Karmadhi

High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born

189 posts in this topic

Keily Jenner is an example that women value isn’t static..

Women can absolutely increase their social value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

11 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

@wwhy  A homeless shy person can be the most caring and kind person you ever met. Does society care about that? NO! He will be seen as a loser by most of society and no girl will be attracted to him

Are you sure about that? There are a lot of homeless girls, and some of them are more attractive and sexy than the Kim Kardashian's of this would (beauty does not care about your bank account balance). They'll just need a shower and some make-up, and you'd be drooling over them like a thirsty dog... :D

Have you heard of Cinderella? Pretty woman? Same story..

Edited by wwhy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@wwhy I was talking about guys not girls. Girls have value based on looks so you are just proving my point. A homeless shy girl that looks good is 100 times more valuable than a homeless shy guys that looks good.

ofc if the guy looks as good as model then he can get a modelling jobs hence no longer homeless haahhahahah. But by looking good i mean just good not 10/10 good.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Karmadhi said:

@wwhy I was talking about guys not girls. Girls have value based on looks so you are just proving my point. A homeless shy girl that looks good is 100 times more valuable than a homeless shy guys that looks good.

ofc if the guy looks as good as model then he can get a modelling jobs hence no longer homeless haahhahahah. But by looking good i mean just good not 10/10 good.

 

Same thing bro. Shower, nice suite and watch... and HE will be good to go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Emerald said:

I wouldn't be so sure of having completely escaped it. This runs very deep here. It's not just newcomers.

I'm not complete, I still have to learn a lot 9_9

But nonetheless, this content has grown me so much. I'm just thankful. 


🌈🌈🌈 Colors are my true nature 🌈🌈🌈

https://www.instagram.com/vibrant_awareness/    🧡🧡🧡

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When women here say that the men on this particular section are not fully matured and use stage orange dating, they are simply spitting facts. Instead of taking it as personal attack and judgement, you can  choose to take it as positive feedback and use it for development. Instead of getting triggered, try to understand the women. You don't want a woman? Then no problem. You shouldn't worry about what a woman thinks. But if you want a woman, then you need to consider what she thinks 

There have been many hateful posts on this section about women. We are human beings. We don't want to be objectified. We can sense the hate. Because you're not criticizing anything, it's simply hate. The way you judge women, it's only based on looks. That can be very harsh to women because looks cannot be dramatically changed. You can't talk about plastic surgery. Not every woman wants plastic surgery  it's like me saying - why can't you get a fake big penis. 

Before you conclude that the reaction was too harsh. Look at how you judge women yourself. We react to what we see. We don't want men to like us only for looks. Because it reduces our value only to appearance. That's a lot that a woman can offer in a relationship. We would want to be liked or desired for our qualities as well. Just like we look for qualities in a woman. Most discussions are only oriented to a woman's looks. That hurts our womanhood very deeply. Because it deprives us of our human qualities that make up our womanhood and increases the pressure that we already face when it comes to looks, something that we can't do much to change. 

This is a fundamental truth that women are less looks oriented and more oriented to find a suitable match for themselves, whereas for men, they mostly care about looks, this is just how it is. Men judge women by looks first, everything else later. Is this hard to understand? 

If you say that you are allowed to be a man when it comes to your choices, we are allowed to be women when it comes to reacting to your choices. Why is the reaction hurting you when your actions are hurting us. Millions of women suffer low self esteem because men Constantly remind them how unattractive they are. Why can't we speak about how we get judged when you do the judging? 

So your ego is an ego and our ego is not an ego? We have every right to judge and react to whatever is being said about us. And this section of the forum says a lot of misleading things about female sexuality. We try to correct it and then they think that we are attacking 

You're coming here to learn then learn. It's good that a woman is giving you feedback on what you think. If you can't take it, then it's your insecurity and ego issue. You would want a woman to give feedback, because whatever you say would be hollow words and illusory nonsense if it doesn't apply to us women. Who are you going to talk to? Empty walls? 

The most ridiculous irony is that you want to talk all day about women but not to a woman. When a woman speaks, suddenly it hurts your ego and you go into denial. Because you don't care to listen to her perspective and carry on with your idealogy about women. How is it fair that you can have a wrong opinion on women and when we defend ourselves against it, you call it an attack? 

If you are genuinely interested in learning, you would take what a woman says as feedback and work on it. 

The women here have observed a unique pattern. When we talk to men outside, they are more wholesome and well rounded in their opinions. But that's not reflected in this section. This begs the question why this difference - because the men we interact with are well rounded in their thinking about women and are more likely to get women because of that. They won't need pua or a dating program. So a man who needs this dating section is obviously a man who has less success with women. Why else will he come to this section. But maybe he has less success because of the very same ideological beliefs about women that hold him back from doing the work that needs to be done in attracting women and simply blaming women if they can't get them or if the woman rejects them. This is something that we see and try to point out. So instead of taking it as an attack, take it as information that you need to distill down into something meaningful that you can apply in changing your mentality regarding women and yourself and use that to develop yourself into a man who is more easily suited for relationships.. Because that's what you want right.. 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Emerald said:

There was an insight I had a year ago at a medicine work ceremony that the masculine is out of its natural alignment and that this, on an energetic level, is why it's somewhat uncommon to find a man with a fully integrated and healthy masculine side. This was part of the avoidance. It's either a lack of integration/rejection of the masculine side or an overextension into a very limited array of masculine traits that are learned from the outside. 

That's so accurate. Thanks for pointing it out. 

This is one of my major concerns when helping other people healing their polarities. And one of my life missions, especially for men. 

Men are still very incomplete and damaged in their masculine and feminine sides (both). They have been like this for millennia. This is also the cause of female oppression. Since men need to be in touch with their feminine side, but were taught not to... They also oppressed the feminine in women. 

Nondually speaking, men rejected women in the past, thus also rejecting themselves. This also happens when a woman rejects masculinity in men, thus rejecting herself. 

Male and female completion/satisfaction is deeply related to the completion of the opposite sex. 

The healing of humanity is deeply connected to the healing of femininity in men (also their masculinity). It sounds absurd but it's absolutely true. -_-

Because a complete man sees no difference between men and women. That's also the absolute truth. Deep down there are no female/male polarities, it's just the Absolute appearing as opposites :x


🌈🌈🌈 Colors are my true nature 🌈🌈🌈

https://www.instagram.com/vibrant_awareness/    🧡🧡🧡

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Preety_India Personally i would date an average looking girl if i liked her personality. Even a bit below average. Most guys would not if they did not find the girl physically attractive. Maybe i would. This is not about me for the 100th time, i care about looks far less than 90 percent of guys out there including Leo. To me feminine behavior is much more attractive than looks are.

However society in a large scale tends to differ and that is not my fault, problem or wish.

Secondly i love how you girls here make guys feel bad about caring about looks a lot like it is something bad. Meanwhile same girls care about equally superficial stuff like confidence, charm, status and money.

Both are equally superficial and say nothing about your inner personality in the end. Some of the most fucked up people in the world are confident charming famous and rich. Why don't you feel bad about liking such guys? Why should guys feel bad about liking hot girls.

Again personally i care about looks FAR less than most guys but that is because i am a bit feminine in this regard. Most guys especially the masculine ones you crave are VERY look focused and there is nothing wrong with that. Both genders like superficial stuff anyway. 

Edited by Karmadhi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping it simple i think the statement 'High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born', is generally true in the dating marketplace. A guy whos at the top 2% of desired men is not gonna be some good looking guy who hasnt achieved anything, its gonna be a guy who has worked on himself, has a high status job, brings value to those around him, is respected, well dressed, looks will play a part but not the main thing. Basically most of those things a guy has to work on, they arent god given (you could argue motivation and circumstance is but lets keep it simple). 

On the other hand the most desirable women, top 2%, in most cases havent had to work on themselves the same way, for one the most desirable woman would be younger so they wouldnt have time to, also what you find is that if they were hot all their lives and were rewarded for that, theres no incentive to work on themselves and so they dont, as humans we all usually take the easy route. They most likely wouldve gotten jobs in which their beauty is the reason behind it, modelling or whatever. Their beauty was god given, or luck in that they grew up in a time where their particular looks worked with societys beauty standards. 

Now these values are pretty much solely based on what the opposite sex desires, men do not care what job a woman has, you can be a high powered career woman but no guy is dreaming about spending a night with Hilary Clinton. On the other side women desire what i mentioned previously, which is what gives men their value. This is only for the dating marketplace, it doesnt mean youre not worth anything because youre not a top man or woman, most people arent period. Yes there will be some who are attracted to different types of people and thats completely cool, we're talking about generally how things play out, theres people who like nissan micras but generally other cars are more popular. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Why don't you feel bad about liking such guys?

Because I don't like those guys. 

And I'm sure most women aren't goldiggers either. Another erroneous belief about women propagated in this section. 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Karmadhi the hypocrisy of your argument (not to mention how severely self contradicting it is) is that you want to believe that women go after superficial things and at the same time make a statement like 

'High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born'

When you make a statement like that it actually shows that men are after superficial things, because one doesn't need to work hard for superficial things, one can be born with it. So no need to grow to attract men. Who is superficial? 

 

 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

@Karmadhi the hypocrisy of your argument (not to mention how severely self contradicting it is) is that you want to believe that women go after superficial things and at the same time make a statement like 

'High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born'

When you make a statement like that it actually shows that men are after superficial things, because one doesn't need to work hard for superficial things, one can be born with it. So no need to grow to attract men. Who is superficial? 

 

 

I think your getting caught up here, its not a case of men are bad or women are bad it just is what it is. 

But lets test the theory with the help of google. So Im going to the website askmen and ill pick some of the most desired women as rated by the readers who i assume are men. This isnt ideal as obviously its women everyone knows not everyday women but we'll just work with it. The assumption is these women can basically have any man they want, theyre not only beautiful but are successful in their own right, lets see who a couple of them choose (im only picking married ones) - 

no. 2 - Beyonce is married to Jay-Z, one of the richest and most respected black men in the world, not the best looking guy, of course has other qualities

no. 3 - Ashley Graham married Justin Ervin who is a talented director and cinematographer worked with netflix, cnn etc pretty high status 

no. 4 - PRIYANKA CHOPRA married Nick Jonas, both are good looking and high status i would say, but either way she didnt marry a good looking nobody (and neither did he)

no. 8 - Kim Kardashian married to Kanye West (they are divorcing) again similar to the Beyonce marriage 

no. 9 - Margot Robbie married to Tom Ackerly, normal looking guy but just so happens to be a producer and director 

no. 14 - Emily Ratajkowski married Sebastian Bear-McClard, im sure you can tell by his name hes quite well off and is a film producer

 

So i can go on and on with this list, but the point is these women are highly desirable, the most desirable even, they dont even need a guys resources really but it just so happened they chose quite rich, high status, normal looking guys. Theyre not gold diggers obviously so the attraction obviously comes from status, ambition whatever, there will be other factors of course but these are the common denominators for the men they chose. 

If the high value women are choosing these men then obviously these are high value men, how did they get to be high value? Well they went to film school, studied hard, broke into the industry, had success and then they met someone like Margot Robbie. Or they become highly successful hip-hop moguls, the bottom line is they did something that most men want to do but were not able to for whatever reason. They were not selected on their looks, the women were, if any of these women had the same success but not the looks, they would not have got these high value men.  Gabourey Sidibe, well known actress from the movie 'Precious', shes dating a guy that works at Cameo and has a linked in page, a normal guy basically. Her value is nothing to do with her success. 

Anyway ill leave you with that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Consept  why do you think that the attraction is only based on status? 

These women are themselves very successful. The parties they will attend or social circles they will be surrounded by would also have people who are also in the same success league. We usually make social circles that are similar to where we live or belong. This applies to all humans regardless of gender 

So it's easy to see why these women are easily getting paired with equally successful men. Because these women themselves belong to that category as well 

 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Consept also the question to you is? 

Is Kanye West marrying a woman on the street? No way. 

You mean to say a woman on the street can't look beautiful? 

This makes me to come at another conclusion 

Not only do men judge women on their looks but also their social status relative to their own status? 

So if a man is at a lower social status, he will pick a woman based on looks and compromise on her social status if she is poor, because it doesn't hurt his status. 

But if a man is at a higher social status, like a celebrity, then he will not only pick a woman based on looks but also social status like her fame etc, because picking a woman from the streets hurts his own status.. And he doesn't want that. So even if a woman looked pretty but nothing else going on, then she still can't get him. 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

24 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

why do you think that the attraction is only based on status? 

I said its a common denominator not that its only based on it.

24 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

These women are themselves very successful. The parties they will attend or social circles they will be surrounded by would also have people who are also in the same success league. We usually make social circles that are similar to where we live or belong. This applies to all humans regardless of gender 

So it's easy to see why these women are easily getting paired with equally successful men. Because these women themselves belong to that category as well 

True but these women will also come into contact with many good looking guys constantly, especially when they live in places like LA where everyones an actor, still somehow they all chose the not so good looking high status guy, not the good looking low status, or the not good looking low status guy. The other point is that these guys success has zero to do with their looks so its not a completely even match. 

20 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Is Kanye West marrying a woman on the street? No way.

Yes Kanye West would marry a woman of lower status, he was in a long term relationship with Amber Rose who was a relatively unknown model before West boosted her stardom. This applies for pretty much all men, they dont care about status, George Clooney, Idris Elba, Matt Damon, Snoop Dogg, the other Jonas brother, loads of high value guys have married women youve never even heard of. Just like the common denominator for women is status, for high value men its looks. 

20 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

You mean to say a woman on the street can't look beautiful? 

Point to where i said that 

 

20 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

So if a man is at a lower social status, he will pick a woman based on looks and compromise on her social status if she is poor, because it doesn't hurt his status. 

But if a man is at a higher social status, like a celebrity, then he will not only pick a woman based on looks but also social status like her fame etc, because picking a woman from the streets hurts his own status.. And he doesn't want that. So even if a woman looked pretty but nothing else going on, then she still can't get him. 

No youve completely read into what i said, a high value man doesnt care about the woman status as i mentioned before and as plays out in the real life examples i gave. If a girl just looks pretty guys will want to get with her, but obviously if she wants a top guy she'd have to have other things going for her, which wouldnt be status but more like how they and how they fit with the guy. Remember he can get many beautiful girls so he can pick what he wants, status isnt usually that much of a factor, at least not as much as other things. 

But in general it feels like youre trying to hold onto a position in the light of quite obvious evidence. Its not for me to convince you im just presenting an evidence backed argument, if you want to hold onto your argument thats cool

Edited by Consept

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Consept said:

Remember he can get many beautiful girls

So he can get many beautiful girls and he should every right to choose a high value girl in his own regard or preference but when a woman gets the same option of many good men, she shouldn't exercise her option to choose a high value guy (a guy who she thinks is high value in terms of status) because if she does that then she is superficial but he is not? 

So your primary argument is that a man who chooses a woman and finds a woman high value based on looks and he is not superficial but If Kim Kardashian chooses Kanye West, then she is superficial? 

 


INTP loner..... Live a Roman.  Die a Roman...... Nothing else but to enjoy  the rest of my dream. Love it. (I'm more Roman than you'll ever be ) only guys with zero ego and zero passive aggressive can talk to me, rest need not bother 

Preety preety

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

So he can get many beautiful girls and he should every right to choose a high value girl in his own regard or preference but when a woman gets the same option of many good men, she shouldn't exercise her option to choose a high value guy (a guy who she thinks is high value in terms of status) because if she does that then she is superficial but he is not? 

So your primary argument is that a man who chooses a woman and finds a woman high value based on looks and he is not superficial but If Kim Kardashian chooses Kanye West, then she is superficial? 

4 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

@wwhy

 

On 15/04/2021 at 8:35 AM, Preety_India said:

 

On 15/04/2021 at 8:19 AM, Preety_India said:

 

 

Point to where I said a woman is superficial and a man's not 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Consept

Meh. That's a bit of a biased researched.

51 minutes ago, Consept said:

But lets test the theory with the help of google. So Im going to the website askmen and ill pick some of the most desired women as rated by the readers who i assume are men. This isnt ideal as obviously its women everyone knows not everyday women but we'll just work with it. The assumption is these women can basically have any man they want, theyre not only beautiful but are successful in their own right, lets see who a couple of them choose (im only picking married ones) - 

no. 2 - Beyonce is married to Jay-Z, one of the richest and most respected black men in the world, not the best looking guy, of course has other qualities

no. 3 - Ashley Graham married Justin Ervin who is a talented director and cinematographer worked with netflix, cnn etc pretty high status 

no. 4 - PRIYANKA CHOPRA married Nick Jonas, both are good looking and high status i would say, but either way she didnt marry a good looking nobody (and neither did he)

no. 8 - Kim Kardashian married to Kanye West (they are divorcing) again similar to the Beyonce marriage 

no. 9 - Margot Robbie married to Tom Ackerly, normal looking guy but just so happens to be a producer and director 

no. 14 - Emily Ratajkowski married Sebastian Bear-McClard, im sure you can tell by his name hes quite well off and is a film producer

Candice Swanepoel, Elsa Hosk, Romee Strijd and Doutzen Kroes are all with guys who aren't as successful as they are. I'd say, they are fairly unknown and probably not as wealthy.

Keanu Reeves is with Alexandra Grant. She's not necessarily your traditional eye candy.


“If you are irritated by every rub, how will you be polished?” - Rumi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now