Emerald

Yes, biology plays a role in attraction. But the role it plays is relatively low compared to other factors. My point is that, when you’re adding in your IDEAS about biology, that your understanding is insufficient and leads to distortions. This is evidenced by the fact that you seemed before to assume in your previous post that people would have to be in relationships with people they didn’t find attractive. Your false assumption about biology seeming to be that most women are not capable of being attracted to a man who isn’t some top 1% guy. There’s where your low self-esteem meets your misunderstanding about human biology. Most men are biologically sufficient for most women to be attracted to, and vice versa. It’s the other psychological and emotional factors that account for the selectivity. Also, I don’t think that more than 10%-20% of society will ever be polyamorous. I think most people will always prefer monogamy. And women are especially monogamously oriented. So, most women will never date a guy who has multiple partners. But if you don’t want women to disregard you as a man, just ditch these ideas (which are lady repellent) and become a well-developed and emotionally intelligent guy. Let go of these petty insecure ideas.

Does your cousin actually want that? I feel like, if she were really certain about it, she’d have probably made it happen… barring fertility issues. Yet again… some women get so wrapped up in the IDEA of a relationship and family that they get into checkbox mentality about their partners.This is especially true where there’s lots of familial pressure involved. And this masculine oriented “pros and cons” mentality around finding “Mr. Right” just puts a stopper in real love and connection. Looking for a good guy “on paper” can really screw over actual connection… which is inherently very messy. But I get that the OP really believes what he’s saying… and in that sense is arguing in good faith. But it’s still nonsense because it isn’t actually based in reality. It’s just a big system of abstract ideas that SEEM like reality because lots of misguided and inexperienced young men believe them and they’re all over on the internet. But the reality is VERY different. Every man is better off just disregarding these ideas.

The honeymoon phase only lasts 3 months. So most people don’t decide to marry by then.

See, you’re again adding in biology where it barely fits. No one needs to pretend to be attracted to someone that they aren’t attracted to. I’ve NEVER been with a guy that I wasn’t attracted to… and I wouldn’t concede on that. Attraction is a pre-requisite for romantic connection. This feels like a “duh”. Why would anyone need to concede this? But I’m going to assume that communal living will start becoming more popular over the coming decades. We’re really in need of a return to more direct socialization.

The issue here is that most people don’t know how to have intimate and fulfilling relationships. So they have a short honeymoon period where all the chemicals are present…. and once that honeymoon period is over, then there’s nowhere to go from there. But that’s not an indicator of the nature of relationship. It’s an indicator that most people are bad at relationships. A relationship with deep intimacy is what women are looking for. And deep down it’s what men want too. But if a woman’s man is emotionally unintelligent, then she’ll probably have no choice but to seek out stimulation elsewhere. So, romance novels and other men are a ‘good’ option if one is starving for intimacy in their primary relationship. But this issue is because most men are disintegrated from their feminine side and don’t know how to be vulnerable or intimate. And they’re as dry as Dr. Spock in the desert.

I’m very glad that stage blue is mostly gone from society. I’d genuinely rather be all alone than have someone else choose my partner. I’ve been in bad relationships before. So I know from personal experience that it’s better to be alone than to be with an incompatible partner. Right now, we would be wise to focus towards shifting back towards communal living with a strong emphasis on having complementary relationships and friendships… including non-traditional relationships, like polyamory for example, Stage blue was all about smooshing people together forever regardless of compatibility. Stage green will be about bringing people together in a way that also honors the individualism and freedom that was discovered in Stage orange. But a high divorce rate right now is a very good sign for cultural evolution. We’re in the process of learning autonomy and individuation from our social groups of origin… when before our families would have squelched our capacity for individuality and chosen everything for us.

Sounds to me like those men need to get off the porn and games and actually go socialize. Also, I call bullshit on the idea that women get desensitized to men after dating some supposedly “alpha” guy. And I am having a hard time believing that you know women personally who are expressing this viewpoint. No man is that special, number one. Number two, female sexuality just doesn’t work that way.

The only problem is that there’s a huge group of men who are brainwashed into believing there is a problem. Things are fine. They just need to socialize and go and meet women. Also, if I were to have a choice to incarnate into a society and I could only base that incarnation off of one statistic about the society… I’d choose to incarnate into the society with the highest divorce rate. And that’s because you’d know it was a freer society than any with low divorce rates. High divorce rate is a very good sign. And longevity is a piss-poor litmus test for the quality of a relationship.

?

Then why proliferate the ideas in your OP? Your post was basically like, “Oh no! Women only like the top 1% of guys but most women aren’t good enough to measure up to those guys’ standards! So, men and women end up lonely because these undeserving women have free choice over their partners! We need to regulate people’s dating choices to save us from the scourge of Feminism and women’s hypergamous ways!” But if you already know that women tend to go for their match… then why even suggest regulation?

I don’t watch it. But I’m glad to hear that my channel would be getting lots of action in that universe. ?

You have shown very little understanding about the role that biology plays in attraction because you haven’t accounted for any of the other realities and how much biology pales in comparison to those other factors. The strongest factor that determines who we will be attracted to is psychology… not biology. Biology is very basic in how it influences our attractions. Basically… most people are biologically suited for reproduction. No one needs this excess of status or looks like you suggest in the OP. And the statistics show that most couples are nearly equivalent in regards to looks, age, education level, and status. You can basically look at the world and see this. Next time you go to Target, just take a gander around at all the couples. You’ll see lots of average folks together. High school drop outs tend to pair with high school dropouts. College educated people tend to pair with college educated people. 10s date 10s and 5s date 5s. There’s an age hypergamy… where the man is 2 years older on average in a coupling. But that’s really the only general statistic you’ll find where there’s a marked disparity between partners on average. But what really determines a person’s relationship quality is their psychology and trauma patterns. A person who has x trauma will tend to attract partners with y trauma. And if you want to ACTUALLY be helpful to people, just stop focusing on biology (which paints a very unrealistic picture of human relationships)… and start focusing on psychology.

I did engage with the substance of what he was saying. I called it nonsense… because it’s all a bunch of armchair philosophizing and bro-science that’s not actually based on the realities of real human relationship dynamics. And it’s important to call it out as such because so many young guys are murdering their own self-esteems based on a false idea… which the OP proliferates. Overall, I’d hope we can all agree to stop proliferating conspiracy theories about female sexuality… and then also to stop proposing solutions to problems that don’t actually exist. The only issue here is that these men prefer their own ideas to the realities of actually coming to know and love a woman. And that requires ZERO regulation. It just requires a man to let go of his bs ideas and actually talk to real women.

And how’s that viewpoint working out for you? See… this is the exact distortion that I’m talking about. It completely discounts the existence of love between two human beings and boils everything down to a zero-sum survival game. And it’s an incredibly unnuanced, immature, and emotionally unintelligent way to view human relationships. It’s no wonder why so many men end up seeing things through this robotic bro-science Darwinian lens and murdering their self-esteem. What a harsh understanding of reality that this form of survivalist reductionism leads to. This perspective really lends itself to lack of emotional intelligence in relationships… all with them believing that they’re some how holding the more true and superior viewpoint relative to relationships. You could certainly boil all of the reality of human beings down to a bunch of neurochemicals firing off. But it would be a very non-holistic perspective. Don’t assume that you understand the truth by boiling things down this way… as the truth of human to human love holds fractals upon fractals of different perspectives and layers.

Sorry, I’m not buying what you’re selling. You’re just as much in fantasy as you were in the original post. Come back to the reality… not the robotic bro science hypergamy nonsense … not to hyper-romantic pedestalization nonsense . Come back to the reality of being human. The mundanity is where it is.

Just reading through the thread… Here’s a bit of a caveat emptor. If RSD coaches break down your self-esteem to get you to buy… they will likely continue to disempower and give you half-crappy/half-helpful advice because it is lucrative to them. Playing off of male insecurity is a very profitable business. You should be cautious because these coaches would lose money if men actually gained confidence and felt better about themselves. Your crippling self-esteem issues and insecurities about your masculinity are their bread and butter.

Too much pedestalization. Still a distortion. Just two sides to the same coin of misrepresentation… one idealized and one denigrated. It all leads to people projecting nonsense onto women and our sexuality. And even if you’re not identified with being into Red Pill stuff, you’re still proliferating their worldview. And look around the internet a bit…, this worldview that you’re pushing as “human nature” just turns men into a bunch of basket cases who can’t even interact with women on a basic human level.

I didn't use an ad hominem attack. I never insulted you. If I called YOU "nonsense" that would be ad hominem. But I didn't. I called your post nonsense... which is true. If you're with women who are cheating on their partners to be with you... you don't have a great dating life. You're attracting low quality partners who have very little integrity. And you're attracting low quality partners largely because of your viewpoint. You're on a bad wavelength. You just don't realize it because you assume that it's just human nature. You'd be wise to differentiate between human nature and low integrity shallow attraction. And you have not done that. And your distorted views on human nature will keep you solidified in these low integrity dynamics.

You’re the OP of this post. So why choose to spread this nonsense? All you’re doing is painting a robotic falsehood over the real thing. Just go out and meet women. Stop theorizing and spinning false horror stories. All this misrepresentation does is murder men’s confidence and self-esteem… and get on women’s nerves.

It can be if you treat it that way. But you don’t need to treat it that way. It’s not about finding some objectively perfect person. But if you’re a woman who seeks only status or a man who seeks only beauty… it will chew you up and spit you out. But that’s because it will mirror your own objectification and fears of inadequacy to you. Play Darwinian games… face a Darwinian fate. But if you attune your intuition to who actually resonates with you, it isn’t so brutal. It’s a process of connecting with those on the same wavelength. And if it sucks… your wavelength probably sucks. Get a better wavelength.

So many of these Red Pill guys are so detached from what a relationship is that they substitute in their own robotic form of bro-science. Too much internet rotting out their brains and self-esteems. You’d think that people are all mono-focused robots based on how they see it. They read no nuance into matters of love and connection. It’s all just a Darwinian survival game that everyone but some mysterious Chad guy wins. Just go out and talk to women and you’ll see that most women who become attracted to you will like you for you. And it isn’t all just some hierarchical and brutal game. There is love to be had between two human beings.

Go to a club with a couple guy friends. And have a few drinks and dance with some women. Then try to get a number. Women expect that they’ll get approached at a club to some extent. So this gives you some social wiggle room. Just be mindful of crossing any serious boundaries. Just have a good time and interact.

Both… but much more struggling within the realm of relationship. His entire viewpoint on relationships boils it all down to a zero-sum survival game. This mono-viewpoint is very non-nuanced and the opposite of multi perspectival and leads to a resistance to human connection in general. And holding and proliferating solely this viewpoint this will especially bring someone into resistance to their feminine side.

But it’s this particular hierarchical viewpoint that leads men to starvation… one which Leo also subscribes to and perpetuates through his dating/relationship advice. I give Leo plenty of credit where it’s due. But this area is one where his lack of integration really comes through.

I don’t see Leo’s feminine side as being very well integrated. He’s on a better foot than some because he understands the value of it in theory. But overall, he doesn’t value the feminine very much.