Random Relationship Derailment Thread

How to pass, fit in, eventually set an example, and ultimately lead the way.
Jin+Guice
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:15 am

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by Jin+Guice »

Ah good points both.

What I resent is the implication by men who have difficulty with women that the changes they would need to make are, by definition, incongruent to themselves. They are forced by a cruel inhospitable world to make a choice between remaining alone yet valiantly true to their pop-tart and video game loving selves or give into the soul shattering expectation that they learn to hold eye contact and have an interesting conversation.



Since the op is in reference to a second hand source, we will never know which changes he found intolerable. However, I suggest that the devil to this myth is in its details. While I'm sure there does exist a small subset of men who are incapable or uninterested in become appealing to women, I think for most, these changes are perhaps not so bad, once we examine what they actually are?

If the op found that he had to put on an act, he could perhaps question which of the changes felt like an act and whether or not these changes were strictly necessary to achieve his romantic goals (which are also unstated). If what feels fake is required perhaps he should ask whether his goals are authentic to himself?

To use Jacob's job analogy, it sounds like he trained, applied for and was given a highly paid, yet ill-suited job. But I feel like the implication is that being "timid and quiet" is the amorous equivalent to unemployment.

Did the OP train to get women he didn't need, in which case there is no real conflict, or did he determine that all of the things he would need to do to increase his dating prospects were untrue to his soul? The job/ skills equivalent would seem to be "my truest self is a trustfund kid."

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

chenda wrote: more than sex men want the social validation that women are attracted to them. Same way women want the validation that men think they are hot (
True, but getting beyond the need for sexual validation is the path to sexual maturity, because until you get beyond the need for validation you will not be able to express or explore what you want. IOW, no matter how objectively hawt/attractive you become, you will remain on some level unattractively "needy" to the extent that you still seeking validation. When somebody finds success by acting "as if" and then feels a repulsion back to previous state/behavior, that is an aspect of what Schnarch ("Passionate Marriage") refers to as Siamese Twin Syndrome. IOW, if you feel like you are putting on an act then you will reflexively not be attracted to anybody who falls for your act AND you will also often experience an unexpected misdirected renewal of feelings of resentment, because you now see how easy it all is. It's only when you have integrated a new skill set as part of your revised identity that you will be able to appropriately VALUE (as opposed to validate) the interplay of your sexuality with that of other. Also, there is the fear of success that comes into play when your new skill set messes with your old sense of identity, and therefore also your sense of belonging. For simplistic instance, you used to feel comfortable sitting at the table with all the other unattractive nerds, but now you've become more sexually and socially attractive, so where's the new lunch table for you?

A similar dilemma is often faced by, for instance, a broke-azz Bohemian type who has figured out how to get her financial life together. Nobody here would advise abandoning financial management skillz in order to once again feel comfortable with identity of broke-azz Bohemian.

Henry
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2022 1:32 pm

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by Henry »

Jin+Guice wrote:
Thu Jul 06, 2023 9:24 am
"I used to be a totally inept handyman, couldn't tell a nail from a screw, and then I taught myself to build my own house, but somewhere between the erecting the frame and laying the pipe I lost myself.
I'm counting four double entendres.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by daylen »

May not be the best thread to post this, but I found this video interesting. Does anyone with more relationship experience find this model accurate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL13EeEhgag

He also made a video on spiral dynamics a couple days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kse87ocS0Uo

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by Ego »

daylen wrote:
Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:20 am
Does anyone with more relationship experience find this model accurate?
I believe it is accurate for some (increasing number of) people and inaccurate for others.

Human beings are doers. Our bias to action tempts us to emulate the things successful people do. It also blinds us to the more fruitful prerequisite to action; refraining from doing the things successful people refrain from doing.

A video like this not only describes a culture, it creates culture. Attention dictates direction. Refraining from buying into this relationship-economics meme keeps one open to the possibility of experiencing a relationship that somehow, mysteriously, is greater than the sum of its parts.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by jacob »

daylen wrote:
Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:20 am
May not be the best thread to post this, but I found this video interesting. Does anyone with more relationship experience find this model accurate?
I have much more relationship experience than I have dating experience and this video is more about dating that relationships, so I can't really tell if this is a good dating model. I think it's a pretty bad relationship model, at least from the [simplistic] guys' perspective. Perhaps this is why so many relationships end in divorce/break-ups.

I am a sucker for 2D models though. I note that the "good guy" scale takes longer time to develop than the "bad boy" scale. Some strategic concerns obtain from this. Also note that the male model is pretty much the female model with the "good girl" dimension rolled up.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Random Relationship Derailment Thread

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

jacob wrote:Also note that the male model is pretty much the female model with the "good girl" dimension rolled up.
Yes, this is because men are pretty much unable to distinguish between the pretty and the good in the short run. And this is why women sometimes prefer pure "bad boys" over "Prince Charming" in the short run; the pure "bad boy" seems less delusional than the guy who is willing to go all in on investing in a relationship with you immediately (ergo clearly mostly just on the basis of your looks.) One of my sisters-in-law, who was married 3 times, was super apple-pie conventionally pretty, and she once told me "Men always think I am so sweet, because of my face, but eventually they discover that I am really a bitch." However, over the long run, a woman who is consistently kind may magically begin to appear to be prettier than a woman who is consistently cruel. MMV.

I would also note that the male model might look somewhat more like the female model if "looks" were subdivided into "great, sexy, body" and "pretty face", because men don't confuse "sexy body" with "the good" like they confuse "pretty face" with "the good." Also, once daters are middle-aged, a relative age difference will generally read the same as "pretty face." You can join me in indulging in the slow-moving train-wreck which is "The Golden Bachelor" if you want additional evidence.

Anyways, because I have gone on plenty of coffee dates, it has become completely predictable to me that if a man says something complimentary about my hair or my eyes, he is probably already putting me in the High Sleeper or Keeper category. (I'm only very moderately pretty, and sometimes I don't make much effort with my looks and/or date men who are prettier/younger than me, so there's enough variance in my experience to provide for control.)It's pretty easy to avoid interacting with men who are putting you in the Sweeper category simply by following rules such as Only Date Men Who Date You, Don't Have Sex Until Third Date, Don't Chase Boys, etc.

So, my take would be that the models presented do have some merit, but only limited and first order. Even putting aside the further dimensions that may come to bear on long-term relationships, levels of Play can theoretically be much more abstracted. For instance, if you wanna guy to put a ring on it, radically improving your looks after you start dating him may prove more effective than doing it prior, due to the likelihood that he will sub-consciously give himself some credit for your transformation. Another example would be that a man who is innately "good guy" and already married, but crazy about you, will often exhibit almost schizophrenic "good guy" behavior in relationship to you, etc. etc. etc. Unfortunately, the romantic attachment of men can become pretty meaningless to the intelligent/experienced heterosexual female who is not (or no longer)very interested in being validated for her physical appearance, but still you sometimes want to get laid or entertained or companionship and it's kind of stupid to not make use of whatever not yet fully depreciated resources you possess.

Post Reply