aurum

The book is looking awesome, excited to read it.

You nailed that one. That's exactly how I think about it. I understand men being punished for femininity, but I wouldn't think women would be as harshly punished. Look at something like Mormon society. It's not really "repressed feminine". It's more mutually strict gender roles. If you were born a Mormon, you would have had an easier time being feminine. Mormonism is like a feminine woman factory machine, to the point that the femininity itself becomes repressive: This is a good example of what SD Blue is like. SD Orange is more repressive of femininity I'd say.

That mostly comes from people with a Cook-Grueter Individualist / Pluralist value-set, where you value authenticity and the deconstruction of oppressive societal roles. It has its value as a perspective. You can be too rigid in how you enforce masculinity on men, to the point of absurdity. Here's an example:

It's about ego development.

"Pro-social" and "community" is relative. If I go to war against an enemy tribe and kill them, that's potentially pro-social and pro their community. And war is not something of the past. War is very much still with us, even if its face has somewhat evolved. I agree that we could be open to more flexibility. Society is complex and there will be people who don't fit the mold. It's also true that as society evolves, men will probably be able to soften more. Here's a good example of the kind of stupidity I think you are getting at: On the whole though, men are not such unique snowflakes you can't predict how they will develop. You can develop genuine masculinity. And it doesn't happen just by integrating more feminine energy. That is not enough. Masculinity develops in a very specific way. It has to be forged, like trial by fire. Honestly, I'm having a hard time understanding why you felt the need to do this. I don't think a woman has ever earned my respect that way. It sounds like you felt the need to compete with men? Or at least be more like men. Reminds me of this

Wild. He's on top.

There's nothing wrong with it per se if that's what you want. Most of us here just aren't interested in that.

You just vibe and get to know each other a bit. Don't talk about "things" too much. Talk about her, talk about you, talk about you together as a unit. Also, you need to be thinking about where you want this interaction to go and make plans accordingly. Is this a ONS? A phone number situation? A social circle environment? Friendship? What do you want from her? Think about solving as many logistical problems before you even go out as possible. Are you going to Uber back to your place? Drive her yourself? Take public transportation? Can you shorten that distance? Is your apartment / home ready to bring women back to? Do you have fun things planned or an excuse to bring her inside? What will you do with her friends? The problem a lot of guys have is they're too haphazard about all this. They think this stuff will just work itself out. Sometimes it can if you're clever, but often it won't. You need to plan ahead.

I didn't think he had a chance originally, but now it looks like he might have a real shot. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out either way.

Good one.

Well we are just going to disagree on this. It has not been outgrown. If you can't understand why men need and even want that kind of pressure, you can't really understand masculinity.

Why do you think that is?

Or, maybe you've just not owned this part of yourself yet.

@Emerald you're making valid points. We are painting broad strokes here and trying to identify general trends. You could splice things in many different ways.

Right, it's a tradeoff. The shadow is that the same impulse to maintain harmony is what causes truth to get swept under the rug. Women are not just sharing truth with more tact. It's a more social way of sense-making, based on consensus and prioritizing group well-being. In that sense, it's more collectivist. Like a hive-mind. This might work if collective sense-making favored truth. But often it doesn't. Group sense-making almost always prioritizes survival of the group. So truth will get sacrificed in these scenarios. Autonomy of mind generally favors men. Men are often rewarded for breaking from the herd for the purposes of innovation, standing out and taking risks. And someone who is not as sensitive to the lasers and attached to connection is much more suited for cutting through group-think and delusion. But of course this also can come at the cost of rupturing social cohesion and connection. Women’s truth mode: high-resolution sensitivity to emotional systems, but often pressured to suppress disruptive insight for social survival. Men’s truth mode: lower sensitivity to emotional costs, enabling more autonomous sense-making and blunt truth-telling, but may lack the nuance to deliver that truth with sensitivity.

That's that Bonnie Blue awakening.

There is more to awakening than ruining your cosmic cosplay.

The ultimate test from God

Folded quick as hell on that one

Yes, that's true. Folding is inevitable. There's no shame in it.

You can still choose Absolute Truth but then live a human life. It's not strictly an either / or choice.

Why are you against addition of inputs? These inputs can be helpful beyond just "compensation". Especially if you don't have top-tier genetics. You seem to keep thinking you can solve all health problems by living like ancient people.

But that also doesn't mean men and women have the same orientation towards truth. Survival has created various incentives and tradeoffs around truth.

Survival / effectiveness often requires both fantasy and truth. You could look at it from either perspective.

You'd have to actually commit to her in a romantic fashion. Do you want that?