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

[Andromeda]

They come across as just looking for an extension of themselves to act and behave the way they want.

So narcissism, basically.

Yeah. And even worse than just being narcissists, they are advocating for it being a superior way of behaving. As narcissists would.

 

[Andromeda]

Yeah, just to be clear, the "just be yourself advice" doesn't work for most people because most people are not the ideal version of themselves, some closer and some farther form that ideal. So it's not just "what if I'm an asshole", it's also "what if I'm introverted" etc. etc. Basically, any trait that makes it difficult for you to create a good impression in the area of trying to attract a woman (or anyone for any reason), when you're in competition with other people who do not have those traits. Bottom line: if you find yourself in a position where those less than ideal traits are an obstacle to getting what it is you want, then you have no other choice than to change yourself, or decide it's not worth the effort.

So to be oneself one must first know oneself and to know oneself one must reach deeper levels of understanding and as one reaches deeper levels of undestanding then one will be 'more able' to accurately determine the level of understanding of others and then act accordingly so as to not cause greater misunderstandings.

So in this context it may be necessary to 'act' consciously. l think it's a balance between being oneself and being not oneself to properly externally consider the world around us so as to not cause greater discord with those who we interact with especially when interacting with those who are consumed by the world of 'A' influences.

right, so the maxim still applies.. "just BE yourself", the trick is that you have to decide who your self will be. It's not be your default self, but.. decide who you will be, from experience and knowledge, and be that or at least be someone who is moving in that direction.

I would say that the most important determinant of how much one should 'be themselves' is the company they keep. As Bluekiwi rightly points out, the more you are yourself, the more feedback you will receive. And, as Jones qualifies that, we should be careful of who gives the feedback. If you are engaging with people who's feedback you trust, and the trust is rightly placed, whether that be general peers or an intimate partner, being yourself is the best way to learn about yourself. But, with people you do not know and trust, it is usually appropriate to be more guarded.

If you are in the dating market and thinking about how to present yourself, I would say that while staying somewhat guarded, make efforts at being your best self - to the best of your knowledge. There is nothing wrong with trying to create a good impression as long as you are mostly being true to yourself and not just selling a false image to get something you want.

 

[Andromeda]

I think so too, perhaps not so much recently but I think one of my favorite examples is Aragorn from TLOTR and his relationship with Arwen. He had to grow, and sacrifice the lawless ranger, become himself.. the king, and only after that was he able to marry her, who had to go through her own process of sacrifice and trials.

In terms of women needing to work on themselves, I'd have to think about it, but perhaps Daisy from The curious case of Benjamin Button, that movie shows growth from immaturity to love in the woman mostly.

And it was a good way to depict that before you meet "the one" if she's there or he's there for you, you have to first introduce yourself to you... and traverse that meeting and decide if you would introduce that person to "the one".. and if not, then you can get to work.

Very good points, but I would emphasize, to not sound too discouraging, that getting to know yourself, becoming true to yourself, and achieving something to offer a partner, is a process. And mostly all one in the same. It's not that anyone should have to be a king or a queen before they are ready for a real relationship, but that they shouldn't pretend to be that if they are only lawless rangers and maidens working in that direction. They should put their best faces forward but be honest that they know they are works in progress and looking to become better. That honesty and intent should be the minimum to offer anyone.

@Corvus I would suggest you take notice of your behaviour, opinions, and the effects, instead of generalising and stereotyping Women and Men. Tolerance and understanding can go a long way, as can seeing the positive in people, not just the negative.

Well now, from my understanding, Corvus was relaying the going philosophy and asking for feedback about it. Though he did do it rather awkwardly.

 

[Andromeda]

I think the root of this kind of dynamic is the fact that no one wants to feel redundant in a relationship. If my wife could do everything I can, and more, where would that leave me? There would be no point in her continuing to be in a relationship with me.

I guess in the unhealthy relationship or in a manipulative woman, these exaggerated traits of helplessness and weakness simply parasitise what are supposed to be the inherent masculine strengths and the man's desire to be of use and gain fulfilment by exercising his abilities. So it's no accident that these caricatures of indecisiveness and weakness are the opposites of traits that are found attractive or inherent in men - decisiveness and physical ability.

Perhaps even if a man thinks he finds a 'helpless' woman attractive, that's not actually what's going on deep down inside him, and that he is actually just seeing the potential to be of use? Although, I guess there actually are 'dangerous' men who see in a helpless woman the potential to dominate and drain her.

I think there might be a lot mixed up in that one, really. On the most base and biological level, submissions and deference is like the female acts when most animals play the mating dance. I raise dogs, I have seen things! It shows acceptance or promises prior to the act.

At a level up, if you will call it that, are people who want a chance to show off their skills of some sort. So, helplessness can contrast intelligence, strength, etc. Men and women like a chance to show off sometimes, especially to the opposite sex (but also to each other), because it gives them a chance to feel attractive and meritous. Which most people like. And, although I do think this quality might be slightly weighted more towards men, as a natural function of being 'wired' to prove themselves more overtly, I have seen women do this a lot too in different areas.

Anyway, there's nothing wrong with that, but I've always been wary myself of any guy who will open the door for me but let it hit grandpa in the head and forget to help grandma across the street. As far as wanting to feel needed in a relationship, little things like that only scratch the surface, but they can be symbolic.

And, in a different category, I would think lazy narcissists want a woman to be that way all the time because they are lazy and narcissists. Going for the low hanging fruit, basically.

fairy tales with peasants getting the girl of high beauty and status are almost non-existent.

Oh! I just thought of a good one. Aladdin. The Disney version.

And another one I'd recommend in general (nothing to do with peasants) is a show called My Love from the Star. I'm not really a big fan of romcoms, but I thought that one was really nice. And the guys seemed to like it too because there is some action adventure.

 

[Beau]

fairy tales with peasants getting the girl of high beauty and status are almost non-existent.

Oh! I just thought of a good one. Aladdin. The Disney version.

Also there is The Princess Bride. The man, a mere farmhand, goes through trials and tribulations to get the princess, and she slowly comes to realize that not only does he love her, but she loves him.

 

[Andromeda]

Also there is The Princess Bride. The man, a mere farmhand, goes through trials and tribulations to get the princess, and she slowly comes to realize that not only does he love her, but she loves him.

Oh yeah, that's a great one.

 

[John G]

"It is normal for most people to be afraid of being rejected. Whether or not someone can take rejection when it happens is what shows their character in the end."

Getting your first rejection early can be before you really get to work on character. An early one kind of made me rejection-proof afterwards but that really wasn't the best way to make rejection easy to handle.

 

[John G]

Very good points, but I would emphasize, to not sound too discouraging, that getting to know yourself, becoming true to yourself, and achieving something to offer a partner, is a process. And mostly all one in the same. It's not that anyone should have to be a king or a queen before they are ready for a real relationship, but that they shouldn't pretend to be that if they are only lawless rangers and maidens working in that direction. They should put their best faces forward but be honest that they know they are works in progress and looking to become better. That honesty and intent should be the minimum to offer anyone.

I was kind of just uninhibited online, that's what I honestly was online and though in-person me was very inhibited, I kind of just waited for in-person me to show that instead of mentioning it online beforehand.

 

[Menna]

Yeah, just to be clear, the "just be yourself advice" doesn't work for most people because most people are not the ideal version of themselves, some closer and some farther form that ideal. So it's not just "what if I'm an asshole", it's also "what if I'm introverted" etc. etc. Basically, any trait that makes it difficult for you to create a good impression in the area of trying to attract a woman (or anyone for any reason), when you're in competition with other people who do not have those traits. Bottom line: if you find yourself in a position where those less than ideal traits are an obstacle to getting what it is you want, then you have no other choice than to change yourself, or decide it's not worth the effort.

I agree with this statement because it contains the words "for most people". To expound on "just be yourself" as we are all corresponding on a forum that contains SELF advancement information. I feel it is important for those align to improve being to just be themselves as 1) There needs to be a truth baseline and see yourself as one really is 2) For me emotional shocks wake me up to truth the best. 3) If one is themselves in a relationship and something does not go as intended one may see a truth better than if they "are wearing a mask"

This gives one a chance to see themselves, advance themselves and work on the relationship as its important to let eachother be who you are. Its correct that being yourself does not work for most people as they will most likely buffer instead of see. However, relationships are one of the best ways to first see oneself and advance oneself. During this process will the relationship cease or continue well that is open as the C's say.

If ones life goal is to have one relationship and always cater to the relationship and the other then yes don't be yourself and act in an A influence way. That doesn't mean the relationship will continue so the former of "being yourself" when talking to people who are engaged in advancement I believe to be "ok" advice as the probability will result closer to a net positive than if one is always acting but as we know most people are not interested in advancement so for most acting might be best...Also, life is full of nuance an ideal way at 3pm on May 8th might not be an ideal way at 8pm on June 2nd....Trying to ideal ones way through life will drive one crazy and is a form IMO of trying to control. Preparing and reacting/non reacting and "ideal" are two separate things

 

[MirAd]

@Andromeda hi, thanks for the detailed comment. worth a read.

firstly, i wanna clarify & agree with you majority of people of both sexes don't know their true self and the exact way how their brains operates, how genetics and ubringing affect their behavior and choices. that's why we will accept some form of generalisation that works on majority, always having in mind not all men or women are like that. we can work with that to have some general conclusions.

yes, being oneself is sound advice, but that more often than not is not enough for your average young male to get the girl. as women are natural selectors men need to find the way to separate themselves from other males in the group. improvement is needed in every field. as cs said small incremental changes will yield the shift in reality we want to 'jump' to. be yourself unless you can be batman. than be batman. (another high value man, noted)

so, what is a high value man? generally speaking, traits cross-culturally valued in males are status (combination of wealth, power and influence), physical fitness, intelligence, strength of character, etc. the more of those in one men, the better. that has shown to be winning formula to get most women. yes, maybe there's is somewhere a woman prefering short skinny bum, but that's niche interest.

a lot these stuff can be explained by evolutionary psychology, and it works for most of the time for most of the people. but that's not the whole story as a person can act through spirit against primal instincts. maybe some hvm can have a harem of women, but still decides to stay monogamous with the woman he loves. maybe a woman can halt internal hypergamous instinct and stay with the sweetheart of her elementary school. that's how love operates.

still, those examples are rarer than those where people act on their selfish desires and it's useful to know 'red pill' truth about that and anything else.

 

[Goemon_]

Maybe not fully, but I'd hazard that they understand a lot more than you think. The whole 'from a male position' and 'my left brain rational thinking' is way overused and often a cop out to actually understanding each other by communicating and finding common ground. Women and men are not so different that they cannot understand each other. I think they were actually made to learn to understand each other. Of course, there are different types of human beings that may have trouble understanding each other. But that is a different story.

Story:
The wife says to her husband: -Don't you smell something?
The husband respond: -No.
End of the story.
What happens is that the wife wants to indicate to the husband that he as leave some dirty clothes on the floor and that she would like him to put the clothes where they belong.
The husband hear the question of the wife literally. He doesn't smell anything peculiar so he doesn't understand the wife's question.

This little story, if true, makes you understand the basic difference between men and women.
To solve the problem of misunderstanding in a couple the wife can try to express things literally and/or the men can try to understand what the wife is really asking.

I would say that the most important determinant of how much one should 'be themselves' is the company they keep. As Bluekiwi rightly points out, the more you are yourself, the more feedback you will receive. And, as Jones qualifies that, we should be careful of who gives the feedback. If you are engaging with people who's feedback you trust, and the trust is rightly placed, whether that be general peers or an intimate partner, being yourself is the best way to learn about yourself. But, with people you do not know and trust, it is usually appropriate to be more guarded.

This goes back to the idea of acting (as in playing a role). External considering goes with acting, in a sense.

The more you trust someone, the less you act. I guess.

 

[Alejo]

This little story, if true, makes you understand the basic difference between men and women.
To solve the problem of misunderstanding in a couple the wife can try to express things literally and/or the men can try to understand what the wife is really asking.

True, which in the interest of this discussion begs the question... how would each one of us react in that story? perhaps the story doesn't end there, perhaps the story continues by the husband asking: Why? what do you smell? and she says: "your dirty laundry" and he says "where?... oh, I am sorry hun, I got it"

In that little exchange, neither was the woman was being unreasonable, nor was the man being a weakling.

And a small conversation ensues about picking up laundry and they both keep learning about one another. The differences between men and women are the reason we like one another in the first place, they are differences and some cannot be bridged, that's where acceptance comes in, but not just acceptance as a passive submission.. but rather, active compromise.

And while those differences do exist, they can also be complimentary. We fit around one another because of what we work on to offer, but also and this is where humility comes in, because of what we lack, that we may never be able to create on our own.

 

[Alejo]

I guess since the ultimate goal is genuine service to others, fake or forced can't be a real long term goal just kind of a step in the process that can maybe put you in a better position for more steps in the process. It might not all work overly ideally in a lifetime, things like personality or bad experiences can be difficult to overcome.

Yes, they can be difficult to overcome, however personality is something that is maleable from what I can tell, if it is someone else's personality.. then that you can simply accept and welcome or let go.

And bad experiences, well... just like with anything, ultimately those are unavoidable, and maybe even necessary in some cases, but it's what we do with those in the end that matters.

From those bad experiences, the painful and humiliating ones, the rejection that digs deep into ourselves, we can learn quite a bit, about ourselves, about the world at large and about each other. How do we make certain decisions? what are or have been our priorities? What does love, sex, company mean for us?

It may be a stubborn aspect of mine, or rebellious perhaps but if I am already unable to erase the painful memories, or the foolish decisions, then why not at least pick something else from it? I believe that one doesn't move on, or overcome a bad experience by forgetting about it, or by numbing the pain... it's really by befriending and recognizing that part that hurts and learn from it.. and perhaps teaching it a bit too.

Before time does its thing and the memory is distant enough for it not to keep you awake at night, one should strive to at least be at peace with what one feels, even if that feeling is deep sorrow.. and see what may be learned from those experiences.

Because remember that wounds don't disappear, they merely turn into scars. Rocky had a good speech about it here, I would perhaps add that more than getting back up after being hit, is to make sure you learn from being on the ground, otherwise you'll keep getting hit by the same hand over and over again.

 

[Alejo]

I think the root of this kind of dynamic is the fact that no one wants to feel redundant in a relationship. If my wife could do everything I can, and more, where would that leave me? There would be no point in her continuing to be in a relationship with me.

I guess in the unhealthy relationship or in a manipulative woman, these exaggerated traits of helplessness and weakness simply parasitise what are supposed to be the inherent masculine strengths and the man's desire to be of use and gain fulfilment by exercising his abilities. So it's no accident that these caricatures of indecisiveness and weakness are the opposites of traits that are found attractive or inherent in men - decisiveness and physical ability.

Perhaps even if a man thinks he finds a 'helpless' woman attractive, that's not actually what's going on deep down inside him, and that he is actually just seeing the potential to be of use? Although, I guess there actually are 'dangerous' men who see in a helpless woman the potential to dominate and drain her.

I think there's also another dimension to these dynamics, I do think that in a relationship, an established one, (although not exclusively in romantic relationships) finding the strength to allow oneself to need someone, specially if one has the tendency to be super self reliant, or life has taught you to be so, is important, for you and your partner.

I do think that seeming helpless is a sure way to fish for men that women can use, and I do think that the signal is an offer for men to come and feed their ego by feeling good about themselves and their abilities, knowledge, skill, wordiness, financial status, as a "come and fulfill your destiny as a protector" type thing, and the opposite can also apply, men who can tap on to women's motherly instinct. It is a manipulation and it can happen unconsciously.

But, there's another dimension to it perhaps, and it's that the above manipulation also works on another level which is it shows vulnerability and trust, that is.. "She trusts me enough to show me her weak side" and viceversa. So if one is interested, and she shows that side of her (and viceversa) it not only offers the natural role fulfillment, but also it digs deeper into ones identity as someone who is not only attractive, worthy.. but trusted.

And being trusted is a really good feeling, I recently watched that Puss in Boots movie, and the character of Perrito kind of made me realize something I had learned with my own dog, and one of the best feelings in the world, is when the dog lays his head on your body somewhere. In the movie, Perrito used that move, laying his head on the cat, as a therapy to calm anxiety, and it struck me that it worked because the cat felt trusted again, and the anxiety dissipated.

So, I think there's more dimensions to why that manipulation works so well.

That isn't to say that vulnerability, trust and learning to need and feeling needed have no place in a real relationship, but I think it's because we recognize their place in a real relationship, that when offered it, and if portrayed with enough fidelity, it's rather difficult to resist.

 

[nf3]

I'm not sure in your particular case how much emphasis you put on devouring mothers and men not being able to control them, but I have heard this line before from men who use it as a blame game, or excuse, and a justification to a misdirected desire to dominate. In the guise of 'taking responsibility'.

Stopping the blame game is the key to breaking the cycle. In my own case it was easy to forgive my mother, but only *after* I did the not-so-easy work of developing enough emotional fortitude to really put myself in her shoes, and to represent to myself the pain and terror she experienced as a helpless little girl at the hands of her father.

After that, it was easy to understand her fear of masculine energy and her unconscious attempts to suppress it in myself and my brothers.

She didn't need to be controlled or dominated, and it sucks that we can't even talk about this without dragging up those negative associations simply because it is, as you say, used as an excuse for just that. But she really did need my father to be a real man in the sense of being strong enough within himself to show her that a man can be strong *for* the women in his life instead of *against* them. She needed that and he couldn't give it to her.

But I can't blame him either because he didn't know any better. He was raised to be a doormat and didn't know how to be otherwise.

That's when real responsibility is born. When you look around and realize that there's nobody to blame, and you're the only one who has any clue of what to do with a situation and, even if it seems impossible, you have to find a way out.

And, it seems to me, that personal inherent character has as much say in how susceptible a person is to that programming as parental care does.

Probably. My inherent character is shit so it's very strange to me how much progress I've suddenly been able to make in the past few years towards changing a lot of seemingly inherent traits. And the rate of change has been accelerating. Strange times.

That's a terrible story and I'm glad you have found each other if you treat each other right.

We were both at rock bottom in our lives when we met. Neither of us were looking for a relationship, and the circumstances of our meeting were strange and unexpected. We weren't even each other's type.

And it's odd, because you'd think that a marriage between a woman with severe daddy issues and a man with severe mommy issues could only end in tragedy.

But something in each of us recognized something in the other and somehow, over the past decade, that something has won out. It grew and guided us through the oftentimes painful process of sweeping out the minefield of our combined childhood trauma. Each of us turned out to be exactly what the other needed. And when I asked her to describe all the traits that, in her opinion, caused her to be attracted to me when we met, they were all traits I had learned to fake to be more attractive to women, the faking of which had simply become at habit by the time we met.