kimberlysteele: (Default)
[personal profile] kimberlysteele


The straight dating scene, if it can be labeled as a single entity, is a hot, red mess.  Dating has always been a hellscape.  Contrary to popular belief, it was worse in the days before internet hookups.  Back in the day, the people at the local pub or bar were the only real choices unless you belonged to a church or managed to stumble upon your true love in the grocery store aisle.  College has become the number one way straight people find someone to marry.  Most people go to college firstly to date and mate with education coming in a distant second or third. The current woke climate of rape culture awareness and penis-policing is one of the dumbest acts of self-sabotage ever perpetrated upon colleges and universities. If straight kids cannot go to college in order to get laid without the scrutiny of finger-pointing ninnies, they might as well skip college and its attendant crippling, inescapable, lifelong debt.  

In an age without the internet, there weren't as many choices when it came to dating.  Anyone who is a certain age remembers personal ads: tiny little bits of text in the classified sections of newspapers where people advertised themselves semi-anonymously in order to find dates.  Though I was never brave enough to answer a personal ad in my single years, I used to enjoy combing through them for laughs and to creep myself out imagining who was actually writing them.  Pictures were expensive to put in the paper back in the day -- at least in today's dating scene, there is more information about a potential suitor or mistress than a few photo-free lines of text.  Additionally, potential dates can be intensively researched on the internet.  You can bet your bottom dollar if I was single and looking in today's dating minefield that I would do the equivalent of a private investigation on my potential date before I so much as swiped right.  Nowadays, any potential date can be vetted before a physical meeting.  That is a tremendous advantage.  Compare the old timey personal ad, which was like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates: you never knew what you were gonna get, in fact, you could not check out what he or she looked like.  STD bug chaser?  Sleepless in Seattle?  Bigamist with four children?  Serial killer?  Yeah.

The improvement of videos, photos, and criminal records of the potential date becoming available does not seem to help the quality issues inherent to finding someone to pair off with.  The problem with dating is... well, humans.  The internet dating scene reminds me of the advent of cable television.  More is not merrier.  While it offered six hundred channels, there was still nothing on.  

Etheric starvation is terrible, especially because it is the commonest condition of our times.  Etheric starvation is a straight and unfettered road to addiction, fatigue, disease, and broken human relationships.  It is the reason I am working on a book called Sacred Homemaking which seeks to repair the etheric via relationships with housing, the land, and its spirits, along with the courted assistance of the Divine.

Men tend to feel the sting of etheric starvation more acutely than women.  Perhaps this is why there are always more men seeking to date women than women seeking to date men: they are hungry in more ways than one.  Women do more etheric labor than men, which is to say women do more of the daily housework that enriches the etheric plane such as cleaning and cooking.  Men of this era have lost both the ability and willingness to do housework and the more male etheric labors of building, maintaining, and fixing things around the home.  

When I was dating from ages 16-24 in the late 80s and early 90s, the men I had to choose from were a pathetic joke.  They weren't men so much as boys.  The first guy I dated spent his late teens rotting in his parents' basement playing the primitive video games of the era and watching syndicated re-runs of Duck Tales, an animated spin off series about Disney's Scrooge McDuck and his nephews.  Another guy asked me out to a restaurant, bragged about paying for his car in cash, and then surprised me by refusing to pay for a modest $12 meal, which obliged me to use one of my first credit cards.  I was so new to it, I did not know where and when to sign.  Needless to say, I did not agree to see him again.  A guy I managed not to date became unemployable after a string of petty thefts from the cash registers of the fast food jobs he worked.  He impregnated my friend when he was nineteen and she was seventeen.  They had the child and tried to raise it together for a time; she ended up as a single mom.  Their baffling relationship occurred despite his reputation of sleeping with over 100 girls (and some women) by the time he was out of high school.  

In this era of etheric starvation, men and women are looking for the same thing: etheric nourishment.  Sex of any sort is nourishing on the etheric plane.  Even masturbation can offer some etheric benefits, though like anything, moderation seems to be far healthier than polar extremes of excess or absence.  Etheric labor (housework) gives rise to etheric nourishment, and because women have either voluntarily or unwillingly given up their roles as etheric labor providers, etheric starvation has reached crisis levels.  

The Low Quality Woman

The low quality woman is a grifter who depends either on her looks or a combination of her looks and catfishing in order to acquire what she believes she deserves.  She lives in a mess subsidized by someone else's unearned wealth.  She cares only about social media and her appearance.  She is addicted to buying products and services she believes will improve her image.  She is extremely expensive to maintain because she lacks the skills, humility, and energy to cook, clean, and work.  To add insult to injury, she often has children in tow who are exposed and vulnerable to the men she fools around with.  Age is her primary enemy: she cannot outrun it and as she ages, her prospects rapidly diminish because of her lack of valuable skills, spendthrift behavior, and her unwillingness to learn basic survival.  

The Low Quality Man

The low quality man is the shiftless product of incompetent parenting.  If he can be summed up in one word, it is "helpless".  He could not fix a leaky sink if it walked up to him and gave him instructions.  Any cooking or cleaning he has picked up is limited to reheated convenience food in a filthy microwave.  Despite his life constantly being in shambles, he does not feel any pressing need to right the ship.  He has relegated himself to the role of passenger in spite of being the captain.  He is dependent and meekly waits for the day when either he or his enablers will die, in which case he will see what benefits he can scrounge from the local government.  He is what we used to call a "scrub" back in the day: no motivation, no mojo, and no manliness.

Neither of these two are what anyone wants, but because of circumstance, there are plenty of low quality women and men available; in fact, it seems that they are the only types available.  

What Men Want

Men want an etheric resource in a woman primarily as a source of healing.  Men have a reputation of wanting more sex than women, but I don't know that this is the case.  Young men of this era are more voracious where sex is concerned, but that seems to be the physiological result of addictive, mass-marketed porn, including the soft porn of video games.  From my observations, men want cooking, cleaning, and CARING perhaps even more than they want sex, especially as they get older.  Men would like a gentle place to land, plus a person and a home worth protecting.  

Enter the Low Quality Woman.  Often, she is so masculine on the physical plane, the casual observer would think he leans gay for staying with her.  A reliably common scenario among straight people is the woman "letting herself go" after being pinned down in a long term relationship or marriage.  This is a sign of taking the man for granted and lacking the kind of respect that would result in an effort to maintain the illusion of sweetness or softness.  Instead, the warts are exposed for all to see, which leaves the man to either live in denial or to understand he was a fool who was tricked.

If there is a short list of what men want in a woman, I would say it is these, and not necessarily in this order: 1. Nurturing, including etheric labor and sex 2.Attractiveness and sweetness 3. To feel appreciated

What Women Want

Women want a provider and protector, especially if we have children.  Feminism is a crock and a sham for the enrichment of idiotic astral pyramids.  Women don't want to be their own warriors.  We don't want to clean the house, bake the bread (I suck at baking bread, for the record), and to have to go out and win the bread as well.  A woman needs a man who refuses to provide like a fish needs a bicycle.  The overgrown man-child is about as useful as a benign tumor, and half the time he isn't benign.  Sadly, the good providers who quickly get snapped up by high and low quality women alike are frequently so consumed by making big paychecks that they have no time to interact with the families they go to work to support. 

Enter the Low Quality Man.  He also lets himself go, albeit in a slightly different way.  He's got an ego about it, and though he may see himself as a forthright paragon of truth and justice, this is more of an ideal born of extreme insecurity than reality.  For him, taking the initiative and making a better life for himself and others is always One Day rather than Day One.

If there is a short list of what women want in men, I would say it is these, and not necessarily in this order: 1. A provider and protector 2.Initiative and independent self-motivation 3. Loyalty/fidelity

Maybe arranged marriages and marriage-as-property-alliance was better, but I tend to think the logical result of such marriages was the Hapsburgs and incest-breeding one's line out of existence.  That's what happens when you try to keep unearned wealth in the family.  I hope that in the future, people will find a happy medium between Tindr/Grindr and all in the family dowry betrothals... until then?  Good luck.  

 

 

 

Date: 2024-02-01 03:16 pm (UTC)
causticus: trees (Default)
From: [personal profile] causticus
Yes, he sure does, lol. As you can probably tell by his vocal intonation, he's a very nerdy, left-brained type of guy (i.e. extreme of "male brain"). The sort of perspective he presents is very materialist-leaning, deterministic and "game theory", i.e. something that would make a neat little ruleset in a computer game, but leaves out a lot of nuance and exceptions, as far as how things work in the real word. I think the general principles are sound as far as how a man or woman of average (or lower) IQ and self-development goes about selecting a partner, but as intelligence and self-awareness increases, things tend to become more nuanced and interesting. In some of his other videos he attempts to incorporate a self-development ladder into the equation, but unfortunately it's a "disenchantment"-based model he borrows from Ken Wilber.

Secondly, I think the whole "bad boy" label is somewhat of a misnomer, as far as what the majority of women are attracted to in men. A more accurate label for this axis on his chart be something like "impact traits", which would be a combination of willpower, looks, and confidence/charisma. Basically, how effective a man is at impacting the world around him; THIS I've found is what women are attracted to, in addition to the "good guy" stuff on the other axis. A man can be skilled in those areas and not be "bad" at all. But yeah, a "low impact" man who is a total wimp or pushover, and lacks practical skills and street smarts is generally a turnoff to women. Yeah, some women do go for actual bad boys, but they tend to be women lacking in social status. The bad boy has those high-impact traits, but is a callous jerk or lacking in status and reliability himself; or worse, a criminal lowlife. From an occult perspective, I do think young women especially like men who can generate fireworks on the astral plane, just as men really dig women who have a lot of (etheric) sexual energy to give. Overall, I think an occult version of this scheme would be interesting to flesh out.

"What worries me is the amount of transactions he is juggling in his head, and that women are all hoes"

The operative theory here is that straight women have the in-born nature to always seek out the highest-status (or most exciting) male of the group, just as straight men have the in-born nature to relentlessly want to boink everything on two legs that's vaguely female. What evolution has programmed into us for survival is sometimes at odds with what sort of behaviors make for a stable civilization (this is why monogamous marriage was invented). Luckily, part of being human is the ability to use our rational minds and will to contain and restrain (or at least, re-channel) our natural urges. The most successful social customs religions tend to be those with rules for keeping those urges in check in service of maintaining a civilized social order (because a lot of "normies" lack the self-awareness or discipline to self-regulate without a rulebook of some sort being imposed on them).

Date: 2024-02-01 10:07 pm (UTC)
causticus: trees (Default)
From: [personal profile] causticus
He's admitted in a few of his videos that he's thinks he has ruined himself from sleeping around too much (probably those experiences are what he's drawn his formulae from). And ofc he illustrated that in the form of a line graph showing how the more and more women he sleeps with, the less and less he trusts women as a whole.

I agree that he's mostly measuring purely-transactional hookups and "situationships" facilitated by those gods-awful apps.

And yeah, it seems like trying to quantitatively-measure the astral is at best a fool's errand, and at worst, a path to insanity.

I do find his type of content fascinating because I see it relating to the sort of ideas the Religion of Progress moves onto next after it drops Wokeness like third period French. (I think this process is already in its early stages). I think something akin to "Techno-Darwinism" will be the next big craze among certain factions of the elite. We already see the likes of Elon Musk leading the way.

Date: 2024-02-02 05:34 pm (UTC)
causticus: trees (Default)
From: [personal profile] causticus
The Sweeper-Sleeper-Keeper thing has rung true for me as well. Back when I actively dated and chased a lot of skirts, it went something like this:

Keeper: Sufficiently attractive (Bonus points if "hot", though mid is ok if strong in other categories), compatible personality, at least a few shared interests, NOT crazy, doesn't have kids from some other guy(s), and NOT embarrassing to have around family and friends. Sad: I've only had like 2 keepers ever.

Sleeper: Sufficiently attractive, NOT crazy (learned this part the hard way), someone my friends think is fun/cool/interesting to hang around. But I'm in no rush to be exclusive with her; I'd like to keep my options open for a better looking girl. I've had tons of sleepers.

Sweeper: Ugh, too many embarrassing experiences getting dredged up as I'm thinking of this. Generally, sweepers happen when I've been on a long dry spell and really need to scratch that itch. These are the encounters I try and forget about real fast, and most certainly the ones I don't tell my friends about. I haven't had TOO many of these, but they usually were one-nighters with crazy girls or single mothers.

I think all the sleeping around (along with heavy social drinking and smoking cigs) in my younger years messed me up real bad on the etheric and astral levels. It took a few years of consistent SOP practice to get those issues to subside.

Date: 2024-02-01 07:36 pm (UTC)
methylethyl: (Default)
From: [personal profile] methylethyl
"impact traits"

I dunno. Maybe I'm just weird. My husband is really the exact things I wanted in a husband, because I knew I couldn't tolerate living with anyone else. I'm really introverted, a homebody, bookish, etc. and there's no way I would have gotten along with someone super outgoing, loud, gregarious... would've hated sharing a house with them. He's more the uh... is there an awkward sexy dork librarian/accountant type? If so, that's my type. The one guy I went out with a couple of times (accountant) before I met my husband *almost* fit that mold... but then he bought a sporty car and he was so in love with that thing, and that was the end for me. Huge turnoff. I am not going to compete for love and affection with a *mode of transport*. Also he was an un-self-aware lapsed Catholic. That's a dealbreaker.

That's what I don't get about all these game-theory dweebs. They're basically coming up with a lot of theory about why the girls they like don't like them. IME normal guys are not that picky. Whatever complex or weird preferences they have (my husband likes redheads: I'm not a redhead and I don't pretend to be) on their imaginary checklists, the number one thing they want in a woman is... a woman who thinks they're great. That's it. And women... it really is more complex, but IMO most of it comes down to, 1) Not a pervert, 2) Not a dependent, and 3) Do we get along? Yeah, women are bad about lists too-- "oh, I want a man who's rich, curly blonde, jacked but not too jacked, anticipates my every want, etc etc" but that's fantasy, not real. In real life, most people who get married end up married to someone who is comparable to themselves in looks, IQ, level of gregariousness, and class background... and that's fine and good. If you're continually chasing women who aren't interested, it's probably because there's a giant glaring mismatch you're ignoring and you need to maybe meditate on that some, give up porn (there's a great source of unrealistic expectations!), and focus for a while on developing self-awareness and practical skills (guys underestimate how sexy it is when they know how to hang a door, balance a ceiling fan, hook up a tow cable, or fix a sink drain-- everyday competence is HOT).

Making full-color charts to explain what women want in men is frankly kind of scary and self-obsessed, and if I'd ever caught my husband doing anything like that I'd've run very fast in the other direction. Just sayin. It's not the chart itself, it's the egocentrism and obsessiveness that it reveals. Who wants to live with that?

Date: 2024-02-01 07:49 pm (UTC)
methylethyl: (Default)
From: [personal profile] methylethyl
TL:DR: It's not about what "most women" or "most men" say they want. It's about what sort of woman/man you'd be good with. If you're looking for permanence and stability, and you only like "hot" women, that's a losers' game: "hot" women are playing the short-term game. If you're playing for keeps, damn near the only trait that really matters is: can this person be trusted to raise your children? Everything else is bonus points. And that applies even if you don't want children.



Date: 2024-02-02 02:41 pm (UTC)
methylethyl: (Default)
From: [personal profile] methylethyl
IKR? I know there's this insta-filter idea that women all need to be flawless skin, huge lips, heavy makeup... I'm sure it's a great professional investment for hookers, but those aren't women that normal men even approach. Thinking on the men in my life: they've all got a type and it's kind of hilarious how consistent they are with it. One guy only dates pillowy women. One chases tall girls, and another only goes for short ones. One friend I strongly suspect only dated women with an IQ over 130 because nobody else could have interesting conversations with him. We've all got our priorities. And very few of those priorities match up to the creepy homogeneity of an instagram filter. As a girl, looking for a guy, you can try to be insta-pretty and go on a lot of dates with crappy men looking for generic women, or you can just try to be the best version of yourself, get asked by fewer men, but now it's men that *you're what they like*. Way better signal-to-noise ratio there.

Date: 2024-02-01 10:12 pm (UTC)
causticus: trees (Default)
From: [personal profile] causticus
Yeah men are really not all that picky when it comes to women, despite what many decades of Hollyweird products and fashion industry propaganda might suggest. Just a few basics are what counts.

Date: 2024-02-02 05:38 pm (UTC)
causticus: trees (Default)
From: [personal profile] causticus
That is great. It sounds like you lucked out in so many ways with him. Or a karmic perk that was gifted to you after having to eat a lot of shale in some of your recent past lives.

Profile

kimberlysteele: (Default)
Kimberly Steele

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 23456 7
89 101112 1314
1516 1718192021
222324 25262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 3rd, 2025 02:08 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
OSZAR »