So I'm not sure who said it first on here, but I'm seeing more and more that the number one principle that best guides all others when interacting with a woman is:
Maintain a balance between her feeling secure and insecure.
I've noticed this most in LTRs, though I think it applies even on a small-scale. If she feels too secure in feeling that you dig her and will stick with her, even the best girl will get lazy towards consistently finding ways to be great to you, or even lose interest and leave. If she feels too insecure, the best girls will wisely leave the situation, the others will turn into the clingy desperate pleaser.
It's amazing how much control you have over her feeling of security, and the subtle and creative ways you can affect this. Lately I've been making an effort to be aware of this and adjust my behavior accordingly. Not some obsessive thing where I constantly over-analyze and filter my behavior and her behavior. I just try to maintain an intuitive awareness of where I think she lies on the security spectrum, and act with this in mind.
It works wonders. It think it's better for both the man and the woman the nearer she is to the 'sweet spot' of security. Things just sort of work.
******************************************************************************************************
Two things I'm curious about:
1) I know this topic has been discussed before, but does it sound to you guys like I have a decent grasp of it?
2) How on earth do you fit marriage/family into this? (Or do these NOT fit). On the one hand, I am amazed at the variety of creative ways to affect a woman's security-level. Perhaps you can keep a wife in the 'sweet spot'. But on the other hand, marriage does seem to be too great a security-boost -- like I'd be giving up too much of that 'power' I tap into to keep the security level where things work best.
******************************************************************************************************
At any rate, my current axiom:
Women are happiest and behave the best when they continually have the 'he loves me, he loves me not' experience.
Am I thinking clearly here?
Maintain a balance between her feeling secure and insecure.
I've noticed this most in LTRs, though I think it applies even on a small-scale. If she feels too secure in feeling that you dig her and will stick with her, even the best girl will get lazy towards consistently finding ways to be great to you, or even lose interest and leave. If she feels too insecure, the best girls will wisely leave the situation, the others will turn into the clingy desperate pleaser.
It's amazing how much control you have over her feeling of security, and the subtle and creative ways you can affect this. Lately I've been making an effort to be aware of this and adjust my behavior accordingly. Not some obsessive thing where I constantly over-analyze and filter my behavior and her behavior. I just try to maintain an intuitive awareness of where I think she lies on the security spectrum, and act with this in mind.
It works wonders. It think it's better for both the man and the woman the nearer she is to the 'sweet spot' of security. Things just sort of work.
******************************************************************************************************
Two things I'm curious about:
1) I know this topic has been discussed before, but does it sound to you guys like I have a decent grasp of it?
2) How on earth do you fit marriage/family into this? (Or do these NOT fit). On the one hand, I am amazed at the variety of creative ways to affect a woman's security-level. Perhaps you can keep a wife in the 'sweet spot'. But on the other hand, marriage does seem to be too great a security-boost -- like I'd be giving up too much of that 'power' I tap into to keep the security level where things work best.
******************************************************************************************************
At any rate, my current axiom:
Women are happiest and behave the best when they continually have the 'he loves me, he loves me not' experience.
Am I thinking clearly here?