Pursuing Further...
Hi
B9.
Originally posted by B9
Have to say my first impression of you was of one who revelled in the role of being in-the-know, but it seems to me now that impression was not quite accurate...
Are impressions ever accurate? Without spending a lot of time with someone, are we not left with a mere impression of their Persona as opposed to their Character?
This very idea is relevant to this thread, as thus:
This forum seems to concentrate on the
Persona, on face-value:
attraction and lust; rather than on the
Character, the core:
companionship and love. That’s fine. But I think both are important and the former, somehow, integral to the latter. I think this is why Princes (DJs) seem to, after going through a PUA phase, return to a pseudo-peasant (AFC) mindset. Only, it’s not. The reason, it seems to me, is because when they were peasants, they merely did not understand attraction and lust—skipping that primal ‘foundation’, they attempted to build their relationships on their naïve understanding of companionship and love alone. It fell. Yet when they found this site, they realized that they were approaching woman ‘wrong’ and discarded all their traditional ideas of
romance (or love, etc.). Some just get caught up in this ‘foundation’, forgetting that there is a house to be built on top of that it. They forget that the reason they’re building that ‘foundation’ is because they use to build houses without foundations. PUAs stay grounded. What’s less productive: a foundation with no house, or a house with no foundation?
Leading us to:
What you say about marriage (and indeed, which can be extended to any relationship) are quite interesting and echoes my hitherto undefined sentiments on the matter. Thanks. Be an interesting topic to pursue further (and indeed, seems to be the very topic of this thread).
Elaborating and continuing on my post above. I believe that CHOICE is the fulcrum that holds the balance of a relationship or the permanent version, marriage. Think teeter-totter:
The peasants, losing their weight or power, allow the fulcrum to slide close to him, giving the woman all the leverage; whereas, the PUAs, feasting on control and power, ensure that the fulcrum is close to the women, taking her leverage away—sure this permits attraction and lust, but that is all. There can be no companionship or love when one partner purges the other of his or her own CHOICES. There is no respect; in a relationship, respect is that balancing of the beam lying with the fulcrum in the middle. Knowing each other’s boundaries. Crucial.
I think some people confuse LEADERSHIP with DICTATORSHIP. By all this, I am not implying that man does not lead. He does; he is the head. The man proposes and persuades in the best interests of his companion (as well as himself), but she still makes the choice to follow, herself. And if she’s a quality woman, she will trust and follow. Else, one of the two made a poor choice being with the other person.
Lately, I’ve begun to forget all the ideas I have about (gender) roles;
make the choices I want, and let everyone else (women) make the choices they want, and whenever anyone else’s choice goes against the grain of mine (or my very nature), I walk. That simple. As long as I’m doing that, I can leave all the ‘role garbage’ up to nature, and let my spirit move through the world embracing my own freedom, as well as the volition of others.
Acquaintances, friends, family: all strangers; cars flying by you on a highway. Think back to elementary school. Chances are the people that were so close and important in your life then, NOW, are complete strangers. As the people so important to you know will be in the future.
George Gordon flips his Character-Mode back to his Persona-Mode
…Or maybe your impression was right, and I AM ‘in-the-know’; and the woman to become my queen will think herself the most fortunate woman of all the times.
Cheers!
!GEORGE GORDON!
