Emerald

Yeah, me too. I just hope that he's gotten some help. He was always like a really good person and a really bad person wrapped up all in one. Like a real Jekyll and Hyde character.

Yeah, that's basically how my relationship went, minus the cheating. He basically made me feel that I was the glue keeping his life together.

No, not usually.

I’m in the mood to do some Tarot readings now. Reply below with a question, if you’d like some Tarot-based insights on it. I’ll pull three cards for you and give a brief explanation of things to consider. Mind you, I’m not psychic. I use the Tarot more as an archetypal vehicle for mining insights.

Actually, the thing that lead me into a relationship to my first boyfriend is that he mirrored a Shadow Aspect in myself. He experienced a ton of trauma in his life, and I went into this whole savior narrative that I can make things better for him and sacrifice myself for him. And I decided that I was super devoted. And I projected onto him my own traumatized aspects, and I felt like in trying to save him I could save that part of myself. So, if I had actually followed my intuition, it would have been a three month long relationship... which would have been fine. It didn't get really bad until much later. But within a few weeks, I decided that I wanted to marry him and have his children one day. And I dug my heals into that narrative and ignored any bits of intuition that tried to spring through. And I just decided that I was super devoted to helping him overcome his hardships. It was like I was trying to be his mom, and he was like a child sometimes. He oscillated back and forth between the badass facade to normal to helpless traumatized child to violent psycho. I lived with him in my last two years of high school. And then, I went to college and he really went off the rails. Then he came to live with me in my college town during my junior year, and that's where everything hit rock bottom. And my ironclad commitment finally broke and I just had to walk away. But I assure you that arrogant man are unattractive to me... specifically because arrogance is so often a cover for weakness and insecurity. I can't even think of an arrogant guy that appears strong to me. Yes... strength is attractive. But only if it is mirrored in their strength of character. Also, my ex was like 5'7" and not very strong or masculine. He was a bit like a Chihuahua in his desire to look like a big dog. He put on a badass front mostly to cover insecurities. But for me, what kept me in it so long is because I felt like he would fall apart without me and that he would kill himself. So, it was his fragility that kept me there.

I would say that men and women want sex just as much... but not just as often. Generally speaking, for women sex can either be very enjoyable or it can be a chore. And it takes a significant degree sexual arousal and emotional stimulation to get what we actually want out of sex. And that's the key... it's harder for women to get what we want out of sex... which isn't just an orgasm. So, there's less incentive to have sex often. BUT my guess is that the desire for that thing that we as women want out of sex is actually far more intense than men's desire for what they want out of sex, because it just isn't so common. But men can guarantee that in nearly every sexual encounter that they will get what they came for, which is the orgasm. So, men will generally want sex with greater frequency than women. Also, there are biological drives to spread the seed that exacerbates this. That said, I do think women want what they want from sex in equal or greater measure to the degree to which guys want what they want from sex. We're looking for different things. Guys can get what they want every time. Women have a harder time getting what they want from sex, but it's amazing when it happens.

how does this go hand in hand with the repression of the masculine though? ( lack of boundaries, people pleasing, unassertivnes, enmeshment trauma) Because masculine and feminine are two sides to one coin, you can't repress one without repressing the other. And everything has a feminine and masculine aspect. Boundaries are masculine in the sense that you have to assert them and draw a line in the sand. But to know what your boundaries are in the first place requires you to be deeply connected to your emotions... which are part of the feminine side of the personality. So, you can't have strong boundaries without integrating the feminine side because the feminine side gives you an intuitive sense for what your boundaries are. Your emotions are your compass in that way. Likewise, you can't have strong boundaries if your masculine side is repressed because you won't be able to assert those boundaries in the external. This also extrapolates out into people pleasing, unassertiveness, and enmeshment. Is it the feminie side that isn't allowed to express itself? I've always struggled with attracting girls but I feel like I'm quite emasulate in some ways and have a lot of the feminie energy. I always thought it was the opposite, but I guess not. What do you, as someone who works with this say? Does integrating that side make really make me more masculine and help me with attracting woman? Isn't it the masculine integration I am missing? The thing to recognize about polarity is that we all have a feminine and masculine side. And to be a highly developed person, we have to integrate both sides. And these are the polarities of Yin and Yang. So, they aren't gender exclusive... they're in everything. And we have an inborn masculine/feminine signature. This means that we can't be any more or less masculine than we already are... nor can we be any more or less feminine than we already are. To believe that we can change these things about ourselves is akin to believing you can convert someone from being gay to being straight. For example, for me, I would categorize myself as about 75% feminine and 25% masculine... which is just about average for a woman. But if I tried to add femininity to myself or take away my masculinity, all I'd be doing is repressing, leaving me in the same exact ratio of masculine to feminine... while also squelching my authenticity. Let's say I'd be trying to get to 100% feminine... but since that's not possible, all I'd be doing is cutting away at my personality and strength while still maintaining my usual 75/25 split. So, the best thing to do is to integrate and own whatever is there regardless of which category it falls into. This will enable you to express your masculinity in its most exalted form... along with your femininity. Now, a lot of times, men in particular, fear being seen as feminine because of cultural attitudes and assumptions about masculinity. So, there comes to be a repression of the feminine... often times based in an insecurity about their masculinity as well as many misconceptions and over-simplifications about how polarity works. What this does is shift a man out of his natural alignment, where he can derive all his authenticity and strength. When the masculine and feminine sides of the personality are at odds or are repressed, there comes to be a stagnation. No life can happen within you without the integration of the masculine and feminine. So, understand that the feminine side of the personality is a bit like the soil from which the masculine side of the personality grows. If there is no soil, there is not growth.

Yes. The self-hate happens when men repress their Anima. And then the Anima projects itself onto women. And through this projection the Anima makes the man feel like he has made his Anima feel... rejected and powerless. So, it is very often that men are grappling with this inner fight with their feminine side, and that this spills out into some gnarly self-esteem problems and a general sense of fixation, aversion, and powerlessness to women... potentially even leading into deep levels of misogyny and a desire to knock his own Anima off the pedestal by doing the same to women. Or to "win" the affection of his rejected Anima that he subconsciously misses by getting women to affirm his worth through sexual attention.

Lol, we say that because we have taken advice from women and than got rejected and friendzoned as a result of that advice. I'm not giving you advice. I'm telling you how female sexuality works. The truths I tell you are not tools that can be wielded easily. If your goal is just to get laid and that's it, what I'm sharing is not a user friendly tool for that. I'm sharing with you a reflection of the subjective reality of women's attraction to men. Also, there is no such thing as a friendzone. This is something that men put on top of their experience of female sexuality to understand it through the lens of their own sexuality, which is one of broad categorization. But women don't actually have the subjective experience of a friendzone because there's no categorization. What the heck is anima? Would love to learn more. Loving Radience posted a couple of my videos on the topic above. But basically, the Anima is the inner woman in every man. This is the man's feminine side, which is necessary to integrate if there is a desire to connect with women at a deeper level and to develop one's self. The Animus is the same but opposite for a woman. If a girl that wants to sleep with you is not a strong indicator that you're attractive ( attest to that girl) , than I don't know what the fuck is. If it's not an indicator, it should be. Otherwise what the fuck is the girl doing. The distinction here is that there is a gradation of potency of attractiveness. At the very lowest grade of attraction potency, I am attracted to the majority of men... probably 70%. This is mostly based on looks and a few other basic qualities. And in times in the past where I've had hook ups and one night stands, my attraction level was there... at the lowest potency. But from the female perspective, these experiences are typically very boring and unsatisfying. You get none of the juiciness you're actually looking for, because depth is what you're craving. But the real indicator of attraction, from the female perspective is if the feeling is potent or not. Women are looking for emotional stimulation and depth... which will never come from some hook up experience. So, when I say that more women sleeping with you isn't an indicator of male attraction, what I mean is that most all men are capable of hitting that low potency bar for women who are open to casual sexual encounters. And maybe you can get a few notches above low potency by doing some pick up techniques. But, the real attraction from the female experience is like the best feeling you've ever felt. And it's so un-manipulable and organic. It feels obsessionally good. So, what I'm saying is that (by my standards), the level of attractiveness it requires for a woman to sleep with a guy if you're in the mood for that is so far away from the full depth and breadth of female magnetism toward a man. It's not that simply but there is some truth here. Most men who have a problem with woman struggle becuase they haven't integrated their masculinity. I mean, masculinity is what attracts woman.. the Lion, underneath it all. Lion is both masculine and feminine. The lion is masculine because it is kinglike and in charge. It is feminine because it is connected to its animal nature, emotions, intuition, and instincts. You can't have the lion without integrating both the masculine and feminine sides of he personality. The lion tamer is also both masculine and feminine. The lion tamer is pro-social and therefore feminine. But it is also masculine because it involves discipline and a taming of nature into a pro-social form. Basically, you can't integrate one without the other. Feminine and masculine are two sides to the same coin.

Would you say that arrogance is exclusive to assholes? I would say that arrogant men are always "assholes", but that assholes are not always arrogant. It can come through in other ways. By that you mean those men who are attracted to Eve & Helen? Yes, men will attract and be attracted to women who embody the Eve of the Genesis story and Helen of Troy Archetypes when they are in those phases. Also, they will tend to see all women as being an embodiment of those Archetypes, including women who have moved past them. Do you mean to be accepted by repressed Anima? How could specific women sleep with the Anima? What I mean by this that men reject their Anima, which is their inner woman... their feminine side. And in that rejection/repression, the Anima has a lot of power over men and a lot of allure when it is projected onto women. So, when men become obsessed with women and women's judgment, it is often because of them projecting their Anima onto those women. And there is a desire to push the Anima away... but also to integrate with the Anima. So, if they project their Anima onto women... and they can get those women to approve of them and sleep with them, it can feel like Anima Integration played out externally. They're playing out an internal Archetypal story.

Yes exactly. The Anima is projected onto women as a whole group... and any reality that exists outside of that is invalidated. A lot of the common male worldview around female sexuality is based around confirmation bias and cherry picking... lots of logical fallacies are employed to maintain that worldview. And the cherry on top of the worldview is "Never listen to women about their own sexuality. They don't know what they want." So, they can never actually learn a more accurate account of what female sexuality is because their cup is already full with useful falsehoods. So, when we say that they are incorrect about the inner workings of female sexuality, they can't see past their own projected Anima image. And they also have a worldview that has basically halted their Anima integration in its tracks... leaving them unknowingly less attractive to women, even though they're able to have more sex. Basically, falsely believing there is a direct correlation between the number of women who have sex with them and their objective attractiveness. Usually girls/women develop this mindset when they're inexperienced. They think that men being attracted to them and wanting to sleep with them is a reflection of how attractive and valuable they are as opposed to simply being a reflection of how those men are. And usually women learn that those things don't coincide with one another quite young... though not always. But men often don't get the chance to learn that because women don't usually approach. So, men can still entertain the notion that a woman sleeping with them is some indicator of their inherent attractiveness. And of course, that would be a very difficult mentality to dispossess oneself of, if a lot of the ego is tied up in women's sexual responses to them. And yes, Anima repression is often caused by a desire to rid one's self of femininity and to hyper-identify with masculinity. And this causes an intense aversion/attraction response to women... which is why men who struggle with the Anima are both misogynistic and utterly obsessed with women sexually. They project a powerful woman up on a pedestal holding the supreme power to judge male worth or lack-there-of. So, they try to find ways to diminish women's power because it makes them feel insecure. So, a lot of these beliefs about female sexuality are an expression of male insecurities and fears relative to women and their own feminine side. And they look through this lens at female sexuality to make themselves feel more attractive and in control by being able to be this way or do that thing. But the reality is that men in phase 1 and 2 feel powerless in relation to women, because of their Anima projection. And it simultaneously soothes and agitates them to hold tight to their narratives. The Anima is powerful and cruel, yes. But if you're accepted by her by proxy of specific women agreeing to sleep with her, then that projected meaning is very soothing and feels like a win.

It's a really intuitive thing. It's not something that you sus out with your mind or try to scan for or categorize. It's a feeling that either arises or doesn't. It's not a rational thing. It's just that I tend to notice a visceral aversion in my body towards arrogant men... like my body is armoring itself. And it makes sense because these types of guys don't make very good fathers... which is what the female sex drive is about at its core. You need a man who is strong, responsible, and gentle to make a good father. When potent feelings do arise for a man for me, he usually has the quality of being very stable, warm-hearted, responsible, paternal, and emotionally and socially attuned... but also that I can notice the strong and wild part within him. It's like his sexuality and animalistic nature glitters through his more civilized and responsible expressions. That's what touches the button for me... noticing the sparkle in an otherwise civilized man's eyes. And it touches a button as a woman because you know that underneath all of the social accoutrements and trappings, that he is still a lion... but one being tamed by an expert tamer. I want to really impress upon you how many magnitudes more attractive a man like this is to me compared to a man who puts his lion out front and center. But you don't go consciously looking for guys based on who has this relationship between lion and lion tamer. You're not trying to find a man who fits a mold. It's just an intuitive feeling that you can glean when you interact with a guy. And I find it best to just allow things to unfold organically. Also, not all men with an integrated lion/lion tamer will click with me. Attraction is a multi-faceted gem, so it isn't just about that. Also, I want to make sure that you're realizing that I'm largely talking about average guys who have integrated these aspects of themselves that are in the running to become attractive to me. It's not some specimen of man... just an average guy who is integrated. I think a lot of time guys tend to doubt women's accounts of what they find attractive because they believe that they're not attractive and this creates an insecurity. And then, it's easier to use confirmation bias to say, "Women only like _____ guys." But this is a quality that any many can possess through integration... and it will be sooo attractive to so many women.

It isn't a choice. I don't choose to be unattracted to assholes. I'm just not attracted to assholes. My body responds aversively to them.

Hence why they become unattractive. You get to see the weakness and instability behind the bad boy facade. The illusion of strength loses its charm when you can see through it to the weaknesses. Bad boys are a lot like Chihuahuas. They put on a front of jerky masculinity... but underneath there are usually things that they're compensating for. And again, not to shame anyone who is dealing with those issues. But it becomes unattractive when the badass act is not convincing any longer. Also, I worked through my issues with weak boundaries and a desire to save the bad boy from himself. So, I no longer attract that... nor am I attracted to it. A lot of this has to do with the degree to which women have or haven't worked through their own issues.

Haha! Yeah, I think most of them would think we'd be into a Gaston-type character with their outlook on female sexuality and human sexuality in general. I relate this to Jung's phases of Anima/Animus integration... Now, the Gaston-type will work for women at the very first state of Animus Integration... which is the man of pure physical strength. These are women who don't yet have a good relationship to their masculine side. And so, they attract and are attracted to a man who mirrors the current state of their Animus. There are four phases of Animus integration, that reveal themselves in the types of men that women are attracted to... The Strong Man - The man whose allure is in his physical strength The Man with a Plan - The man whose allure is in his ability to take strategic action The Intellectual/Scholar - The man whose allure is in his intellectual prowess Hermes - The man whose allure is in his connection to the Divine Masculine. (At this phase a woman possesses the capacity to see men as full human beings who are distinct from their Animus image, and as beings that are capable of both good and evil.) These correspond to the four phases of Anima integration in men... Eve - The woman who is both incapable and untrustworthy Helen - The woman who is capable and untrustworthy Mary - The saintly sacralized angel mother who is above human flaw Sophia - The woman who is in touch with Divine Feminine. (At this phase a man possesses the capacity to see women as full human beings who are distinct from their Anima image, and as beings that are capable of both good and evil.) Ultimately, I think this is why so many men on here have an issue with seeing women outside of the first couple levels of development. You can't really expect a man who is in phase one or two of Anima integration to understand (or trust) women who are in stages three and four of Animus integration. You can tell them until you're blue in the face, but they just don't know the Feminine deeply enough in themselves to really understand. But of course, at earlier phases of Animus Integration, women often are attracted to men who are like a Gaston type. So, confirmation bias will make it seem like women are all secretly attracted to the Gastons of the world... when that arrogant personality type is actually quite repulsive and annoying.

?

We're talking about the socially understood dichotomy of "good boy vs bad boy". It's more of a cultural understanding than any kind of absolute truth. I would say that there's a strong case that Bill Gates is a "bad guy" because of some of his business practices. But no one thinks of him as a "bad boy" as he doesn't fit that cultural archetype.

Both Teal Swan and the woman in the video are correct. They're both giving accurate and thorough reflections of the subjective experience of being attracted to men as a woman. Men do possess that assertive masculine power like both Teal Swan and the woman in the video are talking about. Human beings also have a dual nature, so men who have integrated that assertive masculine power are more attractive than men who have not. BUT men who have learned to tame, channel, and focus that assertive masculine power into virtues and strengths are infinitely more attractive and "high quality" (though I hate referring to people like that) than men who just let their untamed masculine power run amok. That's what Teal Swan is talking about. @knakoo - The woman in the video is talking about the lion in the cage... the lion that is sitting there as waiting potential that's not being tamed and channeled, but is still there none-the-less that women can pick up on.

I explained this yesterday in a post, but I'll put it here. An optimally attractive man is like a very fierce lion with an expertly skilled lion tamer. If a man's lion is not fierce, he is not going to be very attractive. Likewise, if the man's lion tamer is unskilled and wants to avoid the lion... he may repress his lion and puts it in a cage. This leads him to deny his own sovereignty and raw animalistic desires, and this is not an attractive state for a man to be in. And often, when the cage of repression falters, they also set loose their untamed lion... one that's weak willed, morally bankrupt, dangerous, and creepy. The other side is if a man's lion tamer is not skilled, and he just lets his lion run amok and 'rip as many throats out' that he wants to. Thus, he is showing a weakness and instability in character. A man like this is weak willed, morally bankrupt, dangerous, and/or creepy and is not attractive. Now, women who are inexperienced but crave the lion might settle for this guy with an unskilled lion tamer who lets his lion run wild in false hope that they can tame his lion with their love. This is especially true if these women are experiencing a dearth of men who are willing to unleash, integrate, tame, and exalt their lion from a wild animal and up into a state of kinghood. And there is a scarcity of men who have integrated and tamed their inner lion. So, it is often that women have no frame of reference for what they're actually looking for because men who are integrated in this way are fairly rare. And they just see the lion and become attracted. But a truly attractive man is someone who has an expert lion tamer that gives him a high degree of character, virtue, self-control, social acuity, empathy, and discipline... while also having the capacity to unleash his lion and be dominant and violent if he needs to be. So without a lion, women won't be very attracted. With only a lion, you may attract women who crave the lion, but it will never give them what they're really looking for... which is to feel held and protected.

Yeah, the illusion becomes a lot easier to see through once we've been around the block and cleared out our own emotional stuff that lead to the bad relationships. Truly, a lot of what being a "bad boy" is based on is a compensation for traumas and emotional issues. So, bad boy behavior can be kind of like the Napoleon complex. They put on a tough front to hide their weaknesses and vulnerabilities from others... and from themselves. Like my ex-boyfriend was always putting on a tough front and acting like a bad ass. But then he'd have big emotional breakdowns about once a week and be threatening to commit suicide if I don't do this or because I did that. And not to shame anyone who gets into that position where they're having those big emotional breakdowns, but it's just really detrimental and soul sucking to be in a relationship to such a person. It doesn't give you what you're really looking for. A bad boy is not capable of truly holding a woman because he himself is not stable. But I do feel like that pop culture image of the bad boy is a bit of a female wish fulfillment fantasy. Like being able to have the bad boy and tame them. But it's much more empowering to be with a good boy and then seduce his fierce side up out of him... And the flavor of the goodness is much better. But the idea of a good boy is boring. But when he's really a good man, the reality is anything but boring. It reminds me a bit of this quote by Simone Weil...

Good "boys". No contest. Bad boys are really just scrubs. I've never met a bad boy who wasn't one. Bad boys are tiring and weigh your life down. And they don't make good fathers because their lives are usually falling apart from making terrible decisions... as they have weak moral fiber. I feel like someone who prefers bad boys has never actually had a relationship to one. My 4 year relationship to a bad boy (age 16-20) ended up with him breaking a beer bottle and holding it up to my neck and threatening to kill me. And he was always in and out of jail for stupid shit. And he was high all the time. He couldn't hold onto a job. But I was so attached to him and had weak boundaries, that it took me 4 years to realize how bad it all was. There is a romantic pop image of the bad boy. And the trope of the bad boy with a good heart. But the reality of being with a bad boy is that it's absolutely underwhelming and anxiety provoking. And it will absolutely suck your life down to the ground. It's exciting for like a month, and then it just drags you. By the way, here's a great song about leaving a relationship with a "bad boy". It reminds me a bit of when I was 20 when I finally had the clarity to leave...

You're forgetting that all of reality is basically sex... the intermingling between feminine and masculine forces. There's biology involved in human sexuality, sure. And to be out of touch with the body is to be out of touch with the reality of how the feminine and masculine interacts within an individual human being and in a sexual scenario. But you're not mentioning how many analogues of sexuality exist within in the reality of existence and the reality of being human. It isn't just a purely biological reality. it's that too. But it's a very multi-faceted gem. Don't get fixated upon one facet.

I think @Leo Gura may find empowerment in viewing human sexuality only/mostly through that survival lens. It's certainly the lens he focuses on the most. And what he says is somewhat true from that perspective. But the over-use of that lens is itself distortional and reductive. I was really obsessed with this lens too, back when I was 20. I had recognized a repression of my feminine sexual/animal core. And I became obsessed with sexuality from the paradigm. And it's very intoxicating in a way. Now, the animalistic perspective is a perspective where men have an inherent advantage over women. So, I can see why over-focusing on the animal nature can be comforting from the male perspective and a bit anxiety provoking form the female perspective. There was a lot of anxiety woven into my focus towards that perspective back then... but it was also worth it to dive so deep. It just felt like my sexuality was ouroboros eating his own tail. It seemed to self-cannibalize... and it was every bit erotic and frustrating. And it makes sense because to be female from the animal and spiritual perspective is to yield for life to be. It's a complete reversal of everything else that relates to survival and life. Female sexual arousal is like a planet in retrograde. Now much later, I developed that ability to have integration between the animalistic perspective and the higher consciousness perspective and saw how those things intermingle so intimately from the lowest most animalistic behaviors to the highest most exalted form where God makes love to reality. Now, it could be Leo's intention to get people in touch with their animal nature in order to have such a transformation. But I don't really think it comes through in a helpful way. There's a lot more to untangle once you find it. And I think there is a strong chance that I could have become attached to the pleasure and comfort of that perspective if I were a man. I think I would have dug a couple layers deep into human sexuality, found something empowering and exciting, and stayed there. I was always lamenting that that was not possible. I didn't have that chance to find something that was both empowering and exciting until digging layers and layers deep. But I can also recognize from my present state of mind, after having dug through this so much that the animalistic perspective alone will never be satisfying from the female perspective. You really need to integrate the animalistic perspective with the perspective of the heart to really make a woman feel satisfied... and ideally the heart coupled with spirituality.

Well said! The blacked out part is the part that I was taking exception to earlier. Being Shadow Masculine and having low empathy and low emotional intelligence honestly isn't attractive at all from the female perspective once you've gained some life experience and worked through some things. It's actually very repulsive. Now, lots of women might respond to that. But it isn't an indicator that these men are extra attractive. It's more of an indicator of codependent tendencies and weak boundaries in women and a lack of discernment relative to Shadow Masculinity and Positive Masculinity. I brought up the example of how successful Donald Trump has been with supermodels... but he's clearly not an attractive man. And I think the questions at the end are important. I think there's a strong tendency for Leo and others on the forum to boil human sexuality down to simply being a reflection of survival needs. And I understand that that's exciting to be in touch with. There's a real psycho-sexual button there. But it's overall a very reductive way to think about human sexuality which is far more complex. We're wild animals, yes. But we're also beings capable of higher consciousness. And if we base our sexual behaviors and choices on the nature of the beast alone, then there's a problem there.

That's not my thing at all. I don't think that of the people on this thread. That's a totally different issue. I just don't like it when female sexuality is misrepresented or ignored in favor of a useful distortion... especially when the men don't really realize that they're engaging with a useful distortion. They see the usefulness as an indicator of truth, when it is not. And it's most especially a personal pet peeve to have my voice written over as though I have nothing valuable or true to say about female sexuality when I've introspected upon that topic... probably (and I do guess this is accurate) more than anyone I've ever met. And then a bunch of pick up artists who lost their virginity at age 24 and got a little success with women decide that they're suddenly the experts of female sexuality. And I'm like "Oh hell to the no!"