Emerald

How can one demonstrate the opposite is true? These are understandings that I've gleaned from my medicine journeys in my ability to pick up on these subtle qualities... as well as reading Jungian authors and learning to understand archetypal symbolism in literature and in imagery. Remember, these are not about gender norms... or about men and women very much at all. Sometimes men (as a whole group) will have more of an Feminine archetypal quality than women have (as a whole group)... as these qualities are only named Masculine and Feminine as a concession... because they are the closest words in the English language to describe these qualities. But they are named for this because human beings understand these polarities through a gendered lens... but not because these qualities are actually gendered.

You're not understanding what groundedness and loftiness means in this context, if you believe that women are loftier than men. (First off, this isn't about male and female... it's about Masculine and Feminine, which supersede yet inform human gender) The Feminine is the physical and worldly. Grounded means that which is grounded within 3-D reality. It's more accepting of ordinariness and mortality. The Masculine is the spiritual and non-physical. It's the mind and all its abstractions. It's geared towards trying to overcome and become more super-human and immortal. Many inventions come out of the Masculine loftiness. Consider who is more grounded... a mother just living for the day and tending to daily tasks and doing ordinary things with her kids... or Elon Musk trying to take us to Mars or Peter Thiel dreaming of making himself immortal by putting his consciousness into AI? The reality is that men (as a group) are significantly loftier than women... which is sometimes good and sometimes bad... as is the case with all of these dichotomies. But it's important to look at these more as polarities rather than indications of what men and women are like. Otherwise, one will mix up gender norms with polarity... which will lead to a poor understanding.

My experience of social circles have been more like a consistent interaction because of existing in similar spaces as dozens of people. So, one would need to set up some kind of situation like that, where one is interacting socially with many people. It's easier to do in school, where that's the default. But one could also get involved in social activities as well, where they interact with many people. I recommend a meet-up group or something like that. Or take a class. Or go to church (if you'r religious). Basically, find a context where regular meetings and socializing is already normalized. The goal is to build a circle of 150 acquaintances and a few close friends. Most importantly, that's good for meeting basic human social needs (which is necessary anyway for psychological health). So, even if it didn't lead to a romantic relationship, it's important. But it also gives a context where one can make the acquaintance of potential partners. It's honestly the way that it's always been done. Our social contexts are a little threadbare now-a-days because of everything moving online. But it can still be done with a little legwork.

Below, I will post that which is considered archetypally Feminine and Masculine (respectively) to understand these polarities from a symbolic and energetic lens (which is very different from societal gender norms, which are often arbitrary... like women wearing pink, etc.) Keep in mind, this relates indirectly to human gender in general as the Masculine and Feminine are found interplaying in all living and non-living systems. But you will notice that men (as a whole group) have a slight lean towards the Masculine Principled qualities and that women (as a whole group) have a slight lean towards the Feminine Principled qualities. But keep in mind that these arcetypes/qualities were called Masculine and Feminine because of men and women's slight leans towards one energy or the other... but these qualities are only somewhat correlated to human gender expression. So, these polarities superseded yet inform human gender expressions. Here's the list (Feminine first/Masculine second) Being vs Doing Tangible vs Intangible Earthly vs Spiritual Physical vs Non-Physical Grounded vs Lofty Wisdom vs Truth Cycles vs Progressions Imperfection vs Perfection Contraction vs Expansion Emotions vs Thoughts Intuition vs Logic Chaos vs Order Organic vs Geometric The Unconscious Mind vs The Conscious Mind Relationship vs Singularity The Everthingness Facet of Infinity vs The Nothingness Facet of Infinity Sovereignty vs Leadership Internal Knowing vs External Knowledge Mystery vs Clarity Ordinariness vs Extraordinariness Mortality vs Immortality The Body vs The Mind Receptivity vs Radiation Receiving vs Giving Surrender vs Overcoming Inherent Worthiness vs Earning Collective vs Individual Connection vs Disconnection Intuitive Operation vs Algorithmic Operation Internal vs External The Fall and Winter vs The Spring and Summer The Moon vs The Sun The Roots vs The Branches/Fruit Limitation vs Unlimitedness

Exactly. I have had a few one night stands before too in my early 20s. And it was just so much less interesting because there's no feelings or emotional stimulation there. So, I can only imagine that women who get picked up by a pick-up artist are mostly looking for some brief fun but are less likely to consider them for longer term relationships. I just don't see why a woman would give a chance to a random guy if she already knows a bunch of guys from her social circle. So, I would imagine that the divide of "men are most interested in pick-up as theirmain dating stragegy" and "women are most interested in finding a guy from her social circle as their main dating strategy" probably creates a difficulty for men.

If you learn how to flirt and be playful with women you're interested in, that will help your chances quite a lot. There are plenty of men who have never approached a single strange woman in their entire lives and still have had relationships and hook-ups and things. You just have to interact in a relaxed casual way and engage in playful banter.

Gotcha! I thought it was interpretation number 4... but it was actually interpretation number 3. But at first, I read it as interpretation number 2... and for a split second, I was like "Oh no! They got to him!"

I was confused by what @Leo Gura said because I could interpret it two ways... or really four ways. "Soon enough Swedes will be fucking aliens." could be interpreted as... Soon enough Swedes will be having sex with immigrants. Soon enough Swedes will be immigrants in their own country because immigrants will replace them. Soon enough Swedes will be having sex with literal space aliens. Soon enough Swedes will become literal space aliens. I think he meant the fourth one... but I thought (for a second) he could have meant the second one too.

It's not so much that. In the past, relationships always came through my own social circle. Not strangers... but men that I knew over a longer period of time in a platonic way.

I don't deny that women have it very easy if the goal is to get sex and to have men interested. I'm not saying men and women have it the same in terms of level of ease of access to sex, at all. Women can get sex 100x easier than a guy can. It's honestly more difficult to avoid sex if you're a woman... because it comes hunting for you. And that's its own problem, but that's a totally different story. But I have seen plenty of men be successful in these ways that didn't have any kind of special qualities or development... with many being below average across many fields. I tend to think all of that development that a lot of guys do to learn how to talk to women is akin to Dumbo's magic feather. Dumbo believed he could only fly when holding the magic feather. But he had simply mis-correlated the feather with the flying. He could fly without the feather too... he just didn't know it and he doubted himself. But the feather helped him attribute his own success with flying to the feather instead of to himself... which assuaged his doubts. So, a lot of the ways that men develop themselves relative to meeting women is like Dumbo's magic feather in the sense that they didn't' really need to do that to meet a woman and have sex. But they didn't dare approach until they engaged in those means of developing themselves. In reality, they just put themselves out there and were willing to be social with women. That was the thing that changed. And any man who's willing to be social with women can get laid, even if he's quite awkward. So, I'm not saying it's easy. There's a head game about it. But I'm saying that, if some of the guys I've known have been able to make it happen, it can't be the most difficult thing in the world to pull off. That's what makes it seem like more of a limiting belief thing to my perceptions, because I've seen with my eyes really unattractive and social inept guys having girlfriends and getting laid. So, it seems pretty evident to me that the sense of scarcity men perceive relative to sex is exacerbated by certain mindsets and beliefs. The scarcity is not as extreme as they believe.

I actually like it when men don't approach. I prefer a dynamic that starts out platonic and gradually grows into something more intimate... as that's what's more enjoyable and meaningful to me. So, I don't like it when men approach... or when I approach. I hate it when things start on a romantic/sexual foot or when things are rushed to some outcome. It's like reading the end of the mystery novel first and spoiling the story. I get why men do that. But I need the slow-burn of romantic and sexual tension that builds up in platonic acquaintanceship over time to really open up to such a connection. So, I tend to prefer men who are a bit more reserved romantically and sexually who might be a bit nervous to escalate things. I have to get a sense that it's a bit challenging for him to escalate because of his concerns about traversing boundaries. So, I like it (at the outset of a relationship) when he has to be a bit brave to go in for a kiss and I can feel the slight shakiness. I suppose it also doubles as a way of sorting out guys who are always trying to escalate things sexually non-stop with everyone. But that's mostly just something that shows me that the physical intimacy is meaningful to him, which makes the encounter more meaningful to me. But all the things that I mentioned in my post above are a great way to help a man feel drawn in and more comfortable opening up... and even having stronger desires to escalate things.

I can understand why it feels more difficult from men's perspective. And certainly it's more difficult for men than for women. But I do suspect that a lot of the sense of difficulty and scarcity comes from some degree of projection... and not necessarily the reality of the situation itself with regard to actual numbers. So, because men have to approach and overcome insecurities to do so, this may give an illusion that exacerbates the feelings of scarcity... when there are probably more opportunities than men recognize.

That makes sense that that would be a challenge if there's far more men who are up for hook-ups than women. If it's 1 woman who's up for a hook-up for every 10 men looking for a hook-up, I could see that being a challenge.

Even if it's difficult, it's still a more beneficial strategy for nerdy guys. I've had a lot of nerdy guy friends in my time. And they all had girlfriends and had sex by their late teens. And I have to conclude that the primary difference between them and a lot of young nerdy guys today is because they had a warm social circle with both guys and girls in it. Like, the fact that all the nerdy guys I've been friends with haven't struggled as much in this way is because they were social (even if socially awkward)... and they had me and other women in their social circle. Plus, not having a warm social circle is a problem in MANY more ways than just a lack of sexual options. Lack of community is extremely unhealthy for people. And men tend to struggle with this a lot.

@Xonas Pitfall I see what you mean. One thing to take note of is that, if you ask men this question, they'll tell you what they fantasize about that evokes a sexual response because that is what a single man consciously values. But they won't (because mostly they can't) tell you what they really respond to when they fall in love with a woman and want to have a longterm relationship. The conscious agenda of a single man is one of casting the net far and wide... and it's quite impersonal. So, they're going to give you fairly shallow answers if you ask "What are men attracted to?" because men are attracted to fairly surface level things at the outset. But men don't fall in love with what they're attracted to. If you've ever watched porn, that's the level of depth with which they respond to things like tits and ass. It doesn't have a real deep emotional effect on the man, such that it works to bring him closer. What a man responds to in a deeper way is Feminine energy, which in practice means... A woman leaning back into her Feminine energy and giving him space to pursue and woo her A woman being in touch with her feelings without an agenda to manipulate A woman enjoying herself and having fun A woman being open and vulnerable and soft A woman listening and giving space for him to also be a bit vulnerable A woman caring for herself and pouring her energy into herself A woman allowing him to help and feel needed A woman appreciating what she enjoys about him or the things he does But none of these are a way to get a man to be attracted or fall in love. They are not tactics for getting a man, but a way of existing as a woman who wants to experience the joys of the Feminine. But they are also things that happen to create a space for a man that a man desperately longs for. Man-world can be cold and mean. So, men tend to really crave for the softness of the Feminine. So, "How to attract a man?" is not the most effective question to ask. To answer that, it's just to be a woman and to realize that you don't need to do anything at all. But it is in you operating without agenda and just doing what you please that will be magnetic. That's why I said to never try to attract a man. The right man will already be attracted without you trying to attract him. But to deepen the connection and to help him open his heart, just focus on treating yourself like your own beloved and sit comfortably in your Feminine energy... in touch with your feelings and receptive to enjoyment and delight.

I'm going to need to see some more convincing studies. The first one was a survey of 8th grade and 12th grade boys. And the last one you gave was just a statement. I need to know sources, sample sizes, and how the questions are asked. Most of the misogynistic men that I run across on the internet seem to be lonely nerdy guys who are bitter towards women. It's rare to run into an internet misogynist with social skills. But I would find it very hard to believe that men could be influenced by all this misogynistic internet propaganda and that large groups of women wouldn't be on high alert for it. You really don't think women are taking these things into consideration while dating? If I were dating and going on dating apps, I'd be scouring the app for tells about whether a guys is into Red Pill stuff before I ever agreed to meet up with him. Even some subtle tell would be enough to set me off. And I'm almost 100% sure that this describes a sizable percentage of the young female population... since most of them are VERY aware of how bad the misogyny issue has become in recent years.

There are two groups of misogynists... nerdy misogynists with victim complexes who are sucked into online propaganda pipelines (Incels/Red Pill) and hyper-aggressive misogynistic guys with machiavellian tendencies (who are like that regardless of propaganda, as they have been in every era). Both of these groups have extreme disdain for women... and a resistance to the Feminine more generally. So, either way, neither of these groups are good husband and father material. And any woman who gets into a relationship with a man from either of these groups will be in for a world of misery and abuse. But I can see that some women might be attracted to the hyper-aggressive misogynist guys... as these guys might be more outgoing and socially adept than the nerdy Incels. And these guys might actually come across as having some level of Masculine swagger. Plus, they might be pushy enough that they push themselves into a woman's life who has more porous boundaries. But the kind of men that a huge swath of the female population are sorting for are the ones that whine and complain about women all the time... and use the same misogynistic talking points that they picked up from internet propaganda. They're easy to pin-point out because they talk in propaganda speak about hypergamy and Chads and women being "ran through". So, they're very easy to sort for on dating apps and in person. Hence why there's so much complaint around the "male loneliness epidemic".... because these bitter guys who resent women are being sorted from consideration.

This is a study of 8th and 10th grade boys. Not exactly a great sample population for the study. Also, going on more dates doesn't mean that those dates are turning into relationships. In fact, more dates could mean less relationship success. Who do you think has gone on more dates? Someone in a longterm relationship? Or someone who has never had a longterm relationship but is continuously looking for one?

Not sure if that's true. I've known guys in college that hooked up quite a bit by going out to bars. And they were average looking guys... and not particularly dishonest. Just regular guys who happened to be social and outgoing. My perception is that women out at clubs and bars are not so difficult to pick-up because that setting is already primed for that kind of thing. And the guy definitely doesn't need to be Brad Pitt... though it helps if he's a 4 or above in level of attractiveness. If you don't mind my asking, what were your numbers when you were doing pick-up regularly... in terms of approach rate, phone number rate, and close rate? For example, is it like for every 100 girls you approach you get 5 phone numbers and 1 close? Honestly, if it's more difficult than that... why not give men advice on how to build their own social circle around themselves? (Not the OP specifically) Most of these guys are just nerdy guys looking to get their first girlfriend. There's no need to be on hard-mode approaching a bunch of randos unless you want to have sex with a bunch of women. Honestly, a co-ed social circle would help like 60% of the guys in this section of the forum tremendously.

Fair enough. I don't recommend the OP using his social circle for random hook-ups. I'm just saying that sex isn't that scarce to come by. It's just that men have a lot of limiting beliefs that keep them held back from opportunities for interaction with women and hook-ups... and make it out to mean more about themselves and their level of attractiveness than is necessary. But even if there were a sense of extreme scarcity of women who are open to hook-ups (which there isn't)... a guy can't be operating off of scarcity thinking. It's his scarcity mindset that's causing him to feel like he needs to act out of integrity... and not actual scarcity itself.

I'm hardly talking about Brad Pitt. I'll remind you that I'm originally from a redneck town in Florida with all manner of odd people. And I know tons of very unattractive guys who were getting girlfriends and hooking up just because they had a social circle that had women in it and were interacting with women regularly. Perhaps I'm biased because I've definitionally only interacted with men who have women in their social circle. But the reality is that, if you develop a social circle with women in it, you can definitely get laid no problem. I know a guy who was super creepy with a high pitched voice... and who looked like a walrus with the white whiskers and everything... and he still hooked up with a couple girls in my wider social circle. So, I'm sure that men who have no social circle might find it difficult to get laid because they need to learn how to approach random women. But any man who has a co-ed social circle and who is social will be able to find someone to sleep with.

Are you asking about what attracts men? (Also, if you don't mind my asking, are you a woman or man?) If you're a man who wants to attract a man, I can't help you there because it's not something I'm experienced with. But if you're a woman... Honestly... the secret is just being a woman. Women are already attractive to heterosexual men. So, we don't have to come up with any crazy strategies to attract them. It's like birds... where the female bird sits there and the male bird comes up and does all sorts of crazy dances to impress her. The female bird doesn't have to do anything other than simply be a female bird and say "yes" or "no". And even going into strategic thinking about how to attract men puts us more in our Masculine, which is less attractive. So, the key is to NEVER do anything to deliberately attract a man. Instead, just do what makes you feel good and invest in taking care of yourself for your own enjoyment... whatever that might look like. And stay connected deeply with your intuition and your feelings so that you can properly sort the men you like from the ones you don't like. And be willing to walk away from men who can't/won't provide for you the type of relationship experience you want to have. And just focus on having a good time and enjoying the experience. That's really all you need is to enjoy yourself. Consider this... women appreciate a man who's funny, while men like women who laugh at their jokes. So, women don't need to learn any humor skills or to learn how to be playful, but simply be open to enjoying the guy's bird dance... but ONLY IF she actually enjoys the bird dance. So, if a guy is being playful with you and you genuinely like it, just enjoy his playfulness and laugh at him. That will let him know his dance is having an effect. (But don't do this as a tactic. Just enjoy what you enjoy.) So, never focus on attracting a man. Instead, just focus on feeling good and being in the moment. Attraction is a male problem that men need to solve. Sorting is a female problem that women need to solve. The issue is that we live in a society that makes women feel like we're the ones who need to do the mating dance and hyper focus on being attractive. But this puts us in our Masculine... as it is always the male that does the mating dance in nature. And getting us to focus so much on doing the mating dance and being attractive distracts us from our real task... which is sorting the wheat from the chaff. Instead, just know that you'll be attractive to the right guy... and sort ruthlessly until you find the relationships dynamic you really want. And when you do, just feel and enjoy.

I meant more along the lines of one-night stands. There's plenty of those. But either way, the OP should not lie about his intentions. Otherwise, he'd be engaging in sexual coercion because the women would be agreeing to sex under false pretexts... which is non-consensual. But since he's also looking for a relationship, my advice is for him to keep his sexual search separate from his romantic search. For romantic relationship, he should probably just develop a social circle where he can be social and get to know lots of people. And deeper feelings will arise organically with someone. That will help him find someone to be in a relationship with that he really feels connected to. Until then, he can go out to bars and clubs and seek out one-night-stands to get his sexual needs met. The issue is that he's combined these goals together as one. And it's causing him to feel like he's in a dilemma where he needs to lie and sexually coerce women into sleeping with him in order to get both sex and the potential for a longterm relationship. But that's just not the way to go about either of these goals. It's chasing two rabbits and catching none... combined with the false notion that rabbits are a rare animal.

It's the issue of Maximizers versus Satisficers... only as it applies to relationships. Maximizers are always out looking for better and better and better choices... but never feel satisfied with their choice. It's all expansion and no contraction. Maximizers are always looking for the most ideal and most perfect choice. And when applied to relationships, they can never find a partner that they actually want to invest in because there's always a sense of needing more and more and more ideal options... as they are not emotionally mature enough to appreciate an imperfect relationship with an imperfect person (which all humans are). Satisficers on the other hand, find what they like and then commit themselves to that one choice and find what is satisfying in that choice. So, it's a brief expansion and then a contraction and deepening of a relationship with that choice. It's a devotion to what is. That's true whether it's a career, a relationship, a purchasing decision, a life path, etc. Beware the path of the Maximizer. It's a foolish path that presents itself as the 'wisdom' of having high standards.

Whether in integrity or out of integrity... a man can easily have sex with someone if he's a social guy and is willing to interact with women. There's no need to misrepresent one's self to get sex. If a man wants just sex, there are plenty of women who just want that too. So, just be straightforward. It's sexual coercion to do it any other way... as a woman who says 'yes' based on misinformation when she would have otherwise said 'no' is not actually consenting to the sex.