Emerald

I rather enjoy taking on the receptive role in a relationship. I love being able to soften and let go. And it makes me feel good when a man takes the lead sometimes. But I also have a strong masculine side, which also feels good to me where I like to have my own autonomy and goals and desires separate from my relationship. So submitting my will to a man in a relationship is the opposite of enjoyable (except sometimes in kinkier sexual scenarios). There’s honestly a chasm of difference between submission and surrender. If you were a woman you’d know the difference. But honestly, how could you possibly know that relationships were better in the past? They honestly sound horrible. My view is that healthy relationship is something that the human beings are evolving into understanding and embodying. It’s almost certainly not going to be found in the past… only in the future.

I don't get a vibe that he's being dishonest or predatory. There's always some chance of that, but he doesn't throw up that red flag for me. He seems to be sharing his perspective quite thoroughly from his experiences. Also, the things he's saying are just true and observable.

You really don't understand what attractive masculinity is... but the sad part is that you think you do.

I know that you're just responding to what the other guy was saying.

He's making a correlation between a woman giving up her sovereignty and her ability to keep the relationship together. And it's true, if you have a relationship where one person gives away all their power and boundaries and never complains and just goes along with whatever the other person wants, you can have a very long relationship... because it isn't really a relationship. If the understanding is that one partner sets the tone and the other partner obeys the tone, you can keep things together in a very shallow way because it guarantees no conflict as long as the woman can continue to submit. But it's not a real relationship because it isn't really about intimacy. It's a social contract... a very solid social contract especially if the society is very punitive towards the partner that's expected to submit.

Because women and men are given the choice to divorce without extremely negative social consequences. Longevity of marriage doesn't say anything about the quality. When two people feel forced to stay together, you can have an exceptionally long (and exceptionally draining) marriage. If those same two people are raised in a society where they don't have to submit to strict rules around marriage being a forever-union, most people will grow apart and eventually divorce... though some will stay together. My view is that a high divorce rate is actually a good indicator of how developed a society is. If a society has an extremely low divorce rate, the society is probably very Stage Blue and authoritarian in its control over the details of people's everyday lives. But if a society has a divorce rate of 50% or more, it's an indicator of how free the society is.

That man is very attractive and is a shining example of what connection to Divine Masculine looks like. I can tell by the thoughtful heart-centered way he speaks and the softness in his eyes. Masculinity is very subtle in its unpretended forms. And it's rare to find men who have tapped into it. But you can spot it from a mile away. I can see why women were magnetized to him. An attractive man is like a very fierce lion that has been tamed by a very skilled lion tamer. And he's got the combination down.

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.