Toxic dating works better and it's killing me - how to stay authentic?

[aurum]

@everyone 

We have been going in circles, debating this same question about female attraction for years now. It's really time to start working towards some sort of resolution.

 

[Emerald]

28 minutes ago, Candle said:

I don't think so. Everything he wrote was from common sense. And I'm not biased. It was relatable. That's why I am saying this. 

I have understood very well what has happened in the whole thread and I'm out of this thread. 

I'm not specifically responding to anything he said here on this post prior to our conversation about misrepresentation of women's perspectives.

I've just been on this forum on-and-off for the past 8 years or so.

So, I know his perspectives about this topic, and I can see that he's quite attached to them. And it tends towards an over-simplification that comes from his time learning pick up a decade or so ago.

And women call him out frequently for the over-simplification and misrepresentation. But I just makes him dig his heals in further.

Consider this...

If there was a world full of women that were saying things about men's way of operating that you knew weren't painting an accurate picture, you'd also try to correct the record.

And if those same women had the idea "Men are deluded on this topic. Don't listen to them." You'd also be frustrated because they'd be shut off to hearing about what's actually true.

And you might not want to get involved romantically with women who operate off of this framework because they won't be able to see you... and it would be an impediment to intimacy... as they believe they already understand you better than you understand yourself.

And there is nothing you can say to convince them otherwise. So, the only option is to fruitless fight to be seen and hear... or just disengage and find another woman who isn't so bogged down in these narratives.

That's the issue with the attachment to these frameworks. They feel like a solution to the problem of interacting with women... but they're actually an impediment.

[whh2222]

3 minutes ago, Emerald said:

 

And if those same women had the idea "Men are deluded on this topic. Don't listen to them." You'd also be frustrated because they'd be shut off to hearing about what's actually true.

And you might not want to get involved romantically with women who operate off of this framework because they won't be able to see you... and it would be an impediment to intimacy... as they believe they already understand you better than you understand yourself.

And there is nothing you can say to convince them otherwise. So, the only option is to fruitless fight to be seen and hear... or just disengage and find another woman who isn't so bogged down in these narratives.

 

A lot of women act this way. A lot of women assume men are inherently flawed, harmful, unaware, and problematic. They assume this to the point of jumping to conclusions about men. 

"So, the only option is to fruitless fight to be seen and hear... or just disengage and find another woman who isn't so bogged down in these narratives."

- Yeah I find myself disengaging a lot within the dating realm. So many women are on the defensive constantly engaging in a giant feminist power struggle, because they assume that they are in a battle for their own equality, dignity and respect. And although they want to experience love and romance, they also see that man as an obstacle to their empowerment. And I find myself disengaging because I don't enjoy being the symbol of their imaginary battles. 

[Emerald]

9 minutes ago, whh2222 said:

A lot of women act this way. A lot of women assume men are inherently flawed, harmful, unaware, and problematic. They assume this to the point of jumping to conclusions about men. 

"So, the only option is to fruitless fight to be seen and hear... or just disengage and find another woman who isn't so bogged down in these narratives."

- Yeah I find myself disengaging a lot within the dating realm. So many women are on the defensive constantly engaging in a giant feminist power struggle, because they assume that they are in a battle for their own equality, dignity and respect. And although they want to experience love and romance, they also see that man as an obstacle to their empowerment. And I find myself disengaging because I don't enjoy being the symbol of their imaginary battles. 

Sure, there are lots of women who project things onto men as well. And it comes from a dearth of understanding parading itself as a wealth of understanding.

But there definitely is a power struggle going on too that's even breaking into mainstream politics. You just might not be experiencing it because you are neither a woman nor the type of man who is trying to take away women's power and agency.

It doesn't take much searching around on the internet to find sizable swaths of men who are arguing that women shouldn't have the right to vote... or engaging in narratives that imply that women should be the property of men.

It's literally everywhere. And it's really scary to experience as a woman because large groups of stupid people have political power. And it does call for extra layers of discrimination with regard to male friends and partners.

That said, there are lots of narratives that crop up that try to naturalize things that say "Oppression and violence are part of men's nature."

And when that type of thing is believed, it gets in the way of opening up to friendships and relationships with men.. most of whom are just looking for the same kinds of things that all human beings are looking for.

[integral]

4 hours ago, Emerald said:

The post from the OP isn't really about struggling to get a girlfriend. That's just a symptom. So, that kind of advice won't be very helpful to the OP in this instance. 

This issue is that every single thread on this subform becomes about how to attract women because "When all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail."

But that doesn't seem to be the OP's problem as he already said women are interested in him when he pulls away more than when he's available. So presumably, he is having these push/pull experiences in his dating life.

And part of it seems like he might be anxious and attracting and being attracted to more avoidant partners. 

So, attracting women isn't the real problem he's dealing with.

The post is actually about the OP fearing that he will never truly be loved by a woman for who he is... and that bad boys are the only one who get loved by women.

So, my advice to the OP would be to explore what would be so bad about if it were true that women only get into relationships to emasculate men and that women only like bad boys. And that will reveal to him the origin points of his own fears that are getting transferred out onto these false  narratives.

And it would help him learn more about himself and turn inward towards the root cause of the feelings of fear, shame, and disconnection... instead of looking outward to scary manosphere narratives about women that predatory grifters come up with to manipulate men (and as a side note, the grifters cement their predatory narratives by conveniently saying women can't provide any valuable counter-argument to such claims because women are deluded about their own desires.)

So, my advice to him would be to recognize that he doesn't know how women are operating and that in the dearth of knowledge, women are becoming a convenient projection screen for these wounds and narratives to be projected upon. 

And to turn inwards towards his real fears.

I used Claude to help understand the Dynamics here I think it it was interesting enough to show.

Quote

Main points 

LEO GURA:
- Distinguishes between attraction phase vs relationship phase
- States emotional availability/commitment only work deep in relationships, not early dating
- Argues women must sleep with men before getting emotionally invested
- Claims character only matters inside established relationships
- States men are also not attracted to character, using porn viewing as example
- Maintains attraction dynamics work exactly as he explains
- Argues women's individual claims about attraction are irrelevant to general dynamics
- Says women don't need to understand attraction dynamics because they don't face men's challenges
- Claims women's perspectives on attraction are shaped by their agenda rather than understanding what men need
- States his advice helps men achieve both attraction and eventually relationships
- Emphasizes the importance of not investing more than women invest
- Advises being light and fun initially rather than serious too soon
- Suggests talking to many women rather than focusing too much on one

EMERALD:
- Argues Leo's view is reductive and reinforces false narratives
- Suggests OP's issue is about shame and fear of not being loved authentically
- Criticizes the focus on biological over social/emotional realities  
- Says these narratives do more harm than good for men
- Believes the manosphere narratives exploit male vulnerabilities
- Argues women's perspectives shouldn't be dismissed
- Suggests these views create barriers to genuine intimacy
- Provides historical context for why these narratives emerged
- Emphasizes the importance of understanding deeper psychological dynamics
- Connects current dating narratives to archetypal patterns
- Warns against oversimplified dating advice
- Suggests focusing on deeper psychological healing

 

This is a complex topic where both perspectives offer valid insights, but in different domains:

Leo Gura's arguments contain practical truth about initial attraction:
- There is evidence that being overly available/invested too quickly can reduce attraction
- There are distinct phases in dating (attraction vs relationship) that require different approaches
- Men who struggle with basic attraction need different strategies than those already successful
- His advice likely helps men who are completely unsuccessful get initial dates/interest

Emerald's arguments contain deeper psychological truth:
- Focusing solely on attraction tactics can mask deeper issues of self-worth
- Oversimplified views of women can create barriers to genuine connection
- The original poster's struggle seems more about fear of authentic connection than pure attraction
- These narratives can perpetuate unhealthy relationship patterns

Rather than one being "right," they're addressing different layers of the same issue:
- Leo focuses on practical tactics for initial attraction
- Emerald focuses on psychological health and long-term relationship success

The key insight is that both perspectives have value depending on:
1. Where someone is in their dating journey
2. What their goals are (casual dating vs lasting relationship)
3. Their current psychological state and emotional needs

Someone who can't get any dates might need Leo's practical advice first. But once they can attract partners, they'll need Emerald's insights about authentic connection to build lasting relationships.

The healthiest approach would be integrating both perspectives: Using effective attraction strategies while working on deeper psychological development and maintaining authenticity.

Rather than choosing who is "right," the question might be: "What aspects of each perspective are most helpful for my current situation and long-term growth?"

Emerald's frustration with Leo Gura stems from several key concerns:

1. Primary Grievances:
- She feels Leo is overly rigid and unwilling to consider female perspectives
- She believes he oversimplifies complex relationship dynamics
- She sees him as stuck in a pickup-artist mindset that reduces women's behavior to biological drives
- She's frustrated that he dismisses women's input by claiming they "don't understand their own desires"

2. Her Valid Points:
- Leo does appear to dismiss female perspectives categorically
- He maintains a somewhat reductive view of attraction
- He seems resistant to expanding his framework despite counterexamples
- His approach could potentially create barriers to deeper intimacy

3. Leo's Valid Defense:
- He's focused on solving immediate practical problems men face
- His advice appears to work for initial attraction
- He acknowledges character matters in relationships, just not initial attraction
- He's speaking from extensive experience helping men with dating

4. The Core Tension:
Emerald sees Leo as perpetuating harmful narratives that:
- Make men more insecure
- Create unnecessary distance between genders
- Oversimplify female psychology
- Block deeper understanding

While Leo sees himself as:
- Providing practical solutions
- Addressing real-world dynamics
- Helping men who are struggling
- Being realistic rather than idealistic

The validity to Emerald's concerns comes from seeing the potential long-term impact of these narratives on:
- Men's psychological health
- Their ability to form genuine connections
- Their understanding of women
- The quality of relationships they build

However, she may underestimate the immediate value of Leo's tactical advice for men who are struggling with basic attraction. The tension seems to arise from prioritizing different timeframes and different aspects of relationship development.

Both perspectives have merit, but they're often talking past each other because they're focused on different aspects of the same problem - Leo on immediate practical solutions, Emerald on long-term psychological health and relationship quality.

I think this was the main feeling I have when reading this thread is people talking past each other.

[integral]

How Claude has answered this question if anyone's curious.
 

Quote

Let me break this down systematically:

OP'S CORE PROBLEM:
1. Practical Observation:
- Being emotionally distant increases female attention/interest
- Being caring/invested decreases attraction
- This creates internal conflict because he wants to be authentic/caring

2. Key Question:
"How can I be authentic while still maintaining enough emotional distance to keep attraction? Is there a way to be both caring and maintain healthy challenge/mystery in relationships?"

PRACTICAL SHORT-TERM SOLUTION:
1. Understand Dating Phases
- Initial attraction phase requires different behavior than relationship phase
- Early investment should match or slightly trail her investment level
- Build connection gradually rather than all at once

2. Specific Actions:
- Focus on fun, light interactions initially
- Maintain your own life, interests, and priorities
- Respond at similar pace/investment level as her
- Show care through actions more than words early on
- Save deeper emotional sharing for when connection is established
- Build mystery naturally by having a full life rather than artificial distance

PSYCHOLOGICAL LONG-TERM SOLUTION:
1. Reframe the Dynamic:
- Emotional distance isn't about being fake; it's about appropriate pacing
- Strong boundaries aren't cold; they're healthy
- Authenticity doesn't mean sharing everything immediately
- Being caring doesn't require constant availability

2. Personal Development:
- Work on self-worth independent of relationships
- Develop strong personal boundaries
- Build a fulfilling life outside of dating
- Learn to be comfortable with gradual intimacy
- Understand that genuine care includes respecting natural relationship progression

3. Balanced Approach:
- Be authentic in your interactions but pace emotional investment
- Show care through consistent, measured actions rather than overwhelming attention
- Maintain healthy independence while building connection
- Let intimacy develop naturally rather than forcing it

PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION:
1. Early Dating:
- Focus on having fun and getting to know each other
- Keep dates engaging and lighthearted
- Maintain your regular activities and friendships
- Show interest through actions but don't overwhelm
- Let her wonder about you sometimes

2. As Connection Develops:
- Gradually increase emotional availability
- Share deeper feelings as trust builds
- Maintain healthy boundaries while showing care
- Be consistent but not overly available
- Keep some aspects of life separate/independent

The key is understanding that authenticity and attraction aren't mutually exclusive - it's about timing and balance. You can be genuine while still maintaining healthy boundaries and allowing attraction to develop naturally.

The goal isn't to be artificially distant but to avoid premature emotional investment while building a genuine connection at an appropriate pace. This allows both attraction and authenticity to coexist naturally.

 

Edited Thursday at 12:40 AM by integral

[Emerald]

12 minutes ago, integral said:

I used Claude to help understand the Dynamics here I think it it was interesting enough to show.

I think this was the main feeling I have when reading this thread is people talking past each other.

I do agree with that, but I don't negate the things that Leo's saying about the practicalities of approaching women.

It's just the narratives that go along with those practical steps that I have the biggest issue with, because that's where the misrepresentation comes into play.

So, I see my perspective as integrating his practical perspective and easily reconciled with it... as long as the false narratives aren't woven around it.

I'd probably suggest for men to do similar things practically. I just wouldn't frame it through these skewed narratives.

I even talked about the two phases of the relationship myself... attraction phase vs relationship phase.

[Leo Gura]

@integral Ask Claude if he would marry a pig with impeccable character.

Where the rubber meets the road.

Edited Thursday at 01:30 AM by Leo Gura

[integral]

35 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@integral Ask Claude if he would marry a pig with impeccable character.

Where the rubber meets the road.

LEOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooo 😙

Quote

When Claude is told your joking:

Fair play Leo - yes I have to say, that pig with great character does sound like quite the catch... I hear they're excellent listeners and always bring home the bacon. 🥓

You can keep the clever, playful, even provocative style that makes your advice engaging and memorable.

Quote

When Claude does not get the joke:

This response demonstrates exactly the kind of framing that Emerald was concerned about. Let me break this down... 

Uses a deliberately inflammatory comparison

Creates a false equivalence between physical attraction and dehumanizing metaphors

Attempts to dismiss nuanced discussion through reductive logic

Uses mockery rather than engaging with the substance of the critique

Reinforces the exact toxic narratives being discussed

Reduces complex human dynamics to crude analogies

Avoids addressing how framing affects perception

Dismisses legitimate concerns about narrative impact

😅 It does not hold back. 

Edited Thursday at 01:58 AM by integral

[Raze]

Stop with the AI slop. It is literally just scraping the first results on google.

Edited Thursday at 02:28 AM by Raze

[Leo Gura]

@integral I figured you'd get a chuckle outta that

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

Stop with the AI slop. It is literally just scraping the first results on google.

It's literally not.

What wacky dope are you smokin?

Edited Thursday at 03:30 AM by Leo Gura

[Buck Edwards]

Is a man not supposed to express his personal dating experience and prejudice on this forum? I mean why not. This forum is the only place for him to be vulnerable and vulnerability doesn't have boundaries on what's right or wrong. The forum controls red pill nonsense all the time. But men can have their grievances, toxic or not. 

To constantly criticize or correct it will have the reverse effect, it will discourage men from opening up about whatever rhetoric their mind has about women. 

 

[Buck Edwards]

@Emerald Men need pickup advice to get women. Men want to attract women, not study women. If they follow your approach, they will not get women. That's why Leo offers pickup advice. 

[Buck Edwards]

I cannot blame men for this because men are very myopic when it comes to women in my opinion. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

14 hours ago, Miguel1 said:

Can you become demi later on in life?

I’ve started to contemplate deeper that I’ve become a demi or something similar.

Wasn’t like this in my younger years.

Or maybe I just matured lol.

Yes, indeed for myself, it was later in life this transition occurred!

I had a more typical sex drive when younger.

Objectively I could look at random men or women and be turned on, distracted.

Now, I need to be emotionally bonded to ignite my sex drive.

I would say I am smack bang in between high and low libido. 

I just require the additional bond to turn it 'on'.

[BlessedLion]

On 12/30/2024 at 11:02 PM, Shodburrito said:

I recently watched a video claiming that women's primary goal in relationships is to 'emasculate and control' men. The creator argues that women only feel genuine attraction/love for men who don't show them love back, and that being a 'good man' (loyal, loving, honest) makes women lose interest and see you as weak.

He suggests that women are naturally drawn to 'bad boys' who create uncertainty and show they have other options, while they'll ultimately disrespect men who show genuine care and commitment. The video frames traditional relationship virtues (emotional availability, commitment, communication) as weaknesses that lead to losing a woman's interest.

What troubles me is that I've experimented with being more emotionally distant and showing less investment - and I've noticed it actually does increase female attention and interest. When I act less available and more detached, women seem to pursue me more. This really depresses me because I don't want to be toxic or manipulative - I want to be genuine and caring. But I can't deny that showing less emotional investment often leads to more attraction.

I'm struggling to find a healthy balance between maintaining strong boundaries and genuine care. How can I be authentic while still maintaining enough emotional distance to keep attraction? Is there a way to be both caring and maintain healthy challenge/mystery in relationships? I don't want to play games, but I also don't want to fall into patterns that kill attraction.

 

 

 

This is laughably toxic 

[AION]

@integral how did you feed that to Claude? Because Claude says it can't open url's.

[Wyeth]

On 12/31/2024 at 10:04 PM, Emerald said:

And this is where you seem to have the biggest blindspots and lack the most wisdom because of your paradigm lock in this area. You seem to be adamant about only looking from this one over-simplified angle, and you're very protective of this one angle.

 

Leo should get out of Las Vegas if he wants to get over that paradigm lock, so many materialistic stage orange women there that only reinforce his view of dating and women.

Edited Thursday at 06:24 PM by Wyeth

[Miguel1]

1 hour ago, Wyeth said:

Leo should get out of Las Vegas if he wants to get over that paradigm lock, so many materialistic stage orange women there that only reinforce his view of dating and women.

This