zazen

The reason pick up gets frowned upon is because people think the guys learning it are being fake, or that they aren't the genuine article. From a evolutionary psychology perspective, if a guy portrayed he's something he's not ie he has enough resources and strong characteristics to take care of the children / protect provide for the family and she pro created with him only to find out it was a lie, thats literally risking her and her child's life. No man is born great but made great over time through growth. Men build their primary value (strength), women retain their primary value (softness - close to innocence of children). As life happens, a woman under too much strain and under a tough life has to be in her masculine at the expense of her femininity. Sex is the most important thing when you don't have it, anything lacking becomes their new god. As the saying goes the hungry don't get fed. Once you have it in abundance you realise its not all that, and that in fact its best had with someone you have a great connection with. Something with abundance can still have or get options, they just don't exercise those option knowing it won't give them what it wants. Ironically once you take the God pill, and embody godly qualities you have the can have the most abundance yet no longer need sexual relationships but only choose to partake in them out of want. You partake in sexuality, but don't let sexuality take you over.

Why so confrontational with Leo? Its a back and forth thread, and he's responding to you and bouncing back off your comments. It's called vibing, not copy catting.

There are reasons why women are naturally protective of who they have sex with. Men can separate sex from emotions and do it just as a physical act. From a biological view women are more protective sexually as in the past having a child requires protection and provisioning so they naturally seek security of the man to stick around after sex, this is hardwired into women. Today in the modern environment and with technological advancement (birth control, protection etc) to have sex freely isn't a disaster in that way, however our biology is still primal and so reacts in its way to be wary of free sexuality. So its nothing to be ashamed of that you need to have a emotional connection before sex, because you need to feel secure first with the man, to then relax, to then build a connection that leads to you being able to have sex on the basis of trust. Men saying women should freely have sex and that its okay are either projecting from a male point of view how their minds/body works or are coming at it from a more evolved stage where women are able to detach themselves from their biology and so act in ways that maybe aren't as natural to it, but that we ourselves nurture / societally programme ourselves into. Shame comes from the outside, guilt from the inside. Shame is when society tells you how you should be and when you go against it your esteem is attacked. Guilt is when you do something, and internally it doesn't feel right to you, either because it may go against your biology or internal moral compass (which can be subjective).

Today hotness is put on a pedestal but not beauty. What we see is caricature of women not real beauty which is something internal as well as external. In beauty theirs femininity, a certain grace etc. We all truly want beauty, which is deeper than hotness, hotness is purely physical. The body wants the hot body, but something more in us wants something more than just the body also. Men want companionship as well, the physical is maybe what draws us to a woman but not necessarily what keeps men around. One way hot women can be blind sided is they aren't incentivised to build their other qualities as the world is thrown at them for their exterior, and once their exterior starts to fade and they haven't committed to anyone, they have no interior qualities to offer. More youthful men with higher testosterone prioritise looks, but once testosterone starts to lessen as men age and weaken its grip on us, men seek something more than just the physical, some men come to that realisation earlier, it all depends. Older women without physical hotness can still be beautiful, its something deeper. They can be mothers, grandmothers, and even if not biologically they can at least be motherly to their community.

You can go with the flow of your feelings and what feels right in the moment, but that stream can also lead to dirty water. The minute we'r open to pleasurable feelings, the other coin of that is the pain of that pleasure not lasting or being taken away from you, which you become dependent on for your well being. Sometimes it's best not to make long term decisions on short term feelings. Loving yourself ie doing what you love in the moment is one thing, but to also love your future self you must act the right way in this moment, so your future self is happy, unless your strong enough to bear what comes your way which is what self development is all about. If you fortify yourself spiritually, then you can go with your heart, and any heart break that may come won't be a emotional scar that can't heal but a wound that does. Trust isn't just trusting that life will treat you well, but that whatever comes your way you trust yourself to handle it well and come out the other side intact and strong.

Agreed, I meant a quality guy probably won't commit before sex not in general that they won't commit at all. In fact a quality guy should come to the conclusion of how shallow sex can be with person after person to which they have no depth with, and eventually go from breadth of relationships to depth of relationship with one person.

This. A quality guy probably isn't going to commit, the best one can do is at least weed out the completely commitment phobic through questioning, making the guy invest at least a bit, but not taking too long before he just goes off to someone who will give him what he wants with a lot more ease, its a balancing act.

Thats the thing, we on this forum may not view it in a negative light, but the average guy out there views things differently. It's tough at times as us being on forum of self development / spirituality gotta be careful not to project more evolved perspectives onto society when discussing society and the average guy/girl. A lot of the guys who will give a carefree non judgmental attitude towards it when pursuing a girl as to not make her feel 'slutty' / put up defence and so for her to relax and open up sexually. Whether that attitude is genuine or just a facade for the man to get what he wants short term is what women have to be careful and discern themselves with their intuition.

Maybe not the politically correct thing to say and the women's answer would differ from the mens, but as a guy who can get sex quite easily when a girl doesn't put out on the first date even when there is chemistry, it shows some constraint and that she values herself, getting a guy to work a little and so I value her and her maturity. The thinking goes if I can get her to be sexual with me on the first date, so could any other guy so whats so special about me, or she doesn't have control over herself in which case in a relationship I'd be worried of another guy swooping her too easily. If I'm just looking for casual hook ups then its fine and it's not that you look down on the girl or lose respect, it just is what it is. Everyones exploring their sexuality differently or in a different phase.

When leo says quality guys won't wait around its because their in demand and have other girls who will sleep with them and give them a chance to get to know them. Thats where we'r at in todays world, a guy would rather get know and figure if he likes a girl whilst getting his sexual urges met and girls are willing to do that. Guys get love goggles from sex and can become comfortable getting it which makes them want to commit to that eventually, rather than being on the dating scene having to face rejection. In the past when there wasn't sex available like that then guys were incentivised to commit because they couldn't get their needs met any other way. Obviously there are guys who will appreciate a girl holding off and wanting commitment before sex, the more serious minded but even then they'd want to eventually test the sexual chemistry, just after knowing you a while. Have to also be careful of guys who lead girls on to get their needs met without any commitment down the line, as you mentioned why buy the cow when he can get the milk for free. It is tricky now days, the happy medium I can think of is find out what he's looking for and where he's at in life, try avoid sleeping on the first date. If he wants a 2nd/3rd date at least he's serious about knowing you and is investing. That way you weed out the time wasters or guys who just wanted sex. Usually by the 4th date guys will start to get impatient and may feel a girl is just using them for dates, in which case also don't expect or even suggest expensive dates so the guy knows you want to get to know him and not just use him in that way. He'll be more inclined to go past the 3rd date if they aren't heavy on the wallet.

Just some thoughts, would love to hear other men and women's opinion on this. This is a dilemma a lot of women can face, and guys who wish to do the right thing or date with integrity. On the one hand theirs the view that women sleeping around can have negative consequences on their happiness / ability to pair bond, the other is that there is none and that we should embrace our sexuality. From a biological view women are more protective sexually as in the past having a child requires protection and provisioning so they naturally seek security of the man to stick around after sex, this is hardwired into women. Today in the modern environment and with technological advancement (birth control, protection etc) to have sex freely isn't a disaster in that way, however our biology is still primal and so reacts in its way to be wary of free sexuality. Maybe our consciousness/psychology and the way we think about sex can over ride our biology and so if society thought in this way / didn't have conservative hang ups on sexuality women wouldn't feel as torn about sleeping without commitment. I think in general, women tend to need an emotional connection before sex, whereas for men an emotional connection is formed or not more so after sex (post nut clarity - after sexual needs are met a guy knows if he likes the girl for more than just her body, its more clear to him whereas up to sex he's clouded by his sexual urges). For women who wish to have commitment before sex, the problem arises that if there are other women sleeping more easily, they take those men away and off the dating scene more easily, so it almost pushes more sexually wary women to do the same in order to even compete for men, until we have what we have now which is a mostly freely sexual society. As a guy, if I'm told women can be hurt emotionally from having multiple partners it makes me wonder how I should go about dating also. On the one hand you'd want to know if your sexually compatible, but at the same time you know if your not you may hurt the girls future happiness or contribute to her emotional wounds (after sleeping with her a few times) unless the view is wrong and women are generally more emotionally robust.

Red pill is a map to understand human behaviour, particularly female/male dynamics but it is not absolute or simplistic, people are complex. A lot of negativity and toxicity is attached to it now so you have to be careful not to go down that path. Best way forward is to get out and socialise, even just talk to girls as friends without trying to pick them up at first and see how they are first hand. Human nature and biologically men and women are all the same in terms of their instincts, but human nurturing ie their environment and cultural upbringing will influence them also and interplays with those biological instincts. Deep down the hardware is the same, but our social conditioning is the software. You have to approach people with nuance, red pill can give you a good working framework and generalities, but has its simplistic and extreme points. When your out there don't analyse things, just socialise and enjoy yourself. Analyse after being out. Check this video for a balanced view of redpill:

I think its easy to dismiss points made by someone under 'someone must have hurt him'. People can try to just be looking objectively at things. Maybe in the older generation or currently we can see couples together matched on their level, but whats invisible to us is who's single, this could also depend on where you live ie in big cities their are far more singles and urbanisation is ever increasing in the modern and developing world. It could also be generational. We'r discussing not just the reality now but the trends and what could be. In the millennial and coming generations singleness is increasing as a lot has changed since social media etc came about. These are shown in stats, even Morgan Stanley are researching and preparing for where to invest as almost half the population of adult age are predicted to be single by 2030. This isn't all due to feminism as a lot of bitter red pill guys may come to the conclusion of. Its nuance, and their are socio economic reasons, technological reasons and the way we live our life in the modern world. The desire and need for human connection however is the main concern of the day. Red pill can definitely be absolutist and very simplistic and that is its danger, it doesn't discount that their must be some problems people are having in modern dating and that men are seeking out answers. Women wish to be in monogamous relationships and finding partners is hard in old age for both sexes, yet still 70% of divorces are initiated by women. This can't be because all those relationships were abusive, but maybe just the lack of awareness and long term thinking that it would better serve them to work on the relationship and have emotional stability in the long run. Maybe we are given the illusion that we can meet people easily because of living in big cities, and having access via the internet to a world of men and women options out there. Most men struggle and have less options than women so are usually not wanting to leave relationships as easily in general. Interesting video by Alexander Grace.

Disclaimer: These are not my words but an interesting thread I came across elsewhere and would like to share, and have a healthy discussion on. Just a definition of Hypergamy : the action of marrying or forming a sexual relationship with a person of a superior sociological or educational background. Women's instinct to mate with superiors genes basically for the betterment of the species (evolution) Unless you're chad, famous or a sociopath - you won't have multiple women in love with you at the same time. Unless you're a ridiculously beautiful and sweet woman - you won't ever marry an "elite high value man™" Hypergamy and polygamy whilst complementary, are not sustainable. They are not sustainable, because they exclude the vast majority of the population. Most men are by definition, not elite high value men. Most women are not exceptionally beautiful and chaste, nor of the correct temperament and genetics to be marriageable for an elite man. The role of religion in society, in large part, is to regulate the dysfunction that results from these instincts. It forces the men who can have many women to pick one, and all the average woman who think they deserve a top 0.1% man to date a man at their own level. So civilizational monogamy is probably the greatest gift of religion. It essentially ensures the vast majority of the population gets a mate, by curbing natural instincts and holding people accountable to their families and communities. Atomised irreligiosity breaks this. You won't "fix society" if you allow hypergamy and polygamy to run amok unchecked. Without adequate social pressure, most women would rather die alone surrounded by cats, than date a man at or just above their own level - especially if a superior man used and left her before. A woman who has had sex with top tier men thinks she is deserving of a top tier man for marriage and refuses to "lower her standards" - not realising that she never met those men's standards for marriage to begin with - hence why they're gone. Men sleep with women they wouldn't marry and can detach emotion from sex. So women are not only naturally predisposed to feel entitled to the best for no logical reason whatsoever, irrespective of their own value and what they bring to the table, but are furthermore susceptible to even greater delusion when said men give them an oxytocin induced taste. This is why the dating market, like so many markets, needs regulation. When it's laissez-faire, the majority of people lose out whilst a few winners get more than their fill. And society stops working properly when the majority of people are forever single or divorced. Traditional Abrahamic religion of course, is that form of regulation. Extreme feminism is the antithesis, because it is anti-regulation. It promotes a free for all, which naturally means a lot of sex for a minority of men, and a dearth of loving committed relationships for most women. You can, quite literally, trace the problems with the mating market today back to the absence of religion. What other system regulates mating practices? None. Doesn't matter how you feel about God or religion - that's irrelevant. What's important is a functioning system. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As leo mentioned in one of his videos regarding we need regulation on devilry ie in our hunter gatherer days we could get by without much regulation but at scale we need government and regulation or else civilisation won't work. In today's society the only regulation force on our sexuality is ourselves. It is only our level of awareness of our human nature and by choice and consciousness we can make decisions that are good for us in the long term and for society at large. This will be the greatest test of our times.

@Emerald I understand where your coming from. Its not even about the 1%. I guess people use the extreme end to get the point across. Lets say if even 70% of men are attractive enough and able to get a partner. How does society look if 30% who aren't able to stay single even though they don't desire too. The other 30% of women who those men could partner with, maybe those women decide they'd rather not go with them and live out their aspirations as they have the option to do so in todays free world, and there is no compulsion for them to be with those men because women don't depend those men for their livelihood. Their is equality of outcome and equality of opportunity. You could say a stage green free love society is in a sense capitalistic, because it is a free market where everyone has equality of opportunity to get the mate they'd like. In the past they pretty much enforced equality of outcome ie every man and woman has a partner. It's the same way as how the far left try to enforce equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity. Interesting way of looking at the situation. Maybe in the past it would have a destabilising affect on society. But now we have pornography, and other avenues of entertainment to almost satiate / sedate these men. Yet, we still get some who can't handle the pressure of their sexual urge and let it out in a grim fashion. We had a shooting here in UK last month in Plymouth by a self professed incel in fact killing a few people including his mother. A lot of the school shooters were in similar situations. I think for women the sexual urge isn't as intense as it is for men. Men can be horny most of the time where as for women its with the right man in the right context and setting.

This guy has very interesting insights in his approach to male/female dynamics. He isn't red pilled or bitter either.

The only mistake is ignorance, but even that is not a mistake. How can we judge people when they don't act consciously, they aren't even the ones acting. Their biology, instincts, impulses and biases are running the show. Forgive them for they know not what they do, much of humanity is asleep to themselves and their actions. Our society has to move from ignorance to intelligence.

Mistakes may be the wrong word as it denotes shame. Same with whats good and bad, but in reality there is cause and affect. There are actions and their consequences, the only question is a what consequences come from certain actions of ours and are we willing to deal with them as such. Agreed, too much head and not enough heart loses the magic in life. But at the same time, their are men struggling who wish to know how things work as they couldn't learn naturally.

This topic is on the dating forum where their has been a interesting back and forth of opinions and insights.

Fundamentally, biological evolution is slow, cultural evolution is fast, this is the essential problem humanity is facing today. Our lizard brains simply haven't had enough time to adapt to the chaos of the modern age. We have to live from our intelligence rather than instinct, from compulsion (of our instincts) to conciseness ( of how we'd like society to be ). The challenge is it's very hard to discard our natural instincts and in spiral dynamics lower stages are integrated, we have to integrates and live harmoniously with the lower level, that includes the lower parts of ourselves, work with out nature. Its for this reason we have an obesity problem and high divorce rates. Our environment is triggering those instincts in a un healthy fashion. In past environments our instincts didn't destroy us as we had active lifestyles and limited high caloric food, and limited access to partners or by force of religion were not allowed to sleep around easily. Freedom of any kind confers the danger of making the wrong decision, instinctual decisions that in the modern environment can cause us and society harm. Sure, we are free now but we are not free and liberated from ourselves and our instinct, yet.. only the awakened ones are, the sages, the budhha's. On a long enough time scale reality wins, and all what we are going through is our evolution on the path to awakening from our beast nature to our buddha nature. We are currently in limbo between the two, but in order to grow towards the sky, the tree needs to be rooted in the soil also. Our lowest nature is the stepping stone to higher things, we can't discard that stepping stone or deny its existence. The mud, the lower is from where we grow to the heavens.

To start with see that there is a problem, then we can figure out solutions. But yes your right, there is no problem. Everyone is in a happy stable relationships and not alone and suffering in our society. Morgan Stanley with all their billions are delusional also to be investing money to research into trends of how over half the population of mating age will be living alone by 2030 and how this impacts real estate and the wider economy. https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/womens-impact-on-the-economy The stage green, free love utopia that people think will exist where everyone is loved is a disney dream at least in the short to medium term. The people on this forum may be able to love each other despite their not being any attraction but this is under 1 percent of the population. People aren't evolved enough, men aren't evolved enough to love a unattractive lady in the romantic sense, and neither are women to love a weak man who they have to take care of. Until we get to the point where a woman will see the weakest men and consciously be able to say, this man isn't getting any love so I will love him un conditionally, even though Im not attracted to them as it would be better for our society and stop movements such as incels or extreme red pill from propping up, only then can that society function. Our culture and psychology may think in stage green, but our biology will takes thousands of years to evolve to stage green and for it to happen very naturally for us. Nature influences our genes, but we are also able to influence our genes by what we select for and pro create with, just that this takes a very very long time. Maybe in a thousand years babies will be born who are able to love unconditionally without attraction, who knows..

Women want men in touch with their femininity as the ladies have mentioned, but they want strong men in touch with their feminine, not weak. The masculine essence is strength, the feminine softness. Balanced men would be mostly masculine with some feminine to round them off and women mostly feminine with some masculine to round them off. If women were completely feminine without the masculine they would be too easily dominated over and have no boundaries. If men are too masculine they are un empathetic and too harsh. Now days men are lacking their masculinity, and the few that are in touch with it are so in a toxic way. The bad boys, jerks, etc and the music industry specifically hip hop exhibits toxic masculinity, not tempered by any femininity. Most men today are nice guys, but they lack the masculine. Women want a man who wants them, but does not need them as they are emotional spiritually strong amongst them selves. If men were stronger physically ( in touch with their sexuality and able to flirt ), emotionally ( not unavailable but resilient, to be a pillar for his woman and go through the harsh realities of life ), mentally ( in his perspective and way he views him self and the world, in a positive light and that he has worth and is esteemed ) and spiritually strong ( so he feels at home in himself and the world and at ease around women ). Men of strength are relaxed, and when relaxed they can be funnier, witty, non needy, speak clearly and project their voice, and empathetic towards women for if he is in fear of women how can he care for her when he's worried about caring for himself and his self image. In turn women feel relaxed around such men and secure, and when they are safe they can rest in their femininity and soften up. Lack of strong men causes women to have to be excessively strong themselves, at the expense of their softness. Hence, in todays world we have more stronger behaviours which men aren't attracted to such as swearing, combativeness, attitude etc. And for their to be attraction there needs to be a polarity of the masculine and feminine.

Very constructive reply my friend, so much wisdom and feedback. Voluntary celibacy is fine, but most men aren't doing it voluntarily. Their biology pulls at them and we must have sympathy for such people. Once the clutches of biology and their hormones starts weakening on men in their later years only then can they be at some ease and look to other aspects of life not dominated by sex. That or spiritual work from a younger age. Our society pedestalises sex and its all around us, naturally as sex sells to our lower nature, it naturally makes every man think thats what they ought to shoot for. We are a over sexualised society yet undersexed people. And women suffer also for the caricature of the women put on display, the unrealistic shapes of Kardashians etc. Maybe from a sexual repressive society this was a needed swing the other way of the pendulum so we aren't scared of shamed for our sexuality but it needs to come back to balance now. I won't entertain your further comments unless they have some substance.

I think there are many causes for the lack of strength in men today in its many forms physical, social, emotional, etc. On the physical side the access we have to high caloric foods we'r designed to crave and the sedentary lifestyle with our modern day office jobs. Emotional due to unstable family upbringings from childhood, not having a father in the picture to show what masculinity and strength should look like then going into a education system where majority of teachers are female so again not many can see and learn what the masculine is like through osmosis. Then the social side because we grow up behind screens now we'r more cut off from the opposite sex and don't develop those social skills we need. Online dating takes the harsh rejection out for men, they would rather avoid the effort and embarrassment of in person rejection. So everything has moved online. Problem there is that women are attracted to a lot more than just looks and those qualities aren't able to be shown online, so naturally men swipe more and women are more selective in the swipes and skews to top percentile of men. This has been shown again and again in studies. Also, todays environment is pretty hostile towards men. The me too movement which is valid, was the experience of a few percent of the population that got projected out as if its most men who are like that, this created a fear in a lot of men to now approach women ( which their weren't enough men doing anyway ) or for men to consider meeting their partners through work ( men won't even be alone with a woman in a office now days let alone flirt ). The pick up industry arose to correct mens social ills in good faith, obviously what it turned into did have shades of toxicity. But when men need to learn these skills and it is a skill, society shouldn't take elements of it and bash / cancel the whole ordeal. Even red pill etc has elements of truth to it, within anything there will be shades of toxicity of course but to blow those out of proportion and shut down the whole thing is a dis service. Its an easy out. If whenever women discussed mens issues men took something slightly demeaning and focused on it and said thats misandry,stop all this that wouldn't be helpful. There are plenty of women talk shows but very few for men to solve their problems, so forums and platforms were created for this. Men need to learn to develop themselves, and women need stronger better men today more than ever. The guys who'v had it good with women can't just say be your self bro, or be cool. If most guys were just them selves they'd creep girls out. Guys have to be their strongest selves and approach from a position of strength.