Consequences of a unregulated dating market (hypergamy)

[zazen]

17 minutes ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@zazen I wonder how hypergamy relates to the growing numbers of 30' and 40's single woman who never found partners. I know in my family there a few attractive woman in their late 30's who can't find partners bevause they were too picky.

I guess 100 years ago all these woman would have had partners chosen by their families which creates it's own set of problems. 

I think there also been a degeneration in the quality of young men in society too, so there are probably even less suitable men available which compounds the problem 

Yes, in the past men and women were paired off by force / arranged marriage. And more recently not by force but by mingling with each other, but it was done within smaller communities where their options were limited, and where women still relied on men for their livelihood so the incentive was there to pair off with a mate for security. 

Now women have security of their own ( the government and personal income ) more freedom which is great. The government loves it as it increases the tax base, the corporations love it for their stocks. But, women are attracted (by the mechanism of hypergamy) to stronger than themselves, it is hardwired. Which is why most women always want a man taller than themselves, they feel protected on a visceral level, although in the modern day they have no fear as we live in a safe environment, the base line experience of women is fear due to her biology and to seek out security. We must have empathy for them. As women can earn at the same level of more than men , the view men at their level or below as inferior in status or weaker, and therefore not a good mating choice. This is all subconscious of course. And so they don't parter up as easily because their standards are higher and not enough men meet those standards.

Edited September 16, 2021 by zazen

[zazen]

6 minutes ago, Windappreciator said:

@zazen Listen here boy.

Don't bring animals into your nonsense. Animals have heart and emotions.

Otherwise we have a problem.

 

Nice tone man, very inviting and pleasant.  I never said they don't but see how it could come across to you that way. I said animals just live, and man lives but is conscious of his existence. Thats the difference. Animals feel emotion too, and if they evolved modes of expression like us they would surely also create music art poetry etc. 

[Windappreciator]

@zazen animals are conscious of their existence.

That comparison was unnecessary to your point and of weak reflection.

 

[zazen]

2 minutes ago, Windappreciator said:

@zazen animals are conscious of their existence.

That comparison was unnecessary to your point and of weak reflection.

 

Not in the way humans are. This is making a mountain of a molehill lol. I hope the quality of this thread won't be diluted to nit pick at every word and line. See the bigger picture, the nuance. Love.

[Epikur]

 

7 minutes ago, zazen said:

Nice tone man, very inviting and pleasant.  I never said they don't but see how it could come across to you that way. I said animals just live, and man lives but is conscious of his existence. Thats the difference. Animals feel emotion too, and if they evolved modes of expression like us they would surely also create music art poetry etc. 

Quote

Freud further explains “[The Artist] longs to attain honour, power, riches, fame, and the love of women; but he lacks the means of achieving these gratifications.

 

[zazen]

1 hour ago, Epikur said:

 

 

All depends on the place that artist is coming from. Some do it from lack, others from an expression of completeness. This forum and all of Leo's work is his art, his offering to us but I doubt it comes from a place of lack, more from a place of sharing and celebration.

Freud studied sick people for the most part and thus his bias on human psychology and his view was that of the negative. Everything man does can only be for ego and is always sex related. In the east the enlightened ones were looked upon as they graced those lands, the positive psychology, healthy beings which formed the Easts basis of what humans are capable of, that they don't just do because of lack. They behave, but they have Being also. Freud's analysis was that humans behave in order to have things that feed the ego and that is true, but we can also behave out of fullness of our Being.   

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by zazen

[Javfly33]

6 hours ago, Emerald said:

So many of these Red Pill guys are so detached from what a relationship is that they substitute in their own robotic form of bro-science.

Too much internet rotting out their brains and self-esteems.

You’d think that people are all mono-focused robots based on how they see it. They read no nuance into matters of love and connection. It’s all just a Darwinian survival game that everyone but some mysterious Chad guy wins.

Just go out and talk to women and you’ll see that most women who become attracted to you will like you for you.

And it isn’t all just some hierarchical and brutal game. There is love to be had between two human beings.

I agree with most part of your post. But def not the last paragraph.

I wouldnt say that "Love to be had", rather Love is unveiled between the two when they forget themselves on the other one or actions they do together, But that is just because sex and emotional attachment releases a lot of juicy chemicals which triggers this Union. What i mean  the LOVE IS of reality, IS not of the humans. The women chosed the men selfishly as the man did. 

You guys keep thinking love. IS something humans do. They Dont. They cant. Because its not humans property. Thank God on that.

[zazen]

11 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

I agree with most part of your post. But def not the last paragraph.

I wouldnt say that "Love to be had", rather Love is unveiled between the two when they forget themselves on the other one or actions they do together, But that is just because sex and emotional attachment releases a lot of juicy chemicals which triggers this Union. What i mean  the LOVE IS of reality, IS not of the humans. The women chosed the men selfishly as the man did. 

You guys keep thinking love. IS something humans do. They Dont. They cant. Because its not humans property. Thank God on that.

Yes, what people feel is love in lower case, is just our biology at work drawing us closer and flooding us with feel good chemicals in order to procreate and propagate the species. Underlying all this is Love with a capital L, that is god / life. Love is embedded in reality, including us. It is the animating force that moves all form including man and woman to its own realisation. God is the seed, we are the flowering. 

In moments of orgasm and flooded with chemicals, we can forget ourselves, and come into union. When the ego is dropped in moments orgasm/union, Love is revealed to us. Although this moment is temporary and short lived, but it gives man a experience of the beyond, they know their is more to this life than just surface. The other person was just the trigger that helped us feel this union. Of course, we are able to come to such states without the other and with meditation/awakening. That is the beauty of human relationship and the design of evolution, our animal nature is used to reveal to us our divine nature. It is god in play, in hide and seek. 

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Javfly33 said:

I agree with most part of your post. But def not the last paragraph.

I wouldnt say that "Love to be had", rather Love is unveiled between the two when they forget themselves on the other one or actions they do together, But that is just because sex and emotional attachment releases a lot of juicy chemicals which triggers this Union. What i mean  the LOVE IS of reality, IS not of the humans. The women chosed the men selfishly as the man did. 

You guys keep thinking love. IS something humans do. They Dont. They cant. Because its not humans property. Thank God on that.

And how’s that viewpoint working out for you?

See… this is the exact distortion that I’m talking about. It completely discounts the existence of love between two human beings and boils everything down to a zero-sum survival game.

And it’s an incredibly unnuanced, immature, and emotionally unintelligent way to view human relationships. 

It’s no wonder why so many men end up seeing things through this robotic bro-science Darwinian lens and murdering their self-esteem. What a harsh understanding of reality that this form of survivalist reductionism leads to.

This perspective really lends itself to lack of emotional intelligence in relationships… all with them believing that they’re some how holding the more true and superior viewpoint relative to relationships.

You could certainly boil all of the reality of human beings down to a bunch of neurochemicals firing off. But it would be a very non-holistic perspective.

Don’t assume that you understand the truth by boiling things down this way… as the truth of human to human love holds fractals upon fractals of different perspectives and layers.

[Gesundheit2]

Hypergamy only relates to gold-diggers; Most women are not gold-diggers, but have standards. For example, if you make six figures and have a girlfriend, chances are she will not leave you for another guy with similar or higher stats, unless you lose those privileges. It takes high stats (for simplicity's sake, but high stats means more than mere money) to attract most women, but it takes super high stats to attract a gold-digger, and even then she will likely leave you for a guy with higher stats. That's hypergamy. Standards (relates to most women) are not hypergamy.

[zazen]

4 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Hypergamy only relates to gold-diggers; Most women are not gold-diggers, but have standards. For example, if you make six figures and have a girlfriend, chances are she will not leave you for another guy with similar or higher stats, unless you lose those privileges. It takes high stats (for simplicity's sake, but high stats means more than mere money) to attract most women, but it takes super high stats to attract a gold-digger, and even then she will likely leave you for a guy with higher stats. That's hypergamy. Standards (relates to most women) are not hypergamy.

Your proving the point. Hypergamy is in all women, not just gold diggers. Women have STANDARDS and thank god for that. Women set standards for men must meet in order to procreate, thats what got us where we are today. Children are costly to raise in time and resources and women had to ensure the survival of their offspring with the most secure strong mate they could. If women didn't have standards and mated with anybody we would still be in caves. Strength and status come in differing forms, physical strength ensures protection on a physical level, mental shows you have intellect to manoeuvre reality and get creative to survive, emotional strength indicates your able to survive through hard times and if you have good emotion it signals you must have abundance, social strength and ties shows you can survive as you have people who will take care of you, and lastly spiritual strength and having magnetism make all humans feel alive spiritually themselves which they all want to bask in. 

Gold diggers are just looking for one kind of strength which is resources at the exclusion of all else in the man. You say '' if you make six figures and have a girlfriend, chances are she will not leave you for another guy with similar or higher stats, unless you lose those privileges.''  Yes, once a woman has consolidated on the best mate she can and they aren't any higher options out there and is emotionally invested in you its unlikely she will leave, ESPECIALLY if she doesn't have ACCESS to that better male or she thinks she can't get them. In todays world we have ACCESS all the time with the internet, even more with social media, and the illusion a lot can succumb to is they CAN get them because in the past they maybe slept with such a men/dated or those men even slide in their dm's , like their pictures on Instagram if its public, or they get in the presence of such men in their occupation.  The monkey brain keeps second guessing in todays modern environment and won't allow us to rest, there's always the better option out there and our instinct is on over drive. It takes a lot of consciousness today to live through intelligence than instinct and to have healthy long lasting relationships, for the environment isn't as conducive for it.

There is plenty of nuance in all of this. We also have sunken cost affect, which is once we have emotionally invested in something we don't want to give it up, even if there is something better out there, we cherish what we have built rather than the shiny new object we have no history with. We also don't want to lose the respect of the family or community in the past when it was looked down upon to divorce and branch swing. But biology can still get the best of us and plenty people still jump to the new better deal as their relationships become stale and its more morally accepted (not shamed like in the past) in the modern day. 

Edited September 17, 2021 by zazen

[zazen]

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And how’s that viewpoint working out for you?

See… this is the exact distortion that I’m talking about. It completely discounts the existence of love between two human beings and boils everything down to a zero-sum survival game.

And it’s an incredibly unnuanced, immature, and emotionally unintelligent way to view human relationships. 

It’s no wonder why so many men end up seeing things through this robotic bro-science Darwinian lens and murdering their self-esteem. What a harsh understanding of reality that this form of survivalist reductionism leads to.

This perspective really lends itself to lack of emotional intelligence in relationships… all with them believing that they’re some how holding the more true and superior viewpoint relative to relationships.

You could certainly boil all of the reality of human beings down to a bunch of neurochemicals firing off. But it would be a very non-holistic perspective.

Don’t assume that you understand the truth by boiling things down this way… as the truth of human to human love holds fractals upon fractals of different perspectives and layers.

Emerald, see my reply to javfly33:

'' Yes, what people feel is love in lower case, is just our biology at work drawing us closer and flooding us with feel good chemicals in order to procreate and propagate the species. Underlying all this is Love with a capital L, that is god / life. Love is embedded in reality, including us. It is the animating force that moves all form including man and woman to its own realisation. God is the seed, we are the flowering. 

In moments of orgasm and flooded with chemicals, we can forget ourselves, and come into union. When the ego is dropped in moments orgasm/union, Love is revealed to us. Although this moment is temporary and short lived, but it gives man a experience of the beyond, they know their is more to this life than just surface. The other person was just the trigger that helped us feel this union. Of course, we are able to come to such states without the other and with meditation/awakening. That is the beauty of human relationship and the design of evolution, our animal nature is used to reveal to us our divine nature. It is god in play, in hide and seek. ''

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You say its nuance and it is, but part of that nuance is recognising the physical level of existence where we have a bio and neuro chemistry. Thats what Leo and spiral dynamics all eludes to, we have different modes of reality. You can't discount the physical level of things, its all integrated. Its not either or, but both and. 

 

A holistic perspective includes the material and the spiritual. The blind side of materialists is they exalt only our animal nature (and the cruel darwinian zero sum game aspect of it only) BUT the blind side of so called spiritualists is they exalt only our divine nature and deny the animal nature (as its cold and hurts our sense of morality on some level) and think all is just lovey dovey. The fact these truths sting a little is good, it shows sensitivity and that we are human and attuned to something higher in us that wishes to move away from that animal instinct, and to move towards intelligent living. 

Neither approach allows for total understanding and human flourishing. True Spirituality includes both and see's both. The level of the form and level of the formless. So called spiritualists (who deny the material) are so caught up in what reality should/could be they never consider what it really is physically. The materialists are so caught up in only what the physical reality is they never consider it could be more. 

Edited September 17, 2021 by zazen

[Gesundheit2]

@zazen Yeah, whatever.

[zazen]

@Gesundheit2 That song is a vibe, only real tings round here   Much love.

[Intense]

Blackpill is horseshit. Both males and females are extremely selfish in dating.

The only thing it gets right is a recognition of the feminist hypocrisy that men should be more feminine and less dominating, when it is actually women who reward toxic masculinity and punish weak male behaviour.
 

But as a man you can and should just accept this fact and consciously attract women without subscribing to this unholistic and unrealistic ideology.

[zazen]

8 minutes ago, Intense said:

Blackpill is horseshit. Both males and females are extremely selfish in dating.

The only thing it gets right is a recognition of the feminist hypocrisy that men should be more feminine and less dominating, when it is actually women who reward toxic masculinity and punish weak male behaviour.
 

But as a man you can and should just accept this fact and consciously attract women without subscribing to this unholistic and unrealistic ideology.

Everything has to be a pill these days, pill popper galore. Just see life for what it is and live accordingly. 

Women's animal nature rewards 'toxic' masculinity but not women's divine nature, they struggle because their body says one thing but something else in them says another, that this man is bad for me. In the past it wasn't rewarded but simply imposed on women, although today women can still gravitate towards 'toxic' masculinity. The 'bad boys' or 'barbaric men' on a deep level are displaying strength, although in its negative form. Their biology and emotion responds to it and over rides their logic. If their were stronger men in their positive form, they wouldn't gravitate towards the negative masculinity, but today positive masculinity is lacking. Us men need to change that. First by understanding, then by overcoming. 

[Intense]

13 minutes ago, zazen said:

Everything has to be a pill these days, pill popper galore. Just see life for what it is and live accordingly. 

Women's animal nature rewards 'toxic' masculinity but not women's divine nature, they struggle because their body says one thing but something else in them says another, that this man is bad for me. In the past it wasn't rewarded but simply imposed on women, although today women can still gravitate towards 'toxic' masculinity. The 'bad boys' or 'barbaric men' on a deep level are displaying strength, although in its negative form. Their biology and emotion responds to it and over rides their logic. If their were stronger men in their positive form, they wouldn't gravitate towards the negative masculinity, but today positive masculinity is lacking. Us men need to change that. First by understanding, then by overcoming. 

This.

[Intense]

21 minutes ago, Tangerinedream said:

You have to realise that women are still finding themselves after 1000s of years of repression.  Of course we are going to be confused and attracted to toxic men, especially when young.  It’s all we have known.  Unless you are a girl who had a loving, emotionally present and healthy father then you’re gonna get attracted to assholes later in life.  And if you didn’t then you will be confused about men. you live you learn. 
 

I’m not trying to undermine the women’s struggle, but it is not true that toxic men is all that women know. There are plenty of nice guys that want you, always have been, its just that you pretend they don’t exist sexually. 
 

Correct me if im wrong, I am openminded but in my direct experience girls have had access to nice guys but just not be attracted to them.

Edited September 17, 2021 by Intense

[zazen]

22 minutes ago, Tangerinedream said:

You have to realise that women are still finding themselves after 1000s of years of repression.  Of course we are going to be confused and attracted to toxic men, especially when young.  It’s all we have known.  Unless you are a girl who had a loving, emotionally present and healthy father then you’re gonna get attracted to assholes later in life.  And if you didn’t then you will be confused about men. you live you learn. 
 

Agreed and aware of this, we have to do better as a society to change this. Evolutionary psychology only came about 40/50 years ago and so we are better able to understand our nature and why we act the way we act. The more we move from ignorance to understanding the more compassion will arise. We see these themes played in many areas in media and culture, for example beauty and the beast. The beast is man in his animal nature, it is raw strength in the negative, but not sophisticated. The beauty (that is in all women) tames that strength and brings the beasts strength into the positive, and that has been the civilising power the feminine has had on the masculine over time. Although in todays day men are over civilised to the point now lacking strength in any form and masculinity is looked down upon. Which lends to women having to compensate and lose their softness in the process for they feel insecure once again. The past had women insecure in fear of negative strength, the modern day has women insecure due to lack of positive strength of men.

 

We have soft and strong in all of us. The integrated man is mostly strong, with a dab of softness to round out his being. The women who is all soft without any strength is a door mat ready to be imposed on by predatory males. Today's world has over corrected this imbalance. 

Edited September 17, 2021 by zazen

[zazen]

2 hours ago, Tangerinedream said:

I’m saying girls who grew up without a healthy loving father figure, are the ones who mostly get attracted to toxic men.  
if you look around, all the people who had healthy upbringings with 2 emotionally present mother/father figures, easily get into secure relationships from a young age and have no problems with commitment or intimacy.  They’re just naturally loving and connect with someone naturally.   
For the rest of us, who have attachment issues and felt alone in the world, we have to work harder to maintain or find healthy relationships because we use protection mechanisms because we are afraid of love - because we don’t think we are worthy of love so come up with lots of stories to confirm that.  

When girls miss a masculine presence when young they feel insecure and at threat, or if they were only exposed to toxic masculinity in the form of their father, that becomes imprinted in them as to how men are. So the need for security through the strength of man is craved. This leads them to to gravitate towards toxic strength as its much more easily seen and visible/visceral than positive strength, they are in a fight or flight state and need strength of any kind, as soon as possible. 

Most men are nice guys in fact, they are the guys who are usually friend zoned or the more silent types even and can be overlooked as as sexual option. They have been cut off from their masculinity in a similar way , due to lack of masculine role models / fathers growing up and a culture which is mostly feminising and saying masculinity is bad. School teachers are mostly women also so where can man learn what it is to be a healthy man - all the media shows are Dan bilzerian and rap music as thats what drives view/clicks.   Attached to that is the whole me too movement which is valid, but men are ever more scared of getting in touch with their sexuality in a healthy way and interacting with women in such a way. 

Breakdown of the family unity, at a micro level leads to the breakdown of society at the macro and that is what we see. Don't be nice or bad but the good guy, the middle way.  Nice - from the root word in latin is nescius which means ignorant. What nice guys miss is that they are ignorant of their masculine edge, they have strength of intellect and heart possibly but not so much of their physical, they aren't embodied. Bad guys are all balls and no head, nice guys mostly head and no balls. The good guy has his balls head and heart integrated. 

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by zazen