zazen

I believe there is some substance and something we can learn from it yes. By top man it means their top man, the best they think they can get, it will differ slightly for everyone of course. Not necessarily the prince or ceo of a company. ''The best guys to have relationships with are average men'' correct but a lot of women can over look these men they are average. Especially now that women are earning. Women value higher earners - that is a man with security/resources to ensure survival on a certain level, a lot of it is subconscious, and likewise men out of ego wouldn't feel comfortable if their partner earned more than them. But because that is what women value in men, they project this onto themselves and so if they are higher earners also value them selves to that higher status. And so the standard is set that men must meet that level or above for them to even consider certain men as options. Women are out competing men in education today in fact, and theres less men on that level. This isn't how you view it but how a lot women would. There are exceptions to the rule of women earning more than men and being in relationships, but that is the exception. Like Loba mentioned the dating game has changed, yes it has.

Im simply answering? Sure. Whats the delusion then.. and you can't simply say biology, thats a simple answer my friend. All is love. Love it! Yea, when a women is deeply in love she becomes tunnel visioned on that one guy, its a beautiful bubble thats created between the two. The art is in maintaining that bubble over long periods of time as most relationships don't last long. In the past we were monogamous for life, now we are monogamous one at a time! The tide is turning.. must be for the thread to have this many views in a day or so. Interesting discussion for sure, and all insights including Emeralds.

Maybe she deeply wants a family life and to fulfil her maternal instinct. Of course, women don't just have to be mothers biologically by birth but can be motherly in essence to their community also. A few of my female friends in their 30's are single and want the same and are anxious about being able to find someone to share their life with. We feel their pain and wish to know why things are the way they are and what we can do to maybe help.

The original post aren't my words. I think the author was just driving the point home, the 1% percent man is using the extreme to make those points but of course its not like just the 1% man is attractive and 99% aren't. That doesn't discount the fact that there is inequality naturally in the dating pool. Men may be biologically sufficient for women, but they lack emotional mental spiritual strength to attract women, and that is a problem today. Most women won't share men as they are inclined to monogamy and thats what makes it hard. They think, wait for or believe they can secure that top man who would be monogamous with them but that guy plays around. They hold off and disregard other suitors who would be happily partnered with her while she waits and gets older. I don't have low self esteem, I have a very good sex life in fact and great family friends, am in great health etc. Im objectively trying to discuss what is happening around us in society and from what I can see men and women in my life or who I come across suffering.

There are many with anecdotal experience as Raptorsin is point out within his life also. Its not all abstraction. Your proving the point. ''Looking for a good guy “on paper” can really screw over actual connection''. Sure you and other women on this forum may not have such a list as your more consciously evolved but I'd wager most women in the population do and with good reason. Birthing children is costly in time, capital, energy and they need to secure and have standards with who they will mate with so they don't just get left behind to raise the child alone. ''But it’s still nonsense because it isn’t actually based in reality. It’s just a big system of abstract ideas that SEEM like reality because lots of misguided and inexperienced young men believe them and they’re all over on the internet.'' Yeah nothings based in reality. Biological evolution is just an abstract idea also. As @Windappreciator said I should drop the biology delusion. Not sure how I'll type my messages out with out my biological hand, I'll try using my psychology and energy.

I know attraction is a pre-requisite for romantic connection, biology fits into that so how does it not fit. You don't have any biology, you used your biology (hands) to type this message out. No one needs to pretend to be attracted in that society, yes but then what happens in a free for all society where polyamry exists and we let the chips fall where they may. If we aren't evolved enough a subset of men will get most of the access and the remaining men will be disregarded. Unless they become celibates and channel their sexuality into genius to better the community. But like @Raptorsin7 says above, their is a lag. The lag is between our cultural evolution which is fast, and only gets faster with technology and our physical biology and psychology which takes much much longer.

Agreed. The real test is once the honey moon period fades, a lot of couples also make long term decisions (ie parter up, marry) on short term feelings like the honey moon period.

Are we already are pretty much in a free society where no one is being pushed together anymore? Women are liberated and thank god for that. Women don't need to come to men for dependancy financially, but are women out of love and higher consciousness loving just anybody , even if the guy is weak and so with men. Would men be able to love someone they aren't biologically attracted to. Our biologies will work against us but thats where conscious development and evolution takes place. It is utopian, yes the possibility is there, and maybe us on this forum are at that level somewhat but we'r talking about larger society, this forum makes up less than a percent of the world. We need each other more than ever rite now as every one is living atomised lives in big cities which are fast paced, and cut off from each other behind screens. Its a un healthy way of living, working many hours, living alone is grating on the soul. Wonder how communal living would work at scale.

Women can consolidate on the best they can get eventually to settle with. But are they happy in those marriages, and do they last. 50% divorce rates, 70% initiated by women. Once the maternal instinct to procreate is fulfilled, the sex and spark dries up for most couples, but the romance is missed and we seek that outside of marriage. A lot of marriages can end up just being about security, rather than stimulation. We all want a roller coaster, the safety of the ride but yet its stimulating. The problem is the exciting / stimulating romances aren't always the most secure, and the secure relationships aren't always the most emotionally fulfilling. Romance novels fly off bookshelves. Shows like the latest Sex life show this dynamic at work, 50 shades shows the guy that has both qualities. Titanic, where Rose was fixated on her lover Di Caprio. Intense love like that can have an affect or this kind of media wouldn't resonate with so many women.

I get where your coming from. Men need to get up, get out and start living in the world. I wish for a free society also, and that divorces wouldn't destroy couples lives through the predatory court system, and that children wouldn't be affected hugely being brought up in a unstable environment. But we aren't evolved enough to withstand high divorce rate without any casualties and it having no ripple effect on society at large. Wishful thinking.

Its not entirely just due to feminism or that feminism is bad, but because of technological advancements. For example, male sexuality has been outsourced to porn. The drive to achieve has been outsourced to gaming. Both satiate those drives in men and so the younger generation aren't playing in the real world anymore. Hypothetically even if feminism ideologically disappeared tomorrow, we are still being crippled and our instincts are getting the best of us in the modern day due to the technology we live with. Women are putting off and not ''settling''. I have female friends who dated athletes, close to royalty, and the so called alpha types and who compare every relationship the go into to those guys of their past. The emotional response and 'spark' they felt, they don't get from guys less than them, its almost as if they have been desensitised. Also, the way a lot of them discard or dump these women causes these women to get bitter and project that all men are like that which isn't the case. Morgan Stanley have a whole report called the Sheconomy, preparing investment trends for the big corps, from their report ''Based on Census Bureau historical data and Morgan Stanley forecasts, 45% of prime working age women (ages 25-44) will be single by 2030—the largest share in history—up from 41% in 2018.'' This is a trend mostly in urbanised bigger cities, and the rate of urbanisation is increasing. Sex and the city wasn't just a series but a real phenomena.

Like you said in our last line, the problem is men in the younger generation aren't checking those boxes. You have a positive masculinity which is great and what we should all strive for rather than the toxic masculinity promoted in hip hop or bro culture I agree.

Solution to a problem that doesn't exist? Yup, theres no problem. No red pill, incel, black pill, mgtow, high divorce rates, no sexless society like Japan. No problem at all to look into and understand.

@FlyingLotus I'll check it out. Im new here so go easy on me : p It's all in good faith and love.

Yes, biology and psychology are intermeshed and influence each other greatly. If someone attractive jokes around and makes someone laugh, it triggers psychologically which influences their biology. As the saying goes, women fall in love with their ears and men with their eyes. Status comes in many forms. A male strong on a physical, emotional, financial, social, spiritual level can all display status in the eyes of women. It's not as simple as rich man = status = attractive. Theirs different strengths men can display, and women can respond to in attraction. This is reason enough for men not to become depressed, because a lot can be worked on that is in their control. Their body, their attitude, their social skills, humor, emotional resilience (not being unavailable/cold as a lot of the bro's would advise lol)

Psychology can't over ride our biology. Neither can culture supersede it. If psychologically you are developed and a woman came up to you and started rubbing on you, your biology is going to respond. Of course unless you are a Buddha, enlightened or a yogi but lets be realistic, we'r speaking about the general population.

A holistic perspective includes the material and the spiritual. The blind side of materialists is they exalt only our animal nature (and the cruel darwinian zero sum game aspect of it only) BUT the blind side of so called spiritualists is they exalt only our divine nature and deny the animal nature (as its cold and hurts our sense of morality on some level) and think all is just lovey dovey. The fact these truths sting a little is good, it shows sensitivity and that we are human and attuned to something higher in us that wishes to move away from that animal instinct, and to move towards intelligent living.

So biology doesn't exist? Yes, psychology can affect our biology and vica versa. We are souls incarnate into flesh. Carnate comes from carnal - latin root flesh. Carnival (celebration of flesh - drink dance feast) carnivore (flesh eater) etc. We are souls in flesh (the formless in form), you can't deny the flesh or the form we are in, our biology. It's not either or, its both and. A holistic perspective includes the material and the spiritual. The blind side of materialists is they exalt only our animal nature (and the cruel darwinian zero sum game aspect of it only) BUT the blind side of so called spiritualists is they exalt only our divine nature and deny the animal nature (as its cold and hurts our sense of morality on some level) and think all is just lovey dovey. The fact these truths sting a little is good, it shows sensitivity and that we are human and attuned to something higher in us that wishes to move away from that animal instinct, and to move towards intelligent living.

Elsewhere in this thread I had written this. Yes, what people feel is love in lower case, is just our biology at work drawing us closer and flooding us with feel good chemicals in order to procreate and propagate the species. Underlying all this is Love with a capital L, that is god / life. Love is embedded in reality, including us. It is the animating force that moves all form including man and woman to its own realisation. God is the seed, we are the flowering. In moments of orgasm and flooded with chemicals, we can forget ourselves, and come into union. When the ego is dropped in moments orgasm/union, Love is revealed to us. Although this moment is temporary and short lived, but it gives man a experience of the beyond, they know their is more to this life than just surface. The other person was just the trigger that helped us feel this union. Of course, we are able to come to such states without the other and with meditation/awakening. That is the beauty of human relationship and the design of evolution, our animal nature is used to reveal to us our divine nature. It is god in play, in hide and seek. ---------------------- A holistic perspective includes both the material and the spiritual. The blind side of materialists is they exalt only our animal nature (and the cruel darwinian zero sum game aspect of it only) BUT the blind side of so called spiritualists is they exalt only our divine nature and deny the animal nature (as its cold and hurts our sense of morality on some level) and think all is just lovey dovey. The fact these truths sting a little is good, it shows sensitivity and that we are human and attuned to something higher in us that wishes to move away from that animal instinct, and to move towards intelligent living.

@FlyingLotus Thank you for the links, Teal swan is amazing. Im actually fine and had a very healthy upbringing and amazing relationships. The original post was actual content from else where that I found interesting and wanted the forums insight on. If you go through some of my later comments in the thread I think you'll see my perspective more clearly and that is not all negative or that I'm hurt. @Emerald Im being as based in reality as much as possible. You'v overlooked my previous responses to your comments. I'v felt love and am loved in life by family and friends. But to keep these realities in the dark and not understand it is what is hurting a lot of people out there so better to understand our own biology and why we do what we do. Our culture has evolved drastically, but our biologies have not. The fundamental problems we face, are that we live with our primal instinct in a modern environment, if those instincts aren't tempered with our intelligence we go into chaos. It seems you like the idea of reality, rather than reality itself. I see reality and people for what it is and what they are, in its animal aspect and its divine also aspect and love it despite itself for what it is. @Raptorsin7 Its unfortunate indeed. I think I came with substance, delivered in style, and speedily but hey. As Marry Poppin's say, a spoonful of sugar,helps the medicine go down.

First define masculinity, then add the lens of green. The essence of masculinity is strength, feminine is softness. A strong masculinity at stage green will basically be in the service of green values - equality, environment, justice and rights. Tony stark comes to mind. Remember, that each stage integrates the below stage. You can be stage green and still be a billionaire like Tony Stark or Batman, you live amongst a orange world but with a green perspective. You have to work within the matrix, to shift the matrix after all.

Status isn't just someone who is a ceo or star. Emotional strength is held in higher status/regard in the mind of women also, all forms of strength are in some way status for women, be it physical, emotional, mental, social, financial and spiritual. Besides the elite social circles even amongst the average places, there is always those few men who get women's attention. They may not have financial strength but they have emotion strength , are funny , know how to socialise etc. In the past these men wouldn't be able to just sleep around with women because of social stigma, and every women had a mate who would come knocking on that mans door. Today its a different story, and college has a hook up / hoe phase culture. So now these women have intense emotional experiences with these men which can taint them in their later years and in their future relationships. They crave the sex they got from such men but the security of the nice guy who is too timid in that department. Her body wants the alpha, but her mind tells her to stay with the stable/secure man for long term. This split causes emotional distress in women, and why they find it harder to happy in relationships. Not only do they bring financial debt from the degrees, but emotional debt you have to deal with of their past hook ups with such men. I say all this with the utmost empathy for both men and women. Not sure what the solution could be. Theres clearly a mismatch of our instinct to our environment. The environment tugs away at our animal instincts, that is the problem we face today.

When girls miss a masculine presence when young they feel insecure and at threat, or if they were only exposed to toxic masculinity in the form of their father, that becomes imprinted in them as to how men are. So the need for security through the strength of man is craved. This leads them to to gravitate towards toxic strength as its much more easily seen and visible/visceral than positive strength, they are in a fight or flight state and need strength of any kind, as soon as possible. Most men are nice guys in fact, they are the guys who are usually friend zoned or the more silent types even and can be overlooked as as sexual option. They have been cut off from their masculinity in a similar way , due to lack of masculine role models / fathers growing up and a culture which is mostly feminising and saying masculinity is bad. School teachers are mostly women also so where can man learn what it is to be a healthy man - all the media shows are Dan bilzerian and rap music as thats what drives view/clicks. Attached to that is the whole me too movement which is valid, but men are ever more scared of getting in touch with their sexuality in a healthy way and interacting with women in such a way. Breakdown of the family unity, at a micro level leads to the breakdown of society at the macro and that is what we see. Don't be nice or bad but the good guy, the middle way. Nice - from the root word in latin is nescius which means ignorant. What nice guys miss is that they are ignorant of their masculine edge, they have strength of intellect and heart possibly but not so much of their physical, they aren't embodied. Bad guys are all balls and no head, nice guys mostly head and no balls. The good guy has his balls head and heart integrated.

Agreed and aware of this, we have to do better as a society to change this. Evolutionary psychology only came about 40/50 years ago and so we are better able to understand our nature and why we act the way we act. The more we move from ignorance to understanding the more compassion will arise. We see these themes played in many areas in media and culture, for example beauty and the beast. The beast is man in his animal nature, it is raw strength in the negative, but not sophisticated. The beauty (that is in all women) tames that strength and brings the beasts strength into the positive, and that has been the civilising power the feminine has had on the masculine over time. Although in todays day men are over civilised to the point now lacking strength in any form and masculinity is looked down upon. Which lends to women having to compensate and lose their softness in the process for they feel insecure once again. The past had women insecure in fear of negative strength, the modern day has women insecure due to lack of positive strength of men. We have soft and strong in all of us. The integrated man is mostly strong, with a dab of softness to round out his being. The women who is all soft without any strength is a door mat ready to be imposed on by predatory males. Today's world has over corrected this imbalance.

Everything has to be a pill these days, pill popper galore. Just see life for what it is and live accordingly. Women's animal nature rewards 'toxic' masculinity but not women's divine nature, they struggle because their body says one thing but something else in them says another, that this man is bad for me. In the past it wasn't rewarded but simply imposed on women, although today women can still gravitate towards 'toxic' masculinity. The 'bad boys' or 'barbaric men' on a deep level are displaying strength, although in its negative form. Their biology and emotion responds to it and over rides their logic. If their were stronger men in their positive form, they wouldn't gravitate towards the negative masculinity, but today positive masculinity is lacking. Us men need to change that. First by understanding, then by overcoming.