Is There an Ideal Way of Acting and Being in Male-Female Relationships?

I think that what makes the ideal relationship is when we try to become better human beings for one another within the "framework" that we inherited but without being overly rigid

Well said. That made me think of the difference in experience and learning from a man being with a woman that is a bit superficial or "weak" (as opposed to strong) or "as deep as a thimble" as the saying goes. Over the long term, there wouldn't be much to contend with for the man, and by that I mean, he wouldn't be challenged to be or give more to, as he would more likely be in the case of a "strong" woman. By "strong" I mean that in terms of nature or essence, that manifests in the woman standing up for herself, not being a push-over, challenging his assumptions or attitudes at times etc. etc.

If he's with a woman who just wants to paint her nails and go to the beach and read girly magazines and doesn't care about what's going on in the world etc. it might be 'easy' for him to keep her 'happy', but is he going to feel connected to her and fulfilled in the long term? Sure, being with a woman like that can be difficult BECAUSE she challenges him and stands up for herself, and he may often wonder what the hell he is doing and couldn't life be so much easier if he could just find one of those toe-nail-painting girls. Therein, I suppose, lies the choice and whether or not he "manly" enough to walk the hard path.
 
Last edited:
It can also be even more impossible to withstand if that man goes too left brained and doesn't work on empathy. Besides the ups and downs of women's emotions due to hormonal cycles, when a woman is feeling emotional one of the worst feelings on top of that can be not having their emotions understood. Being just a 'rock' for a woman is generally not enough.

Just to clarify, that idea of being "her" (not "a") rock is defined as being more than just well, rock-like, but rather not collapsing or freaking out or getting annoyed under the "weight" of the emotionality and, more to the point, making efforts to listen, understand what's going on, what the problem is, and generally just fulfilling the role that would, in the past, have been fulfilled by another woman she is close to! Basically, be a "girly man", for a moment! Oh, the horror! :-O

I am truly glad that it helped you, T.C. But I would bet that there is a lot more hurt caused by following that road than not. I'm sure that at the beginnings of the feminist movement, there were many women who felt greatly liberated/empowered and could say something similar to what you wrote above. And maybe for good reason on some of their parts at the time too.

That's actually a really interesting point and food for thought. Since feminism has been around for several decades at this point, we have the opportunity to see the distorted monster it has morphed (or been morphed) into over that time, and wonder if the relatively new "masculinity movement" might go down the same road.

It seems reasonable (given they way things tend to go on this planet) to at least consider it possible (or likely) that it might, given more years, contort itself into the "polar opposite" of modern feminism. In fact, it's already showing signs of heading in that direction.
 
Yeah, but there is still a very real transactional nature to things, especially as a man and especially these days. The idea that there's someone out there for everyone, and someone will love you just as you are, is harmful copium for most men, twin flames stories notwithstanding.
Yeah, I see what you're saying and it is true insofar as that's all one chooses to experience, and I do think we have a choice, what I mean is.. one could go on living simply transactionally when it comes to relationships and that's fine, safe even, no depth to anything.. a mere equation. But if that's the case, then all the rules of the value system applies and since it is inevitable for a higher value prospect to show up for your current partner eventually, then at that point... they will just simply trade you in for a better model, and it sucks to be on the receiving end of that one.

That's transactional, and it's good to learn this or be aware of it, because those dynamics rule a lot of interactions. It was mentioned above about the OP possibility which adds a whole new dimension to this discussion. But I don't think to adopt it as your form of living.

I concur about the idea that there's someone out there for everyone isn't helpful, it's false hope, not at least as you described it where "someone will come along who will recognize my greatness and love me forever", specially if you keep it transactional.. because no one will actually get to see any of you beyond the superficial.. so what is there to love?

So, the interactions with the opposite sex could be transactional or they could be energy exchanges, you could put the moves on a girl or court her... on the one you're running a program with the goal of self gratification, on the other you're responding to the individual hidden beneath the facade we all do put up, and probably have to in the jungle that it is the outside world, with bits of yourself.

There's still an exchange, that superficially could look similar to a transaction (or may even begin as such or share elements of it), but that, if you think about it, can never occur in the same way with anyone else, ever.

I mean how many of the male protagonists in the romance novels even are weak, indecisive, anxious, addicted etc.? Not to mention the unchangeable value-boosting traits like tall, aristocratic and extraordinarily good looking 😁.

That said, "value" can come in many forms, and most people tend to value you about the same as you value yourself, regardless of looks or money or whatever else the manosphere obsessed over.

True, and this is what I meant by nature, I think it's better to be more romantic, sensitive, dorky even, for instance, IF it is who you truly are and have that drop "value" in terms of the transactional nature of the world, than to pretend to be cold and emotionless hoping it will increase your value with strangers. It just shouldn't be a by default thing that is never questioned.

Because if you're nice, but as a way to prevent abandonment, for instance, because you're so afraid of it, because of your childhood or previous experience, then you're not really nice.. you're just betraying yourself and that's a weakness. If on the other hand, you're tough and rude because that's what a book told you to be, in order to keep the woman from leaving... or because you're afraid of intimacy, then that's also a weakness, same betrayal of yourself. Emanating from the same place even, only with a different approach, as Joe pointed out.

And I think that authenticity creates a confidence that is far more attractive, not just to the opposite sex, but in general, someone who is able to humbly be who he or she is, recognizing his or her own limitations and strengths without feeling inadequate or arrogant, and who is comfortable in their own skin, who doesn't need to belittle women or men in order to increase their "value", or isn't trying to broadcast their "value" to anyone who shows up, that's someone that is fun to be around, easy to connect with and befriend.
 
Last edited:
I am truly glad that it helped you, T.C. But I would bet that there is a lot more hurt caused by following that road than not. I'm sure that at the beginnings of the feminist movement, there were many women who felt greatly liberated/empowered and could say something similar to what you wrote above. And maybe for good reason on some of their parts at the time too.

I understand that there are different 'levels' in the manosphere, and that not all of it it total rubbish, but for the most part, it seems equal to feminism.

I think it comes back to the ‘divide and conquer’ thing. The empowerment trap for the sex who feel ‘liberated’ by such material comes by effectively dehumanising the other sex. Radical feminists and radical leftists basically hate men now. And I think that’s where my initial reactions to Corvus’ first posts in this thread were coming from: I got the ‘manosphere’ impression from what he wrote and wanted to give a “reader beware” in case the information he had studied had lead to, or was leading to, a dehumanisation or hatred of women.
 
Perhaps my post will be a little off-topic for this discussion. Also, I will leave the post in Russian, since there may be translation inaccuracies in complex discussions.

So, what is an ideal relationship? Why be with someone rather than be on your own? I think if you find someone and you make each other happy; you compliment and suit each other; neither of you creates drama; you’re both practically minded when it comes to life; you have enough healthy common sense, make each other laugh; why on Earth would you not want to spend your life with that person?

Thanks TC for sharing! I totally agree with you!

I would like to share the story of our relationship, as it probably reflects another possible scenario that can happen in life.
My soulmate and I have been together for 18 years. We didn't have a long relationship before we got married. We met online on a dating site (there wasn't as much vulgarity and vulgarity then as there is now). It took about 6 months from the first date to the wedding. I knew right away that it was SHE! I didn't know her as a person in detail. In such a short period, especially since we were young and living apart, we could only get to know each other through phone conversations and not too frequent dates (since she was living and working in another city at the time). But I KNEW she was my destiny.

Before that, there had been many unexplained triggers since I was a kid. They are difficult to explain and explain with logic. But stable preconceptions about what my soulmate should be, always "led" me to her. (For example, for some reason I was sure that my girlfriend's best zodiac sign was Scorpio, that she was a doctor by profession, that she was calm, sensible and very kind, and so on). At the moment of our meetings, my logic was completely blocked. Somewhere very deep, my brain was trying to say, "Oh! What are you doing!? You don't know this girl at all! What if!!! What if something is wrong!!!! " .And in spite of that I just propose to her and she is just as quick to say yes. Our wedding (as it seems to me now) - flew by and even went very "spontaneously". We were supposed to do it for parents and relatives, but personally we had enough of each other and the understanding that we are now together. The very fact that I after the wedding, in a groom's suit, sat behind the wheel and drove until late at night our guests, and my bride at the same time tried to sustain a couple more hours in a tight corset :nuts::whistle: while I divorce all, already says about our attitude to the event.

We had not had an intimate relationship before the wedding, this is important! We did not even think to "check" or somehow "calculate" whether the partner was suitable. We just didn't have that thought!

But we reached out to each other without much expectation and WANTED to do something nice for each other just for fun. Most importantly, 18 years later, that desire has remained constant!

I think this is only possible when our souls have previously "agreed" to be together in this incarnation. Since I can't say that we didn't have difficulties. My parents actively and very strongly tried to break our marriage at once. There was a lot of outside influence. But some internal blockages helped us get through that stage.

If we hadn't gone through, we probably wouldn't be on this forum, couldn't know everything and our lives would obviously be much more useless without each other...

Возможно, мой пост немного будет не по теме данного обсуждения. Также, оставлю сообщение на русском языке, поскольку в сложных обсуждениях могут быть неточности перевода.

Спасибо TC, что поделился! Я полностью согласен с тобой!

Я бы хотел поделиться историей наших взаимоотношений, так как они, наверное, отражают еще один возможный вариант, который может происходить в жизни.

Мы вместе с моей половинкой уже 18 лет. У нас не было длительных отношений до свадьбы. Мы познакомились через интернет на сайте знакомств (тогда там не было столько вульгарности и пошлости, как сейчас это происходит). С момента первого свидания до свадьбы прошло около 6 месяцев. Я сразу понял, что это ОНА! Я не знал её как человека детально. За столь короткий период, особенно если учесть что мы были молодыми и жили раздельно, мы могли узнать друг друга только по телефонным разговорам и не слишком частым свиданиям (так как она в это время жила и работала в другом городе). Но я ЗНАЛ, что она моя судьба.

До этого, с самого детства, было много необъяснимых триггеров. Их сложно объяснить и пояснить логикой. Но устойчивые предубеждения, какой должна быть моя половинка, всегда "вели" меня к ней. (Например я почему-то был уверен что лучший знак зодиака моей девушки - Скорпион, что она по профессии врач, что она спокойная, рассудительная и очень добрая и так далее). В момент наших встреч, у меня была полностью заблокирована логика. Где-то очень глубоко, мозг пытался сказать "О! Что ты делаешь!? Ты же не знаешь эту девушку вообще! А вдруг!!! А если что-то не так!!!... " .И несмотря на это я просто делаю предложение ей и она также быстро соглашается. Наша свадьба (как кажется мне сейчас) - пролетела и даже прошла очень "спонтанно". Мы должны были её сделать для родителей и родных, но лично нам хватало друг друга и понимания того, что теперь мы вместе. Сам факт того, что я после свадьбы, в костюме жениха сел за руль и развозил до поздней ночи наших гостей, а моя невеста в этом время пыталась выдержать еще пару часов в тесном корсете ))) пока я всех развезу , уже говорит о нашем отношении к этому событию.

У нас не было интимных отношений до свадьбы, это важно! Мы не задумывались даже "проверить" или как то "просчитать" подходит ли партнёр. Этой мысли у нас просто не было!

Но мы тянулись друг к другу без особых ожиданий и ХОТЕЛИ сделать что-то хорошее друг для друга просто так. Самое важное, что спустя 18 лет это желание осталось постоянным!

Я думаю, что такое возможно лишь только в том случае, когда наши души ранее "договорились" быть вместе в этом воплощении. Так как я не могу сказать что у нас не было трудностей. Мои родители активно и очень сильно пытались разбить сразу наш брак. Было очень много влияния извне. Но какие-то внутренние блокировки помогли пройти тот этап.
Если бы мы не прошли, то, наверное, мы бы не были на этом форуме, не могли бы знать всего и наша жизнь была бы явно куда более бесполезной друг без друга...
 
Here are a couple of poems, absent the twisted trappings of what's being sold today, with pretty decent advice for both young men and women.


Epistle To A Young Friend​


1786
Robert Burns


I Lang hae thought, my youthfu' friend,
A something to have sent you,
Tho' it should serve nae ither end
Than just a kind memento:
But how the subject-theme may gang,
Let time and chance determine;
Perhaps it may turn out a sang:
Perhaps turn out a sermon.

Ye'll try the world soon, my lad;
And, Andrew dear, believe me,
Ye'll find mankind an unco squad,
And muckle they may grieve ye:
For care and trouble set your thought,
Ev'n when your end's attained;
And a' your views may come to nought,
Where ev'ry nerve is strained.

I'll no say, men are villains a';
The real, harden'd wicked,
Wha hae nae check but human law,
Are to a few restricked;
But, Och! mankind are unco weak,
An' little to be trusted;
If self the wavering balance shake,
It's rarely right adjusted!

Yet they wha fa' in fortune's strife,
Their fate we shouldna censure;
For still, th' important end of life
They equally may answer;
A man may hae an honest heart,
Tho' poortith hourly stare him;
A man may tak a neibor's part,
Yet hae nae cash to spare him.

Aye free, aff-han', your story tell,
When wi' a bosom crony;
But still keep something to yoursel',
Ye scarcely tell to ony:
Conceal yoursel' as weel's ye can
Frae critical dissection;
But keek thro' ev'ry other man,
Wi' sharpen'd, sly inspection.

The sacred lowe o' weel-plac'd love,
Luxuriantly indulge it;
But never tempt th' illicit rove,
Tho' naething should divulge it:
I waive the quantum o' the sin,
The hazard of concealing;
But, Och! it hardens a' within,
And petrifies the feeling!

To catch dame Fortune's golden smile,
Assiduous wait upon her;
And gather gear by ev'ry wile
That's justified by honour;
Not for to hide it in a hedge,
Nor for a train attendant;
But for the glorious privilege
Of being independent.

The fear o' hell's a hangman's whip,
To haud the wretch in order;
But where ye feel your honour grip,
Let that aye be your border;
Its slightest touches, instant pause-
Debar a' side-pretences;
And resolutely keep its laws,
Uncaring consequences.

The great Creator to revere,
Must sure become the creature;
But still the preaching cant forbear,
And ev'n the rigid feature:
Yet ne'er with wits profane to range,
Be complaisance extended;
An atheist-laugh's a poor exchange
For Deity offended!

When ranting round in pleasure's ring,
Religion may be blinded;
Or if she gie a random sting,
It may be little minded;
But when on life we're tempest driv'n-
A conscience but a canker-
A correspondence fix'd wi' Heav'n,
Is sure a noble anchor!

Adieu, dear, amiable youth!
Your heart can ne'er be wanting!
May prudence, fortitude, and truth,
Erect your brow undaunting!
In ploughman phrase, "God send you speed,"
Still daily to grow wiser;
And may ye better reck the rede,
Then ever did th' adviser!

If

Rudyard Kipling - 1865-1936

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:


If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;
If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:


If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’


If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!
 
Concerning the early feminist movement; I remember when my mother got a divorce from my step-father (this was in the late '60s), she was trying to get a credit card in her name instead of his and hit a wall for quite some time as they did not want to give her a credit card with her name on it...because she was a woman.

I think that at the beginning of the feminist movement they had a real cause for wanting to have more rights. Men were seen to be the ones who should have these rights and women should just be happy to let them.

Feminism today is totally bonkers. It, like so many things today, has been twisted to the point that it is making women look bad....well, the ones who are promoting it are bad/crazy/fanatical. It is giving women a bad name.
 
@Andromeda - this seems to be nice poems but I hardly understand what is author talking about. It would be nice to have them explained. If they are particularly telling for man/woman relations from Your point of view ... I know I cant help myself not being in the left brain... but maybe some external help? Could You help here? To point out which are those good fragments and why?
Sorry - I just cannot understand those poems.
 
Given the title of this thread includes both men and women in terms of behavioural ideals, I wondered if anyone has an opinion on:

1) what the analagous 'red pill' view of male behaviour from a female perspective is, and therefore what the most effective behavioural strategies are for securing a long term partner, and;

2) what are our visions for the 'ideal' in this regard, if the behaviour were to transcend 'red pill' / General Law norms?
 
Just to clarify, that idea of being "her" (not "a") rock is defined as being more than just well, rock-like, but rather not collapsing or freaking out or getting annoyed under the "weight" of the emotionality and, more to the point, making efforts to listen, understand what's going on, what the problem is, and generally just fulfilling the role that would, in the past, have been fulfilled by another woman she is close to! Basically, be a "girly man", for a moment! Oh, the horror! :-O



That's actually a really interesting point and food for thought. Since feminism has been around for several decades at this point, we have the opportunity to see the distorted monster it has morphed (or been morphed) into over that time, and wonder if the relatively new "masculinity movement" might go down the same road.

It seems reasonable (given they way things tend to go on this planet) to at least consider it possible (or likely) that it might, given more years, contort itself into the "polar opposite" of modern feminism. In fact, it's already showing signs of heading in that direction.
This reminded me on a book I read as a teenager Egalia's Daughters: A Satire of the Sexes : Brantenberg, Gerd: Amazon.de: Bücher
At that time I usually discussed with everyone, because I thought I am a feminist :lol:
This is a matriarchy, there is a lot of playing with language and it is very exaggerated. I am glad that I have not chosen this way of life for me in the end. :whistle:
I'm more old-school. But I also think that it should be a mutual give and take in a relationship. Isn't that what a relationship is all about?

And when getting to know each other (for example at a date), I think everyone is really like they think the other person will like it. Or at least leaves out the worse sides.... ;-)
 
@Andromeda - this seems to be nice poems but I hardly understand what is author talking about. It would be nice to have them explained. If they are particularly telling for man/woman relations from Your point of view ... I know I cant help myself not being in the left brain... but maybe some external help? Could You help here? To point out which are those good fragments and why?
Sorry - I just cannot understand those poems.

You can do a google search for the translation and meaning of the poem, if you gave google or an equivalent. If you still have questions or comments about specific passages after that, share them and I will try to help.

Robbie Burns is definitely a little difficult to understand at first pass. I read it several times before I really got it all and each time it just got better!


At that time I usually discussed with everyone, because I thought I am a feminist :lol:

LOL! I have to admit, there was a brief period where I was afraid I might be a feminist. But, after closer inspection, it turned out that I'm just southern.
 
Back
Top Bottom