Emerald

The egg does not chase the sperm.

You’re over-thinking this thing about objectification. The Lover and Beloved archetype isn’t about objectification… it’s a reflection of the unconditional giving and receiving of love. Also, all of my relationships with the men I’ve loved and been loved by began organically in the context of just having a good time together and chatting about mutual interests. The reality is that women and men often fall in love just by spending quality time together. It wasn’t some hyper-rational guarded pick up stuff. The logic-mind doesn’t belong in the love dynamic. I knew most of the men I’ve shared a mutual love with as friends first and mutual attraction just arose after some months of spending time together platonically.

Yes, taking the frame of the adored enables the man to usurp the power of the Feminine Beloved archetype and be detached from the relationship while the woman is attached. He begins by aping the Lover to hook the woman and ignite her pair bonding drives. (He apes it because embodying the Lover would feel too vulnerable and he would run the risk of falling in love) And then, when she has fallen for him, he does a bait and switch and positions himself in the role of Feminine Beloved where he will never fall in love. And because she is hooked, she shifts into the role of the Masculine Lover archetype. And she begins vying for his love by giving and giving in the way she would like to receive. But men don’t fall in love by being given to. So, none of that works. So, it puts him on the front foot and her on the back foot. But a mutual love cannot arise from this dynamic. And it’s a misfortune for any children that are conceived. So, women are wise to avoid men who only ape the lover. And men who actually want mutual love are wise to avoid these tactics.

Of course, there is balance and mutualism in the Lover and Beloved dynamic. You would both be ebbing and flowing between the Lover and Beloved in a healthy love dynamic. So, she would also be expressing love. Love is a conversation. And the Lover speaks and the Beloved listens. But those are archetypes not human beings. Two human beings must ebb and flow between the two for there to be conversation. But it’s a good ideas for the man to take the Lover frame and to allow her to take the Beloved frame. This allows love to to blossom in both.

It’s not black and white. All people have the Masculine and the Feminine in them. The woman’s Masculine side must also be the Lover to the man’s Feminine side. For most, the dynamic will probably be around 80/20.

Take it slow. You don’t have to be super vulnerable up front. But for mutual love to happen, it must gradually unfold and you must both surrender to it. This takes time and trust. In the meantime, you can engage with the lighter aspects of the Lover - being playful, fun, flirtatious, etc. It’s best to start out really chilled out about connecting. But if a man tinkers around in the Lover role in the initial stages of attraction and hooks the woman… and then shifts himself in the Feminine Beloved role, where he is up on the pedestal… she will be in love and he will not. He will be detached and she will be falling all over herself to keep him because she will sense his detachment and get really anxious that he will leave. Not a healthy dynamic.

A common dynamic in pick up is for men to usurp the power of the Feminine Beloved role to their own benefit. That way, they can awaken love in the woman without being in love themselves. In this way, they can gain relationship to a woman (or women) without any of the vulnerability or loss of control that is required of the Lover. And if they succeed at awakening love in the woman, she will shift out of her natural power and into the Masculine role to try to keep him. — The mother archetype is a different archetype from the Lover and Beloved. But insofar as the Lover and Beloved apply in parent-child relationship, the parents play the Lover role and the children are the Beloveds. Both nurturing and protecting are part and parcel to the (Masculine) Lover archetype… while being on the receiving end of that love and protection is when the (Feminine) Beloved is embodied. But love is seen as culturally Feminine. But the Lover (the one who gives love) is archetypally Masculine. It extends the most vulnerable parts of itself to give love deeply to all of its beloved creation. The Lover archetype is repressed in men in our culture because we have a society that overvalues the Warrior and King archetypes in men… but undervalues the Magician and the Lover archetypes in men.

These are archetypes. I don’t make the rules. But objectification simply means to view someone as an object… which means nothing about choice or standing out. And the lover and beloved dynamic doesn’t have much to do with objectification. Though we could say that the beloved is the “object” of the lover’s desire. But more than objectification, it’s a reflection of the archetypal love dynamic… from the mundane to the spiritual. In terrestrial form, typically the man embodies the lover more often and the woman typically embodies the beloved more often. Though a healthy relationship dynamic oscillates a bit. And on the spiritual level, God is the lover and all parts of its creation are his beloved.

Of course, don’t put a woman up on a pedestal. But the archetypal story is Masculine Lover and Feminine Beloved. And this dynamic where the man is more in the Lover position and giving love, and the woman is more in the Beloved position and receiving love tends to lead to deeper pair bonding and a mutually loving relationship that feels like home. And it gives way to a stable and comfortable family to raise children within. The opposite dynamic will lead to a situation where the woman loves and adores the man, and the man is pretty detached from the woman. And she’ll feel the need to chase him. So, it will put her in her Masculine energy. And the relationship will be like a very exciting and emotionally disregulating roller coaster ride where the woman will feel insecure and unable to relax because she senses he doesn’t love her. Needless to say, this wouldn’t be a good dynamic to raise children in.

Not necessarily so. The OP never specified what his partner was eating or how much of it. Perhaps she even does eat a relatively healthy diet. Some people (especially women) have dealt with eating disorders where they over-restrict. And restricting food choices could re-trigger those issues. So, it could be quite important for these people to allow themselves to eat any kind of food they want in moderation. Also, many people who have been sexually assaulted tend to feel safer with more weight on their bodies. And so, they’ll unconsciously end up in dynamics of craving and over-eating high calorie foods that willpower alone isn’t going to fix. Or they could just be dealing with body image issues more generally where part of them tries to lose weight because they feel unlovable with weight on their body and another part of them rebels because the desire to lose weight is coming from self-hate. There can be many dynamics as to why someone’s diet is the way it is that has nothing to do with lack of education. It’s fairly common for people to have psychological barriers to eating healthily that have to be worked through before that education can be applied.

No, I was genuinely surprised to watch the video and find that he was speaking about similar archetypes and dynamic… just flipped around.

I’m not specifically saying it’s a gold digger and sugar daddy situation. I mean that it sounds shallow and transactional… and generally un-gratifying. It feels like two people mutually using each other to feel good about themselves as opposed to developing a warm organic relationship between two ordinary people. It’s seems too achievement oriented and meritocratic to feel substantial.

That makes sense that most women wouldn’t be making a lot on Onlyfans. Too much competition.

It’s funny. I posted my reply before I watched the video. And he’s saying similar things to me but only with women in the adorer mode and men in the adored mode. But it’s archetypally backwards where women are in the Masculine lover mode and men are in the Feminine beloved mode. Men don’t like being beloveds.

Men like the idea of an adoring woman in fantasy, but they don’t actually respond very well to it in reality. And men certainly don’t fall in love by receiving adoration. These male/female dynamics are important to understand… - Women tend to fall in love by receiving. - Men tend to fall in love by giving. The more he gives and invests, the deeper he will love. And the more she allows herself to receive of him, the deeper she will love. This is the archetypal lover and beloved dynamic. The lover must always adore the beloved a little bit more than that beloved adores the lover. And when a woman looks up to a man and has the default frame of adoration, it subtly communicates that she sees his value as higher and her value as lower. And it foists the man up onto a pedestal and into the Feminine receiver/selector mode, while she tries to play the part of the Masculine giver as she gives her adoration unconditionally. This is why doing things for a man to get him to be interested backfires. This includes cooking for him, having sex with him, adoring him, cleaning for him, etc. Men will certainly enjoy these things. But he won’t feel compelled to pursue because a woman in giving mode is in her Masculine energy. Men are compelled to pursue challenging woman who make them chase a bit. This requires the woman to have relatively high standards to spark her feelings of adoration.

I think they’re only counting the hottest women as women here. So, when they say “women”, they’re only talking about a fraction of a percentage of women. They don’t really see regular women as women. And they take a cartoon caricature of how the top 1% of hot women live their lives, and they envy that. And they claim things like, “women just float through life” or “women live life on easy mode”… which isn’t true. And they have no empathy or understanding for what it’s like to be a woman. And women will pick up on this through tells in their speech and gestures about their notions about women. And then they’ll wonder why they struggle with finding a girlfriend.

Therein lies the cost. If you’re someone who wants to get free stuff from men, then you have to be willing to position yourself that way. You’ll have to be the hot chick that hangs around rich men who see you as an accessory to their success. And positioning yourself that way sounds like a shallow God awful experience.

The majority of women are not on Onlyfans. Most women are not sex workers and wouldn’t be okay with being sex workers. But I don’t view it as a lack of integrity. Sex work if fine for those who choose it because they enjoy it. I just hope that no one gets into it out of financial desperation. But I’m sure it’s correct also that women have to probably do a lot of marketing to get significant money from Onlyfans. The competition would be quite stiff, I’d imagine. And it’s honestly silly the idea that attractive women don’t have to work or develop character. They’re living life just like everyone else. And hot women are only hot for like 5 or 10 years of their lives. You can’t rely on something that fades so easily.

I’m sure that game is helpful. But the real issue that keeps men lonely isn’t lack of game… or some nonsense that Karmadhi was saying about needing to be in the top 10% of men to get a girlfriend. The real problem is a lack of social outlets… which then behooves men to learn game and do cold approach in lieu of a healthy social life. That’s why I recommended creating a social circle. You can just be an average (or even below average) guy and not learn much game and still get a girlfriend if you have a social circle. I know this because my high school and college social circle consisted of a lot of nerdy guys and girls. And none of them were unable to find partners despite the fact that many of them lacked in social graces and/or looks. And the connection is honestly just better and more organic with social circles. If we were living in a time where society wasn’t so atomized and online, the men who are on here that are complaining about not being able to get girlfriends would have already had some luck.

Leo was just talking about the perks of simply existing in the world and having big boobs… not about joining onlyfans or doing some other form of sex work. The majority of women wouldn’t be okay with doing sex work.

That’s generally not how relationships with women work. Be social and make lots of male and female friends and acquaintances. And when you’re spending time socializing, an organic attraction will eventually arise between you and a woman in your social circle. You don’t need to be in the top 10% of guys. And you don’t even need much game. Just socialize and have a good time and connect with people and your loving cup will eventually be filled.

I think you over-estimate how many freebies women tend to get. The cooks at a restaurant will give you free fries if you’re a waitress. And men at clubs will buy you drinks. I still say that it’s best to take a non-receptive response even to those small gestures, unless you’re genuinely interested in a guy. But that’s about the amount of freebies that you get consistently as a woman… even as a very attractive woman. That is… unless you position yourself for the male gaze and as being receptive to bigger gestures. There’s a personality frame and persona that has to be embodied in order to get that kind of treatment. So, the woman you were seeing who was given the car by the billionaire, probably positioned herself in a way that evoked that reaction. He didn’t just see a hot chick on the street and say, “Hey there miss! Can I buy you a car?” She had to be a certain kind of person to even be interested in embodying the persona of being the woman that receives a car from a rich guy for being hot. And therein lies the cost. It also encourages you to see men as the “middle man” between you and your personal power… and you become reliant on your looks as how you secure resources and power. And once you lose that power to turn the heads of men, you will feel powerless. And that looks-based power fades about ten years into adult life with 40 or 50 years left to go. And woe betide the woman that makes the mistake of getting into a relationship with a billionaire who gives cars to hot women.

Ever since I was a little girl, I noticed that boys/men have a very different idea of what makes men attractive compared to what women actually find attractive about men. One example that I noticed way back then, is that many boys/men tend to think about having big muscles as the ideal male body type. But most women (according to surveys) tend to find men attractive who have a body type that’s strong and lean where the muscles aren’t super huge. (That’s just when women are asked in a survey though. Actual attraction is much more nuanced than that.) But that’s just one example… and a physical one at that. There tends to be some common beliefs among men about men’s attractiveness physically and personality-wise. And this creates a desire to match up to the “ideal” male image that men believe is attractive. And the desire to emulate that image in terms of looks and personality often acts as a spoiler to their natural attractiveness in the eyes of women. Through a woman’s eyes, it looks like a guy covering over and interrupting his own natural Masculinity with a mask of his internal image of the ideal Masculine. It’s a man who doubts his Masculinity and thus feels he needs to pretend to be a man. Here’s a video that talks about this phenomenon in depth…

@something_else Let me rephrase this… those freebies come at a cost that’s greater than sex.

I wasn’t strawmanning. I was being facetious to convey my point that tits don’t confer any kind of real power. And I doubt this billionaire just gave your girlfriend a free car without expecting something in return. The free things that men give to women are never actually free. It’s a good practice to avoid taking “free” things from men. Otherwise you’re like Persephone eating pomegranate seeds in the Underworld.