# Stop Asking The Wrong Questions



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

WARNING: people who have grown up with shallow values may not understand this post

This forum seems stuck on superficial things to find a mate by. Those are probably the same conditions of any possible relationship one might have with that person, shallow.

*Let's get things straight

*The person with the most feminine energy is most attracted to the person with the most masculine energy, which could be woman/man or gay etc.

If two people both have a lot of either feminine or masculine energy, nothing happens!

Masculine energy is what is unchanging, because the most manly men are not easily swayed by their minds or what's happening around them, they make their decisions from their deep sense of purpose (from which many men have become disconnected, reason why they're so shallow).

Feminine energy is what is constantly changing, because the most feminine women are always changing, their hair, their minds, everything.

When the two meet, strong attraction happens.

The most attractive woman to a man will NOT be able to also be friends with that man and talk about stuff that friends talk about, because she's the most feminine, the most changing, thus the man will not be able to communicate with her from the basis of friendship.

The only way a man gets a woman in his life is by accepting her and her femininity, stop looking for answers like "well we're ok most of the time, except she doesn't tell me how she's feeling".

OF COURSE she can't tell you how she's feeling because her feelings are changing moment to moment, just accept her the way she is and shed your veil of shallowness!

This is why girls tend to be attracted to jerks, because they are more in touch with what is unchanging, the deep energy that is manly. This is also why girls don't want or need nice guys, guys that are pliable, changing to suit HER needs and essentially feminine.

So let's forget modern society and all its bullshit, let us meditate and again become connected to who we really are and our real purpose, which is not outside of us, but rather deep within us.

Now was that a cool post or what ?


----------



## Excelsio (Jan 27, 2010)

Thracius said:


> This forum seems stuck on superficial things to find a mate by. Those are probably the same conditions of any possible relationship one might have with that person, shallow.
> 
> *Let's get things straight*
> 
> ...


What... ...


----------



## obz900 (Mar 29, 2010)

I don't agree with this at all.


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

it's interesting but I still stick by my policy that everyone is an idiot and they really don't know what they want.


----------



## Introspiritual (Mar 12, 2010)




----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

How cute... But it's WRONG!


----------



## Monte (Feb 17, 2010)

I think this would be at lot more interesting if we could at least say why he's wrong instead of childishly just posting that "this is wrong". :/


----------



## thewindlistens (Mar 12, 2009)

Monte said:


> I think this would be at lot more interesting if we could at least say why he's wrong instead of childishly just posting that "this is wrong". :/


It would, wouldn't it.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Thracius said:


> The person with the most feminine energy is most attracted to the person with the most masculine energy, which could be woman/man or gay etc.


Feminine energy? Masculine energy? What exactly are these energies? Do they correspond to what society views as feminine and masculine behaviour?



> If two people both have a lot of either feminine or masculine energy, nothing happens!


I disagree, because someone's behaviour being similar to that of their partner does not prevent the relationship from growing.



> Masculine energy is what is unchanging, because the most manly men are not easily swayed by their minds or what's happening around them, they make their decisions from their deep sense of purpose (from which many men have become disconnected, reason why they're so shallow).


So masculinity means conservative, stubborn and detached?



> Feminine energy is what is constantly changing, because the most feminine women are always changing, their hair, their minds, everything.


So femininity means being indecisive and impulsive?



> When the two meet, strong attraction happens.


No. I don't believe that the masculinity and femininity of a couple determines how strong the attraction is, although it probably plays a small part.



> The most attractive woman to a man will NOT be able to also be friends with that man and talk about stuff that friends talk about, because she's the most feminine, the most changing, thus the man will not be able to communicate with her from the basis of friendship.


So a man cannot be friends with a woman unless they are both feminine or both masculine, and if they are opposites they cannot control themselves?



> The only way a man gets a woman in his life is by accepting her and her femininity, stop looking for answers like "well we're ok most of the time, except she doesn't tell me how she's feeling".


Since when did masculine and feminine behaviour have anything to do with communication issues?



> OF COURSE she can't tell you how she's feeling because her feelings are changing moment to moment, just accept her the way she is and shed your veil of shallowness!


So, women are indecisive and unstable? 



> This is why girls tend to be attracted to jerks, because they are more in touch with what is unchanging, the deep energy that is manly. This is also why girls don't want or need nice guys, guys that are pliable, changing to suit HER needs and essentially feminine


This is just a load of bullshit. Not only are you generalising about billions of people based only on their genitals, you're ignoring reality.



> So let's forget modern society and all its bullshit, let us meditate and again become connected to who we really are and our real purpose, which is not outside of us, but rather deep within us.


So you want women to be as stereotypically feminine as possible, and men to be as stereotypically masculine as possible? Wow, that's some original and helpful advice right there!



> Now was that a cool post or what ?


Misguided and inaccurate would be better words to describe it.


----------



## kyebosh (Mar 18, 2010)

Haha.

"Don't put people in superficial boxes"
*puts relationships/genders in boxes*

Sorry mate, couldn't resist


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

To the OP, what you're advocating is a US traditional view on male/female relationships and ultimately reject the notion that a man and woman can't and shouldn't be friends or even have similar interests. While your views aren't necessarily wrong, they're outdated and narrow minded. For example, today's working professional men tend to marry educated and fairly wealthy women which makes sense from a personal view. If you were educated, wealthy and career-minded would you marry someone who has no education or any of the previously mentioned qualities? Some people might, but I'd suspect that the majority would seek a partner with more similar professional aspirations than dissimilar. 

Of course there will always be people raised to believe that the traditional view that men and women don't need to be friends, but that doesn't make your assertion that a more modern view is entirely wrong.


----------



## reyesaaronringo (Dec 27, 2009)

i like it.

i think what he's getting is that we can't deny our biology. sometimes political correctness gets in the way of who we are. some men and women are masculine and others femenine. i've noticed that in my life time. i've been with both types of women and find that i love very femenine women the best. they bring things out in me that i like. this is just my preference of course.

keys and locks,keys and locks. good luck finding yours:happy:


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

kyebosh said:


> Haha.
> 
> "Don't put people in superficial boxes"
> *puts relationships/genders in boxes*
> ...


you've totally missed the point

it's not about gender roles, it's about people's deep sense of purpose, from which they have become disconnected

even the most effeminate man has a deep sense that he must achieve much in life and find a mate to complement him, rather than just someone to cook and clean up and have sex with, although he may ignore this deep calling

if you were, in fact, more connected to who you are deep within, then you would know what I'm talking about

I suggest you meditate and you may, after some time, understand what I'm saying

same goes for everyone else on the forum who has missed the point

either you understand what your deep sense of purpose is or you will be going around in circles for the rest of your life, trying to find "MBTI compatible" people to have relationships with, totally ignoring what your deep consciousness tells you and making mistakes like trying to solve women's "problems" instead of accepting them and being enchanted by them


----------



## thewindlistens (Mar 12, 2009)

Thracius said:


> you've totally missed the point
> 
> it's not about gender roles, it's about people's deep sense of purpose, from which they have become disconnected
> 
> ...



Man, I kinda, vaguely, get what you're trying to say. But I think it's you who needs to work on communicating ideas. You've stepped on a ridiculous amount of obvious landmines. I don't necessarily agree with you, but I suspect it's for different reasons than most of the posters here. At least in response to the first post.

You're so close to talking about traditional gender roles that most people on this forum would stop reading even there. For those who got past that, the ideas of femininity and masculinity that you were talking about might be very different than yours. Because they're different for everyone. When each of us was a kid, we had experiences seeing pregnant mommies and caring daddies. Or maybe not. Maybe we didn't have a perfect childhood. Maybe the only examples of a mom and dad the child had were nothing like your examples of femininity and masculinity. Your ideas might be perfectly valid, but you're talking in a language that those people could never understand.

It's just too subjective.

I might be completely wrong in my interpretation, though (Especially seeing how we're typologically as distant as is possible, and I never get what ISFPs are trying to say. And vice versa.). And trust me, I know how it's like when something is so perfect and clear in my head but I can't get anyone to understand what I mean.



MisterNi said:


> To the OP, what you're advocating is a US traditional view on male/female relationships ...


Ah, yes. Thank you for reminding us how the US still has a monopoly on everything in the world, even if it's negative.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

thewindlistens said:


> You've stepped on a ridiculous amount of obvious landmines.


the truth is like that, I guess

anyway, it's a man's job to share whatever insights (gifts) they have with the world, even if the world won't accept them

a man will keep on giving, regardless :laughing:


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

oh god...you're still bloody stepping on them. Are you trolling or what?


----------



## abitsilly (Mar 4, 2010)

I get what your saying. But its not a complete answer, maybe you need to delve deeper and find other articles that agree with your theory. Or forget it, because your obviously like me who can go off on a tangent every once in a while. I think you should examine the feeling that made you write this. xxxx lots of love for someone who actually thinks about the big questions.


----------



## thewindlistens (Mar 12, 2009)

Thracius said:


> the truth is like that, I guess
> 
> anyway, it's a man's job to share whatever insights (gifts) they have with the world, even if the world won't accept them
> 
> a man will keep on giving, regardless :laughing:


I was trying to imply that you should walk around them. Since they're obvious and all.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

thewindlistens said:


> I was trying to imply that you should walk around them. Since they're obvious and all.


not to me, I say what rings true

come to think of it, traditional gender roles can be quite powerful, given individuals that are a little more enlightened and that can genuinely accept one another, without resorting to shallow judgements like choosing someone by their wealth, or taking what women say literally, in the moments when they're simply tense or have some sort of deep emotional crisis

in those moments they just need support

though pointing this out was definitely not the goal of the thread and no, I did not have parents that were highly traditional, my mother achieved as much as my father

we can always use a little more depth (to be happier, more secure, more confident and with greater ability to enjoy life) because we are surrounded by superficial ideas, messages and people on all sides

that depth only comes from meditation, paying attention to one's tendencies and self-correcting, not to what the mind brings up, because it often brings up junk thoughts that do not evoke progress, such as "avoiding landmines"


----------



## Nitou (Feb 3, 2010)

OP is a heap of rubbish about masculine and feminine "energy," and we just aren't "deep" enough to get it? Okaaaaay....


----------



## Arioche (Aug 5, 2009)

Wut.

I think what everyone who is opposing your "enlightened" view point is saying is...
You're making a shallow assumption in the first place by saying that YOUR view of what is feminine and masculine are perfectly compatible, and this is the universal truth that applies to everyone.

There are too many things you are leaving out vague, most of which are impossible to prove, and honestly sound rather ridiculous. First of all what is feminine or masculine? Do they even exist? (especially since what is feminine and what is masculine is determined by society and culture, which changes.) How do you know they are mutually exclusive and opposite? Why is it that two are completely compatible while the same cannot be? So I should be attracted to someone "masculine" who I can't even talk to? Is there a proof that we are denying ourselves by not compromising to your view of what is feminine and what is masculine? Why is it that many people felt attraction towards (and attract) both types of people of the stereotypical masculinity/femininity spectrum? What about the relationship between two masculine or two feminine individuals that are working out? Are they totally lying and is unhappy at the core because your theory _possibly _cannot be wrong? Let me go ditch my feminine girl friend and go get a stereotypical manly man who is a total jerk and I can't talk to, apparently me being unattracted to them = I am being shallow. QQ

I really hope this is just a troll thread.


----------



## Deja Vu (Dec 26, 2009)

Lets make something clear. He wasn't Political Correct. That crossed the line with you guys. I understand that, I feel for that, but at least hear him out. How he communicated his idea was a bit hard for someone to swallow whole. See, what I'm getting out of it is this...

Masculinity scientifically has been expressed as strong, unchanging behavior. In the animal kingdom there are lions with their protection of their cubs, and so on and so forth. With humans there is the hunter, the protector, and the other archetypes aligned with the history of mankind.

Meanwhile there is feminity along side that which is often expressed in words as changing. This would be exemplified by such ages as the gatherers, and so on and so forth to present day, where feminity and masculinity have been shapeshifted to become something all too different than what they were originally considered to be. In nature the definition between what is masculine and what is feminine are often very clear. Of course there are the cases in the animal kingdom when such is not, but for humans that line was once very, very thick.

Now, it is thin. However, the original poster broke it down into energies. What is masculine is not stubborn, or conservative, it is knightly. The feminity is more elegant, and noble as a princess. The two differing natures may not be at all about gender, for feminity may find itself in a women or a man...and the same in a man.

Of course the original poster did go a bit far in saying that a man must to be all masculine to truly feel the experience of "love" or a _real _relationship with a feminine women, because those defined roles, and defined energies of feminity and masculinity do not know gender anymore. There are women that are quite masculine,a dn there are men who have feminine traits.

What should be extracted from the OP post is the chemistry that is required for true relationship to flourish. As the world has changed, gender is less meaningful, and these energies he is speaking of know both man and women alike, the perfect concotion for a full experience of the yin & yang, the feminine and masculine, the unchanging and changing need to be found. 

A guy like me, who partakes in things that are traditionally considered feminine like arts, and is not as macho as some guys, I would need a girl who is a bit more rough around the edgers, otherwise the balance will be out and things wouldn't flourish to the best of there ability.

Balance is everything in a relationship. And that is what the OP was getting at. He wasn't Political Correct in getting to that thought, but thats ok - we don't have to be. Look for the good in it, everything that you disagree with deeply isn't trolling. :wink:


----------



## thewindlistens (Mar 12, 2009)

This thread is such a cool story, bro.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

I love how some of the people replying totally get it and the others don't get it at all

it shows who's connected to their deep selves and who isn't

thanks everyone for participating :happy:


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

Thracius said:


> same goes for everyone else on the forum who has missed the point


Disagreeing =/= missing the "point."


----------



## Proteus (Mar 5, 2010)

Thracius said:


> *WARNING: people who have grown up with shallow values may not understand this post*
> *
> The person with the most feminine energy is most attracted to the person with the most masculine energy
> *


A contradiction. You has one.



> The most attractive woman to a man will NOT be able to also be friends with that man and talk about stuff that friends talk about, because she's the most feminine, the most changing, thus the man will not be able to communicate with her from the basis of friendship.


My ideal partner is one who is also my best friend and with whom I can connect with on _all _levels. Of course I'd like us to have interests we don't share as to have things to pursue on our own from time to time, but it is perfectly reasonable to want more than just a sexual/romantic connection with a significant other and completely possible.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

Polarizing human attributes and then labeling them as "masculine" or "feminine" does not equate to depth or even being "in touch" with our deeper selves. Quite the opposite. People as individuals possess all of the qualities that the OP suggested. The inability to recognize them within ourselves amounts to supression and repression. What's more is that people who have suppressed these qualities and are then attracted to said qualities often fail in their relationships because they _can't_ understand or communicate well their partner...not until they start integrating and recognizing these traits within themself. 

It's even more distasteful to imply that the feminine can't make up their minds because emotions change and that the masculine won't change their minds because they're void of emotional conflict. This is so divorced from the reality of how people make their decisions it's ridiculous. Even the most stubborn of people can be swayed by the subjective and the most indecisive can be able to see the merit in a good decision.


----------



## SilverScorpio17 (Nov 13, 2009)

Thracius said:


> This is why girls tend to be attracted to jerks, because they are more in touch with what is unchanging, the deep energy that is manly. This is also why girls don't want or need nice guys, guys that are pliable, changing to suit HER needs and essentially feminine.


Um, I think you _tried_ not to be sexist, but that was pretty sexist. 

Girls don't want or need nice guys? I don't know where you came up with that. Stereotypes? Actually, can you explain that?



Thracius said:


> So let's forget modern society and all its bullshit, let us meditate and again become connected to who we really are and our real purpose, which is not outside of us, but rather deep within us.


I guess your overall message is okay. You just don't know how to support it.


----------



## thisisme (Apr 11, 2010)

haven't read all the responses yet but...yeah...i think it's the energies balancing each other out. i'm attracted to someone who's as masculine as i am feminine yep.


----------



## thisisme (Apr 11, 2010)

idris said:


> Lets make something clear. He wasn't Political Correct. That crossed the line with you guys. I understand that, I feel for that, but at least hear him out. How he communicated his idea was a bit hard for someone to swallow whole. See, what I'm getting out of it is this...
> 
> Masculinity scientifically has been expressed as strong, unchanging behavior. In the animal kingdom there are lions with their protection of their cubs, and so on and so forth. With humans there is the hunter, the protector, and the other archetypes aligned with the history of mankind.
> 
> ...


that's how i read it too and have said the same thing before...not about the changing/unchanging nature of the energies but about being attracted to masculine energy...which some women posses as well...like angelina jolie for example. it is about the balance...my energy is quite feminine and i need contrast to feel any kind of chemistry.


----------



## sushi (May 2, 2010)

idris said:


> Balance is everything in a relationship.


i understand there are some things that weren't clarified in the OP but i think the whole masculine feminine energy thingamajig was really just about balance. without it, balance i mean, any relationship would go south.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

Proteus said:


> A contradiction. You has one.


No I don't, read it again, maybe ask someone to read it for you if you can't

even in gay relationships one of the partners is either more feminine or more masculine than the other



> My ideal partner is one who is also my best friend and with whom I can connect with on _all _levels. Of course I'd like us to have interests we don't share as to have things to pursue on our own from time to time, but it is perfectly reasonable to want more than just a sexual/romantic connection with a significant other and completely possible.


yeah and I've rode to the market today on a pink elephant

EDIT: this thread needs to get locked

I totally gave away the key to what makes men attractive to women and vice versa and most of you have no clue about what I'm talking about

one day, while you are lost searching for your idealized mate, which does not exist, you may realize that many of the women you've liked before would've been good for you, if you only you hadn't been so easily driven by your mind/emotions and so disconnected from your deep sense of purpose

this is why men screw up relationships, they don't see the changing nature of a woman and try to "fix her"

women should be, first of all, accepted, then heard, but not heard in the sense that you are internalizing her every idea, but rather more like a song, because women may not even be aware of why they are feeling a certain way, they may not even know why they say the things they say (things that are probably true in the moment but not true in the long run), like "I hate you and I never want to see you again"

men who are disconnected from their masculine energy will hear that and go "are you breaking up with me?"

men who are connected to their masculine energy will hear that and go hold the woman in their arms

from time to time you may see that you've made a mistake, then you need to self-correct and move on

that's it, that's all you need to know to have a good, solid relationship

life is chaotic and messy enough as it is without bothering to look for mates according to superficial things like the MBTI system that does discuss specific tendencies of a type of person but completely fails to show the deep reasons behind a tendency

also, I am done with this forum, I've learned all I could learn from it, which is essentially that what I was looking for is within, not in some book or on a website

if you can't grasp that, it's time you went around the world and did some soul-searching

I hope to never hear from any of you ever again


----------



## Deja Vu (Dec 26, 2009)

Haha...this guy.

Anyway, to summarize any good that came out of this is balance is required to have any attraction. Women can have masculine traits. Men can be a bit effeminate. The attraction and chemistry comes from finding that person who fits your traits right. 

But do not confuse masculinity, and feminity with gender. They are simply words to describe the tpical nature. So...there you go. Guess this is all folks....


----------



## thisisme (Apr 11, 2010)

Thracius said:


> No I don't, read it again, maybe ask someone to read it for you if you can't
> 
> even in gay relationships one of the partners is either more feminine or more masculine than the other
> 
> ...


oh shit. haha you're kidding right?

anyway...i hope that you are. i enjoyed your thread and appreciate your thoughts. stay funny apple person...pleeeease.


----------



## Excelsio (Jan 27, 2010)

Thracius said:


> I hope to never hear from any of you ever again


Are you for real??? a few people, on a public, world wide forum don't agree with you and challenge your *theory* (it is an unproven idea and therefore a theory), and you decide that their ideas and thoughts are so worthless to you that you hope to never hear from any of them again?

That is a serious issue you may want to self-reflect on there... I mean that sincerely, I am not trying to dig at you or anything... but yeah, this is a public forum, theres bound to be someone who disagrees, even if you say the world is generally spherical in nature and orbits the star commonly known in the English language as the sun.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

no great loss


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Thracius said:


> I hope to never hear from any of you ever again


The hope is mutual.


----------



## Excelsio (Jan 27, 2010)

lirulin said:


> no great loss





skycloud86 said:


> The hope is mutual.


Oh come on NTs.... put your fangs away... :wink:


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

fangs?
This is just normal...


----------



## kyebosh (Mar 18, 2010)

Haha wow. Gross generalisations, arrogance, judgement of people's depth or character without knowing them, assumption that those who disagree simply don't understand, proclaimations of "one day you'll be enlightened", delusions of absolute truth, inability to take a ribbing sans personal attacks... This thread delivers 

Just FYI, Mr "I'm not contradicting myself", here's 2 statements you made that seem contradictory to me (but then, I guess I just don't get it huh ):
"I'm certain that this forum rocks"
"I am done with this forum - I hope to never hear from any of you ever again "

Oh, another gem of yours:
"I WANT A NORMAL GIRL! which means I want a normal, friendly, not controlling girl
who is also hot
and an introvert definitely
cuz introverts are so much better than extroverts, they think about things, rather than fly around"

You'll have to excuse me if I'm not particularly willing to take your views on relationships as gospel truth  True for you they may be sir, but it's quite unwise to assume they apply to others too.

I do hope this isn't a fair representation oF ISFP. I'm sure it's not


----------

