It's better for WOMEN to be ADORERS: understanding the balance of attraction

[mr_engineer]

@Emerald You don't get it.

Being an object and being receptive are two very different things. An object is a means to an end. So, a man who objectifies a woman isn't being a giver, he's being a taker. Is that healthy, according to you? 

I'm telling you, teenage boys start out believing what you're saying, cuz this is what the movies condition them with. And they turn into 'nice guys', because they pick wrong. And this is the other side of the coin of being an 'adorer' as a man. You cannot be emotional in your decision-making with women. Because it's an investment. Adoration costs men a lot more than it costs women. Materially. 

Getting to know a woman is not a very emotional process. It's a very sobering, rational, emotionally harsh process, in reality. Women may project their emotionality on this front onto men. But trust me, it's not emotional for men. There is no room for Disney-talk in the real world. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by mr_engineer

[StarStruck]

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

Men like the idea of an adoring woman in fantasy, but they don’t actually respond very well to it in reality.

And men certainly don’t fall in love by receiving adoration.

These male/female dynamics are important to understand…

- Women tend to fall in love by receiving.

- Men tend to fall in love by giving.

The more he gives and invests, the deeper he will love.

And the more she allows herself to receive of him, the deeper she will love.

This is the archetypal lover and beloved dynamic.

The lover must always adore the beloved a little bit more than that beloved adores the lover. 

And when a woman looks up to a man and has the default frame of adoration, it subtly communicates that she sees his value as higher and her value as lower.

And it foists the man up onto a pedestal and into the Feminine receiver/selector mode, while she tries to play the part of the Masculine giver as she gives her adoration unconditionally.

This is why doing things for a man to get him to be interested backfires.

This includes cooking for him, having sex with him, adoring him, cleaning for him, etc.

Men will certainly enjoy these things. But he won’t feel compelled to pursue because a woman in giving mode is in her Masculine energy.

Men are compelled to pursue challenging woman who make them chase a bit. This requires the woman to have relatively high standards to spark her feelings of adoration.

Being the adorer is more fun than being adored from my experience but the guy in the video talks about what is best for the guy strategically, not what feels best.

Being detached is a much better dating strategy for the guy. That is why proposes the guy should be the adored, not the adorer. The guys who detached are the alpha males and get to fuck the best girls from my observation. 

Also in terms of social dynamics, being the guy that is adored will put you on top of the social food chain in a particular social matrix. If you are the guy who adores the sexy women they will see you as lower value than them. 

The top G aka most popular guys are adored by girls and respect by males. Observe it for yourself.

Mind you that guys and girls have different mating and social strategies. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by StarStruck

[Emerald]

Just now, Something Funny said:

@Emerald okay, most of it makes sense now, but I am still skeptical abaout this part

Why would I not love her. I feel like I would really appreciate it if a girl expressed her love to me. That would actually enable me to express love back to her.

And if she was only in the receiving role then I would restrict the amaount of love I express towards her. And would eventually breaak up with her probably cause what's the point of being in a relationship like that when you don't even feel loved...

Of course, there is balance and mutualism in the Lover and Beloved dynamic.

You would both be ebbing and flowing between the Lover and Beloved in a healthy love dynamic.

So, she would also be expressing love.

Love is a conversation.

And the Lover speaks and the Beloved listens. But those are archetypes not human beings.

Two human beings must ebb and flow between the two for there to be conversation.

But it’s a good ideas for the man to take the Lover frame and to allow her to take the Beloved frame. This allows love to to blossom in both.

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Of course, there is balance and mutualism in the Lover and Beloved dynamic.

You would both be ebbing and flowing between the Lover and Beloved in a healthy love dynamic.

So, she would also be expressing love.

Love is a conversation.

And the Lover speaks and the Beloved listens. But those are archetypes not human beings.

Two human beings must ebb and flow between the two for there to be conversation.

You should have started with this. Thank you, now it makes sense.

[Emerald]

2 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

Being the adorer is more fun than being adored from my experience but the guy in the video talks about what is best for the guy, not what feels best. 

Being detached is a much better dating strategy for the guy. That is why proposes the guy should be the adored, not the adorer. The guys who detached are the alpha males and get to fuck the best girls from my observation. 

Also in terms of social dynamics, being the guy that is adored will put you on top of the social food chain in a particular social matrix. If you are the guy who adores the sexy women they will see you as lower value than them. 

The top G aka most popular guys are adored by girls and respect by males. Observe it for yourself.

Mind you that guys and girls have different mating and social strategies. 

Yes, taking the frame of the adored enables the man to usurp the power of the Feminine Beloved archetype and be detached from the relationship while the woman is attached.

He begins by aping the Lover to hook the woman and ignite her pair bonding drives. (He apes it because embodying the Lover would feel too vulnerable and he would run the risk of falling in love)

And then, when she has fallen for him, he does a bait and switch and positions himself in the role of Feminine Beloved where he will never fall in love.

And because she is hooked, she shifts into the role of the Masculine Lover archetype.

And she begins vying for his love by giving and giving in the way she would like to receive.

But men don’t fall in love by being given to. So, none of that works.

So, it puts him on the front foot and her on the back foot.

But a mutual love cannot arise from this dynamic. And it’s a misfortune for any children that are conceived.

So, women are wise to avoid men who only ape the lover.

And men who actually want mutual love are wise to avoid these tactics.

[mr_engineer]

What you're talking about is an issue of emotional-availability. 

This has a lot more to do with whether he's following his passion at work or not, than it has to do with women themselves. If you're capable and you have something to offer to the world and you're passionate about it, women will benefit from it. 

Such a man will be abundant with women. And for him to truly see someone as special, compatibility must exist. And the process of creating that is not one of wishful adoration. 

[StarStruck]

@Emerald I wouldn’t call it aping the lover archetype. And the guy doesn’t switch and bait to take the position of the feminine beloved. 

The alpha males have integrated their lover archetype (they usually got a lot of love from their mothers and thus from females in adult life) so they are not desperate for love and they are less likely to adore the feminine. Thus these guys develop the warrior archetype (detached from love) who are not focused on love but on their life purpose. feminine love is already integrated into their psyche so they don’t search it in external female.

The top G has an integrated lover and warrior archetype (focusing on their life purpose instead of focusing on a female) and thus unlocks the king archetype (according to Robert Green who is a Jungian psychologist) and the king archetype is  able to love his partner who can bear children for him. But it is a different kind of dynamic. The balance of power remains in the hands of the male, not the female. It is very rare a relationship will work out if the female gets the upper hand when the female has conquered the male. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by StarStruck

[Emerald]

24 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

@Emerald You don't get it.

Being an object and being receptive are two very different things. An object is a means to an end. So, a man who objectifies a woman isn't being a giver, he's being a taker. Is that healthy, according to you? 

I'm telling you, teenage boys start out believing what you're saying, cuz this is what the movies condition them with. And they turn into 'nice guys', because they pick wrong. And this is the other side of the coin of being an 'adorer' as a man. You cannot be emotional in your decision-making with women. Because it's an investment. Adoration costs men a lot more than it costs women. Materially. 

Getting to know a woman is not a very emotional process. It's a very sobering, rational, emotionally harsh process, in reality. Women may project their emotionality on this front onto men. But trust me, it's not emotional for men. There is no room for Disney-talk in the real world. 

You’re over-thinking this thing about objectification. The Lover and Beloved archetype isn’t about objectification… it’s a reflection of the unconditional giving and receiving of love.

Also, all of my relationships with the men I’ve loved and been loved by began organically in the context of just having a good time together and chatting about mutual interests.

The reality is that women and men often fall in love just by spending quality time together.

It wasn’t some hyper-rational guarded pick up stuff. The logic-mind doesn’t belong in the love dynamic.

I knew most of the men I’ve shared a mutual love with as friends first and mutual attraction just arose after some months of spending time together platonically.

[mr_engineer]

@Emerald It can't be unconditional. 

This has less to do with the 'inherent selfishness of humans'. I'm not being cynical about our capacity to love here. And it has more to do with compatibility. As loving as two incompatible people may be, they can't give and receive love. 

If you want to avoid these realities and if you want to rationalize being with someone in a familiar dynamic, you do that by objectifying the other person and manipulating them to be a means to your end. 

[Salvijus]

What about if a man and woman both are in the position of adoration and the gratitude of adoration at the same time 100%. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

@Salvijus yeah, this sounds like an awesome option. Why can that be the case?

[StarStruck]

@Salvijus @Something Funny ask god why he created it like this ?

It is called duality. 

Honestly, most of the things we are discussing is already explained by the guy in the video. 

You guys need to rewatch the video. 

[Salvijus]

35 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Why can that be the case?

 

22 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

ask god why he created it like this ?

It is called duality. 

I think it's possible tho. At least inside my imagination it looks doable ?  it would go beyond duality. Perfect unity. Perfect blast of love in all directions.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

@Salvijus yeah, that's what I am saying, why not. Sounds like an ideal relationship. 

[StarStruck]

@Something Funny @Salvijus

The psychologist in the video already explains why that is not possible starting from 0:21 

This guy is really smart with high creds. He is a smarter than anybody on this forum especially on the field of psychology and relationships.  

Of course go and test what he says through direct experience. That is much better than arm chair philosophizing. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by StarStruck

[StarStruck]

@Lila9

I don’t agree with Emerald that a woman chasing a man emasculates the woman. Nor does this have any basis in any psychology literature. 

For example there is a literal king. And all females want to be with this king. Does that emasculate those woman that are doing the chasing? No, this is when the feminine instinct kicks in when she competes with the other females. You can see this behavior in apes too.

It is in the nature of woman to lock in a high status male. And a high status man doesn’t chase pussy. Why is your pussy better than all those other pussies? That is how a high value man thinks because he has options. 

Power = having options

And woman want a male they can respect which entails he has some power of his life, circumstance, and business. 

You and Emerald have watched too many Disney movies. No offense. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by StarStruck

[Salvijus]

23 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

The psychologist in the video already explains why that is not possible starting from 0:21 

I can't believe u made me watch that video ? 

Anyhow, i wasn't very convinced by his arguments. Actually he made no arguments. Just out of blue statements. I would still argue that it is possible to love and adore another fully while another is doing the same and and simultaneously both are in gratitude for what they receive. I don't see why that would be impossible.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Salvijus

[StarStruck]

3 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

I can't believe u made me watch that video ? 

Anyhow, i wasn't very convinced by his arguments. Actually he made no arguments. Just out of blue statements. I would still argue that it is possible to love and adore another fully while another is doing the same and and simultaneously both are in gratitude for what they receive. I don't see why that would be impossible.

You should become a psychologist and get your PhD then ?

 

I talked to dozens of psychologists and believe me. This guy knows what he is talking about. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by StarStruck

[Something Funny]

@Lila9 I don't necessarily say that I want to be chased by girls. Sure, I as a guy have to do the first steps of approaching, setting up a date, etc.

I am just against the idea of me being the only one who invests into a relationships, shows love, care, attention, etc.

I also want to be told that I am loved, or be given a compliment, or cuddled, or jumped on and hugged from time to time.

I don't see what's wrong with that orbhow would that make me lose attraction towards her. 

Edited March 21, 2023 by Something Funny

[Salvijus]

@StarStruck maybe he's right. But so far he makes zero argument why two people who are abiding in deep appreciation and love cannot join together. And i don't think there will ever be a counter argument to that. Bc everyone is capable of adoration, appreciation and gratitude. And u just need two of them to catch hold of each others eyes. And Behold, god's love is upon us. We are one. Amen

Edited March 21, 2023 by Salvijus