nathan Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 How do you reconcile religious perspectives with attracting women??Assuming religioun is taken to be a nullifying of the ego, and a sort of medatative practice. First such perspectives can be a useful thing in attracting women in the sense that if you really do inhabit a sort of egoless space, you are less apt to dwell on transient things, which produces a less 'clingy' and 'needy' type of personality, which tends to facilitate attraction regardless of sex. But then the other side to attraction, is competition. When you have other males competing for the same woman, do you not have to be selfish? Do you not have to secure a position high up in the social heirarchy? And to do so do you not have to 'dominate' other males?It seems sure seems to be so. You don't see women attracted to the guys who do not participate in such games. Usually when there is competition, I just respect it, I don't confront the conflicting intentions between me, and the competition. Then again, other males tend to behave the same towards me. Usually there is no direct confrontation. The game to 'dominate' other males isn't won by intimidating other males, or starting fights with other males, it is won by being the male who is least intimidated. Women are attracted to this 'ease' becuase the like to have something to dance their emotions and thoughts around. The less a male is at ease, the less they are free to dance. Hence, they go for the male who is most at ease. In a sense, things like meditation promotes this ease. In a sense, depending on your interpretations, christian stories also represent the path to this 'ease' in a more visual, but obviously symbolic way... If you read something like augustines confessions, his ascending attitude, his path to god, is very much a stripping of all egoic, transient things in his life, including women. IT seems to very much parallel with the lets say..patterns.. that one goes through during meditation...and also the patterns that one goes through it least in part, for attracting women. It almost liek we this path is self contradictory...The very path that helps a man attract a woman, is also the path that tries to go passed the very need to attract women in the first place. more over though, You can't be a dominant male if you are intimidated by other males. Other males tend not to directly confront eachother, so it is hard to see why or how any male would be intimidated anyway. But males are often very intimidated by other males, usually by self deception, false thoughts, but also because of the very real conflict of interest. So the battle for dominance via, finding that inner ease becomes more difficult. There's more pressure. If the other male is much more at ease than you are, he is definitely more likely to be attracting the women. It basically becomes a battle for this 'ease' then. If you break that ease, there's going to be a potential effect of loosing your place in the hierchy, and consequently, loosing your woman. Males confront eachother, not directly on the subject of the woman, but rather, the force that attracts the woman in the first place-your inner level of 'ease' , the same medatative pathway. This is the only real socially acceptable way for men to confront eachother in regards to their conflict of interest... This is often exploited by other males. If they catch some unease in you they will try to expose it, and thus put you lower down in the hierchy, and consequently have less competition. For instance if a woman witnesses a man catch another man's unease, she will view the former as more dominant, more attractive, more at ease. The female doesnt need to even witness the actual exchange however, becuase once a heirchy is created between the men alone, their relative ease or unease will become obvious within teh group. The heirchy will have been created anyway. How can this ascending, spiritual path, be so intertwined with such things?How can one who is most at ease, also be the one to exploit other people's unease? How can you be 'egoless' while also being the one who dominates? IT seems both necessary and contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.