billiesimon

I get it that the steps he explains about social media are accurate. But what I was asking in the thread was: is the dating life becoming shallow and dehumanized like he is explaining at the beginning of the video? Or is "old fashioned" connection with a girl still possible?

Definitely the marketing target is the classic nerdy guy, who feels lonely. I've been like that and I know it works. Also nerdy guys don't have a clue about how to get intimacy, so they cling to their intelligence to find a "system" and find affection from women. As I have shifted from the dense orange phase of the recent years I've seen that getting attention from women is a double edged sword, because if you attract them with a shiny behaviour (status, social proof, edginess, social power) you will attract a superficial woman who CANNOT connect with you. I believe that a lot of these guys in reality just want to connect and not to get a shiny gf, but they are somehow forced to do it when they learn "shiny" tecniques from the PUA industry. It's a vicious cycle. Now, I don't want to piss on the dating/PUA values, because there are a lot of healthy orange values in them: having courage, being social, being empathetic, taking your social life in your hands, stop complaining, stop being a victim, stop judging sex etc.... But there are some shadow aspects of pickup that are toxic and need to be erased from this discipline. One above all is the focus on women's looks and women's "sexual marketplace value". And the obsession with male status of course. I still believe in dating and in "pickup", but only as a form of honest and proactive, positive social interaction, to build a better life. And I agree with all of your message of course. The only question I still have, now that I'm starting to see the problem of stage orange is.... Are post-orange women still after "value" in a man? With value I mean what a man brings of value in her life. Not necessarily status and money, but simply "value", as a sense of "he's a special man". Is value still the core of attraction for you and for women in your development phase?

Thanks for the insightful response! Well, to be honest RSD never talks about looks, but they definitely focus a lot on status, social proof, and flashy/edgy attitude. The problem with Tyler and his crew is that they both have great life coaching advice (reading eckhart tolle, accepting your flaws, not judging female sexuality etc), at the same time they indulge in very superficial social circles, in the most superficial city of the world: Los Angeles. He definitely is between stage orange and green, but his lines of development are separate, as his dating life is very orange, and his friendship/private life is very green. He's famous for being a very compassionate man in the dating community. The problem with engaging with such a massive audience and wanting to reach everyone is that you have to dumb down your comminication to: "get the hottest and dumbest girls to date you". This is something I don't like about RSD, while at the same time I like a lot of their life coaching advices, and their advices on learning how to understand a woman's need and female communication. Apart from this, I'm glad that this is only a problem related to some social circles and not all.

A very inspiring example for this lost blue value, reintegrated in stage green, is Adina Rivers. A sexuality teacher on Youtube. She has a very open sexuality and at the same time she's a very loving and nurturing mother. She is in my opinion an excellent example of a fully integrated stage green starting to move into yellow (she is very aware of psychology, social dynamics, and very good with different perspectives, zero reaction towards orange/blue). A very inspiring woman! Both for sexuality and relating with people!

I've had this sort of dilemma/insight these days observing some of my female friends around my age (22 - 29 range), and I've noticed that the way they conceptualize children and bonding between girls and children is very very different based on their spiral dynamics stage. I've noticed, at least in my acquaintances, that: 1. Stage blue - mainly blue/orange girls tend to have a very deep bonding with small children. They are very sharp and quick to empathize with them, and have some kind of natural affection for them 2. Stage orange girls tend to be very detached and indifferent towards children. They see them as boring small noisy people. 3. Stage orange/green girls (which are a lot of college educated women) are very far away from the nurturing and caring concept of blue girls. And even though they are NOT indifferent and cold towards children, like oranges are, they are somehow... awkward. Like kids were some kind of important human being worthy of respect but something that's also very far away from their femininity. It's so weird! Green should be all about caring and nurturing, and paradoxically all these green girls in college have zero connection with their "motherhood" instincts. While I completely understand the position of the first two stages, I don't understand green's position. I think it may be the result of all the green propaganda for abortion and contraception (I'm in favour of both if used properly). What's your opionion on this?

Excellent explanation, I appreciate it. Yes, I've noticed that fully ingrained feminine orange values tend to be very detached and alienated from children, because of the "need to achieve". Well, to be honest all the range from purple to blue/orange transition is very accepting of motherhood as a strong feminine value. It's just that the other feminine values, like freedom, sexuality etc. are condemned. But some values like motherhood were always appreciated, except in orange of course. I think that stage green, once fully integrated, brings back this concept of motherhood as an empowering aspect of female nature. A big problem I see in feminism is that motherhood is seen as somehow evil and old fashioned, while in fact it's just a part of female nature. There are some many "awkward" women nowadays who end up without kids and full of regrets. Feminists don't understand that it's just part of our natural instinct to procreate, and it's not a regression to stage blue. But I guess that western society has to grow a little bit more to understand this.

I don't understand all this hatred towards humankind. I think extinction would be terrible. I sincerely hope humankind evolves fast through global consciousness and grows in harmony with Earth. Why the heck should we disappear? That's hoping for the worst, not for the best. Human potential is huge, we can do so much for ourselves and for the universe.

This is so on point. Europe in general tends to pay a lot of homage to Rome, especially Italy, for obvious reasons. In my country universities have a very idealized and glorified image of Rome ("caput mundi", they say: "head of the world"). Champion of civilization and educator of the barbarians. This is how we learn about Rome in college here. This is because we tend to read mostly the highest of the literature, and the ancient romans themselves liked a lot to distance themselves from the savage barbarians (purple-red). In a lot of historians' books you can find disgusted descriptions of barbarians as tribal lowlife. Especially in Caesar's diaries. Virgilius was probably blue-orange, because he described war as absolute horror, and a disgrace to humankind. Glorifying Rome as a bringer of peace and education.

In the latest video Leo presents a chart of the different level of development in Spiral Dynamics. In this chart the roman empire is put at red stage. Isn't it blue? Classic rome and greece were very stable and advanced societies at the time, and they were initially built on stage red because of the first raw conquests that both greeks and romans had to do to create a wealthy kingdom/republic. When the roman republic rose up... they had to create a very strong and reliable law system (whis is STILL nowadays a rolemodel) and excellent roads and sewers. Not to mentions the excellent architecture and also the "greenish" laws of freedom of religion. I think that the roman republic and the later roman empire were classic blue/orange stages to be honest.

I think they are both. This is very interesting because the impression you get from studying classical roman literature and poetry tend to make them look like a perfect blue european country. Law, order, morality, integrity and respect for the senate and the generals are the core beliefs pushed by the roman writers like Virgilius, Catullus, Caesar etc... But I guess they were the elite, the top notch. While most romans were probably at red. Is this right?

Yeah, that's true. My knowledge comes from my classical literature studies (here in italy). I think there is some romanticizing Rome here in my country, since it's somehow patriotic. But it's also true that in an architectural, schooling and legal perspective Rome was definitely blue. Literature and art was very blueish and very far away from purple and red tribal low level art.

I'm really grateful for Teal to release this very neglected insight about male dichotomy and suffering. So honorable and heartwarming for a woman to talk about this. Watch it! By the way, I don't resonate at all with the traditional side, but I agree with the sense of "helplessness" that traditional men feel today in society, since it's very confusing to be a man nowadays.

I agree with generally everything, yeah.

Sorry for the old quote LOL. I was reading just now. Well, in my personal experience, definitely YES. But not all women. Some women I know as acquaintances are very shallow and validation-obsessed. They openly admit that they only want stud guys who fuck them hard and coldly, and that they despise emotional and pleasurable guys (because they are """losers"""). You can't say that they like it this way because of "orange leadership". They are just incapable of appreciating emotions and connection.

Great topic!!!! Definitely one I needed. Thanks Leo I'm gonna watch

Oh my goodness it's the fourth or fifth time I've seen this copypaste topic I've had a similar self esteem issue when I was in high school, and then it dissolved once I started to see my looks as they truly are. Send me a normal picture in pm, I'm SURE as hell you are normal. Also stop catastrofizing this looks issue lol.

I definitely want the dirty talk video

It's a great video. But in the "actualized" man part (which I loved) the only thing that I didn't like was having to defend women. It makes no sense. Women should take responsibility for themselves and stop depending on men. I'll look into that book, thanks bro.

Most people here responded with: ask genuine questions about them. Now, this is my normal policy when meeting people, but this backfires a lot, at least for me. There are some rare cases where the person shows interest in connecting, but in my case most of the times the person (it doesn't matter if man or woman) just starts talking about his/her self and never stops to reciprocate. It becomes some kind of egotistical interview, where they don't give a fuck about sharing commonalities. What's wrong with this approach?

Thanks!

What are the processes of healing in game? I am a noob and going out but I still feel a lot of fear, anxiety, feeling out of place, i feel judged A LOT, and the most alarming signal is that I feel unworthy of interest from new girls. From the girls I've already dated I don't feel this unworthiness, strangely. But with new girls I approach in the clubs and social events I feel this huge void inside my stomach that's consuming me when I ask for a date or to exchange numbers. Also, strangely enough, when I have zero women to date I feel sad but very calm and peaceful, while when dating I'm always anxious and in a constant state of "being judged badly". What do you suggest is the best route to evolve in pickup beyond this?

Thanks a lot, your response is the exact one I was needing Uhm... In my humble experience girls became attracted to me over time... I never saw an immediate attachment. The best example I have is my last ex. She was acting very neutral all the time we were seeing eachother (we exchanged a lot of messages and then went to four dates). Immediately after I kissed her and had sex with her (i mean the same day) she went completely out of the blue from neutral and receptive (but still completely blasè) to completely attached and loving and hugging/cuddling. I was sincerely shocked, but since I was already interested I chose her as my girlfriend then. And the same with the other two gfs. I mean, it might be ME that trigger this kind of "emotional defense" in women, since I've always been CAREFUL and afraid of emotional pain from women. Maybe this triggers them to be "cold" to create the complementary character to mine. But once I have sex with them I become more relaxed and peaceful and they BOOM become attached like they totally lost their coldness. In fact my worst problem with women is that I tend to see them as completely cold and heartless in the first part of dating, and very warm once I reach full sexual intimacy. Which I like! because I'm an emotional guy and I love cuddles and hugs, but I also have self esteem issues with love and affection, I feel poorly worthy of love. I think this might trigger these emotional defenses in women at the beginning of dating. Some of the responses are awful I'm sorry for the bad experiences, but I think I really understand you because I'm a male version of that, even though now I have a better self esteem. But my first gf for example neglected me a lot, while the last one was very caring with me, and at that point my self esteem was somehow decent already. By the way, your experiences are somehow a gift to you and the world since you can now help a lot of people (especially men, to be honest). I agree. No more paranoia and feeling wortless of love for me. I actually found out recently that I am becoming really really attracted to affectionate, caring but also self-respecting girls a lot. They give me some kind of authentic compassionate vibe. Well, thanks a lot again.

I can't get these facts straight. I have some female friends who have had experiences with assholes and I don't understand what's really in the female mind. Disclaimer: I have already talked a lot with them about it and I already know their emotional experience, but I'm here to discuss it rationally and analize it with the actualized girls on this forum (guys too). I have some female friends who have dated assholes for some months and then dumped them because of thei emotional shallowness. Now, the issue that I have with this is that IN THE BEGINNING of their dating with these guys, they were emotionally addicted to them. We're talking about one or two months of dating, and then they rejected these assholes and moved on to find a more balanced guy. But the fact remains that they were absolutely hooked like hell in those short periods of time. And these are nice girls, not emotional whores who are addicted to drugs or alcohol and social media. In fact they moved on exactly because they are nice girls and not damaged souls. But still I don't understand why they were MORE hooked by these assholes than by more balanced and actually cool guys. What's wrong with female nature? I know I sound judgemental but I don't mean to. I just want to understand why girls prefer so much extreme negative emotions over a more balanced emotional guy (I'm not talking about boring plain guys). I'm not here to judge, I just want to hear a female opinion and some insights!

It's just a clickbaity title I'm curious about the feminine, and what the feminine feels. I've had problems understanding women in the past so I'm curious now to reintegrate this.

Well, yes. I personally prefer a more evolved woman. But this doesn't confict with my interest in social dynamics of the average people.