Alpha Male Bible: Become a Casanova! Learn Charisma, Confidence, Self-Hypnosis, Eye Contact, Dating Strategies, Psychology of Attraction, Flirt With ... & Self-Discipline of a Real Seducer Man - Dale Cardone 2021
Attract Women With The Psychology Of Attraction
The ability to attract sexually or generate erotic interest in other people is a skill. But you don't need to have an angel face or spectacular eyes to do it. Some other elements and factors are valued equally or even more.
The First Impression Is Decisive.
As much as we boast on numerous occasions that "what matters is the inside," the eyes cannot escape a physique. The first impression always matters. Let us think that once this first impression is formed, the person will confirm that impression. Something that can go in our favor if this first impression is good, but very against if it is bad.
Appearance is processed in the brain instantly before we even know it. Thus, in less than 2 seconds, we have already made a quick judgment of the person in front of us. His way of dressing, his complexion, his nose... Everything is cataloged and classified. He has already told us a lot without saying anything, or rather, we have interpreted a lot.
It takes us only a tenth of a second to determine how attractive it is when it comes to the face. With which, there is love at first sight. At least the love of the physical.
The psychologist and sexologist Antoni Bolinches assures that: "the woman looks first at intelligence; then, in sympathy, if you have fun with him: and finally, in personality, in his being a mature, magnetic man." He clarifies that the intelligence that attracts is "the constructive one, which makes a woman feel good, not the intelligence that overwhelms."
According to Bolinches, men "at first are hooked by female attractiveness, but over time, that attraction diminishes. And so they need that relationship to be more or less comfortable. They are looking for a travel companion who provides emotional support".
Hair And Smell, Key Elements
Hair is one of the attributes that we value the most. Specifically, women's preferences move between two poles. On the one hand, according to research, it is deduced that lustrous and dense hair is attractive to them. On the other hand, baldness is not as badly considered as some may believe. This is because hair loss is directly related to high levels of testosterone in the blood. Many studies consider that this hormone is responsible for the attractiveness that we find in the other. So if you are starting to bald, you have too much testosterone, which is also attractive. Otherwise, you can count on the physical preference of women and try to have your hair neat.
The smell is the second deciding factor. Unless we are fetishists about it, an unpleasant stench makes us do anything but want to mate with the other. In any case, it is preferable not to risk and opt for perfumes or deodorants with fresh and pleasant aromas, especially if we are looking to make an excellent first impression since the scents are those that also last as memories in women.
Beauty Is Not Everything.
Although they are not beautiful in most people's eyes, some people do have "something" special that makes them irresistible. It is an "I don't know what" that works as a magnet for them: their way of speaking, their gaze, their laugh, their humor. That "interesting" feature is also successful.
On the other hand, a few days a month, women are more attractive to men during their ovulation period.
At that time, men are attracted to a set of sweet and pleasant aromas that women give off. For example, pheromones make them feel attracted and raise blood testosterone more than 100% in just minutes. It is important to emphasize that men must let women know that they like their aroma to feel pleased and attracted.
Other Physical Factors That Arouse Sexual Attraction
Unconsciously, all humans tend to be attracted to symmetrical faces. This anthropometric trait is considered the greatest exponent of beauty. The eyes' color is not so determining. Still, the intensity of the limbal ring, the strip that exists around the iris, is. The darker it is, the more attractive we find it.
Good stature and well-built muscles also add to the appeal. If we go back to the first stages of human evolution, we observed how the strength of Homo sapiens was the key element for the survival of the whole family.
And this heritage has continued relatively to this day. Today, bigger and taller men give women a greater sense of security and protection. This explanation would be part of the evolutionary theory that explains the variables that make us more attractive. However, if these attributes are lacking, you can start working on them by exercising or practicing a sport. Height is not a complication since there are even smaller women to whom a short man may seem tall, too. Some women prefer men of the same height or shorter. It is not an absolute requirement.
We Are Not So Different From Animals
We know that some of the elements that attract us most physically from other people are equally valued by certain animal species. For example, lionesses also look at males' fur, specifically in its quantity, density, and color. The more intense and dark it is, the more indicative it is of high testosterone levels and the more they like it.
Female red partridges prefer males whose colors are more intense. These shades are synonymous with a parasite-free immune system and a good diet. On the other hand, the horns, teeth, or crests have transmitted the females' protection and "symbolize" power.
The Wrinkle Is Also Beautiful
The signs of youth are not much better valued than their opposites. At least, not as much as what they want us to believe from some mass advertising and marketing media, Creams, tricks, treatments... The fight against age and the passage of time.
But a study carried out by the Autonomous University of Madrid refutes this propaganda effect. Their conclusions suggest that women feel more sexual attraction to facial features that distinguish a male from a female face than those that show youth.
That is, they value more, for example, the presence of facial hair, marked lips, or bushy eyebrows, than the fact that there is no mark or scar. Even the brands make some more attractive to women since it is a mystery to know the history that led to this consequence.
Love And Attraction Are Not The Same.
Very linked to sexual attraction is falling in love. But it is influenced by other factors, such as the circumstances and the time in which each person is, their receptivity, affinities, desires, values, or shared interests. Everything counts.
Therefore, sexual attraction is physical and chemical. Without a doubt, as we see, chemicals (substances and hormones) contribute to its emergence. Still, without a good first impression, there is a lot of ground to be traced. There is no doubt that sexual tastes and preferences vary from person to person. However, an assortment of good impressions that generate pleasurable sensations in each of our senses will help trigger that sex appeal.
The Five Definitive Laws Of Attraction:
How We Choose Our Partner
We meet thousands of people throughout our lives. Still, only a handful of them attract our attention, and only a few end up being our partners. Why do we choose some candidates and not others? What makes a person attract us? These are questions that have preoccupied philosophers throughout history and psychology since it was born as such. And although it seems as old a topic as humanity itself, new research is published every year about it. Studies on the matter are more or less framed around two main theories:
The evolutionary theory believes that our choice of mate is based on purely biological criteria: we look for a person with whom we have a better chance of surviving and reproducing. This is why men prefer the most fertile women (young and with better genes, prettier) and women to those men who guarantee the family's stability (the wealthiest and most committed).
The social theory believes that social, not biological, processes guide our mate choice. According to this, the laws of attraction are guided by men and women's roles in society. We, therefore, seek the partner that our social environment expects us to find. According to psychologist Alice Eagly, one of the main defenders of this theory, women are attracted to men with more money and power because society has limited their ability to have money and power, not because biology pushes them to do so evolutionists think.
Although there are fervent defenders of each theory among psychologists, most researchers accept that biological and social aspects influence our behavior. Therefore, both approaches are not exclusive but complementary. As Dr. Noam Shpancer, professor at Otterbein University, explains in Psychology Today, there are some laws of attraction that have been widely studied and accepted by most psychologists:
● The law of familiarity "Touch makes love," The saying goes, and that's what psychologists think. If we do not have frequent contact with a person, it is impossible for us to fall in love with them and, much less, to think about being their partner. The more time we spend with a person, the more chances there are that we like him. There is also a saying that "where there is trust is disgusting," and, indeed, some people fall apart as they spend more time together. Still, according to Spencer, this is only the exception that proves the rule.
● The law of physical attraction. No matter how long we go through a person, we will not like it if we do not find it attractive. The physical influences, of course, and in a decisive way. The harsh reality is that no one is willing to spend their days with a person they consider physically repellent. Otherwise, as Shpancer explains, physical attraction is governed by market laws: "The best merchandise is the most expensive, so buyers who cannot offer what they ask for have to choose what they can afford. Deep down, the rich ride in Mercedes, the middle-class ride in a Toyota, and the poor ride public transportation. The same thing happens with physical attractiveness. The most beautiful people end up with others who are very handsome, the mediocre with the mediocre, etc.".
● The law of personality. Research has identified two personality traits that make a person particularly attractive: a person's competence, or level of intelligence and social skills, and their "warmth," that is, their ability to be close and caring. If you are wise and affectionate, you will flirt more easily.
● The law of proximity. As anyone who has had a long-distance relationship knows, either the parties meet soon or the courtship will fail miserably. The usual thing is that we choose as a couple of someones that we have close, whom we can see but daily, almost, because it is the simplest for both parties.
● The law of similarity. The studies leave no room for doubt: we are attracted to people who are like us. Our partner does not have to be the same, but they have to share certain hobbies, values , and concerns. If we can choose between several people (as we all do), we prefer someone who has things common to a very different person. These five laws operate equally in men and women. They are decisive in choosing potential candidates, but how do we make the final decision? Why do some couples last us for months, years, and others a lifetime? According to Shpancer, "these laws serve to choose the candidates, but they do not work in the final selection." In his opinion, "biology and the environment push us to go to the right store, but it cannot determine what we are going to buy. We decide that ourselves. In the final selection, a subjective, dark and capricious internal process intervenes, which does not necessarily obey the dictates of reason, evolution, cultural pressure, and not even our plans and intentions".
As an alpha, you must be realistic with your limitations to consider attracting females, so you must know these laws. That way, you guide yourself with your search.
The attraction is one of the reasons that can lead us to establish a loving relationship.
Some authors consider that affiliation is the basic phenomenon on which the processes of attraction and love rest. Affiliation is a basic human tendency that leads to seeking other people's company and whose primary function is to ensure the survival of both the individual and the species. In this sense, it is considered that one of the objectives of the affiliation is to enter into relationships, express love and sexuality.
Interpersonal attraction can be understood as the judgment that one person makes of another along an attitudinal dimension whose extremes are positive evaluation (love) and negative evaluation (hate). In addition to this cognitive-evaluative dimension, this judgment is associated with behaviors (e.g., trying to do things with the person that attracts us), feelings (e.g., feeling sad when we cannot be with that person), and other cognitions (e.g., attributing to that person many positive characteristics).
The Consequences Of Association And Reinforcement.
The effects of the association on interpersonal attraction, following classical conditioning principles, consist of being attracted to those who appear to be associated with good experiences. We will dislike those associated with bad experiences. In this sense, the MUM effect consists of people resist transmitting bad news to others, even if we have nothing to do with them. When transmitting them, we will appear associated with the negative event before the eyes of the receiver. We will therefore be unattractive to them.
Exchange and interdependence. According to the theory of social exchange, a person will be attractive to us if we believe that the rewards derived from such a relationship are greater than the costs involved. The judgment of the person's attractiveness involved in a said relationship depends on the comparisons we make using two criteria: a) the comparison level based on past experiences. Any current situation will only be judged as beneficial depending on this comparison, which previous love relationships can form, and, b) the level of comparison with alternatives. A somewhat good relationship can be the best evaluated if it is the only alternative we have.
In addition to these psychosocial explanations, a series of factors play a fundamental role in the appearance and maintenance of the attraction that we come to feel towards certain people. Next, we will review the most relevant ones.
Proximity not only gets people to know each other, it often influences dating and marriages as well. Research by Festinger, Schachter, and Back showed that the three people with whom college students living in a dorm had the best relationships were the people who lived closest to each other. Likewise, authors such as Byrne and Buehler have verified that the students' relationships during the semester are a function of the distance between the seats. That is that physical proximity influences the fact that the students get to know each other. However, the correlations found between physical distance and attraction do not assure us that proximity causes relationships. It could be that people who share certain characteristics (e.g., religion, economic status, etc.) prefer to live close to each other.
There are several explanations about the influence of physical proximity when establishing relationships:
● The people who are closest physically are also, generally, the most accessible.
● With repeated exposure, feelings of anxiety about the unknown decrease, and that new person gradually becomes more familiar.
● Proximity can increase familiarity, and familiarity can, in turn, increase attraction. The effect of mere exposure is that the repeated perception of an initially neutral or positive stimulus leads to a greater attraction to the stimulus.
● Similarity can also increase this familiarity since people who share certain spaces tend to resemble each other in other aspects, such as ideology, aspirations, problems, etc. We will tend to get together either because we are similar or because we have become similar due to being together.
● Finally, according to theories of cognitive consistency, when we have to spend a lot of time with a person, and the relationship is unpleasant for us, we tend to restore balance, either by trying to get away from it or by discovering that that person was not as unpleasant as we assumed.
Proximity positively influences attraction as long as the person is initially positive or neutral, not negative.
Negative And Positive Affect
Experiments consistently show that positive feelings lead to positive evaluations of others, liking, and sympathy. In contrast, negative feelings lead to negative evaluations, dislike, and antipathy. Affection can influence the attraction of two forms:
First, someone else can do something that makes you feel good or bad; people who make you feel good will tend to like you, and if they make you feel bad, you will be disliked.
Second, suppose a person is present only when your positive and negative feelings are activated (for whatever reason) as a consequence. In that case, this person will also be nice or unpleasant to you. The general idea is based on classical conditioning. When an attitudinal object is associated with a stimulus that causes negative or positive feelings, the observer develops negative or positive attitudes towards the object. Numerous experimenters have shown that positive affect leads to liking others, while negative affect leads to dislike.
If positive reactions can be transferred from person to person, so can negative reactions. If negative emotions make other people unpleasant to us, and if affection is easily associated with anyone, then we transfer our negative feelings from one person to another if we see them together. Research on stigmata, negatively perceived characteristics (e.g., race, age, foreign accent, physical disability, etc.) indicates that this negative association occurs just as easily as positive associations. Even if a stigma is overcome, the previous stigma's effect will not necessarily dissipate.
Anderson found that the five most valued traits were being sincere, honest, understanding, loyal, and trustworthy. Likewise, in Moya's research, the best-evaluated personality characteristics were understanding, loyalty, ability to capture others' feelings, sincerity, and joy. Other studies have shown that the most valued traits in people are grouped into two sets: a) affection (e.g., affectionate, friendly, happy, and considerate), non-verbal cues (e.g., smiling, looking attentively, expressing emotions), and dispositions attitudinal (e.g., showing a liking for people); and, b) competence, which includes social skills and intelligence (e.g., having an interesting conversation, etc.
Another series of attributes related to the power, prestige, or social position of the person we interact with is of considerable importance to qualify as attractive, especially for males. In fact, in press advertisements, women offer physical attractiveness and seek financial security. In contrast, men offer financial positions and request certain physical characteristics.
The results of psychosocial research show that, in general, as the similarity between people increases, so does attraction. The two dimensions of similarity that have been studied the most by social psychologists are attitudinal and personality similarity.
The similarity of attitudes refers to how two individuals share the same attitudes about a range of topics. Byrne indicates that the greater the similarity, the greater the attraction. This result has been found in people of all ages, in very different groups, and different countries.
The study by Smeaton, Byrne, and Murnen confirmed the proportion hypothesis that predicted that attraction differed according to the proportion of similar attitudes shared. Despite these results, a series of investigations indicated a slightly greater effect of different attitudes than similar ones, in part because most people assume that a stranger, especially an attractive one, harbors attitudes similar to theirs. This assumption of general agreement with one's opinions is called the false consensus effect, and a consequence is that agreement is expected while disagreement is surprising. Suppose on some special issues. An individual believes that he or she has a minority opinion and that the majority of people disagree. In that case, the disagreement will be expected and will have less effect than an unexpected disagreement.
In the case of personality similarity, the research results are less consistent. Moya argues that the lack of relationship between personality similarity and attraction can be explained because personality characteristics are not usually publicly exhibited. Other times, the personality trait's very nature attracts both alike and those who are different. In general, it has been shown that similarity produces greater attraction than difference, at least in the following characteristics: sexual orientation (that is, if the person is male, female, or androgynous), depression, type A behavior, seeking sensation, and cognitive style.
The following explanations show how similarity can influence attraction, both positively and negatively:
● Similar attitudes activate positive affect, while different attitudes activate negative affect, affecting the attraction.
● According to cognitive consistency and balance theory theories, people naturally organize their likes and dislikes in a balanced way. In this way, balanced relationships occur when someone is similar, and we like them.
● The similarity is reinforcing. The most valuable proof that others approve of our ideas, customs, and tastes is the fact that they have them (Festinger, 1954) precisely. This formulation suggests that we are interested in other people's opinions not because we seek precision but solely because we want to verify what we already believe. However, when people resemble each other because they have some negative characteristic, then it is possible that the similarity, instead of leading to attraction, leads to rejection. Sometimes, the difference can be more reinforcing than the similarity since it allows us to learn new things.
Valuable. Also, feeling unique and special is highly valued.
● The choice of people similar to us in certain dimensions (e.g., educational level, social class, or physical attractiveness) can result from comparing and evaluating the various alternatives we have and their costs and benefits. This is because, generally, the most valued people are the hardest to get. According to expectation-value theories, in real life, we will feel attracted to the most valued people within the field of those who may reciprocate us. In this sense, the pairing hypothesis refers to the fact that married couples and couples in love tend to become couples based on their similar physical attractiveness.
Finally, when questioned directly, university students do not consider social, ideological, and religious similarity as a relevant attribute in a partner's choice. Two explanations would account for this result: a) people are not aware of the importance of situational determinants of behavior; and b) this attribute may be important at the beginning of the relationship, but not for the choice of an intimate partner. However, according to French data, couples' meeting spaces would be closed or reserved for people with a high socioeconomic level. For people with a low socioeconomic level, they would be public open places to all the world. This suggests that even though certain similarities are not relevant when choosing a partner, it is more likely that couples have certain similarities (social, ideological, religious) to the extent that the meeting spaces for couples differ according to the economic stratum.
Once two individuals discover enough similarities to move toward friendship, an additional step is imperative. One of the factors that influence effective relationships' development is the existence or not reciprocity. We are also attractive to these people. Almost everyone is happy to receive such positive feedback, and it is quite unpleasant to be evaluated negatively. An exception is that individuals with negative self-concepts sometimes respond well to accurate negative evaluations, possibly because they are consistent with their self-schema.
Although mutual liking is often expressed in words, the first signs of attraction can be non-verbal indicators. Gold, Ryckman, and Mosley found that when a woman responded positively to a man by gazing at him, talking to him, and approaching him, he tended to be attracted to her, even when he knew their attitudes differed.
Someone who has a bad image of us is not rewarding. Besides, according to the cognitive consistency theories, a person likes me and dislikes me in an unstable situation. Aronson and Coe found that when two people shared the dislike of a third, the attraction between them was greater than when they did not share that feeling.
As Hatfield and Sprecher indicate, given the same characteristics, a person with a pleasant physical appearance is more attractive than another with less physical attractiveness. Physical attractiveness is especially decisive in the first encounters or when the contact is superficial. According to the process of cognitive ignorance, the person that we initially decide has no interest, is not paid attention to, and is forgotten. Research has shown that men often ignore unattractive women.
In various studies, both men and women and people of different races have agreed that an attractive female face is one with both a childlike appearance (large, wide-set eyes, small nose, wide smile, and small chin) and mature features (prominent cheekbones, cheeks narrow, high eyebrows and large pupils). Height has been valued positively in men's physical attractiveness but negatively in women. Another physical characteristic that seems to influence physical attractiveness is body build, the waist-to-hip ratio in women's cases. Alice found that attractiveness decreased notably when an unattractive body matched a very attractive face. Also, overweight people are generally perceived as less attractive.
The following explanations show why a pleasant physique is attractive to us:
● According to implicit theories of personality, there are numerous beliefs about which people's characteristics are associated with each other in our society. In this sense, the halo effect considers that whoever has a good quality will also have other good qualities. Some research has shown that people tend to believe that attractive men and women are more stable, interesting, sociable, independent, dominant, exciting, sexy, balanced, socially skilled, and more successful than those who are not attractive. However, physical attractiveness can be associated with negative characteristics. For example, very attractive women may be judged as more materialistic and vain than less attractive women. They may be considered more guilty than the latter when they are tried for a crime involving deception.
● Attractive people also attract us because our public image is favored when associating with a person of these characteristics. Thus, various studies have confirmed that when a man appears accompanied by a very attractive woman, the impression he causes improves.
● Attractive people can behave in a way that increases their evaluation and makes them more attractive. Reis showed that attractive men had more relationships with women and developed a greater social competence in this field than less attractive men. However, the most attractive women did not establish more interactions with men, were less assertive and more fearful in their relationships with men than the less attractive women.
● According to the affect-centered model, good-looking individuals activate the positive effect, and affect, as already discussed, is an important determinant of attraction.
People are not entirely correct in estimating how others judge their attractiveness. Men (but not women) overestimate their good looks. Because many biases favor attractiveness, it is not surprising that many people care about their appearance. This preoccupation with one's attractiveness and fear of negative judgments by others is known as appearance anxiety.
Judgments about whether a person is attractive are not solely a matter of the person's physical details in question. Situational factors influencing the observer are also important. Kenrick found that if a person had previously seen several highly attractive individuals, the person in question is less attractive.
Behavioral indicators also affect perceptions. People react more positively to a person whose gait is youthful than someone with an elderly-like gait, regardless of gender or age. Furthermore, adults who seem very young are also judged as weak, naive, and incompetent, but loving and honest. Those who appear to be very mature are perceived as more dominant and attractive but less affectionate and friendly.
Attractiveness, Perception And Social Behavior
Contrary to the beliefs that beauty depends on who looks and that there are radically different beauty patterns, fifteen studies have confirmed that people of different nations and ethnic groups agree when they indicate what type of individuals are physically attractive and not. For example, people of different cultures (13 countries and four ethnic groups) judged a female face as more attractive if it showed the following characteristics: large eyes with dilated pupils, small nose, high cheekbones, narrow face with thin cheeks, wide smile, lips thick or full and small chin. However, other results show cultural variability: blacks in the United States evaluate heavier women as more attractive than whites in the United States. This suggests that although there is agreement on the body structure and attractive facial features, there are ethnic variations in the parameters of body weight and size that define an attractive person.
Studies allow the conclusion that people perceive and evaluate attractive people more favorably; it is the effect called 'what is beautiful is good.' The review by Langlois confirmed that the most attractive children were evaluated as more friendly, more competent, with a better fit and affective balance, and with greater interpersonal competence than less attractive children. The same was true of attractive adults: they were judged as more competent at work, more friendly, and better fit or mental health.
Consistently, attractive children and adults were also treated more positively. There were fewer negative interactions with the most attractive children, more positive interactions, and more care for more. While attractive adults received more attention and were given more rewards. More positive interactions were established with them, fewer negative interactions, and more help and cooperation.
It has also been confirmed that attractive people act more positively (e.g., they are more popular, slightly more intelligent, have more adapted social skills and behaviors, have better physical health) and possess more positive characteristics (e.g., greater self-esteem, better mental health, more extraversion).
Finally, attractive people self-perceive or judge themselves slightly better than less attractive people (they perceive themselves as more competent and better mental health).
The above results confirm the explanation of attractiveness: a) cultural norms and values determine the behavior and judgments of the 'judges' and 'evaluated' through their learning; b) expectations and stereotypes are learned ('there is no lame or one-eyed person good') and are confirmed through behaviors and self-fulfilling prophecy (e.g., when faced with someone unattractive, I treat them worse, to which they respond more negatively).
Although the tendency to perceive that 'what is beautiful is good' is common in all the cultures studied, what differs are inferred positive traits. For example, in Korea, it is inferred that an attractive person cares more about others and is more integrated, consistent with that culture's collectivist values . While in the US, it is inferred that the greater the attractiveness, the greater the assertiveness, dominance, and strength, consistent with the dominant individualistic and competitive cultural values in those societies. Another study with Asians (Taiwan Chinese) confirmed that attractive people were evaluated positively on both socially desirable and undesirable traits. Still, there was no relationship between attractiveness and judgment on non-normative traits (of medium desirability). That is, physical attractiveness is associated with traits that are normative in a given culture.
Now, three facts question the sociocultural explanation about 'what is beautiful is good':
● The relationship between the attractiveness of a person and the judgments and behaviors attributed to him is not greater in adults than in children. However, according to social-cultural arguments, people learn beauty patterns and their correlations as they socialize in a given culture, so adults should show this effect with more intensity.
● Likewise, the relationship between attractiveness and the judgments and behaviors attributed to a person is similar for men and women. This fact questions the sociocultural idea that this effect is based on different gender roles that emphasize more female physical beauty than male.
● Lastly, the self-perceptions of attractive people are only slightly more positive. This fact questions the sociocultural perspective that indicates that perceptions and interactions are internalized in the self-concept.
Attractiveness And Evolutionary Explanations
The high cross-cultural agreement in the judgments about attractive features (infantile face, amphora body for women, regular face, and muscular triangular body for men) is consistent with an evolutionary explanation.
However, a series of facts also question the evolutionary hypotheses:
● Since attractive traits similarly influence men and women when it comes to inferring judgments and behaviors about people, the evolutionary hypothesis is questioned that states that when it comes to choosing a partner, attractiveness is more important for men since it indicates the greater reproductive capacity of women, while resources are for women, since it indicates the ability of men to ensure the survival of their offspring.
● Since the relationship between the person's attractiveness and the judgment and behavior attributed to it is similar for children and adults, the evolutionary hypothesis affirms that attractiveness must be important because it is related to reproduction is also questioned, that is, with adulthood.
The results are congruent with the evolutionary hypothesis that attractiveness is a general indicator of good health - the so-called good gene theory. The fact that it associates the attractiveness of a person with their better evaluation and quality of interaction in childhood is also consistent with the evolutionary theory of parental investment, which suggests that parents invest more in children with greater survivability and reproduction - healthier because they are more beautiful, regardless of whether they are boys or girls.
Love is such a complex phenomenon that it has given rise to many definitions
broad and vague that can be applied to other intense emotional events such as bereavement or rape. Besides, love is a dynamic process that is constantly changing during the relationship, so its definition will vary depending on its state. The data provided by various investigations carried out from different disciplines clearly show that there is a progressive decrease in initial passion and that this, together with the gradual growth of commitment, gives rise to a cycle with an initial phase of passionate love strongly associated with sexual desire followed. of a phase of partner love that lasts for about two years in most cases.
Types of Love
One of the basic types is sexual or passionate love that would be characterized by:
● Strong uncontrollable feelings of attraction towards the desired person and of anxiety and discomfort in their absence;
● Strong physiological activation and sexual desire;
● Obsessive thoughts or rumination about the loved object; and,
● A certain pattern of behaviors, such as expressing affection for the desired person, supporting them physically and emotionally, and unconditional acceptance.
On the other hand, non-passionate romantic love would be composed of:
● Thoughts of need, of 'caring for' and of trust in the partner;
● Feeling of well-being, difficulty concentrating, and 'floating in the clouds'
And, to a lesser extent, intense physical reactions; and
● Behaviors of intimacy, support, and tolerance of the other.
Of all the love typologies, Lee will be the first to try to empirically validate his proposal. Lee distinguished three basic love styles: Eros, Ludus, and Storge.
The combination, in different degrees, of these primary styles, would give us other three secondary styles independent of the first: Mania, Pragma, and Agape:
● Eros or passionate love is characterized by an irresistible passion, intense feelings, strong physical attraction, and sexual activity. The Eros lover values love highly but is not obsessed with it or pressure his partner to intensity but rather allows things to develop mutually. The characteristic of this type is self-confidence and high self-esteem.
● Ludus or playful love , with little emotional involvement and no future expectations. This style of love does not have a preferred physical style but rather likes all kinds of partners. Even though many people see this love as morally negative, Ludus does not try to hurt other people. He usually makes the game rules very clear before starting the relationship.
● Storge, or friendly love , is characterized by a long-lasting commitment that develops slowly and prudently and is based on intimacy, friendship and affection. The similarity in terms of values and attitudes is much more important to Storge than physical appearance or sexual satisfaction. The orientation of this love is more to seek a long-term commitment than a short-term passion.
● Mania is obsessive love , with a strong dependence on the partner, intense jealousy, possessiveness, mistrust, and ambivalence. This lover tries to force the couple into commitment without waiting for it to evolve naturally.
● Pragma refers to pragmatic love , love based on the rational search for the ideal partner. The pragmatic lover considers age, education, social status, religion, or the ability to be a good father or mother. Unlike Storage, in which love can grow without being particularly concerned about the partner's future projections or the partner's family background, the pragmatic lover is likely to establish conditions before developing a relationship.
● Agape or altruistic love , of absolute renunciation and totally selfless surrender. It is a rather romantic love in which sexuality and sensuality are not relevant.
The Hendrick and Hendrick scale of attitudes towards love is the one that evaluates this typology from an individual approach to love relationships. With this scale, Hendrick and Hendrick classified the romantic stories described by university students in these six different styles:
Eros or love at first sight
(34%), Storage (66%), Ludus (2%), mania (2 %), pragma (17%) and agape (2%).
More than three-quarters of the stories described corresponded to partner love, followed by a third of them framed in passionate love.
From the point of view of gender differences, Hendrick and Hendrick found that men, compared with women, attach more importance to passionate love (eros) and playful or entertaining (Ludus). Women, compared with men, are more inclined towards friendly love (Storge), logical (pragma), and possessive (mania). These results have been interpreted from the perspective of the functions that these forms of love have had for each sex in the species' evolution.
Functions Of Love And Evolution
The evolutionary conception provides us with arguments about the biological functionality of loving behavior for the individual as a member of a species. This approach sees love as a natural part of the human condition and, perhaps, natural to other species. Love is biologically relevant if it helps promote species' survival, a central theme of evolution theory. Five million years ago, the survival of species depended on reproductive success. Sexual desire and commitment, respectively related to previous aspects of reproductive success, were reinforced in higher primates whose biochemistry led them to seek pleasure from sexual activity and female-male bonding and parents-descendants. Ancestors who acted this way were more likely to pass on their genes than those who were not motivated to sexual activity and/or establish stable emotional bonds. As a result of this evolutionary process, humans are genetically pre-programmed to have sexual activity, to fall in love (stable emotional relationships with a partner), and to care for descendants (parental love). The evolutionary perspective admits that current environmental factors, social influences, and non-genetic aspects of the organism determine sexual activity. Although, the historical influence or the ten thousand years of civilization established as in which we currently live, has acted only during 5% of the existence of the species or over 400 of the 100,000 generations of humanity.
This theory socio-biological, we can explain sex differences in sexual behavior and love from two core processes that have to do with the differential parental investment and sexual selection:
● The sexual selection consists of two different processes: a) Intra-sexual selection refers to the pressure that members of one sex exert on the other through competition. In a species in which males compete for females through their hunting ability and strength, the strongest and best hunting individuals are more likely to dominate the competition and survive; and, b) Epigamic selection is the other part of sexual selection. If one sex selects its partners of the other sex-based on certain attributes such as physical strength and aggressiveness, these attributes must be more characteristic of one sex than the other.
● Is defined Parental investment as the expenditure of time, energy, and risk of the parent in the offspring that increases the probabilities of survival of the latter (and therefore reproductive success) at the cost of the father's ability to invest in another offspring. While the typical parental investment may have been highly variable throughout our evolutionary history, the minimum possible parental investment of females, due to nine months of gestation and subsequent months of lactation, has been much greater than that of males in our species. A woman can have a maximum of 25 children, and the average number of children in simple hunter-gatherer societies is five. Ancestral males might have benefited reproductively from copulating with any fertile female if the risk was low. Therefore, it is reasonable to hypothesize that natural selection favored males who had low thresholds for sexual arousal and reactive to new sexually attractive females. On the other hand, our female ancestors had little to gain reproductively and much to lose if they copulated randomly with new males. Selection is unlikely to have favored females who were sexually attracted to a wide variety of males or solely because of their presence.
According to the socio-biological theory predictions, in the case of the human species, since women must be fertile, they will be better sexual objects when they have a youthful and maternal appearance. For example, the narrower the waist is relative to the hip, the more men will prefer them and value them as more attractive, healthy, and reproductively valuable. It can also be assumed that women would be more selective in selecting their mates since they have a greater parental investment in their offspring than men and can father a few boys in a limited period.
Therefore, women are going to look for attached men with resources to protect themselves and their children. In particular, when choosing potential sexual partners, they will pay more attention to the attributes of status, dominance, and aggressiveness. They will select those with the greatest capacity to obtain resources.
Predictions from socio-biological theory regarding gender differences in behaviors are common with role theories that emphasize that women are assigned and socialized in passive, lower status, and communal roles while men do so. They are inactive roles of higher status and agentic; therefore, women should be less approving of casual relationships. They should have fewer different partners. Sociobiologists argue that although men may be somewhat more permissive than women in extramarital affairs, men especially disapprove of women having such relationships since they must guarantee paternity with the utmost certainty.
From this perspective, it is predicted that men will value playful love more, consistent with their lower parental investment and their positive orientation towards casual sex and obtaining the maximum number of possible partners. Women, given the greater parental investment and the effort necessary to raise a few descendants, will tend to value more pragmatic and friendly love, as well as the criteria of social power and status to choose their partner. Therefore, men's playful love and the pragmatic love of women would favor the species' reproduction.
According to these predictions, cross-cultural research has consistently confirmed socio-biological hypotheses that women prefer older sexual partners and evaluate them based on their resources. In contrast, men prefer younger and physically attractive partners. In this sense, Buss's cross-cultural research confirmed in 37 different countries that women tend to evaluate their male partners based on their economic capacity, ambition, and perseverance. In contrast, the attributes positively evaluated by men to choose a female partner are health, beauty, and youth, and they will choose those with the greatest signs of reproductive capacity. Likewise, in Oliver and Hyde's meta-analysis, men presented more permissive attitudes towards sexual relations, earlier initiation of coital sexual relations, a higher frequency of Intercourse, and a greater number of sexual partners than women. This greater male centrality in sexuality is supported by anthropological research. Of the 849 societies examined in Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas, 708 are polygamic (one husband for several wives). Only 4 are polyandrous (a woman can have two or more husbands). In addition to the four polyandrous, they are all polygamic, the reverse not being true.
According to the socio-biological augmentation, the differences between genders will be reinforced, especially in cultures that impose fewer social constraints. These allow the entire behavioral repertoire to be explored and allow innate differences to manifest more strongly.
Universal Character Of Love And Cultural Influence
From a cultural perspective, some authors have postulated the transcultural existence of romantic or passionate love. Thus, Jankowiak and Fischer, in a review of 186 cultures, have found that 88.5% of them have indicators of passionate love. Other authors, particularly social constructionists and relativists such as Averill, postulate that passionate love is a phenomenon constructed by social discourse at a given historical and cultural moment. Thus, Hendrick and Hendrick, among others, argue that it is exclusive to Western culture and emerged around the 12th century. However, some authors such as Berscheid point out that in much earlier documents, such as the Bible, Hindu, and classical Chinese texts, there are descriptions of desire and passionate love.
More and more psychologists, anthropologists, and other scholars believe that love is a universal phenomenon. However, its specific meaning can vary markedly from one culture to another at different times. Before the modern age, it was not a prerequisite for marriage. Hence, in many societies, it was arranged by parents or relatives, perhaps hoping that love would arise in the couple in the future. Still, there were no great expectations of romantic love. Studies carried out in Western cultures have found that the relationship between marriage and love has changed over the last thirty years. A generation ago, especially women wanted to marry even in the absence of romantic love. Still, since then, men and women have agreed on the idea of romantic love as the basis of marriage. It seems that in the 20th century, in Western societies, romantic love has become a fundamental reason for maintaining long-term marital relationships.
The belief that one should marry only for love becomes an ideology when it is widely shared by a society. Since people today share this belief, it is difficult to understand how marriages in previous centuries could have been happy. Perhaps the people of other times shared another ideology. Perhaps there was often early anticipation of sharing life with a partner, sexual fulfillment or coming to love the partner more deeply over the years. However, some of these anticipations sound a lot like today's anticipations except for 'falling in love.' It is possible that the bond between love and marriage has not changed as much. What may have changed is the ideology of love from 'marriages must Be arranged' to 'marriages must be based on love.' To some extent, this depends on how love is defined (Hendrick and Hendrick, 1986).
Socio-Structural Factors And Intimate Relationships
Some authors have insisted on the influence of social structure factors in beliefs and loving behaviors.
Guttentag and Secord stated that the demographic ratio between men and women is an important variable to explain the dominant type of love. When there are more men than women in the population, the few women are valued. An idealized vision of women, of the family, and a non-passionate romantic vision of love prevails. In this context, a more partner style of love would probably dominate. When there is an excess of women, the family and marriage will be devalued. Extra and pre-marital sex, singleness, and separations would be frequent, committed love would not be dominant, and a playful and erotic love style would predominate. These authors reviewed demographic data from different countries and historical periods, such as ancient Greece, medieval Europe, and the United States, that confirmed these hypotheses during different centuries.
On the other hand, Eagly and Wood argued that sex differences in the criteria for choosing an intimate partner should be smoothed out in societies characterized by greater gender equality, since men's preferences for younger women, capable of being good attractive housewives, as well as the importance given by women to men's social resources reflect the differences in status and roles between men and women. Reanalyzing the partner selection criteria, it was confirmed that the greater equality between the genders, evaluated by a UN indicator on the degree of labor and institutional insertion of women, as well as salary parity with men, there were fewer differences between the sexes in the importance assigned to financial resources and being a good householder as criteria for choosing a partner.
From this socio-structural perspective, the differences in beliefs about the love between nations and between genders depend on social resources, demographics, and distribution of power and status among gender roles. Socio Economic development will directly reinforce the importance of passionate love, love as a criterion and prerequisite for choosing an intimate partner and marrying. It allows the person to value subjective rather than practical aspects. Social and economic development, which is associated with a lower difference in status and power concerning gender roles, will cause more similarities in men's and women's responses about love. Levine concluded that economic development would reinforce individualism, the relative equality of opportunities between men and women (higher education, greater female labor participation, and legal equality), would increase the importance of subjective feelings and personal decisions in the formation of couples, which would be associated with an increase in divorces and a decrease in birth rates (greater control by the woman of contraception and greater planning of the offspring, not experienced as an obligation). Therefore, the differential distribution of resources and roles would explain the differences between men and women and between nations.
Cultural Factors And Intimate Relationships
Other studies have shown the influence of cultural values on beliefs about love.
Dion and Dion suggest that different cultural orientations strongly influence how people conceptualize love and intimacy.
The more individualistic cultures, in which intimate relationships are established face to face and more or less symmetrically, value the passionate romantic component of love more. In contrast, in collectivist societies, intimate relationships are organized through the extended family's intervention. The pragmatic and friendly aspects of love are valued more.
Thus, romantic love is a more important basis for marriage in individualism than in collectivist cultures. In the former, two people's love and individual decisions seem natural to form a stable couple. In the latter, in general, the formation of the couple is a decision of the elderly. It is based on arrangements that respond to the families' wishes, and it is a duty for the individuals. Most of humanity lives in collectivist cultures, and in general, the family has a great influence on marriages. Most of the brides are adolescents. In two-thirds of the societies, a dowry is paid for them. Marriage is conceived as a socioeconomic contract between the families. In 1980, in China, only a third of marriages were free from family influence. In 1989, in Korea, 40% of marriages were arranged, as 72% of Turkish women interviewed in the 1970s. Parental arranged marriage was very common among Indian and Pakistani immigrants.
From this sociocultural and normative perspective, the evaluative norms would explain the differences between genders and between nations more than the differences in resources and roles. Even controlling the level of economic development, cultures whose values emphasize autonomy and individual decisions, and value internal attributes and feelings (individualistic), will reinforce the importance of passionate love, love as a criterion and prerequisite for choosing a partner. And marriage. Collectivist cultures, which are characterized by greater differences in status and emphasize family decisions and normative duties, will give less importance to love as a criterion and prerequisite for forming a stable couple and will value more the practical and friendly aspects of the relationship. Love. It can also be assumed that normative cultures, which emphasize the need to obey rules, will reject playful and pragmatic love and emphasize criteria such as chastity and social status.
These cultures that do not tolerate uncertainty and emotions should also emphasize the style of love mania - strong emotional and possessive activation. Hierarchical cultures, which emphasize the legitimacy of status asymmetries and obedience (from children to fathers and from wives to husbands among others), and masculine, competitive cultures that emphasize gender differences, will also reinforce differences in response between men and women, in particular by reinforcing people's support for traditional gender criteria (e.g., women will value more social status and men will value chastity and feminine characteristics such as being a good housewife). Let us remember that according to a sociocultural argument, cultures that impose more constraints will reduce gender differences in normative responses (e.g., there will be fewer differences between men and women in the valuation of pragmatic love if it is normative in collectivist cultures).
In summary, the phenomenon of love presents an inter and intra-individual variability and a cultural and historical one. Therefore, based on these.
Theoretical and empirical approaches, the cultural and gender differences are described below in two different ways of conceptualizing love: the types of love and the consideration of love as a prerequisite for getting married.
Types of Love And Social-Cultural Factors
A study on the importance of people from 15 countries and regions of the world to Hendrick and Hendrick different love styles has confirmed the influence that economic, social, and cultural factors exert on the valuation of these types of love.
Considering that the lower the score, the better the type of love and that scores above three indicate disapproval, using the national averages, it is confirmed that the erotic style is the most valued, followed by the storge mania style. Ludus and pragma are the least valued styles (see table below).
Besides, cultures that emphasize the friendly and partner style (Storge) also value practicalities (pragma) and place less importance on possession, jealousy, and strong emotional arousal (mania). In this sense, cultures that emphasize passionate love also value manic loveless.
Erotic love is more valued in female cultures, in uncompetitive societies, which value the quality of life. Countries with high social development and cultures with a low rejection of uncertainty are less normative anxious.
The storge and pragma love styles, which do not have such passionate overtones, are more valued in collectivist cultures where intimate relationships are based more on family obligations and duties and cultures with a low aversion to love.
The uncertainty that is, intolerant societies that are less emotional and value gradual and calm love. Countries with less socioeconomic development and greater hierarchical distance attach more importance to love's social and practical aspects. Therefore, these results corroborate what has been found in previous studies, that is, the higher prevalence of the pragmatic and partner love style among African countries and collectivist eastern and less developed nations.
In individualistic cultures that value the individual more and with high avoidance of uncertainty that is more normative and emotional, the manic style related to possession and high affective activation occurs more intensely.
Finally, the playful love style is more valued in collectivist cultures, with low socioeconomic development and low uncertainty avoidance. For example, in these cultures, African countries, due to both the absence of resourceful male partners and a certain greater tolerance and acceptance of casual sex, extramarital sexuality is more frequent.
All this information allows you to make an analysis about which is the preference in your region and to start the hunt based on these references.
Types of Love And Gender Differences
Regarding gender differences, the results show that women, compared to men, are significantly more in agreement with pragmatic love and storge love. At the same time, they value Ludus's love and love more negatively.
It is in feminine (vs. masculine) cultures where there are more differences between women and men in the valuation they make of the playful love style. Therefore, men value playful love more. In particular, it is men from feminine cultures who value play love more than women.
It has also been found that collectivist countries with less social development show a greater difference between women and men in the valuation they make of storge love. Although women show more agreement with the style of friendly love in all cultures than men, this type of love was more emphasized by women from collectivist and less developed societies, probably to compensate for lower resources and autonomy.
The results also indicate that men and women in individualistic countries show a greater difference in their pragma style valuation. Women show more agreement with the practical aspect of love than men in individualistic cultures. However, it is in collectivist countries where both men and women value it more importantly. Likewise, the differences between men and women in their valuation of the pragma style were greater in masculine cultures than in feminine cultures. Therefore, pragmatic love was emphasized more by women than by men in individualistic and competitive cultures, probably as a way of adapting to their environment.
Love and physical attractiveness are more valued as criteria for choosing a partner in individualistic cultures, emphasizing feelings and personal decisions when establishing intimate relationships and in cultures characterized by establishing more egalitarian or less social relationships, hierarchical and greater social development. On the contrary, the valuation of innocence, social status, and good health is more important in societies with fewer resources, less social development, and highly hierarchical. The higher valuation of the more material and realistic aspects of love seems consistent with the sociocultural context. The components of survival and social adaptation of intimate relationships are more relevant in these contexts.
Marriage And Social-Cultural Factors
50% of people from collectivist cultures respond that they would be willing to marry a person even if they were not in love. Studies have confirmed that most people refuse to marry someone who has all the requirements without being in love with him/her, and only a minority accepts it. But, especially, the individuals from individualistic and masculine countries claim to be less in agreement with marrying a person who has all the qualities. Still, with whom they are not in love. Besides, the countries with greater social development and less hierarchy give more importance to love as a prerequisite for establishing intimate and couple relationships. Therefore, these results confirm the studies that indicate that love tended to be more important in westernized, more developed, and individualistic countries, such as the USA, followed by Brazil, England, and Australia, and less important in less developed nations. More hierarchical and collectivist from the East like India, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines. The two least collectivist and most economically developed countries of the Asian countries, Japan and Hong Kong, gave love greater importance. These studies suggest that basic needs' satisfaction allows for the development of more personal fulfillment and expression needs, such as romantic love. Individualism and egalitarian cultural relationships increase the importance of internal attributes and personal decisions regarding marriage and marriage. Couple.
A Basic Principle of Human Psychology Successful Men Deploy to Get Women Like people tend to want to keep their thoughts consistent with their actions. Psychologists call this the Principle of Commitment and Consistency.
Once a person has behaved differently, they adjust their thoughts to be consistent with their behavior.
In the 2004 American election, the Bush-Cheney campaign used this brilliantly by having campaign goers sign a statement stating that they would vote for Bush. Having performed the loyalty action, most of the attendees then adjusted their thoughts somewhat favorable to Bush.
The Signatures are just one way that market experts use the Principle of Commitment and Consistency to their advantage. Once a person commits to an action, they feel a strong need to justify that action to themselves.
Hence, they behave consistently with the commitment they have made. No matter his political vision, the Bush campaign did a good job of getting favorably committed supporters who were a force to be considered and counted, and those supporters flocked on Election Day.
In most cases, the Principle of Commitment and Consistency helps us as individuals. Life is so complex that we don't have time to process all the complex information in one situation if we have already done the same kind of processing in a previous situation. Instead, we remember what decision we made first and stick to it. We think, "Oh, this is just like when so-and-so happened, and I did such a thing then." Then we proceed to do said thing.
For example, if you need to drive to a place that is in the same area of the city where you work, you will get in your car and take the same route that you normally take to get to work, instead of getting a map to see if you will save time by taking another route or street.
Usually, this is beneficial since you would probably spend more time looking at the map than it would take to drive a slightly longer route. When it comes to interpersonal relationships, people tend to project qualities onto us according to how they have treated us. If they do us a favor, their reason must have been that we deserved it because we must have some positive qualities.
Yes, you should never stop a woman from
performing acts of generosity towards you.
When she does you a favor, she increases the good impression because she thinks you are worthy of that attention.
To put it differently, always allow women to do things for you. If she offers to pay for something, let her. Never say, "Oh no, I'll pay." If she offers to cook for you, great. Don't say, "Give it up, I'll buy us a good dinner."
Be grateful, stop in, and get into the mindset
that you deserve to have things done for you.
Great Behaviors That Instantly Lead To Low Status
Avoid the three behaviors below, and you will immediately differentiate yourself above 95% from the other guys out there. This, by itself, when women notice it, immediately makes them feel wetter around you.
● Show off
"You should see my amazing house."
"I'm about to get a six-figure raise a year!"
"I have a big PENIS."
The irony of showing off is that it communicates — that you are a needy guy crying out for approval. Why then would you have to talk about yourself this way?
Avoid putting your good qualities directly into words and allow the woman to discover them for herself. This shows his self-confidence while making him a bit "mysterious" in her eyes.
Be an endless source of fascinating discoveries for her.
● Step Down or Drop
Low-status men tend to be modest out of fear of offending others and because they want to be seen as courteous. Alpha males avoid claiming modesty except when it's an obvious joke.
Having high self-esteem is attractive to women. Think favorably of yourself, and the woman will think favorably of you. It may be okay to make an obvious joke about lowering yourself, as in the following examples (say it with a playful tone of voice):
- "I'm so weak, I'm not sure I can lift that heavy thing." - Spoken by a bodybuilder physique
- "I wear a leather jacket to compensate because my penis is so small. It's not even half an inch long!" - Spoken by a confident man who obviously has no sexual insecurities. (That is why he can joke about the size of his penis.)
- "I'm unemployed, and I live in my parents' basement!" - Spoken by a well-dressed man who obviously has tons of money.
● Lower other People
"Haha, Look at that bum and the rags you saw!"
When you put others down, it reveals its own insecurities. The bum on the sidewalk is no threat to you, so why does he act like he is?
And since women are sensitive creatures and have compassion for the less fortunate, all you'll do is make her stand up for those you downgrade.
Likewise, don't demean the guys who are your sexual competition, which also reveals your insecurity. Instead, just don't pay attention to them, as they are not worthy of your attention.
The Most Important Attitude Of Power You Can Have
If you're like most guys, who think that women are like a prize in life for working hard and living right. It is a tradition that goes back in history. In the Middle Ages, the beautiful maiden was the prize for the gallant knight at the end of his long and arduous mission.
I thought so, too. And it led me to believe that I would have to get the finest car, have the highest paying job, and spend tons of money on women to get them to like me. All my friends thought that too. The bad thing is, looking back, neither of us had much luck with the girls.
"Geez, if I keep working hard and I'm a nice guy who knows the right kind of flowers to buy," I thought, "women will like me." After all, whenever you ask a woman for advice, that's what they will tell you to do. Later, I discovered that women give terrible and bad advice! They provide you with the map to become relationship material only. Take their advice, and you'll be an easily controlled beta who has to wait months before sex, as opposed to an arousing alpha with whom women have sex right away.
Being a sophomore in college, I was very much in love with my roommate. I did all the right things that I thought I had to do to like him. He left the toilet seat downstairs. I would buy their CDs. I fixed things for her in our apartment. He even cleaned the place when she messed Everything up.
She told me it was so cute. But we never had sex. She never felt any attraction whatsoever to me. I was too… good. And good means beta.
Later, I became friends with a guy who seemed to be the opposite of what I thought of what a guy should be like. He wasn't spending money on women, he wasn't excited about shopping with girls, and he wasn't trying to impress women with his car or career ambitions.
But this man constantly had women who admired him, swirling around him, flirted with him, and had sex with him. He did, and I later realized that he displayed alpha male qualities that made women attracted to him on a primitive level.
Everything about him and how he conducted himself reflected her sincere belief that he was a good match. It was the attitude of power from which all his success flowed.
Due to his belief in being a good match, he:
- He would have sex only with women who had earned that honor.
- I would only feel affection towards women who had earned that privilege
- He would only be interested in women if they said something interesting and not just babbled.
Once you've fully embraced this mindset that you're a good match (and not her), you'll be more attractive. It is a fundamental part of human psychology that we tend to assign a higher value to what is not readily available. It is the basic concept of supply and demand: anything that is less in supply demands a higher demand price than usual.
From rare baseball cards to stamps, there are examples of the scarcity principle everywhere. Traders take advantage of it and abuse it all the time.
As an alpha, you can take advantage of this too, and you can increase your value through the following three secrets:
● Being Unavailable for a woman is the advantage you gain, and it is rewarding for Everything you have to invest. (If you take this attitude, how much patience do you think he will have for those women who put him in the "relationship" category and make him wait months for sex ?! Not much!)
● Don't jump in to return phone calls so quickly. As an alpha, you are a busy man, and women need to gain your attention. And when you're on the phone, you'll be the first to hang up, not because some dating book told him to, but because you really are a busy man.
● Not being available for appointments if you have other things to do on your agenda. (And by the way, to be attractive, you must be doing things with your life besides chasing skirts.)
Let me say this again because it is important — by not always being available, you will raise your value. When you adopt the mindset that you are a man of high value deciding for yourself if a woman is worth making time, you will also have certain tolerance rules for her behaviors. When she is not within your expectations, you withdraw your attention.
As an alpha, you live the life you want, free from others' need for approval. (Unfortunately, most people don't live the life they want for precisely this reason, that is, they are afraid of being disapproved.)
Consequently, you move towards the things you want and away from the things you don't want. You are a man of high value, and you are worthy of being treated as such by others.
Creating Your Own Reality
Your world is what you perceive it to be. On the Internet, you can find an immense range of beliefs and ideas, and all of those beliefs are supported by people's own observations.
For example, many religious sites talk about God as if it is obvious that He exists, while atheists say that does not make sense. Read in-depth, and you will find interesting arguments for both views. How can that be that both sides are right? It is because each person has their own vision of reality.
What if a leg is broken? That's bad? You're probably thinking, "Of course it's bad, damn it." But suppose you were a British soldier in 1914 and that broken leg luckily prevented you from being cannon fodder on the Western Front. Then you would thank heaven for his broken leg and his crutches!
Here's the detail: reality is what you perceive it to be. There is no objective reality. Everything is open to interpretation. What would you think of a rainy day? You will have a completely different perspective depending on whether you want to go on a picnic or a farmer suffering through a drought.
Therefore, you have the power to see the world the way you want. You can have your own reality, your own framework of things.
A person with a weak reality is consumed by the perceptions of the world of others.
A person with a strong reality is unaffected by others' perceptions and instead drags them into his world.
Let's say you go to a nightclub and have trouble finding a place to park. A beta that allows external factors to control it will be disturbed by this. But you can come up with a way to keep yourself from being disturbed. Not finding a place to park means there will be many people in the clubs, which means many more women.
Have you ever got caught in traffic? That's not so bad, because it's an opportunity to take a break, relax, meditate, and maybe listen to some music. You don't have to join the rest of the pack by getting upset. You have the power to have a positive perception of events.
Now let's look at what kind of frame you have when talking about yourself. You want to have the framework in which you are an award that women want to win.