Does Success Hurt Woman's Dating Chances

[intotheblack]

50 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

those who keep relationships on the back burner in order to pursue a career are just doing a disservice to themselves because youth is the time when attraction is at peak and love is enjoyable, although there is nothing that says that pursuing a relationship on the side means giving up career those who do it are simply too nerdy and aren't too romantic I guess to begin with  

 

I think the issue is being a workaholic and having your career consume your life, which isn’t healthy for man or woman.  
Men who do the same thing would also have a hard time maintaining a relationship, because there would be no time for relationship growth.  That’s why those 2 type of people would work well together. 

[intotheblack]

59 minutes ago, Arcangelo said:

That will prolly just get us in jail. Just by asking someone's name you can get in trouble nowadays with the whole me too, harassment thing. I know because a girl named Scarlet called security on me at a supermarket, saying that she felt harassed by me.

 

You must have given her a creepy vibe.  I wouldn’t want to be approached either whilst doing my food shopping.  

I’ve been ‘day approached’ 2 times before 
It’s was super awkward, but funny.  I was outside walking in the street though. 
there is an edgey vibe to it, and I can understand why someone would feel freaked out. 

at the time I didn’t know about the whole pickup culture. Well I knew what a pickup artist was, but didn’t know there was whole online communities for it. looking back I’m wondering if they were practicing pickup! 

Edited April 22, 2021 by intotheblack

[freejoy]

Women are not supposed to be like men.

Men and women are different.

A lot of women especially those that strongly believe in equal rights want to prove they can do anything a man can do. Bullshit.

If a woman wants to be like a man then she'll suffer.

A woman needs to be at home with her children. Not working and sending the children to daycare.

I'm not attracted at all to the he-women.

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Consept said:

I saw your comment just after i posted mine lol, but yes i completely agree with your take and i like your conclusion that women are picking with head rather than heart, that is really the core of the issue.

On a wider point just on this whole topic - Woman have always been the choosers, men have had to do what they can to be chosen, this is an evolutionary thing. The reason why men are even ambitious or driven in the first place is that the men women chose, back in hunter gatherer days, were the most resourceful and physically able to protect their family. This how its been for 1000s of years, men have never complained about this even when it leads to things like wanting them to be physically imposing by having a certain height or having enough resources or being able to connect emotionally, all these things and more push men to improve and be their best to attract a woman. If its things they cant change like height they play the cards they were dealt. The alternative is going into victim mode and becoming an incel. 

Look around on this forum, you find a lot of complaints about women's preferences. I'm sure this has always been going on.

From an early age we almost intuitively know we have to work in some way to get a woman, at first we're told be society we need to be really nice to them, then when that doesnt work we might overdo it with the 'badboy' persona, then (if we get there) we realise we have to actually understand women on a deeper level and not treat them as some fragile pixie and actually treat them as a human and reach a connection on that level. This is a hard, long, confusing process (not many tell you this). 

Now cut to women, for the first time in history the last 50 years have seen women nearly reach parity with men in terms of resources, opportunities, pretty much everything, girls are outperforming boys at school so this is likely to carry on. This is great of course, there should be freedom for anyone who wants to do anything (within legality). But now with the choice comes responsibility for the choice, for example back in the day it wasnt that men wanted to do all the work, they just knew if they didnt they wouldnt get a partner. They were free to make that choice to some extent but they knew that it would severely limit their options. Now im not saying thats exactly the same as women working, its not, but you have to realise that men like certain things like a woman whos caring and nurturing, who is co-operative, who doesnt compete with him (oneupmanship), who is attractive, who is fit etc. What ive seen a lot from women that complain about men is 'he needs to take me as i am', which is fine but understand that many men may not want to do that, the same way women will not take a man who hasnt developed himself in the ways ive mentioned previously. 

That's why it's important to be attuned to your intuition. You will naturally be attracted to a man who matches you. The men who are incompatible and want another type of woman shouldn't even be part of your consideration. They're irrelevant to the selection process. The task for women is sorting. You have many suiters, sure. But you pick one based on how you feel about them. And this is quite organic and personality-based. And if there's a man who doesn't resonate with or feels threatened by your goals, then he should be scratched from consideration. 

So there has to be some accountability here of not being what men want, which by the way is not a very long list.

Again, there doesn't need to be any accountability on the woman's part. You just don't choose those men who want something other than what you are. A woman would be very unwise to consider the desires of men she isn't interested in. 

Success doesnt factor into a mans selection to pursue you, its really all the other factors that would put someone off. Also a lot of successful women are not even looking at Mcdonalds workers or refuse collectors, theyre not looking at 91% of men who dont earn more than them, then cut into that 9% with height, fitness, age etc. So when you get to this probably 1% of the male pool that a successful woman would want, this person has a variety of choices, plus he doesnt care about dating someone who earns as much as them, so why would he choose this woman if she doesnt match up in the areas that are important to him?

When a woman is in touch with her intuition, this does the sorting process for her. If she's got a laundry list of traits, then she's choosing with her head on a rational level... and that's a losing strategy in terms of finding an intimate partner. 

Also the guys that are put off by a womans income, this will not even be a factor until they get married and have to work out bills and things like that, in most cases i dont think a guy like this would even get past that womans selection process. If he does what will put him off are other attributes that could be synonymous with a successful woman, its not the success itself.  

Yeah, of course. The only exception is men who are threatened by women's success. But again, it would be unwise to consider them for partnership.

 

[Preety_India]

5 minutes ago, intotheblack said:

I think the issue is being a workaholic and having your career consume your life, which isn’t healthy for man or woman.  
Men who do the same thing would also have a hard time maintaining a relationship, because there would be no time for relationship growth.  That’s why those 2 type of people would work well together. 

Yes true for both. 

 

[freejoy]

A he-women will be attracted to the wimpy guy.

A wimpy guy will be attracted to the he-women.

-----

A strong male is attracted to the feminine in a woman not to her masculine.

[Raptorsin7]

4 minutes ago, freejoy said:

A he-women will be attracted to the wimpy guy.

A wimpy guy will be attracted to the he-women.

There are many woman in my family who have this dynamic with their partners. I think it can work if the man is happy in the role of a dependent/child and the woman is happy being in control.

[freejoy]

1 minute ago, Raptorsin7 said:

There are many woman in my family who have this dynamic with their partners. I think it can work if the man is happy in the role of a dependent/child and the woman is happy being in control.

Yes, a match made in heaven!

: )

[Consept]

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

Look around on this forum, you find a lot of complaints about women's preferences. I'm sure this has always been going on.

First of all i appreciate your response and the time you took to consider the points i brought up. Im gonna just clarify some of the stuff i said. So yes there are some complaints on the forum about women's preferences, but i would say that if its about womens's high standard then its a valid complaint, if its just the fact that women have preference then obviously thats a poor argument. Either way men may complain but the majority have always historically married women, protected them, provided for them etc. Whereas as some women today are complaining to the point of not settling for anyone and putting it on the men ie the Tomi Lahren vid. 

 

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

That's why it's important to be attuned to your intuition. You will naturally be attracted to a man who matches you. The men who are incompatible and want another type of woman shouldn't even be part of your consideration. They're irrelevant to the selection process. The task for women is sorting. You have many suiters, sure. But you pick one based on how you feel about them. And this is quite organic and personality-based. And if there's a man who doesn't resonate with or feels threatened by your goals, then he should be scratched from consideration. 

Again, there doesn't need to be any accountability on the woman's part. You just don't choose those men who want something other than what you are. A woman would be very unwise to consider the desires of men she isn't interested in. 

OK so this is all fine if the women doesnt have a criteria that rules out 99.9% of men. So this is really for the women that are complaining that there arent enough good men, which are usually (not always) successful women. Women traditionally and really even now, will have a certain amount of suitors as you say, who approach them and they make their selection out of those. Obviously the more attractive women will have more options. Whats happened now is that some women have overvalued themselves to the point that theyve priced themselves completely out of the dating market. This is because theyve tied their attractiveness to their success, which as every man has commented on this thread, does not increase their attractiveness. 

Because theyve judged themselves to be so high up, essentially they are becoming the pursuers as their criteria is so high it only includes a certain amount, so they know who the want, the problem is those guys most likely dont want them as their criteria is no where near as high plus theyre probably looking for different things. Therefore there is accountability on the womans part in this case because she needs to compete with the other woman, without her success being a factor. So if she wants that top guy she has to appeal to him otherwise accept the suitors who are giving you attention. That top guy may just want basic things, a feminine woman, co-operative, attractive, fit body, if you cant provide those things, thats not the guys fault and your success does not make up for it.

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

When a woman is in touch with her intuition, this does the sorting process for her. If she's got a laundry list of traits, then she's choosing with her head on a rational level... and that's a losing strategy in terms of finding an intimate partner. 

yes agree completely 

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

Yeah, of course. The only exception is men who are threatened by women's success. But again, it would be unwise to consider them for partnership.

It definitely can happen, in fact some women who earn more than their partner have actually said they have to really consider how to make him feel ok with earning less. This makes sense as if its the other way women dont like to be reminded that the man is earning all the money either, but of course men have had years of being told they should be the breadwinner so it hits harder 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

First of all i appreciate your response and the time you took to consider the points i brought up. Im gonna just clarify some of the stuff i said. So yes there are some complaints on the forum about women's preferences, but i would say that if its about womens's high standard then its a valid complaint, if its just the fact that women have preference then obviously thats a poor argument. Either way men may complain but the majority have always historically married women, protected them, provided for them etc. Whereas as some women today are complaining to the point of not settling for anyone and putting it on the men ie the Tomi Lahren vid. 

I was only responding to the assertion that men have never complained about women's preference. It's definitely true that a great many men complain.

OK so this is all fine if the women doesnt have a criteria that rules out 99.9% of men. So this is really for the women that are complaining that there arent enough good men, which are usually (not always) successful women. Women traditionally and really even now, will have a certain amount of suitors as you say, who approach them and they make their selection out of those. Obviously the more attractive women will have more options. Whats happened now is that some women have overvalued themselves to the point that theyve priced themselves completely out of the dating market. This is because theyve tied their attractiveness to their success, which as every man has commented on this thread, does not increase their attractiveness. 

What has to be understood is that the female perspective on dating doesn't work the same way as it appears from the male perspective. Men often pay attention to what happens with very attractive women and them getting lots of male attention. And then, the projection of their own desire to have abundance of female attention.

But from the female perspective and goal, abundance of options is a double edged sword. The woman's role is to sort and select a partner that resonates. So, having more options doesn't necessarily mean that you have more viable options. A lot of those options are spam. So, you have to be extra in touch with your intuition to sort the wheat from the chaff in terms of who will be a healthy and compatible partner.

And there is no way for a woman to make herself too valuable... just too valuable for a subset of men who feel insecure about their own value. So, it may seem that a woman could make herself too valuable ffrom the perspective of a man who feels threatened by a woman's prowess. But from the perspective of a woman who is on top of her game in all facets of life, these men aren't going to be getting any consideration.

What must be understood is that, unless a woman goes into laundry list mode, there is no scarcity of potential partners. So, there is no need or impetus for a woman to make herself less valuable or smaller to attract one. You just let your intuition sort out the ones that prefer a woman to make herself less valuable or small. 

And because there's no scarcity and no desire for an abundance of male partners, there's no need to cater to the perspectives of men who feel one-uped. 

Because theyve judged themselves to be so high up, essentially they are becoming the pursuers as their criteria is so high it only includes a certain amount, so they know who the want, the problem is those guys most likely dont want them as their criteria is no where near as high plus theyre probably looking for different things. Therefore there is accountability on the womans part in this case because she needs to compete with the other woman, without her success being a factor. So if she wants that top guy she has to appeal to him otherwise accept the suitors who are giving you attention. That top guy may just want basic things, a feminine woman, co-operative, attractive, fit body, if you cant provide those things, thats not the guys fault and your success does not make up for it.

If you're competing for a man with another woman, you already fucked up. And that's why a lot of the advice on here is not good advice for women looking for a long term partner. Women have to remember that they're the selectors. 

If you are competing for a man, you aren't in your feminine selector energy, you're in your masculine competition energy. If you're changing yourself to be more marketable instead of going with what comes intuitively, then you're in your masculine energy. 

Also, as a very career-focused woman (and I've had this orientation since I was in kindergarten)... these things have never come through as a factor in my life. There's a lot of stories about female sexuality that just aren't really true, but men tend to believe them because they're not familiar with what it's like to be a woman. 

The fact of the matter is that most men aren't going to sort a woman from their consideration because she's successful. And if a woman is really homed into her intuition, she won't sort a man from consideration on the basis of finances unless he's a genuine liability to her stability.

And a man who truly is looking to invest in a relationship with a well-rounded partner (which is the only kind of man worth considering from the female perspective) is going to be interested in her dreams and goals too. If he's not excited about that, then he probably is only orienting to the woman through his libido. And that orientation is boring and unfulfilling from the female perspective, and it's also a red flag that she will be easily replaceable to him. And that's just not a good strategy if your goal is a deep and intimate relationship. 

Now, that's not as to say that the career is something that gives more animal magnetism. That's a different layer of attraction. But if a man isn't interested in the things that are important to me, then my intuition will most certainly sort him from consideration. 

And from the female perspective, I can tell you that there's no scarcity of compatible partners. 

And I've tended to attract and be attracted men who have been intrigued by my successes and my prowesses. That's because this is what I need to feel fulfilled in a relationship to another human being. 

Also, it's what makes me feel my sexiest. Pursuing my interests creatively and otherwise gets the libido flowing.

So, he might not get hot for my life-purpose, but I do... and he gets hot for that.

yes agree completely 

It definitely can happen, in fact some women who earn more than their partner have actually said they have to really consider how to make him feel ok with earning less. This makes sense as if its the other way women dont like to be reminded that the man is earning all the money either, but of course men have had years of being told they should be the breadwinner so it hits harder 

Again, if I have to consider how it would make him feel to earn less, this tells me something about him and his self-esteem. It also might reflect and incongruity of values, if he expects things to be very traditional with me. I'm not a traditional person, so I need someone who can color outside the lines a bit.

 

[Parththakkar12]

@Emerald Is this a romantic relationship or is this a friends-with-benefits situation?

[Preety_India]

5 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

There are many woman in my family who have this dynamic with their partners. I think it can work if the man is happy in the role of a dependent/child and the woman is happy being in control.

You need to understand that strong independent or successful woman does not always mean a dependent man and woman in control. 

For example in all of my relationships, I always gave the control to the man. I was the submissive one. 

Yet, I wasn't sitting around passively. 

Some men don't like a woman not doing anything with her life. 

I have drive and ambition and goals and I have an education and I work. 

Having all of that does not mean I'm dominant. 

There are plenty of women like me who are success oriented and ambition oriented and yet are submissive in relationships 

 I would be more than glad if a man takes over and handles everything. 

I would never be in a relationship where I have full control because it doesn't suit me. 

Also remember that  as much as you might dislike that dynamic, it could be specific to your family, there are plenty of relationships where the women are driven and successful but the man wears the pants in the relationship.  And there are plenty of men who would want to be with the type of  women in your family. 

For example I've seen many men who did not like me even though I was submissive because they are gravitated more towards women who are in control rather than women like me. I found it surprising because I always thought that men wanted the manly role in a relationship however that's not the case. Much of the stereotypes like soft woman with a dominating guy is perpetuated by movies and romantic novels and I always thought the same way. 

But in reality plenty of relationships involve a woman who dictates and a man who likes getting dictated. In fact such men don't want the hassle of making all decisions so they appreciate a woman in control, in fact most of the modern marriages I see around me, I see this dynamic. 

In fact, these same men look down on women like me, they don't appreciate the softness in a woman, they consider it as weakness and a hassle for a relationship. 

Such examples exist in my distant family where men are married to the women in control. But during family interactions such men have insulted me telling me that my relationships will be difficult since the man will need to hold power. Do you see my point?

They did not want me to be submissive or feminine because they don't believe in that. They don't compliment that. They are attracted to power wielding women. I found that to be very opposite to the idea shown in movies but that's reality. 

Submissive women will become a rarity as time goes on. Because men are fastly replacing them with powerful dominating women. This is not 1600s.  This is 21st century.  

Most masculine men are looked at with contempt and women reject them because women want someone they can dominate, with feminism, women have been empowered which is a good thing but the by product of giving women more freedom has resulted in relationship dynamics where the woman holds more power.  This won't go away and it's on the rise and I'm not happy about it 

My own mother had this dynamic where she was always in control but I never appreciated it. 

However lot of men seem to want it. 

 

[Preety_India]

@Raptorsin7 another observation that I would like to bring up to you is what I call a false positive and almost every time I became a victim of this. 

What I saw is the phenomenon where in each one of my relationships the men were pretty dominant in the beginning however behind closed doors they didn't want any control in the relationship, they weren't as masculine as I first thought they were. They weren't the type who would take on things or nurture and care for me and let me be the feminine self, in fact it was the opposite, I realized that their masculinity was a facade. Usually masculinity is associated with taking the lead, dominating etc. The thing with these men that I dated was that they were masculine only for appearance, as in physical appearance and body language, they were masculine only to attract females, they had learned how to be masculine in language and body language, in words and appear attractive. But it's a false positive. Because they did not possess actual masculine traits. Same goes for women, you'll spot a woman at a party that appears very feminine and talks softly and appears submissive, but thats a false positive, because in reality behind closed doors, she is calling all the shots. But she knows that appearing more feminine will attract her more potential partners. The same way with these men. They are masculine only for show, so meanwhile they nicely fit the stereotype of the masculine guy, in reality or behind closed doors they want a woman to have full control, which was quite surprising to me. 

In fact in my second last relationship where the guy talked about how masculine he is, how other men were scared of him, he used to put on a bold show, but when it came to finances, he told me to work harder and make double the money I was making at the time meanwhile he was unemployed and wasn't keen on getting a job but complained about how I didn't make enough money and how his life will be better if I made more.. I was honestly surprised because he compared me to his ex wife who was making more than me and was more successful, she was also more powerful and dominating. So I was kinda surprised when he said how much he liked her being in control because this was the same guy always bossing me and telling me how bold and masculine he is, the thing is such men put on a show of masculinity and he enjoyed dominating me but that is only enough to satisfy their male fantasies, they aren't like that from inside. It's only a show. In reality the relationship they want is where the woman is in power whereas a woman like me is just to satisfy their male fantasies. 

So when he started whining about how I wasn't making enough money or not successful enough for him, I felt very bad and I would have honestly been happier with a more masculine guy who takes control and  wouldn't pressure me to become the provider in the relationship. 

There are plenty men who appear sweet, docile, submissive but in reality they take on everything, and carry out  manly responsibilities but do not possess the outward masculine traits or the body language. 

What I realized in my dating experience is that appearances fool us. People who excessively try to show themselves as masculine or feminine, in terms of appearance, expression, body language, words, aren't exactly what they show, they are different on the inside and the showing off is only to fulfill social conventions. Only to attract someone. 

For example, the man I first dated was very attractive to most girls and girls would be gaga over him, he would talk about weight training and fighting with other guys, act masculine, act like he is the leader, but now he is unemployed and lives with a very dominant woman who takes control of everything. Because a book not what the cover shows.. 

 

[Preety_India]

@Raptorsin7 what I have realized is that vibe or appearance is just a facade most of the time. Guys who consider themselves losers aren't exactly that. Guys who boost their profile and call themselves winners are actually not what they show. We get fooled by social culture that encourages us to live a certain vibe. But in reality or actuality, it's the content of what a person speaks that needs to be paid attention to.  I have understood that it is not what people act like which makes them masculine or feminine, (however this is how it is absorbed by the world ) it is their actions that prove if they are masculine or feminine. It's their thoughts. Their intent.  Their ideas and not their vibe. The vibe is only used to fool people and attract people.  

So a man look very feeble and short and timid and actually be more masculine in his thoughts and ideals than the guy who boasts about being the most masculine  

The world is made of many pretenses  

 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Parththakkar12 said:

@Emerald Is this a romantic relationship or is this a friends-with-benefits situation?

I've never had a friends with benefits situation. I don't know if I'd be capable of having a sustained sexual friendship with someone without either falling in love with them or just not being that interested in them anymore and losing the motivation to have sex. Most of my sexual motivation comes from a desire for intimacy.  

So, I'm only speaking from the standpoint of having a deeper relationship to a romantic partner. 

[Preety_India]

@Raptorsin7 in fact I would also go as far as to say this. 

That using the heart for attraction is not the correct strategy in relationships. In fact it backfires very badly like it did for me. 

I experienced intense heart attraction and sexual emotional attraction towards the men I dated because they were able to emotionally stimulate me, but I ended up attracting wrong guys. I did not use my head. I used my heart. And I experienced terrible failure. 

Because it's easy to fool the heart. When we use  heart attraction we easily fall for emotional manipulators. 

I would recommend using the head while attracting someone. Using intellect. Putting your brain into it even if the heart is not exactly attracted to that person. Use the head/brain to correctly judge their intentions and actions. 

What happens when we use the heart is that we tend to gloss over someone's actions and intentions because we are so in love with them and unable to believe that they don't have the best intentions. They appear the best to us because we look at them with Rose tinted glasses 

However when we use the intellect while judging someone, we can easily catch their facades and false pretenses and manipulations and not get played and end up finding a partner who at first might not be very attractive, like I might attract a guy who is not very successful, charming, masculine or good looking, not sexually arousing, yet he might be a guy with a golden heart. To attract such a person, we should stop using the heart which will cloud our judgement and rather use the head. 

 

[Heart of Space]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

You need to understand that strong independent or successful woman does not always mean a dependent man and woman in control. 

For example in all of my relationships, I always gave the control to the man. I was the submissive one. 

Yet, I wasn't sitting around passively. 

Some men don't like a woman not doing anything with her life. 

I have drive and ambition and goals and I have an education and I work. 

Having all of that does not mean I'm dominant. 

There are plenty of women like me who are success oriented and ambition oriented and yet are submissive in relationships 

 I would be more than glad if a man takes over and handles everything. 

I would never be in a relationship where I have full control because it doesn't suit me. 

Also remember that  as much as you might dislike that dynamic, it could be specific to your family, there are plenty of relationships where the women are driven and successful but the man wears the pants in the relationship.  And there are plenty of men who would want to be with the type of  women in your family. 

For example I've seen many men who did not like me even though I was submissive because they are gravitated more towards women who are in control rather than women like me. I found it surprising because I always thought that men wanted the manly role in a relationship however that's not the case. Much of the stereotypes like soft woman with a dominating guy is perpetuated by movies and romantic novels and I always thought the same way. 

But in reality plenty of relationships involve a woman who dictates and a man who likes getting dictated. In fact such men don't want the hassle of making all decisions so they appreciate a woman in control, in fact most of the modern marriages I see around me, I see this dynamic. 

In fact, these same men look down on women like me, they don't appreciate the softness in a woman, they consider it as weakness and a hassle for a relationship. 

Such examples exist in my distant family where men are married to the women in control. But during family interactions such men have insulted me telling me that my relationships will be difficult since the man will need to hold power. Do you see my point?

They did not want me to be submissive or feminine because they don't believe in that. They don't compliment that. They are attracted to power wielding women. I found that to be very opposite to the idea shown in movies but that's reality. 

Submissive women will become a rarity as time goes on. Because men are fastly replacing them with powerful dominating women. This is not 1600s.  This is 21st century.  

Most masculine men are looked at with contempt and women reject them because women want someone they can dominate, with feminism, women have been empowered which is a good thing but the by product of giving women more freedom has resulted in relationship dynamics where the woman holds more power.  This won't go away and it's on the rise and I'm not happy about it 

My own mother had this dynamic where she was always in control but I never appreciated it. 

However lot of men seem to want it. 

 

I don't think I agree.  As far as I've seen 90 % of relationships are a dominant man with a submissive woman.  I'm talking about sexual and emotional dynamics.  

Many guys who are submissive tend to be gay or bi which is a relatively small percentage of the population.  

[Preety_India]

5 minutes ago, Heart of Space said:

I don't think I agree.  As far as I've seen 90 % of relationships are a dominant man with a submissive woman.  I'm talking about sexual and emotional dynamics.  

Many guys who are submissive tend to be gay or bi which is a relatively small percentage of the population.  

This is movie magic. Reality is very different from perception. What you perceive as submissive is not submissive. What you perceive as dominant is not dominant.  What you see is a facade. Emotional and sexual dynamics only exist to fool the senses.  

Falling into those archetypes and fantasies is the perfect road to downspiralling in life. 

Wise people open their eyes, awaken inner wisdom and use intellect than emotion. 

 

[RareGodzilla]

I think there is some truth to that. Our society has in a way became more equal, women generally have a fair chance at starting a strong career. But in relationship our society is still very partiarcihiacal. Obviously if society allows women to get rich but still looks down on a woman going out with a poorer dude it creates a contradiction.

I think that it's fair to point out this problem, it's real even if we pretend to be all nice and say it's not true. However it's important not to seek to reverse societal progress, we need to complete it. The partiarcihiacal view on relationship needs to end. 

[Consept]

Im just going to focus on the points that i think theres a misunderstanding, hopefully ill make it clear what i mean 

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

And there is no way for a woman to make herself too valuable... just too valuable for a subset of men who feel insecure about their own value. So, it may seem that a woman could make herself too valuable ffrom the perspective of a man who feels threatened by a woman's prowess. But from the perspective of a woman who is on top of her game in all facets of life, these men aren't going to be getting any consideration.

When i say a woman has made herself too valuable im literally talking about he sees herself as too valuable, im not saying a man sees her as too valuable and is threatened, Im saying he just doesnt consider her success and so from a mans attraction point of view it doesnt make her more attractive. This is a very important point. To flip it lets say a man works on being nurturing, being more feminine, he learns about womens fashion, he gets really good at housework and looking after kids, this guy might really believe that his value in terms of women being attracted to him is going up, he may put himself at a 10 and think he can relate to women and hes got lots of stuff going for him, he may think that hes now more attractive to women but once he gets out there he'll find that probably isnt the case (yes some will be attracted to that). Just because you think something youre doing makes you more attractive it doesnt make it so and its not to do with guys being intimidated, if you lined up an attractive woman with an unattractive woman who was successful, a guy is not choosing the attractive woman because hes intimidated by the other option. 

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

What must be understood is that, unless a woman goes into laundry list mode, there is no scarcity of potential partners. So, there is no need or impetus for a woman to make herself less valuable or smaller to attract one. You just let your intuition sort out the ones that prefer a woman to make herself less valuable or small. 

Right but the laundry list tends to be from successful women because of their own inflated value, but yes if you dont have a laundry list then there will be a lot of potential partners. Im not saying you have to make yourself small or less valuable to attract a man, however you are will attract men if you look good, women control the access to sex they choose partners ultimately, but when it comes to marriage and long term relationships, men control that aspect of it. The acid test is whether a man wants to marry you or not. For this a man, especially a man valued highly by women, has to really want to do it and to really want to do it, yes he has to see value in the woman on his terms. As you say, if he doesnt and he doesnt think it will work he wont marry her. 

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And because there's no scarcity and no desire for an abundance of male partners, there's no need to cater to the perspectives of men who feel one-uped. 

Again its not about men being one upped or wanting to be catered to, the list for men is very simple and very short, feminine, attractive, co-operative, nurturing, its pretty much it. Even if women havent got a long laundry list youd be lying if you said theres not some things you want, this is the same for men and men wont settle down with you if you dont match up, at least if we have options. So im not saying change yourself, you shouldnt, but if you dont have those qualities you probably wont get what you might consider a higher quality man.

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

The fact of the matter is that most men aren't going to sort a woman from their consideration because she's successful. And if a woman is really homed into her intuition, she won't sort a man from consideration on the basis of finances unless he's a genuine liability to her stability.

True, but there will be a limit for women, most dont want to look after a man, ive not met one that is looking for that, whereas a man would. So there are practical implications here. 

 

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And a man who truly is looking to invest in a relationship with a well-rounded partner (which is the only kind of man worth considering from the female perspective) is going to be interested in her dreams and goals too.

I agree he should be interested in that, but then it depends what he wants. If he wants a family he may choose a woman whos dreams and goals are to have a family. 

 

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And from the female perspective, I can tell you that there's no scarcity of compatible partners. 

There is you are filtering out 99% of the male population. Also you will get a lot of men wanting to hang out but as i said the acid test is if they want to settle down. You might not, but a lot of women i know have problems keeping a man around but not getting them in the first place. But i agree that its probably cos theyre not in their feminine.

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And I've tended to attract and be attracted men who have been intrigued by my successes and my prowesses. That's because this is what I need to feel fulfilled in a relationship to another human being. 

Also, it's what makes me feel my sexiest. Pursuing my interests creatively and otherwise gets the libido flowing.

So, he might not get hot for my life-purpose, but I do... and he gets hot for that.

Actually i believe that if you are with a woman in a long term relationship or marriage, the man should provide that safe space for them to grow and do what they want, so i agree with you on this. 

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

Again, if I have to consider how it would make him feel to earn less, this tells me something about him and his self-esteem. It also might reflect and incongruity of values, if he expects things to be very traditional with me. I'm not a traditional person, so I need someone who can color outside the lines a bit.

If a man brought up that hes the breadwinner or even really believed in its importance and so it showed subtly in his behavior, i think a woman would notice this and not like it. Its the same if a woman does it, but its obviously a slightly more sensitive subject for men, given the history of humans