# Concepts about dating with masculinity/feminity and the world in general.



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

Dezir said:


> Be a simp and own it, be a simp and be proud of it, as long as you are also loved back. And when your simping / caring behavior is going to be loved.


NO! 

Simps get friend-zoned. Which means she'll rely on you for the emotional (and often financial) support she's not getting from the man (or men) she actually sleeps with. If you find yourself in the zone, just walk away. Because that relationship is never going to be healthy, or lead to romance. Just heartbreak. If she were actually into you, there would be no other man because she would not even be able to imagine being with anyone but you.

I speak from experience, because I've been on both sides of the zone. Yes, women can get friend-zoned too, and it's worse because they mutilate themselves trying to figure out what part of their body isn't sexually attracting you. Based on some random thing you said months ago. Don't do that to someone, or let them do it to you! 

Walk. Away.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> NO!
> 
> Simps get friend-zoned. Which means she'll rely on you for the emotional (and often financial) support she's not getting from the man (or men) she actually sleeps with. If you find yourself in the zone, just walk away. Because that relationship is never going to be healthy, or lead to romance. Just heartbreak. If she were actually into you, there would be no other man because she would not even be able to imagine being with anyone but you.
> 
> ...


As a woman, I'm fine being friendzoned. Rejection isn't the end of the world.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> As a woman, I'm fine being friendzoned. Rejection isn't the end of the world.


That's what the woman I friend-zoned said. Right before she had a breakdown because I started dating my wife. 

It's not healthy.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> That's what the woman I friend-zoned said. Right before she had a breakdown because I started dating my wife.
> 
> It's not healthy.


You do realize that not all women plug into a hive-mind, right?


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> You do realize that not all women plug into a hive-mind, right?


It's curious to me that you use the term "Hive Mind". It indicates that you want to be seen as different for its own sake. 

But you're probably more like your fellow humans than you'd like to admit. In that you would probably prefer to experience an actual loving relationship. I wish you the best in finding it.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> It's curious to me that you use the term "Hive Mind". It indicates that you want to be seen as different for its own sake.


Wrong. I perceive people as individuals. Look into genetics and epigenetics.



> But you're probably more like your fellow humans than you'd like to admit. In that you would probably prefer to experience an actual loving relationship. I wish you the best in finding it.


No shit but that doesn't mean that everyone loses their mind from being friendzoned. That's your ego talking.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

INTJ_Artist said:


> Sigh... Here's some clues for the clueless...
> 
> 1) Women will decide, within seconds of meeting you, whether they are interested in you. It has almost nothing to do with your looks. Women respond to confidence and wit.
> 2) Women do not talk (outside of work) to men who do not interest them. Period. If they are talking to you, they are interested. So get to know them a bit and see if YOU are interested.
> ...


I've also had a lot of luck with looking them in the eyes and really listening to what they have to say. Just about everyone wants to feel they are being heard, even if they are not fully understood. I've found women pleasantly surprised to have me recall something they told me months/years before that I took seriously enough to remember because I knew it was important to them.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> Wrong. I perceive people as individuals. Look into genetics and epigenetics.
> 
> No shit but that doesn't mean that everyone loses their mind from being friendzoned. That's your ego talking.


Since I know quite a bit about genetics and epigenetics, I fail to see the connection. As an INTJ, rare as we are, I'm pretty damn similar to all of the other INTJs I've met. We mostly differ in our experiences and maturity.

As for friend zones, it's not my ego talking but my experience. I'll allow that your own experience may be perceived differently by you at this stage of your life. But I still believe that real loving relationships are superior to fake ones where the love only travels in one direction.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> Since I know quite a bit about genetics and epigenetics, I fail to see the connection. As an INTJ, rare as we are, I'm pretty damn similar to all of the other INTJs I've met. We mostly differ in our experiences and maturity.


It's highly doubtful there's much knowledge underpinning your comments, if you fail to see the connection.



> As for friend zones, it's not my ego talking but my experience. I'll allow that your own experience may be perceived differently by you at this stage of your life. But I still believe that real loving relationships are superior to fake ones where the love only travels in one direction.


No, it's your ego speaking, hence why you fear being friendzoned and get an ego boost from the actions of a purported unstable female.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> It's highly doubtful there's much knowledge underpinning your comments, if you fail to see the connection.
> 
> No, it's your ego speaking, hence why you fear being friendzoned and get an ego boost from the actions of a purported unstable female.


It's highly doubtful there's much knowledge underpinning your comments, when you fail to convincingly elaborate on that which you've asserted.

When I talk about having friend-zoned the woman I mentioned, the emotions I feel are shame and regret, not pride. I knew it was wrong. I knew I was causing her pain. But I did it anyway because I enjoyed talking to her. A different woman might not have expressed her angst in the same way, but it would still have been wrong to for me to do it once I realized that she couldn't accept that we were never going to be anything but friends.

I think that perhaps you are confusing being friend-zoned with accepting that the person you love is simply your friend. The former is a delusional relationship. The latter is not. It is the delusion that destroys the mind.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> It's highly doubtful there's much knowledge underpinning your comments, when you fail to convincingly elaborate on that which you've asserted.


Since you never asked for an elaboration, only dismissing it because of an absence of knowledge, this assertion isn't logical.



> When I talk about having friend-zoned the woman I mentioned, the emotions I feel are shame and regret, not pride. I knew it was wrong. I knew I was causing her pain. But I did it anyway because I enjoyed talking to her. A different woman might not have expressed her angst in the same way, but it would still have been wrong to for me to do it once I realized that she couldn't accept that we were never going to be anything but friends.
> 
> I think that perhaps you are confusing being friend-zoned with accepting that the person you love is simply your friend. The former is a delusional relationship. The latter is not. It is the delusion that destroys the mind.


But that's just it. Most sane people can accept rejection without losing their minds, hence why being friend-zoned isn't a big deal.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> Since you never asked for an elaboration, only dismissing it because of an absence of knowledge, this assertion isn't logical.
> 
> But that's just it. Most sane people can accept rejection without losing their minds, hence why being friend-zoned isn't a big deal.


You are engaged in a discussion where you asserted that genetics and epigenetics had some bearing on the subject at hand. When I said that I failed to see the connection, despite having knowledge of those subjects, that was where... logically... you needed to assert the superior knowledge that you supposedly possess.

Instead you are playing semantic games in an effort to exert unearned logical superiority in order to not have to elaborate on your claims. I can therefore only assume that you have no such knowledge.

As for friend-zoning, I see that I was correct. You have failed to see the difference between the deceptive parasitic relationship that "friend-zoning" represents, and the entirely healthily acceptance that someone you love does not love you in return.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> You are engaged in a discussion where you asserted that genetics and epigenetics had some bearing on the subject at hand. When I said that I failed to see the connection, despite having knowledge of those subjects, that was where... logically... you needed to assert the superior knowledge that you supposedly possess.
> 
> Instead you are playing semantic games in an effort to exert unearned logical superiority in order to not have to elaborate on your claims. I can therefore only assume that you have no such knowledge.


Behavioral genetics requires environmental triggers. Behavioral genetics can also be affected by amendments to RNA. Do you now understand how people are individuals, considering the myriad of possibilities?



> As for friend-zoning, I see that I was correct. You have failed to see the difference between the deceptive parasitic relationship that "friend-zoning" represents, and the entirely healthily acceptance that someone you love does not love you in return.


Like I said, most sane people can accept being friend-zoned. That is, unless their sole focus was on the sexual aspects of their relationship. Being friend-zoned can mean that you can still enjoy interacting with the person you like, gaining a friend.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> Behavioral genetics requires environmental triggers. Behavioral genetics can also be affected by amendments to RNA. Do you now understand how people are individuals, considering the myriad of possibilities?


So you understand a little about epigenetics, but know nothing about statistics. You seem to assume that epigenetic triggers are completely random. But this is not the case. Specific inputs lead to predictable likelihoods of specific outcomes. Such as the age of the father having a high correlation with having autistic children.

Therefore, you need to think about how shared environments (geographic, chemical, social) produce shared epigenetic triggers. Which means that you are still more similar to those you grew up with than not. Across a wider array of traits (body weight, intelligence, cancer frequency, confidence, conformity, conscientious , neuroticism, muscle mass, etc., etc.)

Consequently, whether you grew up in a large city or on a farm will tell me much more about your likely mental and physical traits than any other piece of information. Because those two groups live in very different environments where the epigenetic triggers will be shared by those populations. In addition, the kind of environment you grew up in can be guessed with a high degree of accuracy though visual observation and a short conversation.



> Like I said, most sane people can accept being friend-zoned. That is, unless their sole focus was on the sexual aspects of their relationship. Being friend-zoned can mean that you can still enjoy interacting with the person you like, gaining a friend.


Apparently you lack the intelligence to understand the difference between being “friend-zoned” and being a friend. “Friend-Zoning” describes a specific type of parasitic fake relationship that is in many ways similar to how simps are manipulated into giving money to THOTs on OnlyFans. Or to strippers in a club “that really like them”.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

INTJ_Artist said:


> So you understand a little about epigenetics, but know nothing about statistics. You seem to assume that epigenetic triggers are completely random. But this is not the case. Specific inputs lead to predictable likelihoods of specific outcomes. Such as the age of the father having a high correlation with having autistic children.
> 
> Therefore, you need to think about how shared environments (geographic, chemical, social) produce shared epigenetic triggers. Which means that you are still more similar to those you grew up with than not. Across a wider array of traits (body weight, intelligence, cancer frequency, confidence, conformity, conscientious , neuroticism, muscle mass, etc., etc.)
> 
> ...


I don't have the energy to point out all the fallacies and errors in this post so I'll leave you with one thought. Dunning Kruger strikes again.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

What is the difference between being friend zoned and just being friends with someone?

Is it because at one point there was at least a one-sided attraction with the friendzoning, or some kind of romantic expectation?

I've never understood why people complain about friend zoning so much--it just sounds like being friends with someone. I've been on both sides of friend zoning and it doesn't bother me at all. I think that it's probably the best foundation for any relationship, but if a person is a good enough friend then the friendship can stand alone without romance, and the person should/does respect that their friend is ready for a healthy relationship. Because why wouldn't you want your friend to be happy? If they are a true friend you care about them, you are not just attracted to them.

Women might be confused by the social expectation that says "all men want to sleep with women" and think there's something wrong with them if a man rejects them, but it's stupid--just as it's stupid to depict something like friendship as negative, just because it doesn't have a romantic element. (Also I am not calling anyone stupid--I am saying the idea is stupid because it is harmful, and I don't like ideas that harm people.)

That being said, there are times when it's just better not to continue a friendship or see someone a lot--could be for any reason at all. So it's important to be able to accept when friendship just doesn't work for any reason, even if it's because of unresolved romantic feelings. I think.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

WickerDeer said:


> What is the difference between being friend zoned and just being friends with someone?
> 
> Is it because at one point there was at least a one-sided attraction with the friendzoning, or some kind of romantic expectation?
> 
> ...


Time and time again, I want to be friend zoned, as in 'I beg of you, friendzone me'. 😂


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

mia-me said:


> Time and time again, I want to be friend zoned, as in 'I beg of you, friendzone me'. 😂


I agree--nothing is wrong with friendship! I think true friendship is a great gift, and I think respect and care for boundaries is a matter of common decency. 

edited out rambly stuff


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

...


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

I've friendzoned more women than women have friendzoned me, and got all the heat for doing so, especially in highschool. 
A friend of a girl who asked me out once slapped me in the face saying "How dare you say no to her! Do you have no feelings?!" 🙄


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

I’ve had guys get butt hurt with me about being “friend zoned”.
I mean I’m married and always very very clear about not being interested, where the fuck else do they think they’re gonna go?
I don’t encourage, seek out or send mixed signals. 
Some people just need a clue by four to the face.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> I don't have the energy to point out all the fallacies and errors in this post so I'll leave you with one thought. Dunning Kruger strikes again.


So you bail by throwing out yet another catch-phrase that you don't fully understand the definition of. Why? Probably because you're trapped in an academic echo-chamber that rarely challenges you, and you therefore lack the necessary maturity and philosophical knowledge to participate further in this discussion.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

mia-me said:


> Time and time again, I want to be friend zoned, as in 'I beg of you, friendzone me'. 😂


So... You want to be someone else's full-time emotional and/or financial supporter, which is the proper role of a mate, without the intimacy benefits of actually being their mate? This is how social parasites take over the lives of their victims for their own benefit.

How you can confuse that with being a normal friend, with healthy boundaries, and accepting that your friend does not share your romantic interest, shows a lack of discernment that's hard to believe.

Note that I'm only writing this for the benefit of others, as I've deemed you to be a lost cause.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

Queen of Cups said:


> I’ve had guys get butt hurt with me about being “friend zoned”.
> I mean I’m married and always very very clear about not being interested, where the fuck else do they think they’re gonna go?
> I don’t encourage, seek out or send mixed signals.
> Some people just need a clue by four to the face.


If you're not encouraging them, or sending mixed signals, then you are not "friend-zoning" them.


----------



## Mark R (Dec 23, 2015)

Queen of Cups said:


> I’ve had guys get butt hurt with me about being “friend zoned”.
> I mean I’m married and always very very clear about not being interested, where the fuck else do they think they’re gonna go?
> I don’t encourage, seek out or send mixed signals.
> Some people just need a clue by four to the face.


As a cis-male, I have broken a few hearts by having friends of the opposite gender while being in a relationship. Since one particularly bad experience with a jealous "friend," I decided not have friends of the opposite gender.


----------



## gracewil (Sep 7, 2021)

Thanks for useful info!


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> Sigh... Here's some clues for the clueless...
> 
> 1) Women will decide, within seconds of meeting you, whether they are interested in you. It has almost nothing to do with your looks. Women respond to confidence and wit.
> 2) Women do not talk (outside of work) to men who do not interest them. Period. If they are talking to you, they are interested. So get to know them a bit and see if YOU are interested.
> ...


Confidence alone don't mean shit mate, a 1/10 guy with 10/10 confidence doesn't pass the first stage which is the looks stage so his confidence is useless.
A 8/10 guy with 0/10 confidence will drop significantly in rating due to his lack of confidence.

So confidence is something that is expected of u but it's not the 1 thing women look for in a guy so it can't fully carry you either.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

ENTJudgement said:


> Confidence alone don't mean shit mate, a 1/10 guy with 10/10 confidence doesn't pass the first stage which is the looks stage so his confidence is useless.
> A 8/10 guy with 0/10 confidence will drop significantly in rating due to his lack of confidence.
> 
> So confidence is something that is expected of u but it's not the 1 thing women look for in a guy so it can't fully carry you either.


While I agree with you that confidence isn't as important as other factors, you're also inflating the looks aspect too. There are plenty of women who've fallen for a guy's personality where looks took a back seat, within reason of course. 

One autistic way of perceiving dating is that every trait is on a sliding scale of 10. If the total score of all traits equals the magic number of attraction, then bob's your uncle. And of course, reliant on individual preferences, some trait scales will have more weight than others. In your case and in many other cases, looks factor heavily into your total.


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

mia-me said:


> While I agree with you that confidence isn't as important as other factors, you're also inflating the looks aspect too. There are plenty of women who've fallen for a guy's personality where looks took a back seat, within reason of course.
> 
> One autistic way of perceiving dating is that every trait is on a sliding scale of 10. If the total score of all traits equals the magic number of attraction, then bob's your uncle. And of course, reliant on individual preferences, some trait scales will have more weight than others. In your case and in many other cases, looks factor heavily into your total.


Math is the language of the universe.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Quite an interesting read.


INTJ_Artist said:


> If you're a man who has good hygiene and a half way decent job, you should have no problems getting dates. Even if you think you're ugly, women barely care about looks. The primary blocker for most men is that they don't understand attraction markers, or how to seduce (in an honest, forthright way) a woman who has shown interest in them. There's also the problem of our culture being hostile to the normal, healthy ways that men and women interact. So unless you've learned how to actually treat a woman (be playfully teasing/interesting, make them laugh) instead of the propaganda (be nice, non-threatening, and therefore boring) you're going to be extremely frustrated.


True, over the years, we had different definition of that the ideal woman and ideal man are supposed to be like. From the gentleman of the 1950s to the party animal of the 1980s and the bad boy of the 2020s. But I don't think the "bad boy" is really a bad boy, just defiant. As you said, knowing how to treat a woman be playfully teasing/interesting, make them laugh; can come across as disrespectful to people who are focused on be nice, non-threatening, and therefore boring because you push some boundaries in it.

If a man was a real "bad boy" in the real sense of the word "bad", as in treating women and other people with disrespect, I assume he wouldn't get many dates. Yes, there are cases of women being with abusive men, literally bad boys, but that's far from the norm. There's also the "bad boy" in the sense of dangerous and risky behavior. Knowing how to ride a bike or how to fight certainly makes you more attractive for that dangerous and risky factor, but that doesn't necessarly equal with being bad, as in treating others badly. So, "bad boy", not really, just defiant.

Not only women, but people in general, men too, like to have emotional spikes. To feel either extremely positive or extremely negative for a short duration of time. It's right there in your definition, extremely negative: playfully teasing; extremely positive: interesting, make them laugh.

You can't be all like a deflated balloon, all agreeing with her, you can't just be there and be nice and expect girls will like you. You got to push some boundaries, but in a respectful way. 

The issue with be nice, non-threatening, and therefore boring is not that there is a problem with being nice. It's that everyone is nice with the person they like. You're not special. You're literally doing what absolutely everyone else is doing expecting different results. Yes, it's a perk to be nice, it's better to be nice than not to be nice, to be attentive and helpful towards her, even romantic and tender, but, and this is a big but, you also have to have other things going on for you in order to make yourself attractive and make her fall in love with you. 

You got to feel the person, to establish an emotional connection, you got to understand and be aware of the emotions of other people. And based on their reactions adjust or change your behavior. It's all about those emotional spikes.

You can be a bit insistent in teasing as long as the insisting is playful and the other person also laughs. Make jokes about having an proper/improper, normal/abnormal or moral/immoral behavior.

However, teasing has to be non-hurtful. You can be offensive yet respectful. The purpose is to entertain the other person and make them laugh, not make them feel bad. There is a slight superiority in teasing. Or implication of lack of importance for them.

You can make fun of them in an indirect way by waiting for them to make a mistake. Don't say anything, just let them make a mistake, waiting for them to make the mistake, and then laugh at it. Again, all of this is in a playful way, I don't mean a mistake that has consequences.

On the other side of the coin, you could jokingly praise yourself on non-important stuff. It's not bragging because (a) you're not saying _"look how great I am"_ but are rather indirect and jokingly _"that's what it means to be a boss"_ and (b) it's not about something important, it's not about something that says _"I'm superior to others"_.

You can make scare jokes, or show defiance in little but respectful ways, and if they show insistance to your defiance, show more defiance, of course I mean all of this in a playful respectful way, not when it comes to serious things.

You could also mix doing little things for them with not doing things for them and challenging them to be the ones that go and do those little things. Notice that I said little, because it's all in a playful atmosphere, I don't mean _"no, I'm not going to pick you up with my car from the train station"_, but rather _"nah, I won't turn off the light because I'm too far, you go ahead and do it"_.

The point of these defiances is that they make the interaction a little bit spicy, it's a lot better than having someone who always agrees with you and always does what he is asked of.

The "not always does what he is asked of" was discussed above with a mix of doing and not doing little things, show defiance, jokingly praise yourself on non-important stuff, make fun of them in an indirect way by waiting for them to make a mistake, make jokes about having an proper/improper, normal/abnormal or moral/immoral behavior, push some boundaries but in a respectful way. None of these are for real, in a serious situation with consequences don't do any of these, but they are just jokes for the moment in a casual way that keeps the conversation and interaction spicy.

So it's not really "bad boy", more like defiance and simulating bad.


INTJ_Artist said:


> Sigh... Here's some clues for the clueless...
> 
> 1) Women will decide, within seconds of meeting you, whether they are interested in you. It has almost nothing to do with your looks. Women respond to confidence and wit.
> 2) Women do not talk (outside of work) to men who do not interest them. Period. If they are talking to you, they are interested. So get to know them a bit and see if YOU are interested.
> ...


Good advice. But for this part:
4) To seduce... Be friendly, tease them a little, make them laugh, and be a bit unpredictable at all times. You will be surprised how quickly and eagerly women will respond to this.
5) The real keepers will tease you right back. Because this shows that they have confidence in themselves.
6) To repel a woman you don't like, be really nice and non-threatening (uninteresting). They will almost immediately vanish.
Are you sure that it only applies to you, or it's a general thing in all women?


INTJ_Artist said:


> NO!
> 
> Simps get friend-zoned. Which means she'll rely on you for the emotional (and often financial) support she's not getting from the man (or men) she actually sleeps with. If you find yourself in the zone, just walk away. Because that relationship is never going to be healthy, or lead to romance. Just heartbreak. If she were actually into you, there would be no other man because she would not even be able to imagine being with anyone but you.
> 
> ...


I see that I used the term "simp" the wrong way. I meant simping in the strict sense of being caring, attentive and helpful. Sort of being a gentleman. But not ending up doing destructive things where you get the short end of the stick. Helping her when you have nothing to lose, not helping her when you sacrifice a big part of yourself or your time to help her. You can decline politely or say you don't have time. Simping within reason, so to speak. As well as, and especially, as long as you also make a move towards her.

Don't just be a simp, make a move towards her. That's the key difference, lack of directness, as opposed to the simping as in caring itself. And honestly, if you've been talking to a woman for 3 months and you never gave her any signs that you are romantically interested in her or actually asked her out for a date, can you really blame her for putting you in the friendzone? She didn't know otherwise. You never communicated otherwise. She didn't put you in the friendzone, you put yourself in the friendzone.

There is one way out of the friendzone: tell her how you feel or ask her out for a date, and a romantic one, make it clear it's romantic. If she refuses you, fine, go out. No friendship. Being in the friendzone is a choice, not a prison.

I remember this video from long ago:





Get good flirty, indirect hitting on. Such as the act of randomly going and talking to her, asking her about herself. There is always an "I want to date you" in the back of your head when you get good flirty. It's not just normal conversation.

Of course, don't be weird, doing things way too out of the ordinary, with no explaination. That's what it means to be weird.

Simping in the most general sense is the idea that one may impress the other person with how caring is he towards her. It doesn't work that way. People want something fun, want something attractive, want something they enjoy with. Which later could be developed into care. They already have their family and friends to care for them. Simping is the belief that one may impress the other person with the depth of their feelings and make the other person believe they are a good catch because 'he loves me a lot'. But maybe, "he only loves me a lot because he can't have me" and "if I have 2 competitors, then I already have 2 people who 'love me a lot' ".

It's like PR and marketing, most products don't convince to you buy them with a "please buy them, I'll be very nice to you" but rather "look at me, I'm such a quality product, I have so much value _flashy ad_ etc".

So what I was saying is that being caring, attentive and helpful could work, given that, you know, also one makes a move and is being flirty, otherwise it's just friendzone.


tanstaafl28 said:


> I've also had a lot of luck with looking them in the eyes and really listening to what they have to say. Just about everyone wants to feel they are being heard, even if they are not fully understood. I've found women pleasantly surprised to have me recall something they told me months/years before that I took seriously enough to remember because I knew it was important to them.


Yes, that can be very affective.


WickerDeer said:


> What is the difference between being friend zoned and just being friends with someone?
> 
> Is it because at one point there was at least a one-sided attraction with the friendzoning, or some kind of romantic expectation?
> 
> ...


You can start as mutual friends and develop into a relationship. In fact, I think that's pretty much how it all went for me, I've never done "cold dating" in my life, except when I was the one approached.

But friendzone, already implies that 1 of them is not interested.

People complain about it, because you can't be friend with someone you are romantically attracted to, it's not good for you. If there was no feelings, really cool. If there was mutual feelings, really cool. If there are one-sided friendship vs romance feelings, really bad.

As a man, I can guarantee that not all men want to sleep with women. Yes, some men want to sleep with any woman they find, clearly. Any woman they put hands on is good enough. But others don't. Women would probably be the same if it weren't for the bad social stigma "you're a hoe" for doing it. For men, sleeping with as many women as possible is something to brag about, for women, sleeping with as many men as possible is something to be ashamed about.


ENTJudgement said:


> Confidence alone don't mean shit mate, a 1/10 guy with 10/10 confidence doesn't pass the first stage which is the looks stage so his confidence is useless.
> A 8/10 guy with 0/10 confidence will drop significantly in rating due to his lack of confidence.
> 
> So confidence is something that is expected of u but it's not the 1 thing women look for in a guy so it can't fully carry you either.


True. And in fact, this applies to everything in life. "Just be confidence", "just believe in yourself", "think positively!" is just dumb advice.

Yes, being confidence helps when you also have the skills behind it to support it. And positive thinking has some merits at times, allowing you to have a good vibes attitude or expect good things from others.

As we tend to people treat others consistent with our expectations, and therefore, cause the person to behave in a way that confirms such expectations. Like, if you think someone is an asshole, you'll act toward him or her in a way that will produce “asshole” behavior. On the other hand, if you think someone is an friendly towards you, you'll act toward him or her in a way that will produce “friendly” behavior because of your ingratiating actions.

An entrepreneur once said "if you don't understand people, you don't understand business" and he's right, people are a major factor in, well everything. But some people take the short approach and say a naive "just be confident", "just believe in yourself" or "just be yourself". Just be confident? No. You can't feel confident if you don't know what you're doing. It's easy to say "No pressure, chill." when you from your perspective would know how to handle the situation, but other people wouldn't. A pilot is confident in how to drive a plane because he spent a whole school there. If you don't feel like you know what you're doing, just go and find some advice to take, try to understand how it works, the "just be confident" doesn't work. That's not to say experience doesn't work, experience is good, but you need a mix of both.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)




----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

mia-me said:


> One autistic way of perceiving dating is that every trait is on a sliding scale of 10. If the total score of all traits equals the magic number of attraction, then bob's your uncle. And of course, reliant on individual preferences, some trait scales will have more weight than others. In your case and in many other cases, looks factor heavily into your total.


To add to my prior post since it needs emphasis, because it's so rarely discussed, the dimension of consistency vs novelty is very important. Again, a slider would work since people will vary in their needs. It's even more complex than a simple slider would evidence since one can need a lot of emotional consistency but require a lot of topical novelty where others thrive on emotional inconsistency/novelty, preferring a guessing game of yes/no/maybe/no/no etc.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

Dezir said:


> True, over the years, we had different definition of that the ideal woman and ideal man are supposed to be like. From the gentleman of the 1950s to the party animal of the 1980s and the bad boy of the 2020s. But I don't think the "bad boy" is really a bad boy, just defiant. As you said, knowing how to treat a woman be playfully teasing/interesting, make them laugh; can come across as disrespectful to people who are focused on be nice, non-threatening, and therefore boring because you push some boundaries in it.


There may have been a time, perhaps in the Victorian era, where most men were so callus that simply being nice (in the gentlemanly sense) was all you needed. But I kind of doubt it.



> Not only women, but people in general, men too, like to have emotional spikes. To feel either extremely positive or extremely negative for a short duration of time. It's right there in your definition, extremely negative: playfully teasing; extremely positive: interesting, make them laugh.
> 
> You can't be all like a deflated balloon, all agreeing with her, you can't just be there and be nice and expect girls will like you. You got to push some boundaries, but in a respectful way.


This.

And the thing is, it works with just about everyone. Mentally healthy men tease each other incessantly (go to any barber shop to see this) but that wasn’t something that, as an only child, I understood until much later in life. Healthy kids enjoy being playfully teased, and grandmothers too. My sons tease each other and their friends. It‘s what makes them friends.

Problem is, we don’t live in a healthy culture. Kids grow up alone, and in many cases can’t communicate through anything but a screen without getting hyper-emotional. As a college teacher, I’ve seen this. Social media fills them with unfounded fears that they can’t evaluate rationally yet. Then the fear center of the brain gets trained and it takes a long, long time to mentally dig yourself out of that hole.



> However, teasing has to be non-hurtful.


Hurtful teases are called insults. There’s a world of difference between “I can see that your hair roots are obviously a different color than your hair.” and “Wow! I love your hair! But how on earth did you manage to dye just the roots and not the ends?”

Once, in college, a friend of mine and I went over to the house of a girl I liked. She said that she was going to go change before we all went out. My friend then said “Cool, I’ll wait outside. Hey! Which window is yours again?”

I (the simp) was horrified, but she laughed and shot him a radiant smile. I know that she liked me. The signs were all there. But I was never anything but “nice” to her. So I never made her laugh.



> On the other side of the coin, you could jokingly praise yourself on non-important stuff.


It’s actually much more entertaining if, on a first date, you’re asked what you do for a living and you answer with a series of ridiculous jobs and make up the backstories for them as you go. This serves two purposes: It makes her laugh (and it’s great if she joins in too) but it also maintains some mystery and makes her more anxious to know what you really do. In which case you could admit to working pretty much any job and she’ll be much more interested in it.

If your job actually IS interesting, the payoff is even better. “Google Me” was how I’d finally answer truthfully (but teasing at the same time).



> The point of these defiances is that they make the interaction a little bit spicy, it's a lot better than having someone who always agrees with you and always does what he is asked of.


And remember, if you’re both not having fun, you’re doing it wrong! This is a form of play.



> Good advice. But for this part:
> 4) To seduce... Be friendly, tease them a little, make them laugh, and be a bit unpredictable at all times. You will be surprised how quickly and eagerly women will respond to this.
> 5) The real keepers will tease you right back. Because this shows that they have confidence in themselves.
> 6) To repel a woman you don't like, be really nice and non-threatening (uninteresting). They will almost immediately vanish.
> ...


Oh no, it’s general to all women. Feminists especially. One moment you’re teasing them, then she starts showing you all the hilariously inappropriate pics she gets sent by creeps, and pretty soon you’re making out.



> I see that I used the term "simp" the wrong way. I meant simping in the strict sense of being caring, attentive and helpful. Sort of being a gentleman. But not ending up doing destructive things where you get the short end of the stick. Helping her when you have nothing to lose, not helping her when you sacrifice a big part of yourself or your time to help her. You can decline politely or say you don't have time. Simping within reason, so to speak. As well as, and especially, as long as you also make a move towards her.


Friends, REAL friends have boundaries. They have other interests. They do other things. What they don’t do is hang out for 10+ hours a day like a real couple would, and have a one-way emotional bond where she (or he) dumps all of their relationship frustration on you.



> Don't just be a simp, make a move towards her.


Once you’ve been simped, there is almost no way to get out of it. You could start hanging out with her less, setting some boundaries, and be seen with other women. That might get her attention and give you a small chance (if her actual boyfriend isn’t around) of getting somewhere romantically. Even if only for one night.

But chances are, she’s not worth it. Because then you’ll get the full weight of all her insecurities and her fear of being alone. Healthy women don’t allow simps near them, and healthy guys don’t want to be simps. The woman who simped me… Well let’s just say I looked her up years later and was VERY glad that I dodged that bullet. VERY VERY glad!



> You can start as mutual friends and develop into a relationship. In fact, I think that's pretty much how it all went for me, I've never done "cold dating" in my life, except when I was the one approached.
> 
> But friendzone, already implies that 1 of them is not interested.


Mutual friends can absolutely develop a romance. Emphasis on MUTUAL. It happens all the time.

But in the friendzone, she has already established dominance over you. So the relationship will never be equal. If you make the first move, you will be rejected. Your only hope is for her to make the first move, and that’s a very unusual thing for a woman to do.


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> What is the difference between being friend zoned and just being friends with someone?
> 
> Is it because at one point there was at least a one-sided attraction with the friendzoning, or some kind of romantic expectation?
> 
> ...


There are many problems with being just friends when 1 side is romantically interested in the other, in the examples below I will use the woman as the one who wants to be friends and the guy as the one that wants something more.

1. Her bf is probably not gonna like it and theres going to be tension between them.
2. Her friend is going to get frustrated coz many women like to vent and complain about their relationships so shes going to vent to her male friend who likes her about how her current bf isn't treating her right and her male friend is going to think I'd treat you so much better, why don't you just date me?! Some white knights will feel compelled to protect her and probably pick a fight with her current bf which will end up fking up both the friendship and her relationship.
3. Men who are friends with u and also like u are probably going to end up simping at some point so hes going to try really hard to please u thinking he can sway u into seeing him as a good partner but hes going to fail coz ur not physically attracted to him but hes hopeful coz hes a moron but eventually hes going to get really frustrated coz nothing he does works and when hes frustrated he might start being negative like shes only using me etc...
4. It could fk his chances at other girls coz other women who might have been interested in him will think hes in love with u so hes losing opportunities and chances causing his oneitis to become even stronger on you.
5. Hes gonna get dissed from his friends for being a friend zoned simp coz most men wouldn't respect such a guy so he might end up having less male friends.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

ENTJudgement said:


> Confidence alone don't mean shit mate, a 1/10 guy with 10/10 confidence doesn't pass the first stage which is the looks stage so his confidence is useless.
> A 8/10 guy with 0/10 confidence will drop significantly in rating due to his lack of confidence.
> 
> So confidence is something that is expected of u but it's not the 1 thing women look for in a guy so it can't fully carry you either.


I think you’re projecting a male looks-first perspective onto women for whom it’s perhapes 1/3 as important.

I’m at best a 4, old, and fat. Albeit clean and nicely groomed. But I routinely get attention from women who are 7’s and 8’s. Even college girls and life guards. Because I’m confident, sarcastic, and interesting. Being married, I nice them away gently. But I still get hit on and/or flirted with several times a year.


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> I think you’re projecting a male looks-first perspective onto women for whom it’s perhapes 1/3 as important.
> 
> I’m at best a 4, old, and fat. Albeit clean and nicely groomed. But I routinely get attention from women who are 7’s and 8’s. Even college girls and life guards. Because I’m confident, sarcastic, and interesting. Being married, I nice them away gently. But I still get hit on and/or flirted with several times a year.


You believe what u want m8 but this "all you need is confidence" B.S doesn't work from what I've seen. Notice that 2 men do the exact same shit, 1 is a 2/10 and other is a 9/10, the woman will generally say what the 2/10 did was creepy and what the 9/10 guy did was sexy/cute/insert positive remark here, thats the reality. Furthermore, many women will also bash the 2/10 for being confident and say he came off as cocky and arrogant instead. Women want you as a package, containing a combination of many traits, not a 1 trick pony.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

ENTJudgement said:


> You believe what u want m8 but this "all you need is confidence" B.S doesn't work from what I've seen. Notice that 2 men do the exact same shit, 1 is a 2/10 and other is a 9/10, the woman will generally say what the 2/10 did was creepy and what the 9/10 guy did was sexy/cute/insert positive remark here, thats the reality. Furthermore, many women will also bash the 2/10 for being confident and say he came off as cocky and arrogant instead. Women want you as a package, containing a combination of many traits, not a 1 trick pony.


It's a combination of confidence and social status. That matters more to a woman than looks. In my culture (Eastern European) the babushkas have a saying: "The man needs to look slightly more handsome than the devil".

Now insert this into your experiment. Have the 2/10 wealthy, influential, fun and have the 9/10 be poor, no prospects, boring.

Let's see how that works out for the 9/10 guy.


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

@INTJ_Artist @ENTJudgement @FreeKekistan 
I took it upon myself to do a little test and ask my (very attractive) ESFP gf what she thinks are the most atttractive aspects in a man she could think of. 
She mentioned the following:
Responsible, would make a good father, takes initiative, doesn't wait for permission from authorities, loyal, has integrity and sticks to their word.
Also to quote "It doesn't matter about anything else if they start repeating what they're being told. Ew."

Not all women judge by the same qualities, and if you're prepping yourself to be judged based on attractiveness, you'll find yourself going after women who value that more than things that are actually important(like some of the ones mentioned above). If you find yourself in a relationship with a woman who values only your looks and status at some point, don't get upset when they substitute you for someone with better looks and more status, because you didn't consider responsibility as a main factor yourselves.


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> It's a combination of confidence and social status. That matters more to a woman than looks. In my culture (Eastern European) the babushkas have a saying: "The man needs to look slightly more handsome than the devil".
> 
> Now insert this into your experiment. Have the 2/10 wealthy, influential, fun and have the 9/10 be poor, no prospects, boring.
> 
> Let's see how that works out for the 9/10 guy.


My argument was confidence alone isn't enough not looks > everything else so you've just agreed with me.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

ENTJudgement said:


> There are many problems with being just friends when 1 side is romantically interested in the other, in the examples below I will use the woman as the one who wants to be friends and the guy as the one that wants something more.
> 
> 1. Her bf is probably not gonna like it and theres going to be tension between them.
> 2. Her friend is going to get frustrated coz many women like to vent and complain about their relationships so shes going to vent to her male friend who likes her about how her current bf isn't treating her right and her male friend is going to think I'd treat you so much better, why don't you just date me?! Some white knights will feel compelled to protect her and probably pick a fight with her current bf which will end up fking up both the friendship and her relationship.
> ...


That all seems like case-by-case basis stuff.

Just like you shouldn't be friends with everyone--or just limit your friendship to not include those things.

I've not been in a relationship for over ten years so I feel like it's almost ridiculous for me to even worry or think about this anymore, but I think that any person in a relationship should ask themselves about venting about their partner, especially to a friend who is possibly attracted to them. I think venting can help sometimes, but I'm not sure on it being a good idea to go to some people for relationship support, unless you know they have your relationship interest at heart and they are also capable of helping resolve issues. I also question if venting to the wrong person might expose vulnerabilities or possibly an emotional affair, though again--it depends on the friend and the relationship partner.

I don't believe in "simping." I think sympathy is generally a good thing--if someone is sympathetic, they need to evaluate whether or not it is hindering them and adjust according to that. "Simping" seems like a silly concept to me. 

Yeah--being sympathetic isn't supposed to get you things, it's something you do when you're sympathizing with another. It mostly benefits another. People don't have to try to get something out of every interaction they have with another human, sometimes you can be generous or compassionate as well. Some people are more agreeable and "nice" than others--it doesn't mean anything other than that. If it's a problem, draw a boundary. Of course, giving things and expecting something in return isn't really friendly and anyone who does that is going to be disappointed. Probably best not to keep friends around who think they can extract things from you that you didn't offer, because of giving you something you didn't ask for.

If either friend finds their friendship interfering in their romantic prospects, seems good to re-evaluate. Even if it's their own feelings getting in the way. Sometimes people might need to avoid those they had feelings for in order to move on. That's fine.

A true friend, in my opinion, would want their friend's happiness and would respect if they need to do this, even if it's not ideal.

So yeah, I think all these are valid reasons to move on from a friendship or to stop engaging in one, or to not want to cultivate one.

I just don't think they're good reasons to make a rule about "friendzoning is bad." Some people are capable of managing their feelings of attraction better than others. Some people don't even feel attracted if it isn't reciprocated. Some people are going to find being friendly and acting in others best interest easier and more effortless than others, and some will find these things more challenging or perhaps not worth the energy if they need to direct it to other areas of their lives or other people--that's all legitimate.

But I still think concepts like "friend zoning" are silly because it's like--if you can't be a good friend and you need to make that rule, go ahead. But it doesn't mean someone did something bad to you by trying to be friends with you when it doesn't work for you. Then just have boundaries and choose not to do it if it doesn't work for you. I know it's easier said than done.

I do think graciously choosing not to be friends is more responsible than being a bad friend though--same thing with relationship partner. So I don't think there is anything at all wrong with just accepting if you don't want to be friends with someone or choosing to limit your interactions with them.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Fru2 said:


> @INTJ_Artist @ENTJudgement @FreeKekistan
> I took it upon myself to do a little test and ask my (very attractive) ESFP gf what she thinks are the most atttractive aspects in a man she could think of.
> She mentioned the following:
> Responsible, would make a good father, takes initiative, doesn't wait for permission from authorities, loyal, has integrity and sticks to their word.
> ...


I really do think it has to do with values, life goals, and preferences. And every individual is unique.

Then there's the level of honesty and openness--because people can be honest about their values and goals or dishonest (I think women have to worry about this more with PUA culture, which basically teaches men to act like con-men, but there are plenty of women who don't value bluntness and honesty as well, so it's not like it's always easy to figure out).

It sounds like the woman you were talking to had very specific interests and I would bet she's passionate about freedom of expression.

But I also think that some values for the physical world are just practical. I think SFJs especially, get a bad rap sometimes because if they value things like starting a family or living in an American-dream/white-picket fence scenario, it's going to entail a certain amount of wealth. And I think people demonize their pragmatism, just because it goes against notions of romanticism (tbh I get kind of bitter about it at times). But it's just practicality and realism sometimes--and it makes sense for someone who also values that to be accepting that physical things must be in place for some lifestyles. 

So I really think people need to avoid demonizing certain values over others (though I do it for sure), because it seems more about compatibility than one being better than another.

I haven't met many people (especially women) who primarily value a man for his looks or status. But I assume that might happen more in industries where that's more important--maybe high profile acting and performance industries where image is such an important part of the career.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> There may have been a time, perhaps in the Victorian era, where most men were so callus that simply being nice (in the gentlemanly sense) was all you needed. But I kind of doubt it.


Some people would give advice like "Just be normal, be yourself". But I don't think that's a good advice. Instead "work on yourself, improve your personality or your looks".

Because people who have success in dating by being themselves, already have great looks and a great personality going for them. So for them "Just be yourself" is kind of pointless advice, and since they are themselves and it works, they never ask for such advice in the first place.

On the other hand, people who can't find a dating partner by just being themselves, for them, that's an equally useless advice. It's like "be yourself, you think I haven't tried that?" it's the first thing people naturally do, it's only when they fail with being themselves that they actually start looking for dating advice.



INTJ_Artist said:


> This.
> 
> And the thing is, it works with just about everyone. Mentally healthy men tease each other incessantly (go to any barber shop to see this) but that wasn’t something that, as an only child, I understood until much later in life. Healthy kids enjoy being playfully teased, and grandmothers too. My sons tease each other and their friends. It‘s what makes them friends.
> 
> Problem is, we don’t live in a healthy culture. Kids grow up alone, and in many cases can’t communicate through anything but a screen without getting hyper-emotional. As a college teacher, I’ve seen this. Social media fills them with unfounded fears that they can’t evaluate rationally yet. Then the fear center of the brain gets trained and it takes a long, long time to mentally dig yourself out of that hole.


I agree, a tease can really light up the mood and the atmosphere and make 2 people feel closer and more familiar with each other.

That they can afford more things with each other and it's okay to "break some walls" between them that they couldn't with other people. Teasing is a method to get from more formal into more informal and closer to each other, to afford to say or do more things to each other with confidence in the other person that they won't get upset or feel bothered.

Like, if you have a person you barely know, a stranger. Or someone of authority, your boss or your teacher. You simply cannot tease them, because they are not the people you are supposed to be teasing with. You don't know them, they don't know you that well, you may be bothering them. As such, teasing in both dating and friendship is a method to get from more cold and formal to each other towards closer and more informal.

But I think it has to be made gradually, so that the other person doesn't have a shock "wow, where is this coming from?" or "how rude!". Tease about light stuff, see if they are cool with it, if they are cool with it continue.



INTJ_Artist said:


> Hurtful teases are called insults. There’s a world of difference between “I can see that your hair roots are obviously a different color than your hair.” and “Wow! I love your hair! But how on earth did you manage to dye just the roots and not the ends?”
> 
> Once, in college, a friend of mine and I went over to the house of a girl I liked. She said that she was going to go change before we all went out. My friend then said “Cool, I’ll wait outside. Hey! Which window is yours again?”
> 
> I (the simp) was horrified, but she laughed and shot him a radiant smile. I know that she liked me. The signs were all there. But I was never anything but “nice” to her. So I never made her laugh.


Yeah, teasing is really humor. And like any type of humor, the more absurd the better. The more inappropiate, the better.

Because teasing & humor in general are all about violating social norms. Things that are supposed to be done, or things we are supposed to know are cool.

You, when that guy said "Cool, I’ll wait outside. Hey! Which window is yours again?" took it literally. It was the girl and that guy who got the humor, that he didn't mean it, he was just being ironic.

It was clearly the opposite of what the situation dictates, you were like "of course men are not supposed to spy on women through their windows" and both the guy and the girl knew that, and you were right, it was exactly because they knew that that this type of humor was funny.

There's nothing arrogant or malitious about humor, it's just fun, it's just a pretending of the violation of the social norms. That's what I think it comes down to and what makes it funny.

Like when someone randomly starts to sing, it's a violation of the social norm because you're not supposed to randomly start singing.


INTJ_Artist said:


> Oh no, it’s general to all women. Feminists especially. One moment you’re teasing them, then she starts showing you all the hilariously inappropriate pics she gets sent by creeps, and pretty soon you’re making out.
> 
> Friends, REAL friends have boundaries. They have other interests. They do other things. What they don’t do is hang out for 10+ hours a day like a real couple would, and have a one-way emotional bond where she (or he) dumps all of their relationship frustration on you.
> 
> ...


Exactly, because humor breeds comfort. And when they are comfortable with you, they feel more okay to show you pics with what some inappropriate creep sent them a while ago.

When they know that they can break social norms with you, they are going to feel more comfortable with you, because they feel that they are not going to be judged with you.

But since we're on this. I have to ask. How important do you think is character in dating? like showing good character, having high character, compared to other stuff like being fun, being masculine, being dominant, etc?

To me, character means to not want to bother other people. To have shame. I know that shame has a generally negative connotation, it's literally defined as "a painful feeling of humiliation or distress caused by the consciousness of wrong or foolish behaviour" or "used to express sentimental pleasure, especially at something small and endearing", but it can also have a positive connotation, shame is what may make us to mind our behavior.

And what other aspects of a man would you find important in dating?


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

WickerDeer said:


> So I really think people need to avoid demonizing certain values over others (though I do it for sure), because it seems more about compatibility than one being better than another.


You're right, what I deem as important won't be as important to someone else. The problem comes when people value things that are irrelevant to their situation, the celebrity example is a perfect one in this case - people follow their stars and often live in the delusion that having the same set of standards as them will put them at a better position in life, while actually these standards completely don't fit their circumstance.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Fru2 said:


> You're right, what I deem as important won't be as important to someone else. The problem comes when people value things that are irrelevant to their situation, the celebrity example is a perfect one in this case - people follow their stars and often live in the delusion that having the same set of standards as them will put them at a better position in life, while actually these standards completely don't fit their circumstance.


Yeah it gets harder when your values seem to diverge from the rest of society's.

I think sometimes people don't look deeply enough at what they really want. And they associate one thing with another. 

Like celebs in films often play good people--they often play people who have some ethical direction. But that's just a character. The actor himself could be a total douchebag.

You know--even simple things like sexual assault--a lot of women are concerned about it, and a lot of traditional stereotypes suggest that it's only "ugly" or very atypical looking people who would do it, or only quiet awkward people, but realistically it's not about that.

But they might unconsciously associate good looks with good character or safety, which is not true. Or they might associate wealth with having a responsible character, again might not work. So I agree with you that is a big problem with superficial qualities--that we tend to read into them and assign them meaning that's important to us, but that doesn't reflect reality.

But I also think that when someone has a condition, they could substitute you out for it if it's not being met, which is another reason you should match with life goals/values.

Some people also approach relationships more pragmatically and others more romantically and others just for sex or fun times.

I think the biggest problems arise when people who have very different approaches end up together--a romantic and a sex/fun time person are going to end up hating each other, along with the pragmatic one who wants kids and a family.

Idk--I spend more time speculating and thinking about relationships than being in them, it seems though. lol


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

@WickerDeer You have a very detailed and elaborate way of conveying your thoughts, wish I had more of that. It's true that different approaches don't work because two sides always end up trying to pull and manipulate the other in their direction. I have only one relationship to speak about(and most likely the only one I'll have) which I find ideal as we both skipped the whole dating scene and got together due to having the same relationship goals and very complimenting hopes, dreams and values. I'm sure finding eachother physically and psychologically attractive helps a tremendous amount, but the mindset of what you want out of a relationship is indeed very important.


----------



## andreasdevig (Apr 12, 2017)

It always depresses me to read about sex and romance and that sort of thing. I always feel like people are describing [the kind of man that women supposedly want] as being basically the complete opposite of me. It feels like people are saying, "you have to pretend to be the complete opposite of who you really are (in order to attract women), because who you are is completely repulsive to women." Like, "have confidence!" Not sure what you mean by "confidence," but I assume it has something to do with self-esteem. So you're telling me I have to have self-esteem, otherwise I'm completely unlovable and undesirable. Which of course makes my self-esteem even lower. So now I have low self-esteem about my low self-esteem.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

andreasdevig said:


> Not sure what you mean by "confidence,"







Confidence is asking her out for the first time, it is your hand taking hers for the first time while you're walking around instead of endlessly hesitating, is that first kiss you move into without asking if it is OK after a successful date, it is about pulling her hair in bed and doing it rough without constantly stopping at every thrust to ask if that one hurt.

Yes, all of these are potential for creating embarrassing situations, but you gotta take the leap. You could just sit there and hoping that all these things would fall into place without ever taking any action, but how successful will that be?

DISCLAIMER: Don't do this to strangers, I think it is understood this is concerning people that are interested in each other or are in a relationship. Don't come blaming me for pulling the hair of strangers on the street. That is called being an idiot, a creep, but not confident.

Have you tried asking your dad what is confidence? Or your mom what women want? Parents can give somewhat useful advice from their experience.

Do you have a friend that is in a successful relationship? Friends can help also. You get a lot of bullshit advice, but some of it might teach what to do or what to avoid.


----------



## andreasdevig (Apr 12, 2017)

FreeKekistan said:


> Confidence is asking her out for the first time, it is your hand taking hers for the first time while you're walking around instead of endlessly hesitating, is that first kiss you move into without asking if it is OK after a successful date, it is about pulling her hair in bed and doing it rough without constantly stopping at every thrust to ask if that one hurt.
> 
> Yes, all of these are potential for creating embarrassing situations, but you gotta take the leap. You could just sit there and hoping that all these things would fall into place without ever taking any action, but how successful will that be?
> 
> ...


I don't like the way that people use the word 'confidence', the way it's thrown around, etc. The word 'confidence' means trust, secrecy, etc. So 'self-confidence' should mean trusting in yourself, believing in yourself, etc. But people use it to refer to a very specific kind of self-trust - the social one. Giving a firm, hard handshake, making constant eye contact, etc. All that shallow BS. It's very shallow. And it's a very shallow way to judge someone's "self-security." But yeah, maybe sex/romance is shallow. I'm certainly not immune to shallowness myself.

We all have areas we're secure in, and areas we're insecure in. I think people make it too simplistic and black-and-white with this whole 'confidence' thing. I like the way of looking at it in the video though. It's much more healthy. But yeah, anything involving the word "confidence" triggers me. I really hate the word. But I digress.

_"Yes, all of these are potential for creating embarrassing situations, but you gotta take the leap. You could just sit there and hoping that all these things would fall into place without ever taking any action, but how successful will that be?"_

I understand that, but I don't see why these initiations have to fall on men. Why should it be a man's responsibility any more than it's a woman's responsibility?

_"DISCLAIMER: Don't do this to strangers, I think it is understood this is concerning people that are interested in each other or are in a relationship. Don't come blaming me for pulling the hair of strangers on the street. That is called being an idiot, a creep, but not confident."_

Who's to say that that inappropriate behavior is not the result of "confidence"? It seems like you're just twisting the definition of that word so that anything you like is "confidence," and anything you don't [is not].

_"Have you tried asking your dad what is confidence? Or your mom what women want? Parents can give somewhat useful advice from their experience."_
It's not advice I'm looking for. I've heard the advice over and over again. The same old thing. I'm starting to see a trend. Every time I read about dating advice it just makes me feel so depressed and low self-esteem, frankly. It feels like they're just describing me to a t [as the man not to be]. And that I need to become (or pretend to be) the complete opposite of me.

What women supposedly want [is not necessarily the same as] what to do. For example, if I'm turned on by being dominated in the bedroom, I shouldn't seek sexually submissive women. Most women may want a dominant man, but it makes no sense to mold myself like that, to pretend I'm someone I'm not.. just so they'll like me, be attracted to me, etc. It's not even me they'd be attracted to. They'd be attracted to someone I'm pretending to be.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

Dezir said:


> .
> But since we're on this. I have to ask. How important do you think is character in dating? like showing good character, having high character, compared to other stuff like being fun, being masculine, being dominant, etc?


When I finally cracked the code, and started dating in earnest, I had a goal: Find a wife to start a family with. Period. So with that in mind…

1. Be a leader. Because a good woman will expect you to be the leader of the family. That doesn’t mean that you ignore her views, or those of the kids, but you will need to balance them against the needs of the family as a whole. 

Now saying that will rankle some folks who’ve swallowed the myth that men and women are 100% equal in all things. But try hanging out with women. If you’re their simp, they will never ask your opinion, because they are dominant. But if they’re your mate, you are dominant, and they will ask you to decide on all sorts of crazy things. Where to eat, what to wear, what color to paint this or that, etc. Because the natural role of a man is to lead, and for a woman it is to nurture.

I have an INTP friend who doesn’t get this. All he hears is his wife asking about stuff he doesn’t care about, and then starting arguments with him that he doesn’t understand. Why? Because he’s refusing to lead, and therefore she doesn’t respect him. Which is a problem that also plagues him at work, where he doesn’t understand why he gets passed over for promotions. 

2. The purpose of dating is to find a mate and start a family. If it’s anything else, re-examine your priorities. Because otherwise you’re betraying all of your ancestors who made huge sacrifices, and survived untold calamities to ensure that you exist. So you owe it to them and your future decedents to continue that legacy.

3. Don’t play around with her.

Once you find that a woman you’re dating has a serious flaw (insecurity, lack of class, dishonesty, hard-no medical/mental problems, etc.) let her go. Because you’re not going to fix her (any more than she can “fix” you) and to continue the relationship will cause her to bond with you in a situation that you know can’t last.

Why is that a problem? Because women are programmed to bond with a man, with an intensity that most men can’t possibly understand, and if bonded they will be completely faithful to you so long as you provide leadership, emotional support, and protection (physical, financial) for her and the kids. 

But… And this is absolutely the truth… Women can only go through 2-3 broken bondings before they start becoming emotionally damaged. This is because each of those intensely deep bonds that are ripped away leave emotional scars, and after 8-12 failed bondings they will have so many scars that they completely lose the capability to properly bond with a man. 

So don’t play around with her. Don’t let her bond if you’re not serious. Because if you do, you will be adding scar tissue and making it more likely that she will not be able to find a healthy relationship after you. 

Men can also be scarred by failed relationships, but it makes us slower to trust, not unable to bond. Plus we don’t bond as intensely as women to start with.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

andreasdevig said:


> _"Yes, all of these are potential for creating embarrassing situations, but you gotta take the leap. You could just sit there and hoping that all these things would fall into place without ever taking any action, but how successful will that be?"_
> 
> I understand that, but I don't see why these initiations have to fall on men. Why should it be a man's responsibility any more than it's a woman's responsibility?


Because men and women are different. As a man you are expected to lead, and accomplish something in life before you become attractive. Why? Because there is no shortage of nice men who sit around and do nothing much at all.

Women, especially when young, simply have to exist and be somewhat attractive. Why do you think school sports exist, except to provide young men with the ability to demonstrate leadership and/or status at an early age? Most of us don’t become that attractive until we’re 30 and established in a field.

Are you an artist who wants to immediately become attractive? Start directing a short film with your school-mates. Once you start showing leadership you’ll have your pick of all the artsy women.



> _"Have you tried asking your dad what is confidence? Or your mom what women want? Parents can give somewhat useful advice from their experience."_
> It's not advice I'm looking for. I've heard the advice over and over again. The same old thing. I'm starting to see a trend. Every time I read about dating advice it just makes me feel so depressed and low self-esteem, frankly. It feels like they're just describing me to a t [as the man not to be]. And that I need to become (or pretend to be) the complete opposite of me.


No, you just need to become the best version of yourself. Don’t replace who you are. Augment. Upgrade to leader-you and accomplished-you.

A friend of mine, a scientist, once walked the world. Literally walked the length of every continent over 3 years. Do you for a second think that he did it just for the fresh air? Hell no. _Amongst other things_ he met gobs of women and had all sorts of interesting stories to tell when talking to them.

And all he did was walk.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

andreasdevig said:


> I understand that, but I don't see why these initiations have to fall on men. Why should it be a man's responsibility any more than it's a woman's responsibility?


I'm not going to bore you with long talks about the differences between men and women, the details of testosterone vs estrogen, and their effect on human behavior and thinking. So I'm gonna lay it in the most vulgar and down to earth manner I can find.

"Because that's what the p***y wants".

I don't understand why you're upset exactly. You don't want to be like that. OK, then don't be, it's not mandatory for survival. It's mandatory for sex and mating, but if you're not into that, then I see no reason to be like that.

As for the handshake stuff, I disagree. Whenever I shake hands with someone and I see them hold this, half twisted, downward pointing hand, like a stump, I feel like the other person is only doing this out of some sort of obligation. Look, either do it or don't, but if you're gonna do it, do it properly. Manly. Firm handshake, like, you mean it. Or just tilt your head, tip your hat, or whatever. Just do it properly. I excuse women from this equation. I have no expectation for them to do a firm handshake. Nay, in fact, I would like them to not have a firm handshake, but a soft one.

Looks like you just hate that things are the way they are and you'd want the world to change to accommodate you. But the path of least resistance is that you accommodate to the ways of the world. Or don't. Again, nobody is making you do this. You can isolate from society. But if you are going to participate in it, I think it only makes sense to adopt its customs and traditions.


----------



## Dalien (Jul 21, 2010)

INTJ_Artist said:


> A friend of mine, a scientist, once walked the world. Literally walked the length of every continent over 3 years. Do you for a second think that he did it just for the fresh air? Hell no. He met gobs of women and had all sorts of interesting stories to tell when talking to them.


I‘m sorry but he walked to just meet woman—connotation that you put the anecdotal story in is just a piece of the story. He walked for other reasons and happened to meet woman along the way. I’m betting he met men as well.

Come on use a better line.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

impulsenine said:


> Hmmm, then I was all wrong.
> I thought I judge people by their physical attractiveness based on how good they feel about their image, how much they care about their body, and how well they manage to manifest willpower in that direction: "_preserving and improving physical dimension_".
> 
> I think you're overestimating me too.
> ...


That was hilarious and accurate as fuck. But you need help lmfao.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

andreasdevig said:


> What women supposedly want [is not necessarily the same as] what to do. For example, if I'm turned on by being dominated in the bedroom, I shouldn't seek sexually submissive women. Most women may want a dominant man, but it makes no sense to mold myself like that, to pretend I'm someone I'm not.. just so they'll like me, be attracted to me, etc. It's not even me they'd be attracted to. They'd be attracted to someone I'm pretending to be.


Most women DO like to be dominated. As usual, I bring the paperwork, no need to thank me.








The nature of women's rape fantasies: an analysis of prevalence, frequency, and contents - PubMed


This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings. Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is...




pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov




Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

Dalien said:


> I‘m sorry but he walked to just meet woman—connotation that you put the anecdotal story in is just a piece of the story. He walked for other reasons and happened to meet woman along the way. I’m betting he met men as well.
> 
> Come on use a better line.


No, he didn't walk just to meet women, and perhaps I should have phrased it better since that was only one aspect of what he experienced. But there is a context to this discussion, and I would not have communicated this story the same way in a conversation about travel in general.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

FreeKekistan said:


> Most women DO like to be dominated. As usual, I bring the paperwork, no need to thank me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL! The most hard-line feminists I've known absolutely want to be dominated in bed. It feeds a primal need they have that is not satisfied within their otherwise female-dominant relationship positions. It also goes far beyond anything that I would personally consider healthy, and into the realm of abuse by consent. Which in any other context would be considered assault.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

INTJ_Artist said:


> LOL! The most hard-line feminists I've known absolutely want to be dominated in bed. It feeds a primal need they have that is not satisfied within their otherwise female-dominant relationship positions. It also goes far beyond anything that I would personally consider healthy, and into the realm of abuse by consent. Which in any other context would be considered assault.


I know, right? See, when I was in my 20's I though that was bad and that women were delicate little flowers and shit. But then I found out the truth and stopped being fucking pathetic guy. As a kid I was taught the way of the gender roles by society, then willingly unlearned them thinking they were wrong, only to re-learn them through experience later on and looking back I came to the conclusion that I fucking wasted my time and that the old ways are best.

Yes, women's desires are fucked up, to the point of being disturbing.

Y'all into some crazy shit.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> LOL! The most hard-line feminists I've known absolutely want to be dominated in bed.


How many feminists have you asked sexual preferences of lol? 



> It feeds a primal need they have that is not satisfied within their otherwise female-dominant relationship positions. It also goes far beyond anything that I would personally consider healthy, and into the realm of abuse by consent. Which in any other context would be considered assault.


I'm a feminist, but my relationship isn't "female-dominant" whatever that means. We decide things together, process things together, and don't really have the need of one of us "being the leader" lol. 

I don't like controlling or being controlled normally, but in the bedroom (only in a safe, consentual way) I'm mad into using ropes, telling him what to do, and being in control. I don't really like it as much the other way around. I used to think I did, but LOL no. 

Is that just my primal need of being in control, teasing/denying a bit, and having a cute, sweet, good boy lose his mind under me or???? 🤣

I'd really like to know what primal need I'm getting out of that, please enlighten me. Thanks


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> Yes, women's desires are fucked up, to the point of being disturbing.
> 
> Y'all into some crazy shit.


How is that disturbing?


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> How is that disturbing?


I thought that feminism was against rape culture.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> I thought that feminism was against rape culture.


You do realize that a fantasy isn't the same as actually wanting something to happen though, right? 

For one, In a fantasy, the person is still mentally controlling how something happens, in an actual rape, that wouldn't be the case. 

I've fantasized (not erotically, but still) about robbing a bank just so i didn't have to wait in the stupidly slow atm line....that doesn't mean that i actually want to rob a bank, think it's okay, or would enjoy actually doing it. Those aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You do realize that a fantasy isn't the same as actually wanting something to happen though, right?


You do realize that it is hypocrisy? To hate the patriarchy but actually fantasizing about patriarchy giving it to you by force? My male brain says most feminists are hypocrites.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> You do realize that it is hypocrisy? To hate the patriarchy but actually fantasizing about patriarchy giving it to you by force? My male brain says most feminists are hypocrites.


I don't think it's inherently hypocrisy, as they're not actually the same, a but obviously, that's also not my fetish/thing/etc so I can't speak all that much into it.

As I said to intj person: 





daleks_exterminate said:


> How many feminists have you asked sexual preferences of lol?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## andreasdevig (Apr 12, 2017)

INTJ_Artist said:


> ...


"Because men and women are different. As a man you are expected to lead, and accomplish something in life before you become attractive. Why? Because there is no shortage of nice men who sit around and do nothing much at all."
Whether that's true or not, there is no reason why men have to be the one who approaches. If she's turned on by my accomplishments or whatever, then there is no reason why she can't approach me.

"Why do you think school sports exist, except to provide young men with the ability to demonstrate leadership and/or status at an early age?"
Again, this is a defense of the system and tradition. The school system has many faults. Why should I be forced to go to school (for years upon years upon years).. all just to learn a bunch of stuff that I'm never gonna use anyway. And to be taught to hate. To be taught negativity, toxicity, drama, trauma. Gym class is certainly no different. With the extreme amount of yelling, mean & inappropriate behavior that goes on there.



FreeKekistan said:


> ...


Oh man you really are Se Suggestive. You want this display of strength and power in others. I'm Se PoLR, so I can't stand all that macho stuff. It's extremely painful to me.

"It's mandatory for sex and mating, but if you're not into that, then I see no reason to be like that."
I am very much into it. In a way, I wish I wasn't. Then I wouldn't have to deal with all this pain.

"As for the handshake stuff, I disagree. Whenever I shake hands with someone and I see them hold this, half twisted, downward pointing hand, like a stump, I feel like the other person is only doing this out of some sort of obligation. Look, either do it or don't, but if you're gonna do it, do it properly. Manly. Firm handshake, like, you mean it. Or just tilt your head, tip your hat, or whatever. Just do it properly. I excuse women from this equation. I have no expectation for them to do a firm handshake. Nay, in fact, I would like them to not have a firm handshake, but a soft one."
Yeah and I like people who don't laugh too much. Doesn't mean I'm gonna tell people to stop doing it. It's their choice. It hurts nobody. Your silly, sexist expectation of me should have no effect. You only make me want to do more soft handshakes.

"Most women DO like to be dominated."
You're not even listening to my arguments. I never said women don't like to be dominated. In fact, I said that most do. But your argument seems to be "women (and I) want so and so, so be that person." Whereas my argument is "why should I be so and so. It's not right." Yes, if I mold myself to be sexually dominant, I may get laid more, but it will be with people who are sexually incompatible with me.

"Looks like you just hate that things are the way they are and you'd want the world to change to accommodate you."
Of course yeah. That's my argument.

Your argument seems to be "mold yourself to become conventionally attractive" ("how to succeed within the system"). Whereas I'm criticizing the very tenets of conventional attractiveness (I'm criticizing the system itself). Very idealistic, yes, and probably no-one is gonna listen to my crazy, wacko ideas.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

andreasdevig said:


> Oh man you really are Se Suggestive. You want this display of strength and power in others. I'm Se PoLR, so I can't stand all that macho stuff. It's extremely painful to me.


I don't think you don't know what pain is. You tend to overdramatize all these feelings. Everything is over amplified needlessly because you wallow too much in these feelings.

You would like to change an entire system of billions of components, challenge traditional norms that made the system what it is, therefore are embedded within the system and one with the system, so that it suits your way? That's not revolutionary. That's delusional.

It's obvious that you have rejected all societal norms so there is nothing I can help you with. Keep fighting the current until you drown. I wish you find the happiness you seek but not on the counts of the society I live in.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I don't think it's inherently hypocrisy, as they're not actually the same, a but obviously, that's also not my fetish/thing/etc so I can't speak all that much into it.


It's not you, but you're not most women / feminists. This is bigger than you, but you seem to not see the forest because of the trees. That is why I mean it when I say it's hypocrisy because I'm neither a woman or a feminist and I can draw my conclusion from far away.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> It's not you, but you're not most women / feminists. This is bigger than you, but you seem to not see the forest because of the trees. That is why I mean it when I say it's hypocrisy because I'm neither a woman or a feminist and I can draw my conclusion from far away.



I will say from the other side of this...


....any time I've stumbled upon any traditional male advice it reads like gay erotica, and that's extremely funny to me. I've basically seen: "work out every day and have majestic, rippling muscles because, I, _sorry the females, _are very into that.", "He was an attractive man as he was strong, stoic, and liked being covered in grease. He frequently removed his shirt and had oil dripping onto his carved abs, while fixing the exhaust pipe in his 92 sedan..i wish I could bang him,_ i mean as many females_..." 🤣🤣🤣


My husband is VERY Dutch. I am not. He wouldn't wear something that's not comfortable, it isn't the Dutch way. If bright pink shirts were on sale and he needed a shirt, he's not going to pay more to get "masculine gray"....

when he visited America, this lead to some really funny experiences. He basically wore a pair of capris (not quite pants, and not quite shorts but in between) and someone said they wouldn't wear that because they'd look gay.... my husband was genuinely confused, but just like "????? Imagine being so fragile in your sexuality that you care so much about another man's opinion of you, that you can't do basic things like dress how you want and wear what's comfortable because someone may think you look gay.... " and that's really stayed with me.


but it does often seem like there is a correlation at least between the more homophobic someone is, and the more closeted curious they are.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

You're conflating different cultural things and you're processing them through an american lens.

The scots are not gay because they wear kilts.
This is not gay because it looks like he wears what looks like a skirt.









This is just an american thing. You're seeing the world through an american lens.



daleks_exterminate said:


> ....any time I've stumbled upon any traditional male advice it reads like gay erotica


That's not traditional. Traditional male advice doesn't talk about muscles and looking super ripped. It speaks about being strong physically and mentally. I don't know what this is supposed to mean. This sounds like you're reading Cosmopolitan articles.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> .This sounds like you're reading Cosmopolitan articles.


Reddit's red pill forms, but they're basically "masculine" Cosmo. "Can't show your emotions to your partner or they won't respect you" lol yeah, all women really want a stoic psychopath 🤣


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

No. You can show emotions. Man emotions. Man tears should be rare not the norm. Not crying like a woman. Stoicism is a great value that is not understood by women.
Women don't like men that cry. That's a fact. Now you can be the exception, but that means nothing in the greater context.
And you should definitely show emotions. Caring, protection, laughter, sadness, happiness, introspectiveness, seriousness, playfulness. Those are emotions that work. But crying like a lil' bitch, like feminists wanna lie to men across the world that it is fine, is not gonna cause any panties to drop unless they are given to you by the woman to wear them.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Reddit's red pill forms, but they're basically "masculine" Cosmo. "Can't show your emotions to your partner or they won't respect you" lol yeah, all women really want a stoic psychopath 🤣


I think most of the redpillers would probably get way better advice from reading Cosmo. At least they'd know where the clitoris is and that men are capable of doing other activities than whining about feminism incessantly.


----------



## Whippit (Jun 15, 2012)

FreeKekistan said:


> You're conflating different cultural things and you're processing them through an american lens.
> 
> The scots are not gay because they wear kilts.
> This is not gay because it looks like he wears what looks like a skirt.
> ...


As an American, I don't see gay in this photo. But what's really raising the red alert, being an Internet Citizen, is seeing a man wear a fedora. That can only mean bad things. It doesn't help he has a real "m'lady" vibe otherwise.

Anyway, hot take. Carry on.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> No. You can show emotions. Man emotions. Man tears should be rare not the norm. Not crying like a woman.


Crying is cathartic, and people should feel comfortable crying. It would fix so many problems if people just cried. I haven't actually cried in a year or so, because of repressed emotions, it's really not healthy. When my husband cries i don't think he's weak, or stupid, I think he's healthily expressing something.



> Stoicism is a great value that is not understood by women.


Generalize, much?



> Women don't like men that cry. That's a fact. Now you can be the exception, but that means nothing in the greater context.
> And you should definitely show emotions. Caring, protection, laughter, sadness, happiness, introspectiveness, seriousness, playfulness. Those are emotions that work. But crying like a lil' bitch, like feminists wanna lie to men across the world that it is fine, is not gonna cause any panties to drop unless they are given to you by the woman to wear them.


Source for that fact? Also, i don't know many women who just break down and cry for a long time???? If that's common around you, that sounds like people are. Really surpressing stuff that they shouldn't be, or genuinely can't find an out. If i saw someone crying "like a lil bitch" I'd assume things were pretty bad to get to that point.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> How many feminists have you asked sexual preferences of lol?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you really think that you can discern the truth of this through asking questions? No. It has to be done through observation. For which I’ve combined my own experiences with those of other men who’ve described similar experiences, or whose experiences I’ve observed first hand.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> Do you really think that you can discern the truth of this through asking questions? No. It has to be done through observation. For which I’ve combined my own experiences with those of other men who’ve described similar experiences, or whose experiences I’ve observed first hand.


So you admit to a bias (gathering information specifically from those like you, and those who had similar experiences, which of course is obviously not going to factor in the many men not like you and who had different experiences)?


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

FreeKekistan said:


> That's not traditional. Traditional male advice doesn't talk about muscles and looking super ripped. It speaks about being strong physically and mentally. I don't know what this is supposed to mean. This sounds like you're reading Cosmopolitan articles.


I don’t think I could sum it up any better. He’s living in a make believe world that the media will happily use to manipulate him into a child that will consume their dreck. But being a man really isn’t that hard once you’ve thrown off those shackles. He’s just scared of something he doesn’t understand.


----------



## INTJ_Artist (Aug 19, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> So you admit to a bias (gathering information specifically from those like you, and those who had similar experiences, which of course is obviously not going to factor in the many men not like you and who had different experiences)?


There were approximately 450 young men in my high school. Another 200 or so in my college. Add oh… 300 more male relationships of consequence while working during my career, about 600 young men that I taught, and another 50 or so in my Graduate program. Which is a reasonably large sample, especially when one is both participative and observant.

But of course you think you’re “different”, just like the 50+% of the male population who don’t have a clue of how to behave like a man. So you wallow in your fantasy world, where women will take up the dominant role and fall in love with you for… reasons. Been there, done that. Guess what? NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!

Here’s what you don’t yet know. Once you break out of your useless self pity and become a man, it gets easy. In fact, you’ll ENJOY flirting with and courting women. And they’ll suddenly enjoy being around you. Why? Because you’ll be behaving as nature intended you to.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

My impression is that on the interwebs, the big push backwards to gender roles are a combination of hostile nation initiatives to ensure that western nations remain divided, hence useless on the international platform, developing and undeveloped nation culture males who are threatened by the possible loss of their undeserved superiority over females and also, western males who struggle to progress.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

INTJ_Artist said:


> There were approximately 450 young men in my high school. Another 200 or so in my college. Add oh… 300 more male relationships of consequence while working during my career, about 600 young men that I taught, and another 50 or so in my Graduate program. Which is a reasonably large sample, especially when one is both participative and observant.
> 
> But of course you think you’re “different”, just like the 50+% of the male population who don’t have a clue of how to behave like a man. So you wallow in your fantasy world, where women will take up the dominant role and fall in love with you for… reasons. Been there, done that. Guess what? NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!
> 
> Here’s what you don’t yet know. Once you break out of your useless self pity and become a man, it gets easy. In fact, you’ll ENJOY flirting with and courting women. And they’ll suddenly enjoy being around you. Why? Because you’ll be behaving as nature intended you to.



I've been hit on by some pretty hot women....thanks for the advice on how i can better "be a man" though. 🤣👍


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I've been hit on by some pretty hot women....thanks for the advice on how i can better "be a man" though. 🤣👍


You’re a total gigachad!


----------

