to horses.

Ultimately, I would say for sure that you have to be genuinely more developed and mature than her, otherwise she won't trust your lead. And women are attracted to power, if she senses she has more power than you, she loses attraction.

For guys on this forum who are legitimately approaching Tier 2, then yes some developmental leadership is likely inevitable. And yes, that will create somewhat of a hierarchy between you and her.

That being said, most couples who last are at relatively similar levels of development. Otherwise the gap in values and lifestyle will just be too great.

[aurum]

8 hours ago, LordFall said:

I agree I think intellectual and competent women are very hot. I dislike the clueless princess archetype, I want competent queens to rule my empire with me type of energy.

Why are you so confident in being wrong? What makes you say this?

I have met many confident women that operate in their logical mind all day that a lot would consider masculine and controlling in their day to day life and a lot of them just became super girly and submissive behind closed doors. 

One girl I knew was a stage technician like with work boots screaming at people to disassemble the behind the scenes of theater productions and would get coffees at the cafe I worked at. I asked her out one time and she ended up back at my place and she had these pink pyjamas that she brought and was literally the most sweet cuddly girl. Completely different from the girl I saw from her at work or even when she came to the cafe.

In Toronto they have the Cyattie archetype which are women that talk like hood mans and act pretty aggressive and curse all the time. I think that's mostly a sociological adaptation to fit in with the street culture we have here and I haven't slept with one yet but the girl like that I worked with was super nice and sweet once you got to know her but kind of aloof and standoffish otherwise.

That's only two examples but it's so common, even a lot of dominant men are known to enjoy letting go of control behind closed doors and a lot are attracted to dominant women and literal femdoms due to this peculiar psychology. 

 

That does not mean people just flip-flop between masculinity and femininity at their core.

I am strongly against this flip-flop argument. It misunderstands what it actually means to be masculine or feminine. Range of expression is not proof of changing your core orientation.

[Leo Gura]

@Alexop If you can find a sexy feminine woman who also has the mind of a Nobel scholar, then marry her.

But such women are hard to find and are exceptions, not the norm.

Yes, there are very academic women, but many of them come off quite masculine. Of course not all.

You posted a video of a masculine woman. So I don't see how this challenges what I said. If you wanna sleep with that woman, go ahead, don't let me stop you.

Edited 2 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Olaf]

@Leo Gura yeah, because if you would be very feminine, you wouldn't care so much about all this dry logical bullshit we care about hahaha

[Evan Gill]

I find the woman in the video attractive based on intelligence alone.

[Joshe]

Tier 2. lol. You mean someone with the predisposition to systematize? 

I can get into systematizing women if they're engaging with systems I care about, like psychology. But it would be hard to be attracted to a girl systematizing the global economy, unless it was balanced well with the feminine. And probably even then it wouldn't work because I don't even like hanging around dudes systematizing dry shit. I could totally get into a cute therapist or psychiatrist and enjoy discussing those topics with her.

Just like systematizing men are still humans underneath, so are women. It's just a matter of can you put up with their content. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Joshe

[Emerald]

12 hours ago, BlessedLion said:

I kinda feel for women in this regard, becuase we live in a society where being feminine isn't really rewarded, certainly lot financially (unless your in some niche, or a prostitute or porn star) so women are in a bit of this pickle of "do i make money, take care of my shit and lead my own life?" (risking their attractiveness) or "do i stay in my feminine energy but sacrifice my own autonomy and financial independence?"

The problem is that on an evolutionary level, men will not find a woman who is leading her own life and ship a certain way to be very attractive, because there can only be one captain of a ship, the direction of their relationship and lives need to be lead by someone, the idea of steering the ship "together" is cute but will inevitably reach power struggles and head-butting. 

Ideally, you want a woman who finds your ship and where it is going to be very powerful and inspiring and she hops on board. But i can see why woman would find this to be bullshit.

I'd like to share a different perspective here, as a woman who is very dedicated to my life's purpose who has been called Masculine by many on here (though I disagree)... and who has never had trouble attracting men and having longterm relationships with men who love me.

Consider that being hyper-attractive is very positive for men as it widens the net of potential partners. It's like adding a bit of honey to attract more flies, as the challenging task for men is attracting more flies.

So, because your dating/mating strategy is attraction if you want a partner and you find women attractive, you are thinking it works the same way for women.

But the dating/mating strategies are actually quite a bit different. And the goals are often different.

And women of all levels of attractiveness are already receiving quite a bit of male attention (usually too much). And about 95% of that attention is spam attention. The flies are already over-swarming the honey pot.

So, women becoming more attractive to the male gaze doesn't actually increase their ability to strike a good longterm match (which is what most women are seeking out sexually and romantically... and what is actually satisfying to most women). 

Instead, what actually helps women strike a great match is to be more discerning and learning to sort better... which means narrowing the pool of applicants significantly by sorting the wheat from the chaff.

And it's even better if you can disgust the wrong ones and scare them off with your particularity and authenticity... and they sort themselves from consideration. That way, you don't even have to reject them directly.

In this way, hyper-attractiveness is bit of a liability for women... as it's harder to scare off the wrong ones if they're audacious.

And it requires extra defenses, sensitivity to her own feelings of disgust, and what I call "personal disgust factors" for that hyper-attractive woman (and this goes for more average women as well) to end up with a well-suited guy... and not some spam attention guy who only cares about her good looks and wants to mold her to his whims, like in the example you gave.

And disgust factors are things that are polarizing... like high standards, directness, hyper-particular interests, unique styles, career success, high intellect, hyper-particular opinions, decorative make-up that doesn't appeal to the male gaze, development of the Masculine side, etc.

This is often why very attractive women tend to operate in groups and can be bitchy, if you cross them. It scares away the spam.

And very attractive women who fail to consciously adopt these disgust factors or who are too nice, will tend to dim her attractiveness by dressing down, not taking great care of herself, or even gaining weight to deviate more from the beauty standard.

Ordinary-looking women will tend to have her disgust factors built in to scare of the solely looks-and-status motivated guys. So, she doesn't need as many disgust factors, as the hyper-attractive woman. But she still needs some.

Ultimately, these personal disgust factors polarize in the sense that they scare off spam attention... but if they are authentic to her they also attract genuine attention.

So, for women, the main challenge isn't to become more attractive.... it's to become more discerning and more authentic and particularized and therefore disgusting to the wrong ones.

Edited 1 hour ago by Emerald

[LordFall]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

That does not mean people just flip-flop between masculinity and femininity at their core.

I am strongly against this flip-flop argument. It misunderstands what it actually means to be masculine or feminine. Range of expression is not proof of changing your core orientation.

Well, we need to define terms to have a proper discourse around the subject. What do you even mean by masculinity and femininity?

Why are you strongly against it? Do you have some research that backs up this sentiment or it's more of a lived experienced type of thing?

I think humans can present different fronts depending on the environment they're in and yes they can present as quite masculine in one context and more feminine in another. Sometimes a personality is quite consistent in all environments but perhaps for example let's take a very stoic and unemotional man. I would argue that personality type is more of a function of having to be strong and unreactive in the situations that they're in over a core unchangeable personality trait.

Being a feminine flamboyant man is gonna be a less successful life strategy in the favelas of Brazil over the streets of San Francisco or Toronto. 

@Joshe Spiral dynamics tier 2 is not merely about having a predisposition towards systems thinking. It's more of an identity and way of relating to the world. Have you watched the videos on tier Yellow and Turquoise and the applications of spiral dynamics? 

Edited 1 hour ago by LordFall