Emerald

Submission is more of a Shadow Feminine trait than a Divine Feminine trait. Surrender and receptivity are the Divine Feminine qualities. Submission is a denigrated version of these two qualities, which has to do more with self-nullification and learned helplessness. It is a giving up of the feminine power. But the feminine power is much more akin to receiving and surrendering.

You break down your resistances to realizing the masculine and feminine energy that exists within your human intonation. It's the same way how a mystical experiences can break down your repressions so that more of your human self shows through. So, you ask what is the equivalent of saying, "How can a mystical experience help you let go of your psychological repressions when the experience transcends the notion of being human?" Psychological wholeness is a human thing. But there's definitely a correlation between the grounded human wholeness and integration of all your aspects and the ability to experience a perspective that transcends all the details of your humanity. So, the masculine and the feminine can be repressed. And experiencing transcendence of the human perspective can break down our walls that repress these naturally occurring energies.

I didn't consciously know about that cultural association at the time. And I was very very against gender roles and anything that put anyone into a box. I would not have been receptive to labeling Earthly things as feminine, even if I had been aware of that association. But what it really is is Yin energy... which the closest word I could associate it with is femininity. And this is because women tend to have more of that subtle energy than men do... though everyone has both. So, the label of feminine/masculine is not objective. Yin and Yang supersede but inform human gender and ideas about gender. So Yin and Yang is objective because you can observe it with enough sensitivity... though it is subtle. And the reason we label Yin as feminine and Yang as masculine is because we can notice these energies play out in people. And we will notice generally more Yin energy in women as a whole group and more Yang energy in men as a whole group, though there are a sizable minority of exceptions. This is why it's easy to make a symbolic approximation to discuss what is otherwise very subtle to observe and very difficult to communicate without the use of archetypal and anthropic symbolism.

Interesting article about the societal changes that have given way to the incel phenomenon… https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/11/the-new-superfluous-men/?fbclid=IwAR3L50jNw8okIZ5g_H-QtIkNnQJgwKfbSllbQ2-b1ohxNlDEiwJREPyh7g4

That's really awesome. It's very important to integrate the feminine side. Society has historically undervalued it. And the result is that many women (and men) end up repressing the feminine in themselves. And it creates so many problems for the individual and society alike. It may seem to be a radical statement, but most of the dysfunctions that exist in this world (from gender inequality to wealth inequality to climate change) take their roots in disconnection with the feminine.

It was so interesting because it wasn't anything traditionally associated with feminine gender norms. But it was just an overwhelmingly feminine feeling. And "social construct" was my FAVORITE phrase at the time. I always felt like everything, especially stuff related to gender was super made up and not based in anything. But that was only partially true. There is definitely an objectivity to masculine and feminine energy that can be sensed. And gender norms are really just constructs that are sometimes derived from those energies and sometimes not derived from those energies. For example, the color pink has nothing to do with feminine energy. It's purely socially constructed. But there are many forms that are mostly informed by feminine energy. For example, the energy of plants and greenery are very feminine. That was what I was sensing. I was outside and night and it felt feminine. And I knew no better word to describe it. And later, I found that both plants and the nighttime are associated with the feminine across many different cultures. So, I highly encourage you to think about masculinity and femininity not just as social constructs.... but to parse the distinction between what is social construct and what is objective about them. I was inadvertently repressing a lot of the feminine in myself because I was defining everything masculine as neutral/good and everything feminine as undesirable/lesser. And I had no idea that I was repressing and undervaluing so much of the feminine in myself, in the world, and in others because I couldn't see how those things were connected together and how it related to my feminine side and the feminine side of the world.

Prior to my awakenings at 20, I was of the notion that all ideas of masculine and feminine were naught more that social constructs. And then, in my first awakening, I experienced an energy that I could only describe as feminine. And I realized I'd been repressing it. And in the years following, I had a time period where I tried to re-adopt the female gender norm... and it so did not work for me. I cut so much of myself off. I just didn't know any other way to connect with my feminine energy. And so I tried to put myself into the old construct. But I realized later that my femininity is not very well aligned to traditional feminine gender role. Domesticity doesn't really appeal, though I do enjoy my children very much. I'm still very career and ambition oriented. I'm incredibly passionate about this facet of my life. My femininity is a type of femininity that's not been historically very well accepted. In any other era, I would guess that I'd be burnt on pyre in the middle of the town square surrounded by villagers with pitchforks if I dared express it. I am much more like a witch than I was before I discovered my femininity. This is how the feminine comes up for me. I'm like the old witch in the woods that little children whisper stories about and people come to for healing. This is the type of femininity that fits me. So, this Hecate femininity is more of what I found. But someone could find in themselves a Hestia kind of femininity, focused on the hearth and home. The important thing to remember though is that, even if your femininity aligns mostly to the guidelines of traditional feminine gender roles, that you should be mindful to differentiate between the two so that you don't get boxed in.

If she believes that Jesus is the only thing holding her back from sleeping with 100s of men, then her sexuality is really repressed. If she just let herself do what she wanted to do, my guess is that she’d have sex with a few random guys and realize that the experience isn’t really that interesting to her. So the repression will probably create some issues for her in relationships.

But you see, women don't get any guarantee that the guy will be interested back. And the connection usually runs deeper when a woman communicates her feelings as she's already developed the feelings deeply... if she's at a confession point. So, it isn't the same thing as doing cold approach and asking for a date. There are really high stakes there, because if the guy doesn't like you, you can't just get another one of him. And it takes a while to develop feelings for someone else. So, I won't usually tell my feelings until I know for sure. Or I'll communicate my feelings through flirting. And I'm quite sure that this is how most women operate. It's quite natural for women to keep their feelings about a guy to themselves... especially because they don't want to be perceived as obsessive or clingy.

I rarely tell guys that I like them (unless I'm 95%+ positive he's interested in me) because I fear rejection. It's genuinely scary from the female perspective to be rejected because women tend to develop very strong bonds and feelings with a guy they like prior to the start of any relationship. And rejection is difficult when you're already invested and have had a crush on a guy for a while.

I said before to someone on here that the solution isn't easy... but it is simple. It won't be easy to develop a habit of socialization. There will be many comfort zones you'll have to leave to do so. But it is simple in the sense that the answer to your problem IS socialization. There is no other way to deal with your desire for a woman than to go out and be social enough to meet some. Socialization is your answer. Period. Now, are you willing to go and do that? Or do you prefer to just wallow in your victim narrative and the bad feelings and self-deprecating stories as your life passes you by? And I'm going to assume that it's the former... given that this is a personal development forum.

Yeah... absolutely. There's a lot of that. And it's pretty off-putting for women because most women have pretty serious insecurities about their looks. I've been scrutinizing my looks and dealing with body image issues since I was like 4. So, when a guy who's a 5 is like "10s or nothing!" it jumps right on those issues and I immediately close up... even if I would have otherwise found him attractive. And I'm pretty sure that's the case for most women... even 10s. It is the high bar for female beauty that's a huge turn-off because it jumps right on the nerves and is the female version of emasculation. If a guy can't appreciate more modest beauty, I nope right out of there because it threatens to tread on my deepest insecurities. So, it is like a Voluntary Celibacy and shooting one's self in the foot all at once.

If you're a 5, you won't have any issues find a woman who's a 5 who's interested in you. I'll tell you a really obvious secret... most women are attracted to men. If you're a man and you're a 5, and you have a social circle, you'll do just fine.

Here's the first step... Go meet 5 men and 5 women this week. Start building your circle. Start getting used to socializing. Flex your extraversion muscles.

If a man is a 5 on the attractiveness scale but refuses to date a woman who is a 5 because he only wants 10s, then he isn't really INVOLUNTARILY celibate. He is choosing to wait for a woman who is a 10 to drop into his lap. It's his choice. He is VOLUNTARILY celibate. But if a man who is a 5 can't get attracted to a woman who is a 5, then that's a bigger issue for him. He'll either have to find ways to make himself more attractive or he'll have to work through his emotional blocks that only enable him to be attracted to women who look like supermodels.

Have a wider social circle, with 150+ people and go out regularly to meet new people. There will be plenty of opportunities to meet women.

Haha! I love that picture of Jordan Peterson. I think it comes down to the traumas associated with anti-feminine indoctrination. This has gotten better with the widespread acceptance of the LGBTQ community, because lots of people are more accepting of men and women who deviate from gender norms. And this benefits society a lot because it takes the pressure off of everyone (including straight, cisgendered folk) to conform to narrow gender roles. But having grown up in a small redneck town in Florida where gender roles were still firm in the 90s, there was a real sense of femininity being a sign of weakness for males and females alike. That's why I became very misogynistic at a young age and very resistant to anything traditionally feminine. But it was especially egregious to be feminine for boys/men. It would guarantee that you'd be bullied and branded as gay... of which homophobia was just the norm then. I was even quite homophobic at the time just because it seen as just the way things are. It wasn't until I was about 13 and had bi and gay friends that I realized that I was being a jerk. So, there is a pretty rough patriarchal hierarchy that a great many boys/men have been indoctrinated with and learned. And everything about that hierarchy creates a constant anxiety about where each man falls in relation to other men in terms of adherence to the religion of masculinity. And level of masculinity is one of the main things that's scrutinized within this hierarchy. Also, as an extension of that, success with women is scrutinized within that hierarchy. If fact, I'd say that most men who are really focused towards have a lot of sex with a lot of women are really coming from a concern for where they fall in the masculinity hierarchy... and not as much with the potential for pleasure within the sexual experiences with those women. The concern is more one of status than one of pleasure. So given that there are tons of social expectations and social traumas that come as a result of deviating from those expectations, it makes sense that men are really caught up in that patriarchal hierarchy, even as it chews up their self-esteem. There's also a lot of meaning there that must be unlearned. If you imagine someone who has been told that the meaning of their life is to earn a lot of money. And that person creates their identity in relation to that understanding of "the meaning of life is to earn money." And then, it's like money is abolished. And for better or for worse, that person has that identity broken down because the thing they were basing their identity off of no longer exists. It would be the same thing to let go of patriarchal hierarchical understanding. There's so much experience and meaning and identity shaping going on there. It would be a real death to let go of. Like a compete upending of the worldview... which is hard for anyone. And I would guess that this understanding of society wasn't something that just so happened to fall into place. I think it's very useful for elite men (and elite people in general) to keep non-elite men playing this losing game. That way, these men keep directing their anger and aggression downward towards other non-elite men and women... as opposed to getting together and directing all that masculine aggression upwards towards the powers that be. If you can keep men playing this game, it's a way of diffusing and sublimating their revolutionary power-disrupting energy towards even more marginalized people... and thus enforcing the power structures that be. It's the oldest trick of the powers that be. Get the men to use their privilege and power to further subjugate women so that they don't band together and disrupt the powers that be... and further enforce the subjugation of the powers that be by subjugating women. Get the white people to use their privilege and power to further subjugate non-white people so that the white people don't band together and disrupt the powers that be... and further enforce the subjugation of the powers that be by subjugating non-white people. None of it is on accident. When you create a hierarchy, you can keep the people always looking to level up while stepping on the people below them. And this is how those at the very top keep their power. And the rest of the hierarchy polices and subjugates itself.

My point is that there are absolutely ZERO men that exist that will be universally panned by all of woman-kind. I know it might feel that way. But it's just not going to happen. If you're a man... even if you're a solid 1... there will be women out there who are interested in you. Will it be harder to find if you're a 1? Yes. Will you eventually find it? Also yes. And at any rate, most of the guys who are Incels are average guys. There's nothing stopping them from find a girlfriend but them.

I grew up in a relatively small town. And so, I knew lots of people in the wider town. It was a very social town. And there were few places to hang out. But we'd find them. There was one place called the Vinyard which was a church that had created a teen night. That's where I knew Walrus boy and so many other people. And isn't just guys that I know who suck who got girlfriends. It's almost EVERY guy that I was acquainted with (regardless of whether or not they sucked). There are plenty of guys who are unattractive and socially awkward... and even some guys who are just creepy/crappy people. But because they're social, they've had girlfriends. I honestly think this is a too much social media and too little face to face social interaction issue. So, it's a shame that so many guys misattribute their lack of success with girls as having to do with some flaw in them... and not what it ACTUALLY is. And that's a lack of social outlets and/or an unwillingness/discomfort with social situations.

Trust me... I've known plenty of social guys who suck. In fact, all the guys I've know who have sucked have been social... because that's how I knew them. I wouldn't know that they suck unless I was social with them. And I've found, that there can be absolutely delightful shy loner guys and horribly creepy weird guys who suck that are very social. Also, you don't really need to be liked by everyone in your social circle to have your social circle. Everyone knew Walrus Boy. And he was never by himself. He always had friends and acquaintances around. And that's because he made a point to go out and socialize. Like I said, many people in his social circle felt uncomfortable around him. But he was still able to find some people who tolerated him and even some people who like him. He dated quite a few girls in his wider social circle. And if you met the guy, you'd recognize that NO ONE is truly an Incel (INVOLUNTARILY celibate). If this guy isn't an Incel, then absolutely no one on the planet is.

The solution is not easy. But it is simple. It's not easy to go and be social. There's a lot of bravery that it takes and lots of inner work and logistics to be taken care of. But the solution is simple... go socialize. That's what needs to happen. And the obstacle is the path.

Trust me when I say, I've known MANY guys who "suck" across the board. But these guys who suck were also part of my wider social circle and had their own wider social circle. And thus, they were able to get girlfriends. For example, there was this guy that I used to know when I was a teenager that everyone called Walrus Boy because he looked like a walrus (sparse white mustache and all). And he was super awkward and not a very nice guy. And foremost, he was very creepy. He was the type of guy that most girls would specifically avoid interacting with. And yet... he had a wide social circle. And he had plenty of girlfriends over the years I was acquainted with him... though I was perplexed about that. Trust me when I say that I'm shocked that anyone is an incel. I've seen absolute trainwrecks of guys get girlfriends. But the thing that differentiates these guys is just that they were out socializing with a bunch of people.

Honestly, up until the later years of high school when I found myself, I was definitely someone who was on the bottom of the barrel in terms of social status in most social contexts. And so my friends (male and female) have usually also been people who would be considered nerds or social outcasts. People who, in school, would be part of the unpopular crowd. And so, a high number of the guys I dated in middle and early high school were nerd guys who were seen as unpopular. And I still have quite a lot of friends who are awkward nerdy guys. And of course, it's a bit harder for them to meet women and start relationships. But you know what, EVERY SINGLE ONE of those guys that I know have had girlfriends. Some of them now have wives. And so, the ONLY factor that I can see that's different between an Incel and my nerdy guy friends is that Incels have a shitty ideology and my friends don't... and that my nerdy guy friends regularly interact socially with both men and women and Incels don't. My nerdy guy friends have male friends and they have female friends. They have a rich social circle of accepting like-minded people around them. These Incel guys are guys who just don't socialize and who are bogged down in victim's mentality and low self-esteem. If they did socialize and resolve their self-esteem issues, they would eventually find a lady who's into them. But they have to stop playing that hierarchical game and trying to match up to some unrealistic standard of masculinity.

What I mostly glean from the article is that patriarchy sets up a power structure where a significant chunk of men never reproduce. That's surprising to me personally. I had assumed a relative parity in terms of the ratio of men and women who reproduce. And this means that the more patriarchal a society is the more that female sexuality will be controlled, commodified, and have a false sense of scarcity applied to it. This is done by applying all kinds of psychological control mechanisms around sexual shame and chastity for women. Hence, why slut shaming has been so prevalent. It keeps women and society at large policing their sexual desires... hence keeping the "commodity" safe. And then, the men who get the shittier end of the stick reproductively speaking, will have a high probability of being culled in a truly patriarchal society because they will be sent to war or to toil away to serve some rich guy. But these men, if they're kept around (as they are now) will keep trying the play the patriachal game that fucks them over in hopes of flipping the power structures in their favor... which requires a nearly revolutionary effort as you're fighting against the powers that be. So it is difficult for them to buck the patriarchal narrative that fucks them, because they see a glimmer of hope to become the top dog. But there is no real freedom there. It's just a very vicious power structure where women are commodified and men are constantly being ranked (with the possibility of being culled for ranking low). Ultimately, I see the solution being already set in motion. In my experience, my attractions don't have an extreme amount do with status and are very intuitive. It's about how I feel. They are also very monogamously oriented and love oriented. I can absolutely only have eyes for someone who is not objectively high status. And my guess is that this is not just me. I think it's how feminine sexuality actually is. I can see that, if women had things more their way and feminine principled traits like socialization and emotional intelligence were encouraged, then there would likely be a less hierarchical relationship set-up. It seems that the facts bear that out. Egalitarian hunter gather societies were 3 to 1 in terms of men and women who reproduced respectively. Where patriarchal societies (with hierarchical ranking and strong control over female sexuality) were 17 to 1 in terms of men and women who reproduced respectively. So, in a similar way to how (because of the way government serves corporations) there is extreme wealth inequality where it is rigged to where the rich get richer and poor get poorer... in an extreme patriarchy (which is not the situation we're in currently even though we still have many patriarchal elements in the system) you have very wealthy men having multiple wives where the bottom 95% of men don't reproduce at all. But overall, I see the solution for the individual Incel or man struggling with hierarchy, being to buck this deeply ingrained patriarchal narrative that tells them that they have to compete on this hierarchy to realize that the game is built so that there are a large number of men who lose it. Within that game, the weak ones are only there to justify the strong. And of course someone's self-esteem will be shit if they're attached to that game. To stop playing that game, all you need to do is be social and meet people... including women. There is a nearly equal number of women to men on the planet. There is no reason for that reproduction disparity to be there at all... especially since women tend to be very aversive to men having mistresses and other wives.

Yes exactly