I want to add some more to yesterday's answers about how to keep a guy around. Most of what I've written on this blog so far is advice for guys, or directed at inner game. Although much of it applies equally to girls, I'm still finding ways to articulate my own experience and knowledge in a way that other people will find helpful.
One of the commenters found the "intuition" answer a little unsatisfying, so let's say this:
Attraction is not something you do, it's something you are or become.
Here's the paradox. Attraction is of the heart. It is the natural magnetism of one heart for another heart. The very moment that a girl (or guy) starts thinking about what is going to be attractive to another person, she has moved out of her heart and into her head, and has disconnected from the very source of attraction itself, which is love.
This is why I focus on inner game. We are not adding tricks and gimmicks. We are stripping away layers of mind chatter and nonsense so that our inner essence of femininity will naturally shine through. We are not wearing sexy clothes and standing in strategic locations to attract attention. We wear clothes that feel good. We sit in places that feel good. We clean up our belief system about men so that men can FEEL that we love and adore them.
Honestly, I have way more guys randomly walking up to talk to me now that I don't focus on it at all than I did a few years ago when I was focused on meeting a guy.
Now, if you are an outside observer, here are some of the qualities that a girl is going to have if she does the inner game work I talk about on this blog. But again, if I "try" to do these things in order to attract a man, they won't work. These are qualities that come about naturally when a woman is in tune with her intuition:
Unpredictability/sense of adventure: Following rules and decorum is very predictable and ... BORING. When following intuition, a girl is never going to be predictable. Thus, she is more interesting and challenging.
Radical authenticity: This is a key part of congruence. When a girl is willing to say things out loud that most people are too scared to say, she becomes more attractive. Guys love honesty, especially when it has a tiny bit of an edge to it.
Positive beliefs about men: I love guys, and that is obvious to everyone around me. Our belief systems are telegraphed to other people. Probably the absolute most important thing a woman can do is clean up her belief system as it relates to men.
Clear sense of what she wants and doesn't want: A woman who is acting from presence is deeply in touch with her own feelings. Thus, for example, if she's on a date and the guy wants to go "Dutch" (which happens to be one of my own pet peeves), she will immediately register this at the level of feelings and speak up. A lack of chivalry kills romantic attraction for me, pretty much immediately and completely. For example (this goes back to radical authenticity), I might say: "I don't mind paying for myself, but chivalry in dating is really important to me, so that will mean this is purely platonic for me." (Note I make it all about me, and not about him. It's still his choice to do what he wants, I'm just letting him know how that is going to affect my choices.)
Another example is sex. A woman who is acting from presence knows what she wants and doesn't want. For example, I have zero interest in casual sex. I have zero interest in having sex with a guy who is not committed to me. Guys find it way more attractive that I speak up about this and don't just "go along with things" so as "not to make waves."
Eye contact and smiling: The intention behind an action is more important than the action itself. Eye contact and smiling are a perfect example of this. When I make eye contact with a guy, it's not to "manipulate" him into coming to talk to me. But I do make eye contact with lots of people, men and women, everywhere I go, as a way of feeling connected with my world. And if I know a guy, then I make eye contact and smile as a way of refreshing that connection. So at the superconference, I saw a lot of guys that I had met before. Making eye contact and smiling feels like a very natural way of saying, non-verbally, "oh hello, it's good to see you again."
Passionate life purpose: Having something other than men that fires the girl up. The best way to connect at a deep level with guys, in my experience, is to share a passion with them. For me, for example, the seduction arts is a huge passion. So I naturally connect with guys who share that passion.
Sincere interest in other people: This can't really be faked, so it's related to "passionate life purpose." When a girl is deeply interested in what the guy is talking about, she can vibe with him for a long time and the energy will never drain out of the conversation. It's more challenging when talking with people where a shared passion is not immediately identified, or where the other people are so out of touch with their own aliveness that they don't even know what their passions are (sometimes referred to as "the walking dead"). But those aren't guys I'm going to be interested in dating anyway. In those situations, I do as much as I can to help the other person get in touch with some aspect of their own passion.
Femininity: The willingness to be a woman. To be soft and warm. To wear soft, flowing clothes. Skirts and long hair and lipstick and perfume. To let a guy pay for dinner and make plans.
Receptivity/openness/inviting vibe: The willingness to let a guy's energy come toward her, whether that's in the form of touch or romantic interest or flirtation, etc. A lot of women have tons of defenses without even realizing it, and men bounce right off them. A woman who has cleaned up her belief system about men has a natural curiosity and openness.
Playfulness/laughter: This comes naturally once the belief system has been cleaned up. The willingness to play and laugh with men is incredibly important. This generates chemistry and shared bonding experiences.
Internally validated: The woman's self-esteem is not dependent on what the guy says or does. Period.
Observing ego: When I get upset, it's never the guy's fault. It's important that women learn how to communicate negative feelings in a non-accusatory way. As a relationship deepens, this may in fact be the MOST important quality of all that a girl can have.
For all of this, nothing is more important than the belief system. Cleaning up a person's belief system is going to be a big part of my upcoming e-book.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Been following your Blog for a while now...awesome post! I'm going to send the link out to all my girl friends..
You nailed some major points!!! :)
A real man wants be with a women who can help him grow in a positive way, and a woman can only do that if she's very aware herself...
Keep writing...we love your work :D
My favorite post you've written so far, good job! It's SO true that women need game, and whatever bs Cosmo or whatever throws at them isn't going to cut it.
"I don't mind paying for myself, but chivalry in dating is really important to me, so that will mean this is purely platonic for me."
Has a guy ever responded well to this?
I don't know anything about non-violent communication, but when I hear something like that I feel like I'm getting blackmailed. No way I'd ever see the girl again.
i second anonymous 11:09. that statement is a threat. you might try to call it something else, but a rose by any other name still smells the same. if a girl tried this with me, my immediate thought would be 'gold-digger' and i'd drop her faster than a hot potato.
Excellent post, i m gonna print it out!
I have one criticism though, what do you mean by « chivalry », especially when it comes to money and what are your expectations monetary wise beyond the first date / first dinner?
What in your eyes seem “fair” when it comes to expenses (going out, entertainment expenses, going on vacation, buying stuff for the house, bills, other expenses), in other words how should monetary matters be handled when you are living together with a gf/bf? I don’t think it’s fair that the guy has to dish out more cash because a) he makes money (if that’s the case) or b) just because he is a guy
I definitely agree that a man should not be cheap for being cheap and a miser is a very unattractive attribute. But no man should be “used” or be taken advantage of money-wise. Financial management is an important skill.
I believe in giving without expecting anything in return, i.e. if I want to buy my friend a meal, then it’s because I feel like it….he can toss it in the trash bin and I wouldn’t mind because it is now his and not mine. But if he expects me to buy him a meal everytime, then that ain’t a friend.
However, when dealing with relationships, monetary matters do seem to come into play.
I wouldn’t mind treating my Gf or spoiling her sparingly from time to time (less is more) but I don’t believe in paying for most our time spent together or buying her stuff just to please her. It’s not like her presence is a gift to me, yeah I may want her pussy but I don’t need it.
Perhaps you could discuss that.
Btw If you go on a dinner date with a guy and you know deep down (or figure out over the course of the date, because most guys talk themselves stupidly out of sleeping with a lady) that you are not interested in him and that there won’t be a second date, do you go “dutch” with him?
Best.
MH
HI Erika,
I'm also loving these posts... Finally! Some conversation for the women about their inner game!
Just one quickie about money and dating... David Deida talks about this right? First stage man, second and third stage men right? And there are first, second and third stage women or something like that!
A man's inner game about money is crucial to his having a great dating life... his relaxation with it... his ability to play with the woman as attraction where money is concerned is key! Money has become for men and for women a big barrier to successful attraction.
So.. I don't know the Game... maybe it's in there somewhere... and I can only imagine both a woman and a man having a rock solid inner game about money will led to the kind of openness and attraction that inner clarity will bring.
It's really a big subject, huh? Bottom line is this... you can't buy anyone... so paying for a date, a trip or anything else comes under a totally different heading than buying someone...
And as a woman, I've gotten so off center about my own choices with this one... Deida's work is a good reference point for what it brings to a man to be Third Stage... and I'll have to do some further reading on that one before I can imagine how sublime it would be to feel completely relaxed, with no expectations placed on me, because I've attended something mutually enjoyable paid for by the man.
I've more to say on this one and I need to go for now... Thanks for writing this one... it is wonderful and also... when presented inside of long term frameworks of relating... I wonder what will show up!
xoxo!
Finally, some CONTENT on the blog! Each of these points really deserves a full post, but here are my gut reactions….
>>>“Unpredictability/sense of adventure: Following rules and decorum is very predictable and ... BORING.”
Everything that you write after, contradicts this. You seem to have a lot of rules actually, including: I always speak my mind, I wear certain clothes to feel feminine, guys pay for my meals, and I don’t have “casual” sex. Boring!
>>>“Radical authenticity: This is a key part of congruence. When a girl is willing to say things out loud that most people are too scared to say, she becomes more attractive.”
What you are not acknowledging is TACT: Acute sensitivity to what is proper and appropriate in dealing with others, including the ability to speak or act without offending.
>>>“Positive beliefs about men: I love guys, and that is obvious to everyone around me.”
I am realizing that for a woman to be so guy-centric she is exhibiting a masculine quality. Similarly, you talk a lot about your “presence” rather than your “radiance.” Ultimately the divine is one, but manifested as two. This is fine. As a woman with a masculine sexual essence, you are a minority, but it is no wonder you found the PU community. This is by no means disrespect; just an observation without evaluation.
>>>“Clear sense of what she wants and doesn't want: A woman who is acting from presence is deeply in touch with her own feelings. Thus, for example, if she's on a date and the guy wants to go "Dutch" (which happens to be one of my own pet peeves), she will immediately register this at the level of feelings and speak up. A lack of chivalry kills romantic attraction for me, pretty much immediately and completely.”
Chivalry is benevolent sexism (BS). Men invented chivalry not out of some sense of entitlement or expectation from women, but as a condescending means to an end. Men, if you believe in equality, mutual pursuit, reciprocal satisfaction, and LUSTFUL sex, do not buy this BS. Tell her, look, you can have differential treatment OR respect, but not both. And see what she says. I choose a woman that chooses respect every time.
>>>“Another example is sex. A woman who is acting from presence knows what she wants and doesn't want. For example, I have zero interest in casual sex. I have zero interest in having sex with a guy who is not committed to me.”
Boring. The opposite of committed sex is not casual sex. I have no idea what casual sex is. I can have an STR as short as one night that is not casual by any measure. Also consider that devotion (“ardent, often selfless affection and dedication”) is a much more powerful concept than commitment (“obligation, responsibility, or promise that restricts freedom of action”) any day.
>>>“Eye contact and smiling: The intention behind an action is more important than the action itself. Eye contact and smiling are a perfect example of this. When I make eye contact with a guy, it's not to "manipulate" him into coming to talk to me.”
Intentions speak louder than actions, sure. But if you are telling us you are unaware of the subtleties and nuances of your own sub-communication, then you really are confusing manipulation for intuition (see previous thread). If you think “eye contact is eye contact, I give the same eye contact to everyone” then you really have a lot to learn about yourself. That’s fine – most people don’t know themselves that well – but from the awareness that you exhibit from your previous writing, I think you know what’s going on.
>>>”Passionate life purpose: Having something other than men that fires the girl up. The best way to connect at a deep level with guys, in my experience, is to share a passion with them. For me, for example, the seduction arts is a huge passion. So I naturally connect with guys who share that passion.”
Freedom of consciousness and finding your life’s purpose is a masculine pursuit. Nothing wrong with that. You are very guy-centric, so you gravitate toward men that are girl-centric. The energy is the same. You’re preaching to the choir on this one. What are you passions besides the PU arts? And don’t name some hobbies mistaken as passions….
>>>”Sincere interest in other people: This can't really be faked, so it's related to "passionate life purpose." When a girl is deeply interested in what the guy is talking about, she can vibe with him for a long time and the energy will never drain out of the conversation.”
Someone retrieve a post on deep rapport vs wide rapport. I can’t remember the author. Both are sincere. Here’s the thing. Depth of connection is a masculine quality. I would rather meet a girl that exhibits curiosity and enthusiasm. She can vibe a little bit about a lot of things to keep the conversation going. I will lead the interaction and go for depth with appropriate.
>>>”Femininity: The willingness to be a woman. To be soft and warm. To wear soft, flowing clothes. Skirts and long hair and lipstick and perfume. To let a guy pay for dinner and make plans.”
This is a pretty superficial definition of femininity. Honestly, it is a masculine definition of femininity. I also can’t help but notice that it is the shortest criteria and near the bottom of the list. Since I am a man with a masculine sexual essence I want a woman with a feminine sexual essence. Though I am not discounting that a woman with a masculine sexual essence can TEACH masculine men about male-female dynamics, I personally find it to be a turn off. But feminine women usually don’t find the PU community all that interesting.
>>>”Receptivity/openness/inviting vibe: The willingness to let a guy's energy come toward her, whether that's in the form of touch or romantic interest or flirtation, etc. A lot of women have tons of defenses without even realizing it, and men bounce right off them. A woman who has cleaned up her belief system about men has a natural curiosity and openness.”
Lower her defenses and awaken her senses – don’t steal my tagline. I’ve noticed that a lot of people who think they cleaned up their belief system still have some of the biggest sexual hangups. I like to say that there are two kinds of people: Exhibitionists, and those with something to hide.
>>>”Playfulness/laughter: This comes naturally once the belief system has been cleaned up. The willingness to play and laugh with men is incredibly important. This generates chemistry and shared bonding experiences.”
In the rewrite, can we move this to the top of the list!
>>>”Internally validated: The woman's self-esteem is not dependent on what the guy says or does. Period.”
There is a really simple test for this. (Oh shit, can I talk about technique?) It’s called the Q-Test. Tell her this: Take the index finger of the hand you write with and finger-write in front of your face the capital letter Q. Just do it quick without thinking about it…Now…here’s what it means… if she put the little bar on the Q on her right – so that it would look correct to her as the viewer, she is internally validated. If she put the little bar of the Q on her left, so that it would appear correct to others viewing it, she is externally validated. Screening is the name of the game.
“Observing ego: When I get upset, it's never the guy's fault.”
Are you sure? :-P
Thank you Erika for this post and a chance for me to field some of my gut reaction on these topics!
GoneSavage
Wow, great comments. Really struck a nerve it seems ... looks like "Money & Dating" might be a good topic for a future blog.
Rup and Justin, thanks for your support and for recognizing that women need to have game, too.
Anonymous 1 and 2, I'll write more about this later, but the short answer is yes I've had positive responses from guys being honest like that and no I don't worry about it if the guy decides he doesn't want to date me because of it. We're not going to be compatible if that's the case.
GoneSavage, as sometimes happens, I passionately disagree with virtually everything you said!!! And that's ok. I appreciate your comments anyway.
Just as one example, Entropy was chivalrous with me in LA, and I can assure you it did not lead to "obligatory" sex. Nor is there anything masculine about presence. And that's just the beginning of what I disagree about ... but I'll save the rest for later.
xoxo,
Erika
Gonesavage, I've heard rumours of the mcsavage, but that is like the whole fuckin value meal right there.
Erika your whole post describes how you project your femininity, but not necessarily how to win and keep a man.
Its like there are undertones of entitlement throughout it all. It seems like a lot of women who hold off on sex have sort of the midas-pussy syndrome... when infact theyre falling into the trap of letting their ego make them think that theyre above a mutual exchange of pleasure. As if their pussy had a divine entitlement to it... come on.
We're made of molecules. We're finite and limited beings. Despite being alive, what makes up us is no different than a chair or a rock. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks all the spiritual references are just bullshit drawn up to patch holes in the foundation of a belief system thats not firmly entrenched in (objective) reality.
Its like how the more things are out of control in a persons life, the more religious theyre likely to be.
Now that I think about it, I went off on a tangent there and likely read too far into things, since I dont really personally know how sacred you treat your pussy.
Anonymous, I am glad you brought up the relational stages that David Deida talks about.
(PS. Why anonymous? Doesn’t the system allow you to type in a name? I am starting to lose staying power for those who want remain anonymous. I just don’t have the stamina for casual encounters anymore.)
This is a direct quotation:
As a woman, you man find yourself growing through three stages in relationship to the masculine force. First, you feel this force as something outside of you, something that is more powerful than you. You look to another as your savior, whether he is a husband, therapist, teacher, or close friend. You may find yourself depending on his guidance, support, and knowledge, afraid to lose it, worried that he might leave you for another woman he finds more attractive. You may find yourself playing the helpless victim to his ways, either grateful for his wisdom or tolerating his abuse – or both.
Eventually, you may grow into a second stage, where you “come into your own.” That is, you discover and cultivate your own masculine directionality and consciousness. You may start a new career or pursue higher education. You learn to make your own decisions, independent of a man or other outside influence. You refuse to be a victim – but you also miss the pleasure of opening to a man’s loving presence. You become more whole and autonomous as a person, but as a side effect of guarding yourself, you also feel less fulfilled sexually and emotionally.
The third stage begins when you know that you don’t depend on a man, that you can make your own decisions and guide your own life, and yet you are tired of keeping up your guard; you want to relax in your feminine body and emotions. You want to stop protecting your heart. You want to swoon into the bliss of utter surrender, spiritually, emotionally and sexually.
In the first stage, you seek this masculine force in a man on whom you could depend. In the second stage, you seek to depend on yourself for this masculine force. In the third stage, you don’t depend on others or yourself: You practice opening directly and being permeable to the ever-present force of divine masculine consciousness itself.
Now, I will bottom-line a couple things quickly:
1) Any woman that believes in the unilateral demands of chivalry is STUCK in stage one. This unreciprocated sense of entitlement will keep her dependent on a man in some way or another. I am not even suggesting that she is dependent on his money, but she is certainly dependent on his presence and support in some way.
2) It is a little disappointing to see an author finding herself ripe in stage two suddenly revert back to stage one. It is sad really. The PU community is full of stage one men looking for stage one women. Don’t let the anti-supplication mantras fool you.
3) Another thing to consider is that the author is indeed still in stage two – since it seems that she is currently finding her masculinity – but the lingering notions of stage one are still going to hold her back. This is common. Women fluctuate between stage one and two frequently.
4) David Deida on money: “Generally speaking, the more someone is clear in their priorities and able to stay consistently on purpose, the more money they are able to earn. This is why money is sexy: Money is a stepped-down version of free masculine consciousness, and every woman feels this. A man who is very conscious, present, full of humor, and wealthy is sexy. These qualities – consciousness, presence, humor, and wealth – reflect different levels of the attainment of masculine freedom; a person with these qualities is sexy to you if you have a feminine sexual essence.”
5) Should a woman find a man with money sexy? YES. Should that man SPEND money on her in the name of chivalry? NO. Whether either of them knows it, they will lose respect and passion for each other. You can have respect or differential treatment, but not both. Neither of them will move beyond stage one. “Chivalry differs from civility, which is a two-way street of considerate, generous behavior.” –Marc Rudov
6) I am going to add this to my blog with a personal story that happened just a couple days ago. It is the first time I have encountered gender-based entitlement in quite awhile, but I will tell you exactly how I handled it to maintain mutual respect.
GoneSavage
I agree with a lot of what GoneSavage says, particularly with the David Deida stuff. I think wealth is enormously attractive to women if it means that the man's financially free and has arrived there on his path; not if he's super anxious to foot the bill. I think you (Erika) might be ignoring how incredibly manipulative and non-authentic chivalry can be. Honestly, it's a neutral force. I think guys can "do it right" and "do it wrong." So why require it?
By the way Erika, this means we can only be friends. Sorry.
By the way, for all of the talk about presence and vibe, I'd be anxious to hear your take on how this is achieved. I believe in the power of inner game as much as you, probably, but how is a "vibe" cultivated?
Oh, Dan, I am so sad ...
Anyhoo, McSavage, honey, you know I love you and ... rather than hear your diagnoses of me (which are not really landing with me), I would much rather hear you go deep and tell us why (it seems) this issue is so triggering for you.
Dan, you are right that chivalry can be done "right" and "wrong." But yes, it's a must have for me. This is not a logical thing, it's an emotional thing. It feels deeply tied to my femininity. I've tried to reason my way out of it, and there's no reasoning with it. So when guys are not chivalrous, I still like them as people, I'll still be friends with them, but no I won't date them.
Dan,
Re your second comment, how is this vibe achieved?
Ah yes, THAT is the subject matter of the upcoming e-book. I can't give away all my secrets on this blog ;-)
Love,
Erika
Giggle! Diagnosis 911! You guys are sooooo funny!!! Love it!! And “gender-based entitlement” … wow! What a mouthful that one is, whew. Hot topic sho ‘nuff. “Midas pussy syndrome” … hahaha! Omg!!!
“… your whole post describes how you project your femininity, but not necessarily how to win and keep a man.” You know, for me, I find projecting that femininity is definitely one of the most important, perhaps the most important aspect of wining and keeping a man. Of course, for it to be viable longer-term, there needs to be a couple more things in the mix, but for me, it’s definitely what draws me to a woman.
“We're finite and limited beings. Despite being alive, what makes up us is no different than a chair or a rock … all the spiritual references are just bullshit drawn up to patch holes in the foundation of a belief system …” I can understand that perspective. Especially nowadays, when a lot of what is advertised as spirituality in the marketplace is feelgood salve. In this realm where we wake up and eat breakfast and go to work, it seems as if our bodies are all separate, our biological lives are finite and on the clock. We have our thoughts, our words, our perspectives, which are also finite and limited. For me personally, my experience of authentic spirituality begins when I realize I am not this finite limited body … I am not these finite limited perspectives or thoughts … I am not these holes in my beliefs … I am not this personality. I experience all these things. I experience this body and these perspectives, and I experience others bodies and perspectives … I notice these things … and yet I am not any of these things … what am I? Not who am I … but what am I? When everything I could ever notice is not what I am, but I am still there to be noticing … what am I? That’s when spirituality starts for me. And in that moment, I notice my body and thoughts and personality and beliefs are finite, and also I am infinite. In that moment … it might be possible to say I am both finite and limited AND infinite and boundaryless. Just like everybody else. Then, knowing this, remembering this again, the way it always was, what do I do about it? In this way, it’s not so much a patch for a flagging belief system, as much as it is the relentless rediscovering of something mysterious about what I, and we, always were and always will be, regardless of what we think about it … the rediscovery of what was always the case.
This whole conversation about chivalry is fun and interesting, too! Something that I’ve noticed in my own life is that there can be chivalry when having a first stage moment … and it’s all about one’s own ego … there can be chivalry in a second stage moment … when it’s about recognizing her ego, my ego, our separate qualities, being okay with those, matching those, giving person to person, etc … and then there can be chivalry in a third stage moment, when the energy of it comes through us, and doesn’t give a damn about what our egos or personalities or perspectives want … maybe even directly opposite to what our egos want … unkinking us.
Is there a difference between entitlement and qualification?
“But yes, it's a must have for me. This is not a logical thing, it's an emotional thing. It feels deeply tied to my femininity. I've tried to reason my way out of it, and there's no reasoning with it. So when guys are not chivalrous, I still like them as people, I'll still be friends with them, but no I won't date them.
“
Well instead of speaking in ambiguous terms and throwing blank statement how about you become upfront, straightforward clear and specific about what you mean by Chivalry. What do you expect from a man in order for him to become chivalrous? I assume that you can shed a lot of light on this subject since it seems like a deal breaker for you. How about giving us concrete examples instead of saying “I want a chivalrous man”. Let’s say you are dating a college graduate that is working in the corporate world, what are your expectations from him chivalry wise?
What are your dos and don’ts of chivalry ?
each women has a different definition of what chivalry is…please explain to us in details and examples what you really mean by chivalry.
thanks
MH
"Anyhoo, McSavage, honey, you know I love you and ... rather than hear your diagnoses of me (which are not really landing with me), I would much rather hear you go deep and tell us why (it seems) this issue is so triggering for you"
Wow, what a smug, self-righteous thing to say. Erika you've just shown your true colors.
Even a fool can see through your feeble attempt to avoid accepting fault here. Savage is dead on and called you out on your bullshit, and instead of offering a well-written rebuttal with some thought put into it, you imply his arguments are the result of an emotional imbalance.
@ Anonymous 7:20 am;
My dear, have you forgotten that you are talking to someone who cannot hear judgments? Let's list yours here:
Smug
Self-righteous
Bullshit
Fault
It's your life, but if you're open to it, I highly suggest converting each of those judgments into your own feelings and needs (www.cnvc.org).
To be clear, I am in no way suggesting that McSavage has an "emotional imbalance" (another judgment, btw). I was merely guessing that he might have been emotionally triggered by what I wrote. Big difference, my dear. Virtually everyone gets triggered from time to time, including me.
What makes the difference is how we handle it when we get triggered. Do we project our feelings out at someone else by using judgments, shame, and blame, or do we go within and express ourselves and help the other person express himself in a non-violent way?
There is no judgment of me or anyone else that can ever be "dead on" because judgments are always inherently false. Now if someone wants to say, "I feel angry when I read your post because my desire for mutuality is not met by chivalric ideals as I currently understand them" ... ah, there is a jumping off point for a rich conversation. Because they're not pointing a finger at me, they are sharing what is alive in them.
Or if someone says, "I feel angry when I read your response to McSavage because my desire to be heard and understood has not been met," and then goes on to explain in a non-accusatory way what they mean by that ... well, again, that is a jumping off point for a rich conversation.
I've written before on this blog that "you statements" are problematic. They tend to put the other person on the defensive rather than fostering mutual understanding. Some of the comments I received on this post are real-life examples of that. As a giraffe, I always listen for the life-serving energy behind the judgments ... but not everyone out there has been trained to do that. So my intention is to help people see that they are more likely to get their needs met if they refrain from judging other people and instead speak from their own experience and feelings.
And on that note, I'm open to being incorrect in my guess about what was going on for McSavage. I'm not judging him, I am curious about him.
This is quite interesting to me - you seem so "open" and focused on substantive men and can point to all of these things you try to do and things you look for, but when it comes to paying for a meal, you have the same standards as a 17-year-old high school girl and can't explain it logically.
Oh, I can explain it plenty, and probably will on a future blog post, but I'm out of time right now. What I'm saying is that its importance is not logical, it's emotional. It's a masculine/feminine polarity thing for me, it's also an abundance thing. A guy with an abundance mentality in my experience ENJOYS taking a girl out to dinner and drinks. He enjoys giving to her. Of course I give back to my men, but I prefer to do it in other ways.
Anyway, I need to go, so this will have to wait until later ...
I've been following this thread with interest.
I read Gone Savage's blog and I think: "He's a trouble-making douchebag, hiding his sleaze behind semantics and pretty sounding words."
I read Erika's blog and I think: "She's a passive-agressive hypocrite, making judgmments from behind her NVC shield."
And yet...
I've never met either of them. The only thing I have to label them with are the things I find within myself.
What does that say about me, I wonder?
Thank you, both of you. I feel you've both helped me very much.
Dan (a different Dan than the guy who made the previous comments)
"Other people can see things about you that you yourself cannot see, even if those people are stupid"
-David Foster Wallace
oh yeah, and by the way, Erika, I have been on occasion been told I have a strong feminine polarity.
I'm not bothered by it so much anymore, but used to upset me so much the only way I could cheer myself up was going out and buying a new pair of shoes.
Holy shit, where did all of these comments come from?
I'm only going to comment on the chivalry thing because I think it's getting blown WAAAAAY out of proportion here.
As a man who took Erika on dates, and as a man who doesn't typically do the chivalry thing, I think I can make some observations about what she means.
I'm typically not chivalrous at all with girls (I like to go dutch). Early on in the interaction, probably after I did or said something unchivalrous, Erika told me that it was important to her and her attraction.
I knew she wasn't gold-digging, because well... Erika is probably financially worth at least 50 times as much as I am.
But I did it because it was important to her, it wasn't that big of a deal to me, and I wanted us to have a good time and not let anything trivial get in the way.
Was this supplicating? Maybe. I call it being reasonable.
What I noticed is that what she wanted wasn't my money, but she wanted to know that I was willing to do it -- I think it elicited an emotion in her of safety or being taken care of that she liked and felt important to her.
In reality, dollar for dollar, she probably ended up spending as much on me as I did on her, but in every situation what mattered was that she knew that I was WILLING to pay and take care of her if she needed me to. Once it was apparent to her that I was willing to do it, the actual money wasn't a big deal at all.
There were no "rules" or strict guidelines, it was really something that made her comfortable and happy, and so I made these minor gestures for her.
Hahaha, I actually had to look up chivalry in the dictionary. Did you know it’s related to the word chevalier? And the useage of the word in different meanings goes back to the 14th century? Wow. Some definitions were: courtesy, honor, and gallantry, gentlemanliness, politeness, politesse, generosity.
Hell, these days, we’ve got so many guys out there in public who act like they absolutely have to supplicate to get women to pay attention to them at all. Just getting them to stop buying girls drinks and concentrate on building attractive qualities and skills is huge, and these guys really ought to concentrate on gaining respect, in my opinion. However, once a man’s been able to develop expressing his attractive qualities in various ways, why not play the scales and the extremes with women who also can play the scales and extremes?
We can have respect or differential treatment; we can have respect through differential treatment. We can have first stage chivalry, second stage chivalry, and third stage chivalry too, if the man and woman are in a third-stage moment. Should he spend money on her being chivalrous in a third-stage moment? If you are thinking about it in the moment, then it’s not a third-stage moment.
Hey Entropy, nice post. A lot of times, it’s not the thing, but the feelings associated with the thing, that’s the thing. Right on man. Minor gestures. That’s quality.
Makes sense Entropy - I don't have anything against chivalry (like I said I think it's a neutral force). If you had purposely avoided paying probably would have lead down an awkward path.
Erika - I'd love to hear more about this issue from the female perspective, because obviously the feelings it generates in women can be a very important thing.
By the way other Dan - can't you be "Dan B"?
I read your post but not all the comments. First of all it seems everything you write is contradictory. Your a girl trying to behave rationally and a pua that can't close.everything I read generates an auto eye roll response.
how about chivalry in a long term relationships not the first 2,3 dates.
MH
I work with a woman who exemplifies several of the things in your post, and I have to say it is tremendously attractive. Men are drawn to her something fierce. Her feelings and way about her leak down into her body language even. It’s a great pleasure to be around her and bask in the way she has about her. For me, it almost feels restorative.
A story comes to me about having passionate purpose. Many years ago, I was doing the “let’s be friends” thing with an ex-girlfriend, and for quite a while, we had many interactions where I wanted to go deep into meaningful things and found that she had a tendency to stay superficial about emotional content. It puzzled me and I felt irritated by it, being young … friends are deep together, in my world, and I wasn’t “getting my needs met” or at least was befuddled by the label of friend that didn’t match my definition of friend. Besides, I knew what she was capable of emotionally, and wasn’t seeing it. There were periods of time where it would show itself in in the slightest way, but it was unpredictable and I couldn’t figure it out. Anyway, after a good period of time went by like this, she eventually told me that she really wanted to open up a real dialogue with me. I was delighted, and told her that I wanted that too, and if she wanted to be more up close and personal and revealed with our communication, then let’s do it. Her response? “I never knew you wanted to hear about my boyfriends.”
Sigh. Palm smacks forehead.
It eventually dawned on me why it was barely there and unpredictable when it was.
A woman who is passionate about something is a wonderful thing. One of the delightful things about the girl I’ve worked with above is that she’s passionate in general about most things. So whether it’s bored-ness about something, enjoyment about something, headstrong-ness about something, she’s able to be passionately THAT, and it’s really an even more wonderful thing that if she was only passionate about one thing or a couple things. But one is better than none! Ya gotta start somewhere!
wow, awesome post! I love it!!! The discussion is awesome. Enjoyed reading every comment just as I enjoyed reading the post.
As far as the comments, everybody had good points, and I truly mean that. GoneSavage... damn, you described every stage I went through in my relationship. I am in stage 3. Please ease up on Erica with the "chivalry". She knows what she wants and she goes for it, and I love the fact that she is not afraid to say it. I as a woman do want my man to be a gentleman. It turns me on! For him to open the door for me or pull me to the inside of the sidewalk not facing the street is awesome. Can I open my own door, hell yeah. Those things he does are just thoughtful. Now, as far as the money, with us, it's a non issue. From the beginning, we took turns paying. If I invited him more than likely I payed and vice versa. We never keep track as to whose turn it is. I am a proud alpha woman, I do not have a problem paying at times. I think that you should feel comfortable on a date and not be money be an issue. I feel that both men and women should spoil each other. :)
Post a Comment