Is it ethical for a guy to break a girl's heart ?

[Emerald]

On 5/24/2021 at 10:42 AM, Harlen Kelly said:

@Preety_India

''How can any human being even survive without expectations, wouldn't they end up dead sooner or later?''

That is exactly my point that you fail to understand, survival is selfishness which again does not make survival ''immoral'' or ''bad'', it simply makes your survival selfish. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a monogamous relationship or a family for that matter, the problem occurs when you delude yourself into thinking that what you are doing is not survival and is not selfish. 

Your expectation for a monogamous relationship after a guy has sex with you will create unnecessary and deep suffering, it will also severely limit your psychological growth and development, this is painfully obvious and I am certain you intuitively know this.

If you never had any expectations what would happen in practice (not in theory) is you would feel deeply connected and joyous with this moment. That's what happens in practice when you let go of expectations. 

I agree with your point that desiring a monogamous relationship is as self-focused as any other desire. It's an agenda just like any other agenda.

But I do think women are wisest to expect (and by expect, I mean feel entitled to) the dynamic they want. And then, be ready to duck out if that dynamic is not to be had with that particular guy... ideally prior to getting involved with him. 

Women are wise to remember that they are the selector and the "prize" in the mating dance, and that any man who isn't ready/willing to step up into the role she is looking for him to fill isn't a good candidate for that selection process. 

So, ideally don't have sex with that person, unless you're looking for casual sex and you know for sure that you're never going to want him in any serious way. And ideally, don't even spend time with him once you know that he's not aligned to your agenda as you don't want feelings to develop with someone who isn't aligned to your agenda.

There are plenty of men out there who will be in alignment. Unless you're really just interested in some sexual escapades, it's best to move on and look for a more solid man.

[Raptorsin7]

2 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I agree with your point that desiring a monogamous relationship is as self-focused as any other desire. It's an agenda just like any other agenda.

But I do think women are wisest to expect (and by expect, I mean feel entitled to) the dynamic they want. And then, be ready to duck out if that dynamic is not to be had with that particular guy... ideally prior to getting involved with him. 

Women are wise to remember that they are the selector and the "prize" in the mating dance, and that any man who isn't ready/willing to step up into the role she is looking for him to fill isn't a good candidate for that selection process. 

So, ideally don't have sex with that person, unless you're looking for casual sex and you know for sure that you're never going to want him in any serious way. And ideally, don't even spend time with him once you know that he's not aligned to your agenda as you don't want feelings to develop with someone who isn't aligned to your agenda.

There are plenty of men out there who will be in alignment. Unless you're really just interested in some sexual escapades, it's best to move on and look for a more solid man.

What do you mean woman are the prize in a relationship?

A man in the top 1% of earners, who is integrated etc is exceptionally rare. Men's standards for woman are lower than the other way around. Seems to me like at the top end men are the prize and are much more difficult to come by.

What do you consider a solid man? And how exactly is there no shortage of these kinds of men?

[Emerald]

Just now, Raptorsin7 said:

What do you mean woman are the prize in a relationship?

A man in the top 1% of earners, who is integrated etc is exceptionally rare. Men's standards for woman are lower than the other way around. Seems to me like at the top end men are the prize and are much more difficult to come by.

What do you consider a solid man? And how exactly is there no shortage of these kinds of men?

Women are the selectors and men are the one's trying to be selected. That's what that means. This is the heterosexual human mating dance.

If a woman acts as if the man is the prize, then she's already messed up because she'll be in her masculine energy trying to impress the guy and win him over. And that just doesn't work. It communicates low standards.

One of the best things a woman can do is to be in here Yin energy and communicate her standards. Men who are genuinely interested in her will (and only men who are interested in her) rise the challenge. This sorts out the men who are not good choices.

As an analogue to the human mating dance, there is one egg and many sperm... and only the best sperm gets to join with the egg. Women are best to remember that they are not the sperm in that scenario. The main goal is not to chase and impress. The main goal is to be receptive and attract but to sort who isn't suited... or have them sort themselves. 

Also, in a healthy relationship dynamic, the man is more committed to the woman even than the woman is committed to him. If you have it the other way around, there's going to be a lot of disharmony in that relationship because the guy doesn't actually see the woman as the prize.

When you have it the other way around, the woman feels anxious and chases the guy around and the guy feels annoyed. And that's because the guy really doesn't want to be selected by her.

Also, I didn't say there's "no shortage" of solid men. Most men are not very solid. But there are plenty of solid men. And with the woman being the selector, her job is sort the wheat from the chaff... sorting out men who don't see/treat her as the prize, who are not solid, etc.

With this sorting job, 95% of that job is done by communicating expectations and being connected to the intuition.

[Raptorsin7]

2 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Women are the selectors and men are the one's trying to be selected. That's what that means. This is the heterosexual human mating dance.

If a woman acts as if the man is the prize, then she's already messed up because she'll be in her masculine energy trying to impress the guy and win him over. And that just doesn't work. It communicates low standards.

One of the best things a woman can do is to be in here Yin energy and communicate her standards. Men who are genuinely interested in her will (and only men who are interested in her) rise the challenge. This sorts out the men who are not good choices.

As an analogue to the human mating dance, there is one egg and many sperm... and only the best sperm gets to join with the egg. Women are best to remember that they are not the sperm in that scenario. The main goal is not to chase and impress. The main goal is to be receptive and attract but to sort who isn't suited... or have them sort themselves. 

Also, in a healthy relationship dynamic, the man is more committed to the woman even than the woman is committed to him. If you have it the other way around, there's going to be a lot of disharmony in that relationship because the guy doesn't actually see the woman as the prize.

When you have it the other way around, the woman feels anxious and chases the guy around and the guy feels annoyed. And that's because the guy really doesn't want to be selected by her.

Also, I didn't say there's "no shortage" of solid men. Most men are not very solid. But there are plenty of solid men. And with the woman being the selector, her job is sort the wheat from the chaff... sorting out men who don't see/treat her as the prize, who are not solid, etc.

With this sorting job, 95% of that job is done by communicating expectations and being connected to the intuition.

Ahh okay that makes sense

[Harlen Kelly]

35 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I agree with your point that desiring a monogamous relationship is as self-focused as any other desire. It's an agenda just like any other agenda.

But I do think women are wisest to expect (and by expect, I mean feel entitled to) the dynamic they want. And then, be ready to duck out if that dynamic is not to be had with that particular guy... ideally prior to getting involved with him. 

Women are wise to remember that they are the selector and the "prize" in the mating dance, and that any man who isn't ready/willing to step up into the role she is looking for him to fill isn't a good candidate for that selection process. 

So, ideally don't have sex with that person, unless you're looking for casual sex and you know for sure that you're never going to want him in any serious way. And ideally, don't even spend time with him once you know that he's not aligned to your agenda as you don't want feelings to develop with someone who isn't aligned to your agenda.

There are plenty of men out there who will be in alignment. Unless you're really just interested in some sexual escapades, it's best to move on and look for a more solid man.

Makes sense. 

[Zion]

22 hours ago, Emerald said:

Women are the selectors and men are the one's trying to be selected. That's what that means. This is the heterosexual human mating dance.

If a woman acts as if the man is the prize, then she's already messed up because she'll be in her masculine energy trying to impress the guy and win him over. And that just doesn't work. It communicates low standards.

One of the best things a woman can do is to be in here Yin energy and communicate her standards. Men who are genuinely interested in her will (and only men who are interested in her) rise the challenge. This sorts out the men who are not good choices.

As an analogue to the human mating dance, there is one egg and many sperm... and only the best sperm gets to join with the egg. Women are best to remember that they are not the sperm in that scenario. The main goal is not to chase and impress. The main goal is to be receptive and attract but to sort who isn't suited... or have them sort themselves. 

Also, in a healthy relationship dynamic, the man is more committed to the woman even than the woman is committed to him. If you have it the other way around, there's going to be a lot of disharmony in that relationship because the guy doesn't actually see the woman as the prize.

When you have it the other way around, the woman feels anxious and chases the guy around and the guy feels annoyed. And that's because the guy really doesn't want to be selected by her.

Also, I didn't say there's "no shortage" of solid men. Most men are not very solid. But there are plenty of solid men. And with the woman being the selector, her job is sort the wheat from the chaff... sorting out men who don't see/treat her as the prize, who are not solid, etc.

With this sorting job, 95% of that job is done by communicating expectations and being connected to the intuition.

Well said. I never thought of it this way.

Thanks

[Axiomatic]

On 5/24/2021 at 7:36 AM, Preety_India said:

Is it ethical for a sexy attractive guy to game a girl, seduce her, have sex with her and then break her heart by walking away  after getting her heart and body ?

I've thought of scenarios where the guy is totally irresistible but he breaks the woman's heart after getting her involved sexually. Is it fair? Can we call it love ?

What if he does it to every girl who is attracted to him and enjoys his game ? Would that be loving for him to do this?

 

why do you always paint guys as predators and women as victims? women play men all the time too. jesus christ. From the way you post, you sound like one of the loneliest and most insecure people I have ever seen posting on the internet. 

 

Stop arguing ethics and just be smarter about who you fall for. If you expect too much and don't have yourself grounded, then you are going to have a hard time when you get played. I know you want to lock up all men who don't act the way you think they should act, but learning how to deal with PEOPLE who play games is apart of life. 

Edited May 27, 2021 by Axiomatic

[MatteO22]

On 26/05/2021 at 0:20 AM, Emerald said:

Women are the selectors and men are the one's trying to be selected. That's what that means. This is the heterosexual human mating dance.

If a woman acts as if the man is the prize, then she's already messed up because she'll be in her masculine energy trying to impress the guy and win him over. And that just doesn't work. It communicates low standards.

One of the best things a woman can do is to be in here Yin energy and communicate her standards. Men who are genuinely interested in her will (and only men who are interested in her) rise the challenge. This sorts out the men who are not good choices.

As an analogue to the human mating dance, there is one egg and many sperm... and only the best sperm gets to join with the egg. Women are best to remember that they are not the sperm in that scenario. The main goal is not to chase and impress. The main goal is to be receptive and attract but to sort who isn't suited... or have them sort themselves. 

Also, in a healthy relationship dynamic, the man is more committed to the woman even than the woman is committed to him. If you have it the other way around, there's going to be a lot of disharmony in that relationship because the guy doesn't actually see the woman as the prize.

When you have it the other way around, the woman feels anxious and chases the guy around and the guy feels annoyed. And that's because the guy really doesn't want to be selected by her.

Also, I didn't say there's "no shortage" of solid men. Most men are not very solid. But there are plenty of solid men. And with the woman being the selector, her job is sort the wheat from the chaff... sorting out men who don't see/treat her as the prize, who are not solid, etc.

With this sorting job, 95% of that job is done by communicating expectations and being connected to the intuition.

I’ve been reading the forum for a while and I feel a need to express myself regarding this. 
 

The idea that woman is a selector and men should be trying to be selected is rooted in a patriarchal belief that exists to perpetuate codependency and obliterate emotional boundaries for men and women equally.

 

If you imply that a man needs to ‘prove himself’ to be selected by a woman we are perpetuating a belief of ‘I am not good enough just as I am’. Essentially your post suggests that men are less worthy of unconditional love which is a huge problem.

 

We societally treat men (just as much as women) with a series of conditions that ultimately determine their value. We objectify men and then tell them their worth based on how useful or worthy they are in the eyes of society/women/parents/patriarchy. This in and of itself creates wounding and perpetuates emotional abandonment towards men that tends to be seen as the norm. This happens to us guys since an early age and is then perpetuated to the dating stage. It is one of the reasons why men struggle with vulnerability and emotions - because such things receive messages as not being valued. 
 

the truth is every man has infinite intrinsic value and worth, it is just a matter of how much of it is suppressed by wounding and conditioning, not how ‘selected and chosen’ they can be. If I have infinite value and worth, I am very much a selector, not someone trying to be selected. It is I who chooses my partner, not someone jumping through loops to be valued and seen for what has always been unconditionally mine.

 

On the other hand women being the selector at the expense of being more proactive also creates a similar problem. One way of looking at it is that this creates a fear of intimacy - why? 
 

Let’s just go back to your statement ‘in a healthy relationship man is more committed than the woman’. That is a rather interesting version of ‘healthy’ you’ve got there.

If the man is more committed than the woman you’re automatically suggesting that Lack of commitment is something to be celebrated in a woman. Lack of commitment stems from fear of intimacy. Fear of intimacy stems from unresolved emotional pain. Unresolved emotional pain is the barrier that creates an unsafety around the fulfilment of our emotional needs. Without complete commitment, a woman cannot be fulfilled in the relationship - because her needs will be unmet. Just as man’s would be.

 

 In a healthy partnership, both individuals are equally the choosers, and they simply choose each other day after day. Anything BUT that is a cop-out. 
 

You also imply that woman is to be in her feminine energy and man to be masculine.

what if it isn’t the distinction between genders being feminine and masculine, but it is more of a question ‘how balanced is my feminine with my own masculine’ that both genders need to ask themselves.

If I’m a man, healing my feminine wounding is just as much as important as embracing my masculine qualities - because if I try to be masculine at the expense of my feminine I will commit an act of self abandonment. I will make choices that are misaligned with my intuition, and disregard the sensitivity and intuitions of others. In essence I will be a cruel, potentially abusive and abrasive man.

 

If I were a woman who embraced her feminine without fully stepping up within my masculine energy I will be perpetually waiting to be rescued, create scenarios of victimisation, I won’t be able to set effective boundaries and probably will be unable to make proper career decisions. 
a person who only embraces their feminine energy eventually commits to a passive life of victim hood: such feminine energy is imbalanced and toxic, and will be healed by embracing the polarity of the masculine (not by dating a masculine guy).

 

We all have the ability to embrace feminine and masculine as an inside job. To try to be in one more than the other is unhealthy and codependent. We can thank our partners for bringing out in us more of our embodied divine masculine or feminine qualities, but we cannot get lost in the trap of ‘since I’m a feminine woman I need a masculine man to pursue me’ - why ? Because if such a man is so focused  and wired towards pursuing, they will be completely unable to receive you as a partner because pursuing and receiving or truly being Present with someone are very different things. 

[tatsumaru]

On 5/24/2021 at 2:36 PM, Preety_India said:

Is it ethical for a sexy attractive guy to game a girl, seduce her, have sex with her and then break her heart by walking away  after getting her heart and body ?

I've thought of scenarios where the guy is totally irresistible but he breaks the woman's heart after getting her involved sexually. Is it fair? Can we call it love ?

What if he does it to every girl who is attracted to him and enjoys his game ? Would that be loving for him to do this?

 

I broke a couple of hearts a while ago just for sex and I regret it deeply. Back in the days I thought it was just how the world worked and it didn't matter as long as I get what I want, but that was simply rooted in desperation and frustration. I wasn't conscious enough at the time and didn't realize the damage I was actually causing to both of us and the karma I was perpetuating. I thought "she'll get over it" or maybe I didn't even care. It was extremely stupid of me and I've certainly created more work for psychotherapists with my ignorant behavior. I think the main reason this happens with guys is because they aren't honest due to being scared that if they say what they really want they won't get it (which is true in some cases, but is also okay to not get it sometimes) and also because they don't really know who they are and what they want, they are just desperate to relieve their urges. For example in many cases a guy doesn't feel any love and just wants to have sex or is being lonely and needs to feel wanted. He tells some girl that she's different and special (which she is but not to him), or that their future kids would look cute or that he is willing to change his religion for her or that he might marry her one day or whatever she wants to hear to open her legs, and once he's done - bye bye. A lot of men consider this sort of manipulation to be some sort of pickup mastery but it's actually fucking shit. Anyone can be ignorant and lie, there's no mastery there. True mastery lies in knowing who you are and not engaging in relationships that aren't harmonious to your true nature. And if I guy is simply horny and wants to fuck he should go all in on the sexual attraction and not tell any lies, instead he should say "I really want to fuck you right now" and if the girl says "No" (and means it), then it's simply not the right girl or the right time or the right place and the guy should let it go without causing any trauma and suffering and move on.

[charlie cho]

i have this problem. But I pride myself at least knowing I have a problem. 

What am I to say in this situation? Say I hope I will solve this? Whatever I say.... 

 

[Jacob Morres]

Shouldn't this question be about empathy not ethics? 

If you have appropriate empathy, it would tell you that this action is probably not good to engage in. It seems to be a lack of emotional awareness/intelligence to engage in that behavior (for whatever reason. Lack of development, pain, suffering, some form of unconsciousness) 

Edit: but on second thought, ethics is the right topic. Empathy informs ethics

Edited May 31, 2021 by Jacob Morres