What is love - girls like emotional guys?

[Ayilton]

On 9/24/2018 at 6:09 PM, Samra said:

Again. It's not that girls like cruel, insensitive, macho, masculine... kind of guys. It's that YOU like the kind of girls that like that kind of guys! There are many kinds of people. You yourself are only attracted to certain type and disregard the rest. I'm saying its your own projection. And that kind of girl is the cruel type. You like that. But you are also upset about that cause you are not cruel, macho, masculine, tattooed, ... kind of guy. You want to be. Cause you want that kind of girl. See? 

You got him... right on the balls  ! Very good explanation 

[Forestluv]

20 hours ago, Key Elements said:

@Serotoninluv I think many ppl in society are not getting this...

When you're in a relationship, do you want it to last? Yes? 

Not necessarily. Making a relationship last has no inherent value to me. In some situations it has value - but no inherent value in and of itself. 

I spent 10 years trying to make a relationship last until I realized this truth.

[Forestluv]

19 hours ago, now is forever said:

this is because if they focus on that, they are usually triggered by some kind of abusive guys and have had bad experiences, so they long for being treated better but can’t overcome their own addiction. they wish their addiction could be a healthy one but then of course they are addicted to the unhealthy one, because it’s an addiction.

same goes for guys in a lot of cases. it’s a circle of needs and wishes - of rejection and acceptance until you find your match.

Good points. There are also lots of profiles in all caps saying they don’t want any liars, cheaters, games or drama. Unfortunately, that is exactly what they will attract and the cycle will continue.

[Key Elements]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

Not necessarily. Making a relationship last has no inherent value to me. In some situations it has value - but no inherent value in and of itself. 

I spent 10 years trying to make a relationship last until I realized this truth.

I get what you're saying here. If I was in a situation where the relationship fell apart after years of commitment, I rather not find another. For me, there are other things to do in life. Being embodied in an "ego," we don't have all the time in this world to do what we really want to do. Life is temporary.

[Forestluv]

3 minutes ago, Key Elements said:

I get what you're saying here. If I was in a situation where the relationship fell apart after years of commitment, I rather not find another. For me, there are other things to do in life. Being embodied in an "ego," we don't have all the time in this world to do what we really want to do. Life is temporary.

There may have been some relationship fatigue, yet I think I also realized an inner truth. My whole life I had been conditioned to value long-term commitment as a virtue. Then, I began to question whether long-term commitment was virtous in and of itself. Then I began realizing that beneath my desire for long term commitment was seeking energy, fear and desire for control and security. 

It’s been a process of letting go and learning to be ok with uncertainty and impermanence. I don’t know what the future will hold - people change. Life changes. These days, I try to be fully present in a relationship. To be a good listener and supportive. To express unconditional love. To give of myself genuinely and freely.

These values have risen higher than my desire for long-term commitment. If things naturally evolve in that direction, fine. Yet I no longer seek to steer things in that direction. 

[Wyatt]

Whatever you think you know about what women want, give it up. Everyone wants something different and specific. Some women want a man that's stoic and a rock. Some women want a man who's adventurous and will take them everywhere. Some women want a man who's sensitive and emotional and easy to open up with.

So just be whatever comes naturally. Then, if you put yourself out there as yourself, you'll get a few takers. Now the girl likes you for who you are, no need to pretend to be something you're not. But if you consciously change and develop, expect the relationship to fall apart. That's life

[Forestluv]

3 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

Whatever you think you know about what women want, give it up. Everyone wants something different and specific. Some women want a man that's stoic and a rock. Some women want a man who's adventurous and will take them everywhere. Some women want a man who's sensitive and emotional and easy to open up with.

On dating apps the top thing women say the want in a guy: sense of humor.

I wonder if that’s true when the are actually in a relationship. I’ve never had issues come up about humor. 

[Key Elements]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

These values have risen higher than my desire for long-term commitment. If things naturally evolve in that direction, fine. Yet I no longer seek to steer things in that direction. 

I also don't right now, but I'm happy that I did and it worked out. I see nothing wrong with it. I appreciate the lessons that it taught me, and it made me realize how to live life better. The saying, "Challenges are opportunities," is totally true.

[Shadowraix]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

There may have been some relationship fatigue, yet I think I also realized an inner truth. My whole life I had been conditioned to value long-term commitment as a virtue. Then, I began to question whether long-term commitment was virtous in and of itself. Then I began realizing that beneath my desire for long term commitment was seeking energy, fear and desire for control and security. 

It’s been a process of letting go and learning to be ok with uncertainty and impermanence. I don’t know what the future will hold - people change. Life changes. These days, I try to be fully present in a relationship. To be a good listener and supportive. To express unconditional love. To give of myself genuinely and freely.

These values have risen higher than my desire for long-term commitment. If things naturally evolve in that direction, fine. Yet I no longer seek to steer things in that direction. 

Yep, I've had a similar shift. My girlfriend likes to fantasize about the potential future but in the relationship I've been a big grounding encouraging for her and I to live in the present and just enjoy having each other around. She might change or I might. And thats okay. 

I think this kind of mentality has helped my girlfriend and I bond more by worrying less about "oh what if they leave me" etc etc

[Forestluv]

5 minutes ago, Key Elements said:

I also don't right now, but I'm happy that I did and it worked out. I see nothing wrong with it. I appreciate the lessons that it taught me, and it made me realize how to live life better. The saying, "Challenges are opportunities," is totally true.

Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to take a different path. I often placed personal freedom and autonomy over self-sacrifice within the relationship. I think this made it hard to form the types of bonds you write about. 

[Forestluv]

1 minute ago, Shadowraix said:

Yep, I've had a similar shift. My girlfriend likes to fantasize about the potential future but in the relationship I've been a big grounding encouraging for her and I to live in the present and just enjoy having each other around. She might change or I might. And thats okay. 

I think this kind of mentality has helped my girlfriend and I bond more by worrying less about "oh what if they leave me" etc etc

You seem grounded with it. I’ve been single 4 months and gravitating to this space. Yet, I don’t know how I will feel when I’m feeling n the next relationship. 

[now is forever]

23 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to take a different path. I often placed personal freedom and autonomy over self-sacrifice within the relationship. I think this made it hard to form the types of bonds you write about. 

woman expectation though is often a middle way, they don’t want self-sacrifice. but being autonomous means you are autonomous enough to give and understand without sacrificing. because the sacrifice for the we together turns into a pleasure.

[Key Elements]

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

On dating apps

Reminds me of this clip...

I like how Leo puts it here. He basically nailed it. But, I think he forgot to say that it takes work to grow into that.

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Key Elements said:

Reminds me of this clip...

I like how Leo puts it here. He basically nailed it. But, I think he forgot to say that it takes work to grow into that.

This looks like the next generation of conservative values. My parents’ generation criticized my generation’s style of relationships as being shallow and lacking substance. Similar to how he is doing here. He seems judgemental and ideological in this video.

I don’t think this is fair portrayal of millennial relationships and I don’t think they are inferior to traditional relationships. 

[bejapuskas]

@Serotoninluv  This is partially right for some people. Is it just an evolution to unhealthy orange?

[Key Elements]

6 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

This looks like the next generation of conservative values. My parents’ generation criticized my generation’s style of relationships as being shallow and lacking substance. Similar to how he is doing here. He seems judgemental and ideological in this video.

I don’t think this is fair portrayal of millennial relationships and I don’t think they are inferior to traditional relationships. 

I see nothing about it being "traditional." It could work in any type of relationship. He never said anything about it's wrong to break up or anything like that. Most of what Leo said on his clip also made sense to me. What's traditional about it? I can't picture a stage blue person listening to these clips.

[Key Elements]

@Serotoninluv here's another thing I want to mention that doesn't make any sense to me. First off, I'm completely ok with not talking to ppl. It's not easy to have a conversation nowadays. It's only small talk. Most ppl I run into, when they find out that I'm married with children for years, I'm usually automatically labeled as a "traditional" or something for no apparent reason. And, I tell them that I'm not interested in going into my marriage because it's personal and no one knows what's going on except for us, esp when there are labels and criticism. "Aren't you bored of him?" I'm like, "no, why should I be?" It sounds very inauthentic and insulting to me to make some kind of petty excuse just to break up.

I don't see the difference between what Leo said in his clip and the clip done by Jay Shetty. Both mean the same thing. Leo just happens to not include talking about social media, and he also forgot to include that it takes work for the ppl involved in the relationship to get there.

[Forestluv]

4 hours ago, Key Elements said:

I see nothing about it being "traditional." It could work in any type of relationship. He never said anything about it's wrong to break up or anything like that. Most of what Leo said on his clip also made sense to me. What's traditional about it? I can't picture a stage blue person listening to these clips.

I think there is a lot of value in the video relative to specific forms of relationships. I think his video is oversimplified and overgeneralized. He sets up a binary framework by repeatedly saying "illusion relationship" and "actual relationship". Yet, he never defines what an "actual relationship" is. The meaning of relationship is a highly subjective / relative concept. There are hundreds of different forms of relationships. It's highly complex and simplifying it to undefined "illusion relationship" and "actual relationship" only works at a surface level. It's "either / or" blue-level thinking. A person is Either in an illusion relationship Or an actual relationship. It doesn't incorporate Orange-level continuum thinking such that relationships lie on a continuum between illusion relationship and actual relationship. For example, a couple that live 100 miles apart that see each other on the weekends and communicate via social media on weekdays might be considered 60% illusion relationship and 40% actual relationship. As well, his binary framework does not include relativism found at Green and Yellow levels. From a relativist perspective an actual relationship would be however a couple or group define what "actual relationship" means for them. 

You say that "it" could work in any type of relationship, yet if we look closer - does it really? He excludes social media based relationships by labeling them as "illusion relationships", so it doesn't work for people that define a social media relationship as an "actual relationship". (And he cites outdated social media such as facebook - and does not consider more common and more interactive social media such as facetime/skype.). As well, he states "We want to take it slow, we want to see where it goes, we don't want to label things, we just go with the flow" as being in the illusionary relationship category. So, "it" doesn't work for this type of relationship. Yet, for some people taking things slow, not labeling and going with the flow is very healthy and works for them. If that's what a couple decides is best for them and that is an "actual" relationship for them, how can the speaker discredit their relationship as not being "actual"? 

There are also mongamous relationships, polyamourous relationships, open relationships etc. And with each of those forms of relationship, there are subforms of relationships - monogamy can range from strict monogamy to a flexible monogamy. Does "it" work for all of these forms of relationships? I don't think so. What about a woman that is in a primary relationship, two secondary relationships and a comet relationship structured as a hierarchical relationship with her primary partner. The video assumes a person only has one relationship (he consistently says "a relationship" in it's singular form. So, is this woman in an "actual relationship"? Should we group all four of her relationships and decide if it's an "actual relationship"? Or should we consider each relationship separately? What if she is highly committed to the primary partner and one secondary partner and they have lots of quality time together - and one secondary partner and the comet partner is based on social media? Would we say she has two "actual relationships" and two "illusionary relationships". At what point does an actual relationship become an illusionary relationship?

Or what about a happily committed married couple that likes to spice things up with threesomes and swinger parties? How would we label their swinging partners? What if the swinging partners were in a tight-nit group that communicated through social media and got together for a party once a month? What if they shared deeply with each other and had close bonds? How would we apply the speaker's advice to this couple and their swinging relationships?

[Key Elements]

@Serotoninluv I knew that you would mention polyamory. Yes, it does include that too. Polyamory ppl do talk about serious stuff, like who (which partners) are involved and so much more beyond that. They don't just talk about which coffee they like, and which beer they like to drink, and what shoes they will wear today. The conversations go way beyond those at the start of their relationships. Whether they want to end the relationship is up to them. Jay is saying that with anything it takes work, and yes, the word "work" is deep and profound. It takes work to fully understand the other person, and this doesn't involve shallow conversations with labels.

[Forestluv]

7 hours ago, bejapuskas said:

@Serotoninluv  This is partially right for some people. Is it just an evolution to unhealthy orange?

Well said. I would agree that this is partially right for some people. I would say this speaker is a mix of blue, orange and lower green.

Blue - he sets up a bimodal framework of "illusion relationship" or "actual relationship". Either / Or thinking is stage blue

Orange - He speaks mentions plenty Orange key words such as "acheiving" and "winning". As well . . . personal hardwork to reach a goal. 

Lower Green - He is critical of certain dynamics common at Orange stages. For example, Orange often acts in their self interest and their relationships are often shallow - e.g. more about sex than forming human bonds. As well, he speaks of real human connection. Yet doesn't go further into green - he doesn't stress the value of equality and empathy as being core components of relationships. I'd say he places the highest value on commitment - I think this is the most common value he uses. 

Upper Green - Upper green has mastered cultural relativism and has a basic understanding of holistic relativism. The speaker does not use either mode of thinking.

Overall, I would say he is transitioning into Green, yet is burdened with Blue and Orange level views.