This is very illuminating and helpful. Will have plenty to self-reflect on.
But it seems like a one-sided transaction. She loves him because she he gives her stuff and does stuff for her. Why does he love her? What does he get in return, and how is it equal to what he gives?
re: "Encourage men to discuss the issues they face, and listen to them."
Arrived at a recent take that men's emotional privacy is important to respect and that not respecting it is directly how you get to Tate-ism etc. Masculine ideals taboo externalizing one's emotions because men tend to react to adversity by doing and so it's important that the baseline be personal responsibility, especially for when the doing gets fucked up. When you encourage men to externalize their emotional angst, you give them license to behave badly for reasons that they no longer have to feel responsible for and will consequently seek no change to modify. Men can absolutely be deeply emotional, but directing that internally is the briefest of necessary stop-gaps between "I feel X" and "therefore I'm about to do Y, is this a good idea?"
How does being extroverted and social in a men’s group lead to dates with women? I can’t tell but it seems like you met your partner through a dating app. Being needed is nice but if it’s all by people you don’t want to date, I don’t know if that’s going to do much.
It sounds like the main issue for your rationalist groups was that there were no women. As far as I know, the turn out in most rationalist groups is still very heavily male. Most men gravitate towards being social in their preferred hobbies, which are gender biased. Another issue is that while you might like your hobby, it might more generally not attract the type of individual you’d be best fit to date.
I guess my point is that your personal story doesn’t seem to align with the narrative.
Over the past 10 years I've had phases where I was leading a team, the guy more or less holding a small company together during a chaotic time, running a "cool" 500-person event — or quite aimless with what felt like no good options for doing anything useful for anyone available.
Sometimes there were women around in the former contexts who were directly impressed by what I was doing (it led to dates, but I also missed many great opportunities because I was a total idiot lol), but even when there weren't, how I was feeling about myself in the former situations vs. the latter carried over into other contexts and made dating a lot easier, and I think other people could tell.
Of course it's optimal if you can directly display your competence and usefulness with plenty of single women in your "target demographic" around, but my point is that even when you can't, having "a thing" that makes you feel productive and useful will likely make it a lot easier to meet someone somewhere else too.
N.B. this doesn't really mean you will be dropped by the wayside if you fall out of love with your job — many friends, including and especially women, have been extremely patient and supportive during my more aimless/lost times — but if you meet someone new while you yourself sort of don't think you're doing anything useful with your life, they are likely to believe you too.
I just don’t think that really translates to things like online dating swipe culture. Whether or not you’re “needed” at work and other situations isn’t going to really be demonstrable in 6 photos and 3 sentences. For your first few text messages, I don’t think it’ll show up either. Maybe it can appear after you get into some dates but that’s way down the pipeline that most men don’t struggle with anywhere near like the initial funnel. This article is about the initial funnel as well.
How did you get dates out of these things? If you’re in a high position of authority, typically having any relationship start at work is practically outlawed. If your event is somehow full of your target demo then I guess lucky you but that seems pretty hard for most men to accomplish. I’ve also run a lot of events and it never led to anything.
Idk man. My experience and that I see of many others is that people can need things from you but not want to fuck you still. They seem pretty unrelated for most scenarios.
> I just don’t think that really translates to things like online dating swipe culture. (...) Maybe it can appear after you get into some dates but that’s way down the pipeline that most men don’t struggle with anywhere near like the initial funnel.
This is obviously highly individual, but personally I dread the thought of going on a first date when I don't have some sense of purpose or progress or agency in the rest of my life, so even if it's not something conveyed on an app profile. YMMV.
> How did you get dates out of these things?
Again, part of it is just that I found it much easier to date people I'd met online or elsewhere IRL on the basis of the confidence it gave me. I did date a coworker once (I had no authority over her, and also little "formal" authority in the company in general despite my standing, it was a small and very non-corporate place). Re. the events I did maybe get lucky, I wouldn't say "full of", but it seemed like a well-selected environment for people I get along with. It just kinda happens, you're exposed to each other repeatedly, you start talking, you find an excuse to text each other, maybe you end up going out at some point. Again, YMMV, I don't know enough about you and your life to tell you how this does and doesn't apply in your context.
> Idk man. My experience and that I see of many others is that people can need things from you but not want to fuck you still.
Of course. Most people who "need something" from me aren't romantically interested in me either, and many aren't women. My point was just that when I'm feeling useful in some way it makes me a generally better and more attractive person.
And like, when I derive a sense of purpose from being the guy who knows the legacy codebase at work inside and out that doesn't mean women are into me because they need someone to help them navigate that legacy codebase, it's just nicer to be with someone purposeful who feels good about themselves and has demonstrated competence. Of course they can't tell that from your picture on Tinder or whatever, but it shows when you interact with people.
I think there's countless different ways in which guys struggle with dating and relationships, no one story gives a theory of all of them. And it's also important to distinguish between "having no sense of purpose/project you like/... is a turn-off, and XYZ helps with that" vs. "doing XYZ is a direct way to get dates".
I’m just reiterating on the idea that the article is really about the initial funnel - attracting women to begin with and yet I’d say this is aspect you’re talking about is much more about sustaining attraction.
You’re not getting dates based off of this behavior. You’re keeping women who are already interested to stick around with this part.
Maybe this helps some people but I’ve never felt the “need to be needed.” I don’t feel like I need to impress someone, have them rely on me, or be a person who knows more than others and is a go to expert or whatever. I’d be completely fine with self-sufficiency. I’ve never noticed some correlation between being useful and getting more romantic traction either. I’ve only seen that correlate with people trying to use me. The more money, knowledge, etc. I have the more people who are looking to use others end up gravitating towards me. It makes sense and has little to do with my actual behaviors or personhood and more to do with what that type of person seeks out.
I just don’t see the “how I feel about myself” aspect really doing anything when most people are evaluating you over 6 photos. It feels akin to the same irrational thoughts in The Secret or The Quantum You. I think it could have more effect in real life for situations where you’re on the margin with someone but that’s slim odds. Most people want to be physically attracted to their partner and as far as I can tell, this won’t address that or help you find people who are less choosy or into whatever you are.
All the men mentioned in the ACX review got a date with the author — they all passed the initial funnel. And then they all failed miserably because they had no core of self that they were aligned with and proud of. My article is very clearly saying that if you're lost in the way these men are lost, being on apps and calculating your funnel is the LAST thing you should be doing. That you read my article precisely backwards suggests that you're not really "close to getting it", you're getting the wrong lessons from the wrong post on the wrong Substack *for you*.
On a deeper level, being someone that you're happy being is NOT instrumental. It's not something you LARP at to get dates. It's not something other people "try to use you" for. It's the actual place you're trying to arrive, a place from which everything looks completely different from how it looks to you. Being liked by women (and men) you interact with is a good objective indicator of whether you're there or not, but neither being liked nor being whole are instrumental steps to get to the other.
You can be lost like these men are lost but also lack the dating funnel. That’s more of what I took from it. Especially since she seems to talk at length about a particular type of man who gets literally no dates or attraction or anything but would change drastically as a person if he did get meaningful attention. She writes like she’s the one person who is willing to go on a date with anyone - not that she’s purely picking these men cause they’re fine specimens.
I have met many men who fit the narratives of these men and they are not going on dates.
Maybe both of these articles need the prepend of “I am assuming you’re a man who can get a good amount of dates off of apps, irl, crystal ball, etc. due to pure physical attraction or what have you.” As I didn’t see that being a requirement for either article to be read.
Damn, I feel a little called out here 😅
This is very illuminating and helpful. Will have plenty to self-reflect on.
But it seems like a one-sided transaction. She loves him because she he gives her stuff and does stuff for her. Why does he love her? What does he get in return, and how is it equal to what he gives?
Wow, this is so fucking good. So many profound insights here. Will be coming back to this one
re: "Encourage men to discuss the issues they face, and listen to them."
Arrived at a recent take that men's emotional privacy is important to respect and that not respecting it is directly how you get to Tate-ism etc. Masculine ideals taboo externalizing one's emotions because men tend to react to adversity by doing and so it's important that the baseline be personal responsibility, especially for when the doing gets fucked up. When you encourage men to externalize their emotional angst, you give them license to behave badly for reasons that they no longer have to feel responsible for and will consequently seek no change to modify. Men can absolutely be deeply emotional, but directing that internally is the briefest of necessary stop-gaps between "I feel X" and "therefore I'm about to do Y, is this a good idea?"
Great fuckin’ article, has given me some things to think about
Loved this, no notes, every young man should read this. Ideally before downloading a million dating apps.
How does being extroverted and social in a men’s group lead to dates with women? I can’t tell but it seems like you met your partner through a dating app. Being needed is nice but if it’s all by people you don’t want to date, I don’t know if that’s going to do much.
It sounds like the main issue for your rationalist groups was that there were no women. As far as I know, the turn out in most rationalist groups is still very heavily male. Most men gravitate towards being social in their preferred hobbies, which are gender biased. Another issue is that while you might like your hobby, it might more generally not attract the type of individual you’d be best fit to date.
I guess my point is that your personal story doesn’t seem to align with the narrative.
Over the past 10 years I've had phases where I was leading a team, the guy more or less holding a small company together during a chaotic time, running a "cool" 500-person event — or quite aimless with what felt like no good options for doing anything useful for anyone available.
Sometimes there were women around in the former contexts who were directly impressed by what I was doing (it led to dates, but I also missed many great opportunities because I was a total idiot lol), but even when there weren't, how I was feeling about myself in the former situations vs. the latter carried over into other contexts and made dating a lot easier, and I think other people could tell.
Of course it's optimal if you can directly display your competence and usefulness with plenty of single women in your "target demographic" around, but my point is that even when you can't, having "a thing" that makes you feel productive and useful will likely make it a lot easier to meet someone somewhere else too.
N.B. this doesn't really mean you will be dropped by the wayside if you fall out of love with your job — many friends, including and especially women, have been extremely patient and supportive during my more aimless/lost times — but if you meet someone new while you yourself sort of don't think you're doing anything useful with your life, they are likely to believe you too.
I just don’t think that really translates to things like online dating swipe culture. Whether or not you’re “needed” at work and other situations isn’t going to really be demonstrable in 6 photos and 3 sentences. For your first few text messages, I don’t think it’ll show up either. Maybe it can appear after you get into some dates but that’s way down the pipeline that most men don’t struggle with anywhere near like the initial funnel. This article is about the initial funnel as well.
How did you get dates out of these things? If you’re in a high position of authority, typically having any relationship start at work is practically outlawed. If your event is somehow full of your target demo then I guess lucky you but that seems pretty hard for most men to accomplish. I’ve also run a lot of events and it never led to anything.
Idk man. My experience and that I see of many others is that people can need things from you but not want to fuck you still. They seem pretty unrelated for most scenarios.
> I just don’t think that really translates to things like online dating swipe culture. (...) Maybe it can appear after you get into some dates but that’s way down the pipeline that most men don’t struggle with anywhere near like the initial funnel.
This is obviously highly individual, but personally I dread the thought of going on a first date when I don't have some sense of purpose or progress or agency in the rest of my life, so even if it's not something conveyed on an app profile. YMMV.
> How did you get dates out of these things?
Again, part of it is just that I found it much easier to date people I'd met online or elsewhere IRL on the basis of the confidence it gave me. I did date a coworker once (I had no authority over her, and also little "formal" authority in the company in general despite my standing, it was a small and very non-corporate place). Re. the events I did maybe get lucky, I wouldn't say "full of", but it seemed like a well-selected environment for people I get along with. It just kinda happens, you're exposed to each other repeatedly, you start talking, you find an excuse to text each other, maybe you end up going out at some point. Again, YMMV, I don't know enough about you and your life to tell you how this does and doesn't apply in your context.
> Idk man. My experience and that I see of many others is that people can need things from you but not want to fuck you still.
Of course. Most people who "need something" from me aren't romantically interested in me either, and many aren't women. My point was just that when I'm feeling useful in some way it makes me a generally better and more attractive person.
And like, when I derive a sense of purpose from being the guy who knows the legacy codebase at work inside and out that doesn't mean women are into me because they need someone to help them navigate that legacy codebase, it's just nicer to be with someone purposeful who feels good about themselves and has demonstrated competence. Of course they can't tell that from your picture on Tinder or whatever, but it shows when you interact with people.
I think there's countless different ways in which guys struggle with dating and relationships, no one story gives a theory of all of them. And it's also important to distinguish between "having no sense of purpose/project you like/... is a turn-off, and XYZ helps with that" vs. "doing XYZ is a direct way to get dates".
I’m just reiterating on the idea that the article is really about the initial funnel - attracting women to begin with and yet I’d say this is aspect you’re talking about is much more about sustaining attraction.
You’re not getting dates based off of this behavior. You’re keeping women who are already interested to stick around with this part.
Maybe this helps some people but I’ve never felt the “need to be needed.” I don’t feel like I need to impress someone, have them rely on me, or be a person who knows more than others and is a go to expert or whatever. I’d be completely fine with self-sufficiency. I’ve never noticed some correlation between being useful and getting more romantic traction either. I’ve only seen that correlate with people trying to use me. The more money, knowledge, etc. I have the more people who are looking to use others end up gravitating towards me. It makes sense and has little to do with my actual behaviors or personhood and more to do with what that type of person seeks out.
I just don’t see the “how I feel about myself” aspect really doing anything when most people are evaluating you over 6 photos. It feels akin to the same irrational thoughts in The Secret or The Quantum You. I think it could have more effect in real life for situations where you’re on the margin with someone but that’s slim odds. Most people want to be physically attracted to their partner and as far as I can tell, this won’t address that or help you find people who are less choosy or into whatever you are.
All the men mentioned in the ACX review got a date with the author — they all passed the initial funnel. And then they all failed miserably because they had no core of self that they were aligned with and proud of. My article is very clearly saying that if you're lost in the way these men are lost, being on apps and calculating your funnel is the LAST thing you should be doing. That you read my article precisely backwards suggests that you're not really "close to getting it", you're getting the wrong lessons from the wrong post on the wrong Substack *for you*.
On a deeper level, being someone that you're happy being is NOT instrumental. It's not something you LARP at to get dates. It's not something other people "try to use you" for. It's the actual place you're trying to arrive, a place from which everything looks completely different from how it looks to you. Being liked by women (and men) you interact with is a good objective indicator of whether you're there or not, but neither being liked nor being whole are instrumental steps to get to the other.
You can be lost like these men are lost but also lack the dating funnel. That’s more of what I took from it. Especially since she seems to talk at length about a particular type of man who gets literally no dates or attraction or anything but would change drastically as a person if he did get meaningful attention. She writes like she’s the one person who is willing to go on a date with anyone - not that she’s purely picking these men cause they’re fine specimens.
I have met many men who fit the narratives of these men and they are not going on dates.
Maybe both of these articles need the prepend of “I am assuming you’re a man who can get a good amount of dates off of apps, irl, crystal ball, etc. due to pure physical attraction or what have you.” As I didn’t see that being a requirement for either article to be read.
Can you write a version of this article for men who are seeking out romantic monogamous relationships with other men?