The Renaissance Man

Context: Todd V is a pick up artist that used to be a RSD coach. He's known for being very methodical in his cold approach style, but here you can see how he's also very methodical in his marketing. You may find some insights for your own business. I haven't purchased any of his product, so this is all information you can gather from his socials and website. I did this because I'm interested in marketing and I was familiar with Todd. Free Layer The funnel starts with free content, on social media. YouTube is probably the main one. YouTube is the platform that allows most trust to be built, because of the longer exposure. The next level is the two lead magnets: A collection of infields A course on inner game To unlock these you give your email, where email marketing begins. Newsletters contain little value, but are not bothering to read. Each of them has one or multiple pitches. Some of them are notifications for "special sales", more on that in a minute. This is all the free stuff. Todd is giving loads of value for free, and you start to trust him more and more. You create a positive association, start to interpret him as an authority figure, he starts to stand out as someone who is a viable solution to solve your dating problems. Course Layer Todd sells multiple products/services, but they're very purposefully structured. The first paid layer are the courses. There are 4 of them, all one-time purchases: The System (his overall framework for cold approach) €397 Verbal Game Academy (conversation) €597 Value Masterclass (conveying value & attractiveness) €347 Online Dating Academy €397 Together, the 4 courses provide a very solid dating foundation. Despite that, they are only the tip of the iceberg. Todd could price them higher, but he doesn't, because they're meant to be a low-entry barrier to create even more trust and get people to the real juice: the next layer. In fact, he routinely discounts the 4 courses at €197, which allows for the compelling [50% off!] headline. Coaching Layer The courses are pre-recorded, the coaching is tailored to you. And it's much more expensive. Todd offers 3 services, some are to small groups, some are online, some are still one-to-many. Mentorship Program €400/month with community, access to coaches for questions, and some live Q&As Digital Black Belt €300/week all about online dating, helps you create a profile, create pictures with AI (yes), and more In-Person Bootcamp €1000/day the classic cold approach bootcamp As you can can see, coaching costs the same as a course... per month, per week or even per day. The first two are online, the bootcamp is in person. Memberships are known to be far more profitable than one-time purchases. To lower the entry barrier to the subscriptions, there's often a "free trial" giving the first month or the first couple weeks at $1 (I guess to collect credit card information and remove friction through auto-billing future payments). You can/have to book a sales call for some of those. I think this is about 85% of his marketing. You could analyze his landing page's copy, or his video's CTAs, but this is the main funnel.

I haven't read the replies to your post but I have read your post. I think you're right, but you're also underestimating the forum. I believe the truth is in the middle in this case. You have probably experienced how quickly learning about certain concepts, especially about beliefs and epistemology, can make you vertically develop. It's insane. That is true development. You can see it when dealing with other people. They just don't see their blindness. That can happen in 6 months. That has happened to a lot of people here in 6 months. There's no denying that. New scenarios, worldviews that were not mentioned in any book or episode, yet the ability to maintain a detachment and catch the self-deception earlier than 99% of people. This doesn't mean zero self-deception, but it means far better than normal. In months. So the idea that a stage must take decades is false to me. It may be true if you actually stumble your way through development, not being aware it even exists. Only growing through experience and the various discrepancies that hopefully you start to notice. Then it takes decades. But if the light is shown straight to the problematic point, you can really develop certain areas at warp speed. And that's not even an opinion. I think it's quite common for people in this forum to have had this warp-speed perspective development in months or a couple years. Obviously there will always be the loud minority of people who are 4 stages earlier and make crazy claims.

@MsNobody @Leo Gura Drop the YT URL into NotebookLM by Google, tell it to give you the main points to contemplate, done. The solution is already here

@Something Funny We need a distinction. The word "understanding" is creating confusion. We're talking about two kinds of understanding here. This is recognition/memorization. We can call this "shallow understanding". This requires "deep understanding", which is not memorization or recognition, but it requires a grasp of the underlying principles, and an ability to move the pieces around and view them from whichever perspective you need and please. It's obviously on a spectrum, but having a clear distinction helps. Yes, unconsciously, in your mind, a model of how spiral dynamics works is developing. Can you feel the model? It feels like a cohesive, interconnected thing. Compare that to the scattered confusion you may have about the Proofs of God video. No cohesive model, only scattered pieces. That's the difference between deep understanding and shallow understanding. Leo is speaking english, and he follows a clear line of logic. Of course there's some understanding. But the trap is that it's only shallow, but you don't see it... until you try to explain it. I suggest that by actively looking for the model underneath, you can actually shortcut the process, and jump much closer to deep understanding, without needing "dumb repetition". Obviously some topics are just complex and you can't just go to deep understanding in one go. But it's not surprising to see a 5x improvement in how much it takes to get to deep understanding.

@Flowerfaeiry Let's say you're on one side of a corner. And on the other side there may or may not be another person. Would you be able to know if the another person is behind the corner just from the energy? If a person makes a sound behind a corner I hear it, after all. So it should be the same for energy, right?

@Arnam Motivation is too complex for a simple solution like the one you're looking for. No reply under this post will ever make your mind go David Goggins. Motivation is complex but it can be understood. I suggest you do a deep dive on motivation, reading 3-5 books on it, and trying to really get it. Pro-tip: clarity and habits are 90% of motivation. Clarity over what you want and clarity over the steps to get there, all the way to your hourly tasks. And for habits, it's mainly about making distractions invisible, and removing any friction for work and good habits.

@Something Funny Good question. Getting this right is actually a revolutionary skill, because it skyrockets your understanding of everything. The problem is that after watching a video you only have an illusion of understanding. You say you have no issue with understanding, but I say that's an illusion. I instead guess the reality is that you have a bunch of scattered ideas, and the interconnected understanding is fuzzy at best. Is this correct? When you study, try to go to the "model" that's behind the single bits of knowledge. Try to really understand the topic. I'm talking while you're studying, not after or in a review. I still suggest you take notes, but that's not the core issue here. From this new approach to learning, explaining the topic clearly, which you now struggle with, will become automatic. Because it's already all fleshed out in your mind. I know this advice sounds abstract, but it's like that on purpose: the task is pretty simple. Go to the underlying "model", the actual understanding, and not the memorization of the insights. An example might help. If you're studying Spiral Dynamics, you may hear from Leo a list of values, characteristics and examples. Normally, you'd take notes, and think: ok, stage orange has these traits. Understanding on the other hand means going one layer deeper. Why those specific traits? What do they have in common? What is it like to be a mind at stage orange? Why does it behave that way? Why can't it see the things Green sees? How does stage orange work? And as you answer, a model starts developing in your mind. A model of stage orange, holistic, complete, logical. That's understanding, and that's what you're looking for. You'll be suprised when from that new perspective, you'll be able to generate your own characteristics and examples with ease! Because you'll finally get it. Leo gets it, that's why he's able to talk about topics that way. He hasn't just memorized facts on the surface. He gets them. Consciously or not, his mind goes through the process I laid out in this reply. Just a shift in your approach to learning can make you 10x, no effort. PS - Studying how learning works - Meta-Learning - is a big thing of mine. This is my bread and butter, so I get what you're saying, I'm not just giving the first bunch of tips that came to mind.

Alex Hormozi! Especially the two books

Majed already made up his mind long before this conversation. It's no use discussing with logic. I want to understand why that's his perspective from his mouth (I guess fingers). That's where the juice is at.

Have you written a thread on this? I'm curious it sounds wild

@Emerald Thank you, that was very very insightful. Now I understand what you mean, it's quite illuminating to realize from a man's perspective. So I guess this risk isn't too frequent, given the ability an attractive man has to woo a woman.

Is this true? How do you know it's true? How did you verify this claim? I'm not saying it's false either. I'm asking you, as that's quite the claim you're making. Do you personally know high value self respecting men? Be honest though. Could this be false? How do you know it's true?

@yetineti Keep in mind this was in the context of dating women, not in the context of talking to women on a forum. So the phrase "don't speak hard truths to women" wasn't intended to be taken universally. If he doesn't speak hard truths to women he dates, then it's integrity. Doesn't mean I agree with Leo's POV on the children thread by the way. This thread isn't about women but about integrity.

The clickbait game on this thread is wild lol

Is writing to confirm the title related to the structure problem in some way? Why is that a priority? Just to understand why she said that as a final response to your asks. By "prepared for that" you mean because you're asking too much? If that's the case, you could tell her about your concern that you're afraid you're asking too much, and maybe asking her what she would prefer, in case you have [insert hypothetical future problem] in the future. That way next time you know. Hmmm I thought the structure is the proper connection of the individual ideas. How can you have a good structure that gives you no guarantees? Isn't the proper connection of ideas the way you come up with a structure in the first place? Maybe you have some framework you were told to follow, and it clashes with the structure that would more naturally emerge from the ideas, and that's the difference I'm not getting. Is that it?

Ok from this it seems more about maintaining a kernel of rationality and perspective, more so than being strictly about having a man being in the Lover role. You didn't really mention the roles in this reply so I still can't fully get the dynamic at work, because it seems to not be just about maintaining some "rational distance" and not jumping feet-first into it. In your post you clearly stated how the Masculine Lover and Feminine Beloved dynamic is a necessity, because a man in the Beloved role will end up leaving. And also that he either naturally loves you, or he never will. And finally, that to make him "stay there", you must stay in your Beloved role. Am I getting this right? So my two questions from before are still open: How do you suggest the woman who's really into the man should behave in later phases of dating? How long should she maintain this dynamic going, even though emotionally she wants to invest a lot into the relationship? Does it depend on some factors? Is there a risk to take the advice of the Beloved too extremely, and resulting "too cold", ending up losing what would've been a good man? Where do you think that "too much" level is?

Hey Judy, I can tell you that by reading this what I feel is that the fact you've taken notes, and made several attempts shows that you've been hard working, instead of lazy and completely afraid and paralyzed. A professor sees the difference between hard work and laziness. Let me see if I understand the problem: it seems to be about how to structure your thesis. In particular this arises from the interconnectedness of the topic, where there's not a clear logical line but the information flows in every direction. Also it seems the problem is not about structuring or writing a thesis, but your thesis, because of the topic. Am I getting this right? First, as I said, your struggle seems ABSOLUTELY legitimate. And while you may be far more anxious than the average student, your problem feels normal in this situation. And regardless of the individual's anxiety, a very complex task is still very damn complex. I don't know your professor personally, but it seems like feedback on how to structure your thesis would be a valid and very important request, and she'd understand that. Second, I would seriously use AI (DeepSeek, ChatGPT, Claude), they're all free, but even the paid version could be worth it, since it's a special occasion, to help you in developing the structure. If you articulate the problem clearly, telling it exactly why and where you're struggling, and iterating response after response, I believe you can make some solid progress and gain a lot of clarity. I'm talking seriously, AI. I don't know how often you use AI, but I truly believe it would help. It's like having a second helping professor, with the difference it can answer infinite questions.

As a man, I'm trying to really understand your points about the Masculine Lover and Feminine Beloved. It seems like this "inauthentic" dynamic (inauthentic because often the woman needs to dominate her authentic feelings, not because it's problematic) needs to be present out of necessity, because only a man that naturally falls under the Lover role initially will create healthy ground for a relationship. So it's a matter of sorting, once again. It also seems like even if he falls naturally under the Lover role, the woman must still watch out and behave as the Beloved, because otherwise she may push him into the Beloved, even though he wasn't naturally there. Is this all correct? I have two questions: How do you suggest the woman who's really into the man should behave in later phases of dating? How long should she maintain this dynamic going, even though emotionally she wants to invest a lot into the relationship? Does it depend on some factors? Is there a risk to take the advice of the Beloved too extremely, and resulting "too cold", ending up losing what would've been a good man? Where do you think that "too much" level is?

You could reduce your caffeine intake gradually instead of going cold turkey. Eventually the headaches go away, but a softer transition may be better for you, since you describe them as debilitating.

I agree, and I was surprised by the name of the thread. How can that work for an adult, developed person? I feel everybody here has a different idea in their mind about what the masculine and feminine are, and how they can work together. And I also am very unclear on what masculine and feminine are. I can't pinpoint them in a sophisticated way. The idea of the child is extreme and shallow, but it has some truth deep in it. So where's the balance? What's the better, integrated version? I'd appreciate some perspective on this, if any of you can help.

@OMG Brother! Thanks for sharing. I read through all your story, it seems your LP is still to do coaching, right? You enrolled in a coaching school, so you should kind of know how the daily life at work of a life coach is. Is that the life you want? Is that your LP? I don't want you to fall in love with the idea of coaching, and then hate the actuality of it. Regardless, you learned that there's no way around money. You need money to survive. You need to take care of that. There are two ways: First option: You go and look for a job right now, that gives you financial stability (you can look for jobs that are easier to find, but use a PC, so you may be able to do some studying or work for your LP as you're there). And after you find the job, you can look for a better one, so you job-hop into better and better positions, maybe a nice part-time job, maybe one where you work from home, etc. This is better than trying to find a good job from scratch and risking being unemployed for months and months, if you really need money, you can't afford that. Yes, it's tedious. Make a plan and STICK TO IT. Make a plan, you can't rely on how you feel each day, as you've already learned. Second option: if you think there's a chance you can make money with your LP soon, you could consider going all in on that, and let that take your entire day, instead of a job. BUT write down a number clearly: the amount of money below which you'll go and find a job, no matter what happens. I don't know your financial situation, so you may already be below that number. So, you either work a job and make slower progress in your LP in the remaining time, or you try to make it work before you go into the red financial zone. I have an opinion about Leo's course, and concept of life purpose. I understand the course is from 8 years ago or so, and that while still incredibly valuable, Leo's best work came well after that phase. The main problem I see is that it only gives you half the picture. The half-picture about passion, mastery, inspiration. The other half is marketing. You need to be as much of a marketing master as you are at your actual job if you want to make a living out of your life purpose. This isn't said enough times. Doesn't mean grifting people. But it means you need reliable ways to: Get the attention of potential clients reliably and consistently (social media content, direct messaging people on their profiles, paid advertisement are the big 3) Learn to communicate the value you're actually offering. This is called being persuasive, or "sales". If you get attention, but you're the only one knowing how great your coaching is... no-one's going to buy. And if you get no attention, well... In conclusion Money needs to be taken care of in one of the two ways I explained. In the meantime you've got to become good at business! First, do you have the skill to provide value? Are you able to provide coaching results? Second, are you able to find the people to which you can even make an offer to help and give that value? PS - If you've never worked with a client, start working for free. Extend the time horizon for wealth. You'll probably suck initially. And working for free, and then charging little, makes it easy to find clients, get testimonials, and most importantly experience. It's doable, I'm telling you! Don't underestimate the wisdom you have accumulated since leaving your job. Most coaches don't have Leo's teachings behind them, you have a major advantage!

@BlessedLion I wouldn't want him as a friend haha, but I think he's an exceptional thinker and strategist. And exceptional is an understatement. But at the surface he may appear like that. If you want to see his best work, check out his books and leave out the socials stuff.

This is an article I wrote, called Blindness. It tries to explain why people don't change and can't change. Blindness is the absence of independent thinking. Almost every human is blind. They are just animals acting out their social conditioning. They lack independent thinking. The average person lives his life, has values, makes decisions, almost entirely based on how they were conditioned growing up. By conditioning I mean what they learned from the environment, their parents, teachers, authorities, and in general what was "normal" in their eyes. That becomes their only reality. That is unconsciousness. That is absence of independent thinking. That limited reality is all they see. Outside that there's blindness. For a fuller picture, add to conditioning a flavor of genetic personality, and life experiences, that in most cases are just little dots of light in a sea of blindness. Far from enough to have enough context to spark independent thinking. Social conditioning is not the same in everybody. Here, again, we have a mix between genetics and upbringing. We may see more and less mature perspectives, or more and less naive people, or more and less people able to interpret certain situations. What remains common though, is that all those people remain limited by their conditioning. Children of entrepreneurs much more often become entrepreneurs. And it's not about the money, it's about blindness. Children of employees were conditioned to believe that entrepreneurship is impossible, in most cases. Why would you pursue something impossible? A person who was conditioned to believe that a needy "nice guy" behavior is attractive, will only have that tool at his disposal, and even though it will keep not working, he'll still persist and suffer, over and over again. In the face of suffering, the blind person reflexively, like an animal, tries to find a way out. But he's blind, he can't see. Just like if you put a cat in a box next to a lever, he doesn't know what a lever is, and so he'll start experimenting randomly, jumping around, scratching everything, until, by chance, he moves the lever and makes progress. But he never understands why he made progress. One step forward is just one data point. One dot of light. How many do you need for the full picture? For actual sight? The average person only sees within his conditioning boundaries. If life's problems are solvable within the boundaries, then everything's great. But when it's not enough, when the tools given by your conditioning don't solve the problem, then it's chaos. Then it's the "cat in the box" situation: Blindness. But the blind mind does not think or see that it's blind. Otherwise he'd quickly find a way to stop being blind (by learning, contemplating, introspecting). The thought of blindness implies a meta-perspective that would make that kind of blindness almost impossible. That's the problem of self-deception! Let's see what it's like to be blind. Blindness is synonym with unconsciousness. To understand the blind person, which is almost everybody in the world, you need to see them like an animal. Not in the sense that they have the intellect or the worth of an animal. But in the sense that their behaviors, values, life decisions, are all unconscious reactions that are the result of the interaction between conditioning, genetic personality and circumstances. The poor blind is a complete victim to his conditioning. His life is just the sum of those reactions, of which he almost never made a conscious one. It's most fascinating to see the blind person when faced with a challenge where the solution is outside the person's conditioning. For example, when a "nice guy" can't attract women, no matter how hard he tries. How is it possible that "nice guys" can often remain such for all their lives? The answer is simple. They're blind! They're the cat in the box! The difference is that attraction is much more complicated than a lever. That's why the cat gets out the box, but the nice guy doesn't get laid. See, even the recognition that the nice guy approach is problematic requires sight in the first place. It requires the ability to see the flawed conditioning from outside. But by definition, the blind when outside his conditioning... is blind. This is how the blind thinks: What is happiness? It depends on what I was conditioned to believe it is. What is a healthy relationship? It depends on what I was conditioned to believe it is. How do you know if you're happy? I just compare my current situation to my conditioning. Does this reflect the reality of most people? I think so. A final point: What about the people who make progress? After all, people seem to mature as they age. They learn lessons, they change. Doesn't this go against the idea of conditioning and blindness? First, progress in those situations is extremely slow. Any experience contradicting your conditioning is just a little dot of light into the 360 view of blindness. A lot of experience is required to become seriously effective, unless someone straight up teaches you how to do things right. But that's not really in your power. Even when those people learn lessons (and this tends to end in their 20s or 30s, when they set up a normal life, just as they were conditioned to), the lessons are extremely specific and isolated. Not enough to gain enough clarity over the whole situation, which is what's required to solve the problem for good. It's true that self-help has made millions change. But remember that not everybody is aware of self-help. If your conditioning didn't teach you about self-help, or the idea of improvement, you either stumble upon it by chance, or you remain the same all your life. Once again, victims of conditioning! What's the solution to blindness then? It's what we have here. It's becoming aware of it. Leo's epistemology playlist is a superpower for this reason. It is the antidote to blindness. The real solution to blindness is when you start what I call a flywheel effect: when you see blindness in action, you now seek to understand and learn, until you're not blind anymore. Your area of sight has expanded. New area of blindness? Repeat, and again, expansion. It's a flywheel effect because unlike blind people, which are stuck for life, you are constantly expanding your area of sight, more and more, understanding more and more, thinking independently more and more. Remember I defined blindenss as the absence of independent thinking. It's a meta-mechanism that instead of reacting to blindness, it sees it from the outside, and then dissolves it. PS - I was "blind" all my life. Actually, I was more blind than normal. I was extremely blind. Extremely naive. I lived this transformation first-hand only recently (3 years). I am in the rare position of remembering how it was to be extremely blind. I have countless stories of my blind life. 95% of them are too painful to share. Self-help, and especially Leo's work, changed my life. It's insane how the same person can change so much over 3 years. If I weren't blind this much and for this long, I wouldn't believe it could be possible.

Brother after creating this I learned to stop underestimating AI Never say never!