Female Dating Advice

[Majed]

@Emerald No, here where you go all wrong. An attractive woman is an attractive woman, and a non attractive woman is non attractive. There's no relativism here. Most men recognize when they see a hot girl, and when they see an ugly girl. Stop treating us like we're fools please. 

Edited Sunday at 09:54 PM by Majed

[Emerald]

21 minutes ago, The Renaissance Man said:

Majed already made up his mind long before this conversation. It's no use discussing with logic.

I want to understand why that's his perspective from his mouth (I guess fingers). That's where the juice is at.

I'm pretty sure it's just insecurity.

I basically wrote a post recommending that women get better at sorting... and developing certain standards.

And I didn't add "Be as attractive as possible" into my dating advice.... frankly because it's not great advice.

So, it probably messed with his idea that the main power that women have is their attractiveness. Lots of men who feel disempowered relative to women, find relief in that idea that women's power is wrapped up solely in her ability to be attractive to men.

And that's precisely because women's looks are not something that can be significantly changed (without plastic surgery). And looks always fade over time.

It probably also bothered him that I mentioned that women don't need to focus on attraction because it happens automatically... because that is his pain point. And he has to work at attracting.

So, he is saying these things to make me feel how my post and replies made him feel... like I'm less valuable and that men will never want to sleep with me because I am not attractive enough. And that's because that's what my post triggered in him.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Seems like a goal worthy of pursuing. Affection from such a higher quality woman I mean

[Raze]

18 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I'm pretty sure it's just insecurity.

I basically wrote a post recommending that women get better at sorting... and developing certain standards.

And I didn't add "Be as attractive as possible" into my dating advice.... frankly because it's not great advice.

So, it probably messed with his idea that the main power that women have is their attractiveness. Lots of men who feel disempowered relative to women, find relief in that idea that women's power is wrapped up solely in her ability to be attractive to men.

And that's precisely because women's looks are not something that can be significantly changed (without plastic surgery). And looks always fade over time.

It probably also bothered him that I mentioned that women don't need to focus on attraction because it happens automatically... because that is his pain point. And he has to work at attracting.

So, he is saying these things to make me feel how my post and replies made him feel... like I'm less valuable and that men will never want to sleep with me because I am not attractive enough. And that's because that's what my post triggered in him.

That doesn’t make sense, a woman can only sort as much as her options, if you only have a small amount or poor options than sorting won’t make it better, and you yourself said they should look for guys who pursue and like them the most at first, that would mostly be based on looks, at least in the beginning as that’s what they first go off of. 

The idea that attraction isn’t important is based on longer interactions where the person is won over, over time. Which is why pickup artists who say looks don’t matter teach all sorts of techniques to win the person over with their personality when they aren’t interested at first. 
 

If you’re saying women should instead sort among many options for the ones who pursue them and like them more initially, attraction would be highly important to increase options to sort from and get said early investment. 

Edited Sunday at 10:18 PM by Raze

[Lyubov]

The man should be more into you than you are into him in the initial phases of courtship

I almost never see or hear of women that feel this way about a man. Women date up, men date down. In theory this is good advice but I never see women who actually screen like this and it’s actually a turn off for women if they don’t see their man as borderline out of her league (him above her).

Edited Sunday at 10:15 PM by Lyubov

[Raze]

3 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

The man should be more into you than you are into him in the initial phases of courtship

I almost never see or hear of women that feel this way about a man. Women date up, men date down. In theory this is good advice but I never see women who actually screen like this and it’s actually a turn off for women if they don’t see their man as borderline out of her league (him above her).

Probably because you’re dealing with younger women. It’s usually more experienced women who realize this. Women may be more attracted to the hard to get guy, but that gets exhausting, whereas when they give the guy who really likes them a chance, long term they get more benefits from him.  

Edited Sunday at 10:18 PM by Raze

[Lyubov]

10 minutes ago, Raze said:

Probably because you’re dealing with younger women. It’s usually more experienced women who realize this. Women may be more attracted to the hard to get guy, but that gets exhausting, whereas when they give the guy who really likes them a chance, long term they get more benefits from him.  

I am and I prefer younger women because they have positives to them and give me as a man what I want from a woman, even though we are gaslit often by women why it’s wrong for us to want youth, beauty and low body count. It sounds mean but it’s hard for me to conceptualize this mating strategy as anything other than settling down with a more passive guy who doesn’t stand up for his interests and needs and desires. I mean, I think the red pill teaching of women basically going after beta male type guys after they’ve slept around is somewhat accurate but also framed unfairly harshly and is not entirely accurate either. I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with this either. You can settle down with anyone and if you’re happy that’s fine, life isn’t about winning at mating. But to me from my experience and what I understand about women and their psychology, most women who are quite feminine and quite beautiful do not go after guys that want them more, they will even pick a guy they are unbelievably attracted to as well and create a narrative in their mind how he’s winning and above her or has something only she can get from him. Women want to feel like winners and they got the best guy, not feel like they are the best and their man is a replaceable simp. Men want to feel like they got a girl that is theirs and only theirs. 

Edited Sunday at 10:28 PM by Lyubov

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, Raze said:

That doesn’t make sense, a woman can only sort as much as her options, if you only have a small amount or poor options than sorting won’t make it better, and you yourself said they should look for guys who pursue and like them the most at first, that would mostly be based on looks, at least in the beginning as that’s what they first go off of. 

There are 8 billion people on the planet... about 4 billion are men. There is no scarcity of options. And if you're monogamous, you literally only need one guy out of those 4 billion.

Like, most women aren't interested in collecting a harem full of men. 

But focusing on looks is fine if that's part of your personality and identity. Lots of women (including myself to some degree) like to adorn themselves and peacock around a bit.

But I don't recommend doing this specifically to attract a partner, as you want to be attracting that partner based on the way that you would normally show up in life. Do it only if it's part of your identity to do so.

And if that involves doing hair, make-up, and dressing to the 9s... do that. Or if that involves jeans and a t-shirt a messy bun and no make-up, do that.

You want to advertise as you are... as this will repel the wrong ones and attract the right ones. Ideally, you repel 90%+ because that narrows things down to only guys who are really interested in what you have going on.

Just don't get too worried about attraction. Those that find you unattractive will sort themselves... and those that find you attractive will come closer like bees to flowers. 

Then, you can sort from there. 

So, women have to learn how to repel and sort, while men have to learn how to approach and attract.

I think the confusion is that men are used to thinking about dating from a sense of needing to cast the net wide and to attract as many as possible using active strategies to make themselves more attractive. And there's a tendency to project that necessity onto women... especially because men are attracted to women.

But women don't really need to maximize their appearance. In fact, it can kind of get in the way as attractive women attract a lot of spam attention. So, beautiful women need ESPECIALLY to learn how to sort as she can end up with a guy who only sees her as a status trophy.

So, it's just a different strategy than you're used to.

[Raze]

2 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

But to me from my experience and what I understand about women and their psychology, most women who are quite feminine and quite beautiful do not go after guys that want them more, they will even pick a guy they are unbelievably attracted to as well and create a narrative in their mind how he’s winning and above her or has something only she can get from him. Women want to feel like winners and they got the best guy, not feel like they are the best and their man is a replaceable simp. 

Yes. That is because culturally they are planted with the idea of pursuing passionate emotions. If you talk to women who grew up in the third world without modern internet access they have different standards, usually just wanting someone with a good job.

As for our modern culture, the issue with this is for various reasons that causes long term difficulty as the guy won’t commit or is arrogant etc. so the woman shifts more towards seeking investment which is more found in men who like them more. 

Though there are also cultural expectations about that so you will see most women saying this from the start, but their behavior often doesn’t line up with it, especially if they are younger.

[Raze]

20 minutes ago, Emerald said:

There are 8 billion people on the planet... about 4 billion are men. There is no scarcity of options. And if you're monogamous, you literally only need one guy out of those 4 billion.

That doesn’t automatically mean the woman has access to them, or all those men are worthwhile options. A fraction of those fulfill a woman’s baseline standards such as age, height, income, etc.

If a woman just wears a jacket and yoga pants and only goes outside to do errands, her quality options will be few and far between because they simply won’t find her.

20 minutes ago, Emerald said:

So, women have to learn how to repel and sort, while men have to learn how to approach and attract.

I think the confusion is that men are used to thinking about dating from a sense of needing to cast the net wide and to attract as many as possible using active strategies to make themselves more attractive. And there's a tendency to project that necessity onto women... especially because men are attracted to women.

But women don't really need to maximize their appearance. In fact, it can kind of get in the way as attractive women attract a lot of spam attention. So, beautiful women need ESPECIALLY to learn how to sort as she can end up with a guy who only sees her as a status trophy.

So, it's just a different strategy than you're used to.

This is a misunderstanding. Most men do not by default have a tendency to cast a wide net. The default is they have a fantasy of one special woman who they bump into and everything works out because they’re meant to be together like it’s a disney movie. The dating and pickup community go against this and condition the man to force abundance by seeing many women to get a variety of options, actually trying to put him in the woman’s usual position. They actually have a term for it called “oneitis” about the default behavior they condition guys out of. 

The issue with your reasoning is you’re suggesting the woman begin in a almost judge like role where the men come to her wanting her more than she wants them and she sorts for the one she likes, but then undercutting what strengthens that position by saying attraction isn’t important. Attraction would be what gets the large amount of options to sort from and what makes the guy like her more than she likes them and pursue them more in the beginning. 
She may filter 90 percent of them, but that would mean she’d need 100 to have 10 options. If just 10 pursued her she’d have 1.

If that’s how you date odds are it wouldn’t have worked as well if you didn’t put the emphasis on attraction that you said you did.

 

Edited Sunday at 10:50 PM by Raze

[Emerald]

17 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

The man should be more into you than you are into him in the initial phases of courtship

I almost never see or hear of women that feel this way about a man. Women date up, men date down. In theory this is good advice but I never see women who actually screen like this and it’s actually a turn off for women if they don’t see their man as borderline out of her league (him above her).

Well, women like to date up finances-wise. And men like to date up looks-wise. So both women and men date up and down... just along different spectrums of status.

But it's important to note that these considerations are not based on any kind of objective measures of status.

This is based purely on feelings.

A man must feel somewhat more invested in the woman than she feels invested in him for the relationship to work out over the long-term.

But lots of women make the mistake of searching out the really ambrosial feelings of Masculine Lover mode and go seeking for the high and low spikes of trying to woo and win over a low-investment man (regardless of whether he's a CEO or a free-loader she lets live on her couch).

So, if you hear a woman gushing about a man she's just started dating... she's making a mistake. And it's a very common mistake.

Hence the advice that most women make a few times until they know better.

[Emerald]

17 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

I am and I prefer younger women because they have positives to them and give me as a man what I want from a woman, even though we are gaslit often by women why it’s wrong for us to want youth, beauty and low body count. It sounds mean but it’s hard for me to conceptualize this mating strategy as anything other than settling down with a more passive guy who doesn’t stand up for his interests and needs and desires. I mean, I think the red pill teaching of women basically going after beta male type guys after they’ve slept around is somewhat accurate but also framed unfairly harshly and is not entirely accurate either. I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with this either. You can settle down with anyone and if you’re happy that’s fine, life isn’t about winning at mating. But to me from my experience and what I understand about women and their psychology, most women who are quite feminine and quite beautiful do not go after guys that want them more, they will even pick a guy they are unbelievably attracted to as well and create a narrative in their mind how he’s winning and above her or has something only she can get from him. Women want to feel like winners and they got the best guy, not feel like they are the best and their man is a replaceable simp. Men want to feel like they got a girl that is theirs and only theirs. 

To be honest, it's occurred to me before that the men that many men call "betas" tend to be the highest quality partners and make the best fathers.

It's just that a lot of men view a valuable man as a man who gets laid often... and they assume women share in these values. So, they believe that women are settling for less... when the women are just getting an upgrade.

There's nothing sexier than a mature man.

But women tend to grow out of this desire for these "alpha" party guys in VERY early adulthood (usually between 20 and 25).

So, while men tend to view a valuable man as a man who can get laid easily, women view a valuable man as a man who is a good partner and father. And if she herself is mature, she will begin looking for a more mature partner.

That's why I try to discourage a lot of these types of perspectives, because a lot of men on this forum are being influenced by other men to develop values that will keep them resistant to the "beta" qualities that mature women respond to. And they may end up alone longterm because of these values.

[BlessedLion]

4 hours ago, Emerald said:

Counterintuitively - anxiety and really crushy obsessive feelings are an indicator that he's not a good option. Instead, focus on feeling peaceful, safe, and at home as that settled feeling is an indicator that you feel safe with a man. You should have a clear sense that this guy is capable of being your rock.

This is good advice for men too. Def fallen into this illusion in dating, for the stimulating, edgy, fireworks kinda woman, leading to inevitable pain

[Emerald]

17 minutes ago, Raze said:

That doesn’t automatically mean the woman has access to them, or all those men are worthwhile options. A fraction of those fulfill a woman’s baseline standards such as age, height, income, etc.

If a woman just wears a sweat shirt and yoga pants and only goes outside to do errands, her quality options will be few and far between.

This is a misunderstanding. Most men do not by default have a tendency to cast a wide net. The default is they have a fantasy of one special woman who they win over like it’s a romcom. The dating and pickup community go against this and condition the man to force abundance by seeing many women to get a variety of options, actually trying to put him in the woman’s usual position. They actually have a term for it called “oneitis” about the default behavior they condition guys out of. 

The issue with your reasoning is you’re suggesting the woman begin in a almost judge like role where the men come to her wanting her more than she wants them and she sorts for the one she likes, but then undercutting what strengthens that position by saying attraction isn’t important. Attraction would be what gets the large amount of options to sort from and what makes the guy like her more than she likes them and pursue them more in the beginning. 

If that’s how you date odds are it wouldn’t have worked as well if you didn’t put the emphasis on attraction that you said you did.

Well, the romcom fantasy is more like the Lover and Beloved dynamic. That's when the Lover awakes in a man towards an individual woman when he feels this way.

And the Lover (when it awakes) makes the person who embodies it very vulnerable and attached to the Beloved. And the feelings are strong.

The issue is that there's no guarantee that the Beloved will love him back. So, it can be a better strategy to cast the net wider as a man and shake that one-itis until there's more confirmation of interest... and to shake neediness.

And pick-up is about deliberately using the Beloved Feminine frame to attract a broader swath of women that he doesn't feel too invested in. It teaches men to avoid awakening the Lover in themselves and to remain in the Beloved position to increase women's attraction to him through bringing up those really high/low Lover feelings in her.

It's good for a guy who wants a lot of low investment lays. But it's not very good for truly establishing a longer term relationship.

But I'm not saying that being more attractive in your appearance won't increase a woman's options. It certainly will increase her options and she can attract a more attractive guy.

But the reason why I don't add that to my list is because it's better to show up exactly as you would normally show up in life... however that may be.

Advertise your identity as it is, and let the men who aren't interested in that sort themselves from consideration.

Your concern that there won't be anyone left attracted to her just isn't a concern that women have to deal with... unless she herself has unrealistic standards. 

[BlessedLion]

13 minutes ago, Emerald said:

To be honest, it's occurred to me before that the men that many men call "betas" tend to be the highest quality partners and make the best fathers.

It's just that a lot of men view a valuable man as a man who gets laid often... and they assume women share in these values. So, they believe that women are settling for less... when the women are just getting an upgrade.

There's nothing sexier than a mature man.

But women tend to grow out of this desire for these "alpha" party guys in VERY early adulthood (usually between 20 and 25).

So, while men tend to view a valuable man as a man who can get laid easily, women view a valuable man as a man who is a good partner and father. And if she herself is mature, she will begin looking for a more mature partner.

That's why I try to discourage a lot of these types of perspectives, because a lot of men on this forum are being influenced by other men to develop values that will keep them resistant to the "beta" qualities that mature women respond to. And they may end up alone longterm because of these values.

Insightful. I think it depends how we’re contexting “Beta” too, because this can also mean spineless, no boundaries, overly nice, worming his way for female attention

 

But if “Beta” means emotional, caring, kind, sensitive, sexually disciplined, then yes a Beta is a solid catch (as long as he’s still in his masculine frame and focused on purpose, mission, discipline and isn’t more emotional than his Woman. Imo.)

[Emerald]

Just now, BlessedLion said:

Insightful. I think it depends how we’re contexting “Beta” too, because this can also mean spineless, no boundaries, overly nice, worming his way for female attention

But if “Beta” means emotional, caring, kind, sensitive, sexually disciplined, then yes a Beta is a solid catch (as long as he’s still in his masculine frame and focused on purpose, mission, discipline and isn’t more emotional than his Woman. Imo.)

That's true. I thought about that too.

There can genuinely be guys that operate like "betas" in a negative way.

But when it comes to this particular narrative of "Women screw around with the Chads until they hit the wall and lose all their value, and then have to quickly settle for the betas and get married to those low quality simps so they aren't alone with their cats forever."... usually the men they call betas in this narrative are just higher quality partners that are more mature.

 But because there's a whole narrative frames the fuck-boy as the desired option and the guy she ends up marrying as the non-desire option... it's like "women can only get the Chad when she's young and fertile and hasn't been fully "run through"... and once she's 30+ and rode the entire dick carousel and her pussy is loose because of all the Chads have big dicks and the Chads have rejected her for a younger model, she has to settle for weak cuckish simp boys who don't even have multiple women in their rotation."

But from the female perspective, it's just a huge misread on what women genuinely value as an aggregate. And it assumes that we're like "The highlight of my life was fucking Chad when I was 21"... but now I have to settle for lame Jimmy who's a a low status guy who loves me and our kids and pays all his bills on time.

[Emerald]

19 minutes ago, BlessedLion said:

This is good advice for men too. Def fallen into this illusion in dating, for the stimulating, edgy, fireworks kinda woman, leading to inevitable pain

Definitely can be a repeat of childhood familial dynamics and traumas when those super intense limerance feelings come up.

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

It's just that men generally find lots of different types of women attractive.

Exactly. They all have their different types. 

[Emerald]

10 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Exactly. They all have their different types. 

Definitely. Lots of men will talk a lot about wanting to be with the most attractive women in the world. But they're not really that picky. 

[Basman]

The idea that men are picky is really funny and untrue. I've seen bridge trolls get hit on by conventionally handsome men. Guys will fuck peanutbutter jars and melons. Most guys don't have crazy standards. Of course, everyone likes hot chicks but that is another story.