Emerald

Men are certainly biased towards attraction, and women are certainly biased towards relationship as you can see on this forum. But the reason why I am harping on relationship is because attraction by itself is not substantial enough to meet our deeper social and relationship needs. And that's true for both men and women. For most people, a life of mutual masturbation will eventually turn stale and lose its charm. And it will likely give way to deep loneliness. Also, a man can't really satisfy a woman without deep levels intimacy. This is also impossible without the woman sensing that she is special to him and not just interchangeable with other women. And for a man only geared towards attraction, women are 100% fungible. And that's just not gratifying or stable feeling to be with such a man... especially if you're looking for a father for your children. This is something that men would be wise to know about the female bias, as deep connection with a man who only orients towards attraction is just not possible. And it's a big red flag that a great many women will filter men out for. So, for a man to purely stay within his biases around attraction basically guarantees that he will never really satisfy a woman.

And likewise, no woman wants to be contained by a man she doesn't find attractive either. Attraction is all part of it. But once the attraction occurs, the deeper relationship isn't any more served by adding big tits to the equation... as attractive as that may be. But masculine containment and feminine surrender are vital ingredients of the deeper relationship.

Yeah, it's really common

But you're failing to recognize who the selectors are... Women tend to be monogamously oriented and don't typically want to share a man with another woman. So if I, as a monogamously oriented woman, was given the choice between investing energy in a man who desires a monogamous relationship and investing energy in a man who desires a polygenist relationship, it becomes quite clear who the more compatible and higher quality partner is. Also, most women who are oriented towards polyamory are a bit allergic to polygeny. So, it may be a little difficult to find such a unicorn even amongst polyamorous women, though I'm sure they exist.

There is quite a big difference between wanting big tits on a woman and a woman wanting masculine containment. The reason why men are attracted to tits in the first place is because they feed the babies that the man will make with her. And a woman with small tits can breastfeed a child just as well as a woman with large tits (I know because I've spent 5 years of my life breastfeeding and a good chunk of that time learning about it. Women with more volume to their breasts don't typically produce more milk than women with less volume so it doesn't really confer an advantage toward survival.) So, big tits is more of a preference thing based in what's fashionable in the day... similar to how men were more attracted to chubbier women in certain eras but men are on average more attracted to thin women today. Contrarily with masculine containment, it strikes deeper to the root of our instincts for both feeling protected on the more survival level. If a woman feels protected and held, she can open up. And it's also necessary for women to actually be in her feminine with you, which is something that has an effect on all facets of the self. To play out the dance of the masculine and feminine, masculine containment has to be there. So, the examples you gave are actual false equivalencies as well, because big tits are not a requirement for a deep and gratifying relationship while masculine containment is. But yes, sometimes women do get triggered by what men want sexually. But I honestly don't usually have much of an emotional response to that in and of itself. Keep in mind, I'm also attracted to women in both the subjectifying and objectifying sense, and I don't find men's sexual interests particularly gross nor inherently demeaning. And I also really enjoy it when a man orients to me that way. As long as I'm not totally boiled down to being solely an object of male pleasure, I tend to like it. But women can misrepresent themselves on accident if they are triggered or genuinely inexperienced... and there certainly are tons of wounds. Women and men are frequently orienting to one another in very immature ways because they haven't done the requisite inner work, as I'm sure you can see. So, there are a great many women who may try to mislead you. But that isn't what I'm doing. I'm taking what I've observed about my own sexuality and telling you what's there. I want men to be able to satisfy their partners because they tend to care a lot about that. I want women to be able to get what they really want for men because they tend to care a lot about that. So, I have no personal skin in the game to misrepresent myself and my desires. I'm not trying to trick anyone because that would be really stupid as there's enough misrepresentation flying around already. So, I want you to understand when I say that I am actually seeing this subject more completely than you are, and so are a few others on this thread. You may not recognize this, but I do understand what men need and want very well... perhaps better than most men do as most would be unwilling to admit to the vulnerabilities that they have. Men tend to hide the very parts in themselves behind the thickest walls of armor they want touched the very most. This is what I can feel about men who armor themselves. But bottom line is that your relationships will suffer if you fail to integrate the feminine perspective. So, you can either stay stuck in your preferred paradigm that keeps you safe and in control or you can actually become more open-minded about the topic and explore into what's truly interesting about and integral to the relationship to the feminine.

Men do have more biological impetus to seek indiscriminate sex. But this doesn't mean that it's good for survival. If that drive goes untempered by the human drive for connection and pair bonding/community building, this impulse can create a lot of survival issues for our species. Sure, it modern day we have condoms and other forms of contraceptive. But we are wired for nomadic times. And in that situation if men sought indiscriminate sex outside of his small hunter/gatherer group, he's leaving the woman and his children very susceptible to death. So, it isn't good for procreation and the survival of the species... nor is it great for the chances of him passing on healthy offspring. So, it isn't good for survival when the drive is used out of tandem with other pro-social drives including the drive towards fatherhood, even though it is something that would be enjoyed by many men. Now, it is quite natural for men to be sexually attracted to many women, if that's what you mean. Generally, men do have a polyamorous sex drive, in greater degree to which women have a polyamorous sex drive. But men also have a strong drive for connection, community creation, fatherhood, and pair bonding. These are also male instincts. So, if a man never wants to have deeper relationships that go beyond base-line sexual attraction, there are strong chances that he is having issues with avoidance and/or issues with setting boundaries and that this is an indication that he's suppressing some of his instincts. Though, of course, there are many people who simply don't resonate with the whole pair bond and have children thing. And that's fine. But often a lack of interest in deeper relationships can denote fears of intimacy.

Sometimes it is necessary to be really straight with someone to get through to them. Other times not so much. I'm usually in two minds about things. On one hand, I can get a more transcendent perspective and have all the patience and understanding in the world once I can see the situation as an impersonal chain of cause and effect. On the other hand, I'm human and have deep wounds relative to this dynamic just as everyone else does. And the wound of the feminine is about being suppressed and ignored. So, on one hand, I can stay in the transcendent perspective where I can see people's embattlements. But on the other hand, these conversations are like lemon juice in wounds. And even though I've acclimatized to the lemon juice by exploring these wounds in myself a lot and I've also healed certain wounds, there are still concentrations of the "lemon juice" that can make me feel really frustrated especially when it comes to insisting something is untrue that I know to be true and vice versa. It's like trying to tell people the sky is blue and they try to tell me it's red. And I say, "Yes, sometimes it's red. But only in certain situations. But most of the time it's blue." And then a bunch of sunset enthusiasts reply, "Nah! It's red. All the books I've read have told me the sky is red. And I experienced that the sky was red a bunch of times." And I go, "I get it that you like it when the sky is red, you're a sunset enthusiast. But generally speaking, the sky is blue." And they go, "What do you know about the sky, you're just a sky enthusiast. We're sunset enthusiasts, so we know better. We've experienced the sky being red many times." And I go

<3

A lot of men are afraid of intimacy. So casual/short interactions based mostly in mutual masturbation will feel like the safest way for a man to meet his needs if he's dealing with avoidant patterns. Not as to say that most men wouldn't enjoy casual sex. The enjoyment is certainly there to be had. But often, when it comes to avoidance of deeper relationships, it doesn't come from a genuine lack of desire to have them. It usually comes from fears of vulnerability or fears of losing themselves in a relationship. But this tendency actually runs counter to human survival. Human beings are meant to pair bond (or in earlier societies) settle down with a small group of male and female sexual partners so that all adults raise all the children. Men having indiscriminate sex with lots of female partners, even in nomadic times, leaves most of those children and the women in serious jeopardy. So, it isn't actually good for survival, as we are a social species with responsibilities for one another. Also, such a relationship will never really satisfy a woman unless she's GENUINELY looking for indiscriminate sex too. So, if you want a bunch of sex, you'll certainly be able to find women who (for one reason or another) are willing to sleep with you. But just don't fool yourself into thinking that you've given them something really satisfying.

I brought this up in my earlier post. It's a lot of insecurity and fears of worthlessness. And then wanting to construct an easy-to-understand narrative around women's sexuality to feel more secure and in control of women's feelings... which they see as the ultimate measuring stick of whether they're enough or not. And then, of course, men can feel even more in control if they can continue to believe that women don't really know what they want. And this is why I keep repeating myself. Men with this insecurity end up shooting themselves in the foot. They want so badly to be enough in women's eyes, that they construct a narrative in their mind where they can get some success with women and feel enough. But then, that narrative will only take them that far. And then once it gets past a certain point, they will only orient to their idea of a woman and not the woman herself... basically guaranteeing that he won't give the woman what she really wants, which is intimacy. So don't think that I don't feel this on so many men. It's very frustrating to try to get it across because, as a woman, I have a lot of personal experiences with being dismissed and ignored even in times where I've had the most accurate and sound perspective. So, there are definitely wounds there for me that this triggers. And I may get a little sharp if I'm ignored for a long time. But I do fundamentally see what underlies men's insecurities around intimacy with a woman. It's fear of being seen and judged as lesser. Edit: Here is my post from earlier... I'm reading through the comments since yesterday, and it's not looking good. Lots of guys on here with really apparent chips on their shoulders in relation to women. And lots of willful ignorance around the female perspective on sexuality and relationships. And a lot more of just doubting women's sincerity and/or ability to communicate what they want. So many of the guys on here have such a skewed view of female emotions and sexuality that they are basically lining themselves up to attract very harsh and insecure women to themselves that mirror their own insecurities. And it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy that will seem to confirm their suspicions over and over again, the more unconscious/traumatized women they attract... further entrenching them in the cycle of distortion and unconscious dating behavior. And then, the women who actually are relatively conscious, compassionate, and who have done a lot of work on themselves will automatically sort them out because their instincts will lead them to a man who matches them with regard to their mental/emotional state. And they won't even realize that they're being unconsciously filtered out as unhealthy men by healthy women. And much of this is based in fear of femininity and the fear of being deemed lesser, so there is a desire to construct a narrative where they feel more in control of how women feel. And this comes from their own low self-esteem and fear of their own feminine side, so they prefer to stay in a narrative that is deeply distorted but feels empowering to them where they can remain armored and in control as opposed to recognizing other perspectives and really allowing themselves to be fully human and have the intimacy that all people need. And it's especially a shame that Leo (as an influential person) has a lot of these same chips on his shoulder relative to emotions, intimacy, and femininity because he just green-lights all the unconsciousness relative to his understanding the female perspective and frames it as conscious and parades a distorted perspective as truth. And you can see all these guys feel emboldened in their distortions once he validates them. Ultimately guys, this is mostly your problem to sort out as you will be the ones reaping the consequences of this problem. And I can tell you all about the female perspective until I'm blue in the face. But understand, I'm not doing this for my own health. I'm mostly sharing this perspective to help the men on here understand so they can at least have some chance of experiencing a fulfilling relationship and satisfying their woman. It doesn't do any good to be so myopic towards your own survival agenda if you're looking for a real relationship. So, for those that are working on themselves, if you want a fulfilling relationship to a relatively conscious woman, then you're going to have to be conscious relative to how you approach relationships. And you'll need to be multi-perspectival in how you approach relationships without getting stuck in the reductive perspective of seeing man/woman relationships as purely a cruel survival game. And all this farcical alpha nonsense may get you laid here and there by women who line up with that... but it isn't going to cut it if you're looking to satisfy a woman and have a good relationship with her. Women who are relatively attuned to their intuition will recognize your willful ignorance and defensive behavior for what it is... weakness and fragility and fear of the feminine.

That's a false equivalency. It isn't the same on both sides because there isn't a ton of distorted information about male sexuality. We all know about what men want and need in a relationship and you can go to 95% of the posts on the forum to see that. And women never say, "Don't listen to men about what they want. They don't really know." It's specifically blind men who believe they have 20/20 vision invalidating the female perspective.

Exactly

If a woman has fallen over onto the right side of the horse instead of the left.

I'm reading through the comments since yesterday, and it's not looking good. Lots of guys on here with really apparent chips on their shoulders in relation to women. And lots of willful ignorance around the female perspective on sexuality and relationships. And a lot more of just doubting women's sincerity and/or ability to communicate what they want. So many of the guys on here have such a skewed view of female emotions and sexuality that they are basically lining themselves up to attract very harsh and insecure women to themselves that mirror their own insecurities. And it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy that will seem to confirm their suspicions over and over again, the more unconscious/traumatized women they attract... further entrenching them in the cycle of distortion and unconscious dating behavior. And then, the women who actually are relatively conscious, compassionate, and who have done a lot of work on themselves will automatically sort them out because their instincts will lead them to a man who matches them with regard to their mental/emotional state. And they won't even realize that they're being unconsciously filtered out as unhealthy men by healthy women. And much of this is based in fear of femininity and the fear of being deemed lesser, so there is a desire to construct a narrative where they feel more in control of how women feel. And this comes from their own low self-esteem and fear of their own feminine side, so they prefer to stay in a narrative that is deeply distorted but feels empowering to them where they can remain armored and in control as opposed to recognizing other perspectives and really allowing themselves to be fully human and have the intimacy that all people need. And it's especially a shame that Leo (as an influential person) has a lot of these same chips on his shoulder relative to emotions, intimacy, and femininity because he just green-lights all the unconsciousness relative to his understanding the female perspective and frames it as conscious and parades a distorted perspective as truth. And you can see all these guys feel emboldened in their distortions once he validates them. Ultimately guys, this is mostly your problem to sort out as you will be the ones reaping the consequences of this problem. And I can tell you all about the female perspective until I'm blue in the face. But understand, I'm not doing this for my own health. I'm mostly sharing this perspective to help the men on here understand so they can at least have some chance of experiencing a fulfilling relationship and satisfying their woman. It doesn't do any good to be so myopic towards your own survival agenda if you're looking for a real relationship. So, for those that are working on themselves, if you want a fulfilling relationship to a relatively conscious woman, then you're going to have to be conscious relative to how you approach relationships. And you'll need to be multi-perspectival in how you approach relationships without getting stuck in the reductive perspective of seeing man/woman relationships as purely a cruel survival game. And all this farcical alpha nonsense may get you laid here and there by women who line up with that... but it isn't going to cut it if you're looking to satisfy a woman and have a good relationship with her. Women who are relatively attuned to their intuition will recognize your willful ignorance and defensive behavior for what it is... weakness and fragility and fear of the feminine.

For me, it would honestly turn me off because it would mean that he's not all that into me. So, I would probably just take his courtship as a casual fling or just move on... unless I were already head over heals for the guy, which typically takes me a long time. Now, if I were in that situation and already head over heals for the guy, I would feel very insecure and it would really screw with me. Basically, once a guy strikes at that insecurity, I know that I would be best to force myself to move on regardless of how I feel, though it may take me a while to sever it once strong feelings arise. But it really depends on the woman and if she's more oriented towards polyamory or monogamy. So, just tell her up front. I am very oriented towards monogamy as I like to put all my investment in one person. So I know that it would be a dealbreaker for me if a guy was with multiple women at once, as it would disrupt my ability to invest in him and be courted. And I'd probably automatically sort him out if I knew that up front. And if a guy didn't tell me and I already got to the point where I was invested in him, I'd be hurt because I'm not oriented that way. And I'd start putting up walls and beginning the severance process.

@OnecirrusI second that notion. You'll be all jammed up in yourself if you don't. And this can impact you negatively in all kinds of ways that may seem totally unrelated to sex at first blush.

It makes sense with your background why you would feel that way. But it's imperative for you to heal those wounds and integrate your sexuality and your feelings to have a healthy orientation to yourself and others. I would begin by questioning what weakness means to you.

It can sometimes happen where gay men with a more masculine polarity are also attracted to men and the same for lesbians. There are two ways this can happen. One way is that the sexual instinct is also subject to the rules of polarity. So, even if someone has a polarity where they are in the majority/norm... meaning that they are men that are mostly masculine or women that are mostly feminine... they can still have a sexual instinct that deviates from the norms for most in their gender. Another way is if a person's sexuality is still geared towards the opposite polarity associated with their gender. So, if we take a masculine gay man who is mostly attracted to feminine men, or a feminine lesbian who is mostly attracted to masculine women. These are all possibilities with regard to polarity. But because everyone has masculine/feminine in them, an understanding of polarity is very helpful. But honestly, I talk a lot about these topics. And I have gotten quite a bit of positive feedback from those in the LGBTQ community. Now, that's mostly because I acknowledge these distinctions up front, so as not to marginalize. That's why I said that Teal Swan could do a better job with that. But polarity is not usually very simple. It can devolve into stereotypical discussions that miss the meat of what's really substantial about having these discussions. It has to be handled responsibly and with proper distinctions between Yin and Yang vs the masculine and feminine principle vs cultural masculinity and femininity vs every individual person's polarity. There are many distinctions to parse. That said, right now, there is a huge polarity issue between the masculine and feminine that needs to be resolved. And it impacts everyone... straight, gay, gender conforming, or non-gender conforming. And we have to look at where the wounds are... not just for the sake of men and women's relationships to one another but to how these polarities play out in ever person and in society at large in the form of major social, political, and environmental issues that often don't seem to have much to do with gender.

Very much so. At the core of most of our societal ales sits the imbalance between Yin and Yang, where the Yang polarity has a stronghold over society and chokes out the Yin polarity. Before, this worked because we weren't effectively encroaching upon Mother Nature. But yes, a huge part of counteracting Shadow Masculinity is for men (in general) to connect to their Healthy Masculine energy in a conscious way. It's not about them denying their masculine polarity... it's really about reconnecting to it and bringing themselves back into alignment. Shadow Masculine only comes up when Masculinity has been pushed into the Shadow.

Certainly that's true. I think Teal could do a better job at specifying her reasons for focusing specifically on a heteronormative and gender-conforming perspective to clarify that she's not discounting the validity of the people who naturally have uncommon energetic signatures. But it also is very important to look at heterosexual and gender conforming issues around polarity as this is often where we can see the polarity issues of the world play out. You can look at the average straight man and straight woman and notice the larger societal issues with Yin/Yang imbalance and see how it feeds directly into a great many major social problems... some that involve gender/sexuality but most that don't. So, to avoid that perspective all together means that we can never heal the wounds of that perspective. And that's not to say that the polarities of people who don't conform to the gender norms or sexual norms are invalid. Those are very real and very valid things. I'm bi-sexual myself.

While it is true that some women are more masculine and some men are more feminine and that's valid, this is not true for most people. And the man/woman, feminine/masculine perspective is actually REALLY important to look at, as this is where all the wounds are that have to be addressed. To invalidate that perspective altogether is to repress and close off the ability to heal those wounds.

This is where Teal's perspective in this video is limited... probably for the purpose of simplicity. She keeps it mostly to one facet of the discussion around polarity so that people can get an idea of what it is in terms of relationships between men and women. But polarity is a lot more complex than just the gender binary. From some perspectives, there is no binary at all. Everything is one. Which is true. From other perspectives, you could say that everything is infinitely Yin and Yang... which is also true. Basically, all people contain a unique masculine/feminine signature. And for a person to have a relationship where these energies are engaged, it's best to find someone who has a complementary masculine feminine signature to your own. So, for simplicity sake (though it is more complex than this still), let's say that there is a straight woman who is 80% feminine and 20% masculine... she will be most polarized to a man who is 80% masculine and 20% feminine. To add an extra layer of complexity, these percentages happen across many different spectrums of traits within the personality. So, polarity and compatibility are a lot more complicated to understand logically. Ideally, what you want is for the feminine side of the woman to be contained by the masculine side of the man... and to have the feminine side of the man contained by the masculine side of the woman. And there's always a dance happening here. Also, you'll want to have your own masculine side containing your own feminine side. The main thing is being able to get in touch with your natural polarity and going with whatever naturally feels good in tandem with that natural polarity, and things will flow better from there.

The main thing about personal sovereignty is to be in touch with your own feelings. A person with issues with boundaries, codependency, and a lack of personal sovereignty ends up projecting their own sovereignty onto others... who then become like an authority figure to them. And then that person starts to look at the other person and tries to make decisions by thinking "How are they going to feel about this?" as opposed to making decisions by saying, "How do I feel about this?" And what Teal Swan refers to as containment requires that a man be in touch with his personal sovereignty so that he can lead the dynamic and she can surrender and be receptive. So if a man is out of touch with his own sovereignty, then no intimacy is possible. A man who is enmeshed and simply exists as a character in the woman's story, cannot contain. The woman then has to contain the man in her story. Basically enmeshment and containment are polar opposites. That which is enmeshed cannot contain that which it is enmeshed with.

There will always be changes in the relationship. And one thing that Teal doesn't mention in the video (probably for simplicity purposes) is that all people have both a masculine and feminine polarity. And so, women can use her masculine polarity to contain a man's feminine side. Though, because typically women have a more pronounced feminine side and because men have a more pronounced masculine side that the dance will involve the man containing the woman more often when done in a satisfying way for both partners. Now, one exception that she brought up is that a lot of men have not experienced containment in childhood, and will look for a mother to contain him in a partnership. And this really doesn't feel good to a woman. So, while there are times for women to contain men naturally, if a woman feels like she has to push herself into her masculine polarity constantly, this isn't going to feel natural or good to her... unless she is in the minority of women who are naturally more masculine and are also attracted to men. But yes, there are ups and downs to a relationship. And this is more of a dance of containment than a static thing. And flexibility is required. But it simply isn't going to feel good to most women to play the mom or the masculine role more than what naturally lines up with her polarity.

I don't know. I have clients all over the world, and it all seems pretty similar. But yet again, I have a very particular kind of target audience that's interested in self-exploration. So, I couldn't honestly say. But I have noticed that all people have some degree of struggle with this. And it's simply because most people are raised to see their own emotions as something to tune out from or repress. And this creates deep issues with opening up, being vulnerable, and having intimacy in relationships and friendships. And boys/men are hit extra hard with this in particular.