Dr. K and Kruti Review Pickup Artist Advice

Join us today as we dive into the world of dating and relationships, exploring the psychology behind pickup artists and red pill ideas!

feedback we get is "Oh, this person doesn't represent us," or "This person is not a true red pillar," or "This person is not a true incel." So, it's important to recognize that there's a lot of variability within these communities.

Welcome to another Healthy Gamer GG stream. My name is Dr. Al Kenoi. Just a reminder that although I'm a doctor, nothing we discuss on stream today is intended to be taken as medical advice. Everything is for educational or entertainment purposes only. If y'all have a medical concern or question, please go see a licensed professional.

Today, we are going to be doing a fun stream in honor of it being a Friday, which is often the time when we allow dating and relationship discussions on our Reddit. So, we're going to be talking a little bit about dating and relationships today. Gruy may be joining us after about an hour to an hour and a half.

We will be discussing pickup artist and red pill kind of ideas. We will look at a couple of posts and comment on them from a psychiatric or psychological perspective. I'm super excited about doing this because I dipped my toes in the pickup artist community in the early 2000s. I had a friend who was like, "Hey bro, check this out." This was back when I was a freshman in college at the University of Texas, a party school, and we were trying to pick up chicks and get laid.

In the early 2000s, there was this pickup artist community, and my friend introduced me to it. Over time, this evolved into red pill, manosphere, and other movements. I learned a lot of science, psychology, and psychiatry, and worked with many men and women, including those who identify as Alphas, red pillars, and incels. I have a lot of thoughts on the subject, some of which are opinions and some informed by science.

Today, we will talk about these topics. A couple of quick disclaimers: there is a lot of variability within these communities. If you look at pickup artist, red pill communities, female dating strategy, etc., there's this idea that they're monolithic, but they are actually quite heterogeneous. Sometimes, we talk to someone from these communities who self-identifies as a red pillar, alpha, or incel, and we often hear feedback like, "This person doesn't represent us," or "This person is not a true red pillar/incel." It's important to recognize this variability as we discuss these topics.

=> 00:09:59

Not all communities are monolithic; there's a lot of diversity and even good within them.

Thoughts are opinions, and some of them, I think, are informed by science fairly well. Today, we're going to talk about that stuff. A couple of quick disclaimers: there's a lot of variability within these communities. If you look at pickup artist, red pill kind of communities, female dating strategy, or whatever, there's this idea that they're all monolithic, but as we'll see today, there are a lot of different perspectives within these communities, and these are heterogeneous. Sometimes, we'll even talk to someone from these communities—someone who self-identifies as a red pillar, an alpha, or an incel. One of the most common pieces of feedback we get on those streams is, "Hey, that person wasn't a real incel or a real red pillar. I'm a real red pillar. I'm a real incel. You should talk to me." So, there's a lot of heterogeneity that we need to acknowledge.

At the same time, there are certain common ideas and beliefs that develop in different ways, and we're going to be addressing some of those core ideas today. Keep in mind that everything we discuss may not represent what you think real pickup artists do, and that's fair enough. There's just variability within it.

Another disclaimer is that we are going to be talking about a lot of stuff that people find controversial. We're going to be looking directly at some of these ideas from the horse's mouth, and some of that stuff can be kind of toxic to read. We'll try to keep things civil and friendly, but just to let you all know.

I'll do my best to keep this organized, but we're going to bounce back and forth between different posts and perspectives. I'll comment on posts and also try to explain certain concepts from start to finish, which I think are really important to understand. One of the biggest things about these communities is that there's a lot of good in them. Communities of predominantly men who have struggled with certain problems come together and try to solve their problems. They stumble upon particular discoveries, share those discoveries, and these become things like canon.

I think there's a lot of good in them, and we're actually seeing the most healthy version of a lot of this stuff nowadays. Hopefully, that will become clear when we look at some of these posts. For example, if I interact with people who are red pillars, half of them are like, "Go to therapy, bro. You got to sort this stuff out." They're also very positive in the sense of taking control of your life, moving towards financial independence, focusing on your appearance and health, and building a life that is independent and worth living. There's a lot of positivity in them that I think is quite healthy.

The challenge is that it tends to get intermixed with a lot of negativity. We have a whole spectrum from the positive end of the stuff to the very toxic negative end.

Let's dive in. We're going to do this in a couple of different ways. I have something to react to real quick. Be careful, chat; this could be loud. I'm going to go on mute.

That's interesting. I'm guessing that most people are going to expect me to say this is insane, but I think the really insane thing is that there may really be some...

=> 00:14:28

Grounding techniques like tapping or patting specific body points can help regulate emotions and reduce stress.

With a lot of negativity, we have a whole spectrum ranging from the positive end of the spectrum to the negative, which is very toxic. Make sense? So let's dive in. What we're going to do is approach this in a couple of different ways.

Firstly, I have something to react to real quick. So, let's proceed with that. Be careful, chat; this could be loud. I'm going to go on mute.

That's interesting. I'm guessing that most people are going to expect me to say this is insane, but I think the really insane thing is that there may really be some merit to this. Let's understand that this person is saying to Pat the eight voids, which are like your ephemeral regions, when you're feeling sad or angry. The wildest thing about this is that there's actually some evidence that this is pretty effective.

I don't know that this is going to be a cure for all of your ailments, but we do know a couple of things. The first is that if we look at any kind of emotional regulation technique, a grounding technique used when you are feeling a negative emotion is generally very effective. It doesn't matter what you do; you can do breathing, box breathing, pushups, or ice diving. One of the interesting things we know from emotional regulation techniques is that if you do something that anchors yourself in the body, it will help you get out of your own head and emotions.

I see this as a very physically engaging technique. There's a sequence to it; you do it for a certain amount of time. It sounds like you can't just do it in 3 seconds; you have to Pat the eight voids. It's quite physically grounding. It's not like observing your breath, which can easily lead to getting lost in thought. Patting yourself is quite grounding, so there's some validity to it.

The second thing is that there's some evidence for something called the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT). I first came across this in the early 2000s and thought it was a bunch of BS. There's a hypothesis that trauma is stored within the body and that by literally tapping on certain parts of the body, we can release stored traumas. Initially, I didn't think this had much physiological basis, but now there are some studies and meta-analyses of tapping or EFT that have shown it can be an effective treatment for trauma.

The question then becomes whether these techniques are effective for trauma because emotions are stored in the body or if it's more of a common factors kind of thing. This means that it's not the particular intervention that's helpful but the fact that you go to a compassionate, caring person week after week who calms you down and decreases your cortisol level. This human connection can be sufficient for change.

If we look at research on psychotherapy, we've figured out that having someone who cares about you and provides stability is crucial. The content of what they say isn't actually that important. Whether they're doing psychoanalysis of your dreams or thought logs in CBT, the effect size is comparable.

That being said, it is possible that some of the hypothesized mechanisms of EFT or something like tapping on the eight voids are valid. We just don't know that yet. There are some studies of things like acupuncture that show good outcomes independent of our understanding of physiology. Some things acupuncture can do don't correlate with nerves and such. Similarly, meditation techniques have been effective for a long time.

=> 00:18:28

The science might not fully understand it yet, but alternative therapies like reflexology and acupuncture can have real, beneficial effects.

The content of what people say during therapy sessions, whether it's psychoanalysis of dreams or thought logs in CBT, isn't actually that important. The effect size is pretty comparable between these methods. However, it is possible that some of the hypothesized mechanisms of EFT or techniques like tapping on the eight voids are valid, though we just don't know that yet. There are studies on acupuncture, for instance, that show quite good outcomes independent of our understanding of physiology. Some things that acupuncture can do don't correlate with nerves and other physiological aspects.

Similarly, meditation techniques have been effective long before science understood their benefits. There could be some underlying physiology that we're not aware of. Back in my monk days, I encountered something called marash shastra, which is the knowledge of pressure points in the body. There is even a text that talks about 9 or 12 kill points in the body—areas that, if hit, can be fatal. Some of these points map onto known physiology, while others do not. For example, the femoral region has two major arteries where a cut could be lethal. There is a lot of physiological stuff in these areas, and some areas where we are not sure.

My guess is that your mileage may vary if you try this kind of stuff, but there is some scientific plausibility that it could help. It's not as crazy as it seems. Speaking of things that are not as crazy as they seem, I once made my friend poop using reflexology pressure, which is actually pretty common. There are certain regions on the bottom of the foot, particularly the outer part, that supposedly stimulate the colon and can cause bowel movements.

There is enough validity to reflexology that the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) has a warning for pregnant women because reflexology can induce labor. This is quite wild. I tried to find the ACOG bulletin on this but couldn't locate it. However, I did find a randomized controlled study on premenstrual symptoms treated with ear, hand, and foot reflexology. The clinical findings support the use of reflexology for treating PMS, showing a significantly greater decrease in symptoms for women given true reflexology treatment compared to those in the placebo group. This study, though interesting, only involved 35 women.

=> 00:23:18

Reflexology might actually help with PMS symptoms, but the science is rarely black or white.

I found something interesting during my literature search: a randomized controlled study on premenstrual symptoms treated with ear, hand, and foot reflexology. The clinical findings support the use of these reflexology methods for the treatment of PMS. An ANOVA for repeated measures demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in premenstrual symptoms for women given true reflexology treatment compared to those in the placebo group. The placebo group received placebo reflexology, which is intriguing. This trial involved only 35 women, so while the findings are interesting, the sample size is quite small.

In studies on reflexology or CAM-oriented treatments, we must be cautious about the control groups. Often, the placebo is just a waitlist, where one group receives reflexology and the other group waits for their turn. This is not a sufficient control. However, if placebo reflexology means performing reflexology without focusing on theoretical points, and there's still a statistical difference, it suggests there's more to the story. Both groups receive some form of touch on these body parts, yet there's a difference in outcomes.

The study also used analysis of variance, which is good, but again, the sample size is small. Another interesting aspect is the idea that reflexology might induce labor, which could explain why feet can be an erogenous zone for some women. The hypothesis is that the nerves from the leg and foot enter the spinal cord in a similar area to the nerves from the genitals in the sacral region. This could be why some people have foot fetishes, although this theory has both supporting and counter evidence.

Science is rarely black or white; it's often about balancing different pieces of evidence. For example, should you prescribe antidepressants to pregnant women? Some studies suggest that antidepressants can increase the risk of autism, but there's also evidence that untreated depression during pregnancy and after birth can do more harm to the child than the antidepressants would. We need to consider the health costs of both scenarios.

If Mrs. K gets upset, I'll just give her a foot massage to make things right. Now, speaking of nuanced science and the lack of understanding of it, let's talk about pickup artists and dating advice. I really want to find that ACOG bulletin. Hold on, chat, I'm not giving up yet. Ah, fail. GG, chat. Okay, let's move on.

=> 00:27:36

Negging isn't about insulting women; it's about showing disinterest to manipulate their attention.

We have a mom who's depressed, and we need to consider the health costs of that. Things get complicated. If Mrs. K is going to be upset, I'll just give her a foot massage, and we'll be good. Speaking of nuanced science and the lack of understanding of nuanced science, let's talk about pickup artists and dating advice.

I really want to find that ACOG bulletin. Actually, I know where I can find it. Hold on, chat. I'm not willing to give up yet. Sorry, one second. No, ah damn it, fail. Okay, GG chat, I was wrecked.

So, let's talk about pickup artists, red pill, etc. The first thing we're going to discuss is the art of the neg. One of the challenges with this topic is that often times, the posts on pickup artists and red pill forums are like real walls of text. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but we don't have time to read all that. I've taken the liberty of summarizing the important parts of the posts.

Let's keep in mind that anytime someone on the internet reviews something, they're going to be selective in what they choose to include and respond to. Often times, we don't offer a complete picture. I want to say from the get-go that I'm leaving some stuff out. However, I don't think I'm leaving out a lot of the substantive stuff; most of what I tried to trim were the examples as opposed to the key points. I did my best to pull out the key thesis.

Let's talk about this concept of negging. Some people think negging is vocal rape. Maybe this will clear up that misconception. To clarify, negging is simply a form of teasing or flirting. Unfortunately, the red pill and seduction community have a reputation for being full of manipulative douchebags—guys going around insulting women and lowering their self-esteem, hoping it'll get them to drop their panties faster than they'd drop a heavy bowling ball. This misconception relies on a misunderstanding of what negging actually is.

A neg isn't an insult. A neg is merely the kind of comment that someone who is interested in her wouldn't make. Based on the ever-so-rampant "women are wonderful" effect, negs don't even have to be negative. What they're really doing is negating your own interest. For example, another classic neg is, "You and I would not get along; we're too alike." You're not saying anything bad about her, merely that you're not interested in dating her. The reality is that most other women, even very attractive women, are constantly being made to feel inadequate about their appearance. Therefore, these women are not standing on pedestals that need to be knocked off before you can talk to them. In fact, most of the time they'll respond much more positively towards the flattery inherent in your attention.

So, let's talk a little bit about negging. Negging is this concept that if you're interested in someone, you should, on the one hand, say something negative to them. That's literally what negging means—sometimes you should be insulting to the person you're attracted to. On the other side, this person makes the argument that negging is a way to demonstrate a lack of interest. Let's understand both of these perspectives.

It's my firm belief that one of the most solid foundations of success in the pickup artist community is creating a sample size so large that eventually you find a psychologically damaged and/or traumatized woman for whom some of these techniques will work. A big part of this is that you have to approach thousands of women and use these techniques on thousands of women. When you use these techniques on thousands of women, you will get better at it, and it will work. There's a lot of validity to that.

=> 00:31:35

Negging isn't a clever technique; it's exploiting trauma and low self-esteem in vulnerable individuals.

The argument that negging is a way to demonstrate a lack of interest needs to be understood from multiple perspectives. It is my firm belief that one of the most solid foundations of success in the pickup artist community is creating a sample size so large that eventually you find a psychologically damaged and/or traumatized woman for whom some of these techniques will work. A big part of this involves approaching thousands of women and using these techniques repeatedly. When you use these techniques on thousands of women, you will get better at it, and it will work to some extent. There is a lot of validity to this approach, but let's understand the mechanism behind it.

If I walk down the street and try to break into a thousand houses, eventually I'm going to find someone who did not lock their door. Similarly, there are a lot of people out there, including women, who have been traumatized. As they struggle with things like low self-esteem, being mean or insulting to them can actually trigger some kind of sexual engagement. For example, some people have an anxious attachment style and may utilize sexual activity as a form of creating intimacy or emotional regulation. If you keep on checking with various women, you will eventually find someone who has been abused growing up, which is not that uncommon. Statistics show that around 30 to 37% of women will have some experience of sexual assault in their life. The odds are in your favor if you're doing this with hundreds or thousands of women; one out of three will fit this profile, and eventually, you will succeed in having a sexual relationship with someone.

However, this success is not because the technique is great but because it exploits a vulnerability in a population that has been traumatized. Once you do this, it can work, but it's an unfortunate and unethical approach. These techniques are not valuable in a moral sense; they are valuable only if your goal is to take advantage of traumatized individuals. The reason these techniques often involve approaching a large number of people is that if you encounter one of the 50% of women who have a secure attachment style, they will likely reject you outright. Thus, a big part of the pickup artist and red pill success hinges on using a scattershot method, metaphorically speaking, covering a lot of ground to eventually find someone this will work for. This does not mean the method is good; there are far better methods, which we will discuss later.

On the severe end of negging, another reason people like it is that it makes them feel better about themselves. If you're a dude who has been hurt by women, this resonates deeply. I feel super confident in saying that 100% of pickup artists, red pills, and incels I have worked with have had at least one, if not multiple, traumatic experiences with women. A lot of this behavior is born out of traumatic experiences. Anytime you get traumatized by someone, there's a power dynamic involved. This person hurt you, and in red pill and pickup artist communities, there's a lot of talk about power and power dynamics. People become obsessed with power usually because they have had traumatic experiences where they were made to feel weak.

=> 00:35:37

Trauma often drives people to seek power over others to feel less vulnerable.

A dude who has been hurt by women often feels super confident about his experiences. I would say 100% of pickup artists, red pills, and incels that I have worked with have had at least one traumatic, if not multiple traumatic, experiences with women. A lot of this behavior is born out of these traumatic experiences. Anytime you get traumatized by someone, there's a power dynamic involved—this person hurt you. If you look at red pill and pickup artist content, they talk a lot about power and power dynamics. Power is everything—power, power, power. Why are people so obsessed with power? Usually, it’s because they have had traumatic experiences in their own life where they were made to feel weak. You loved this girl, did everything for her, and she ended up taking advantage of your kindness, friend-zoning you, and then going and [expletive] a different dude. You feel incredibly powerless and then try to create this power dynamic.

One of the things we know is if you look at the psychology of people who were abused, why are they more likely to be abusive? Think about a child growing up who is abused. It’s wild because, on the one hand, plenty of people say to themselves, "If I have kids one day, I will never do this to my children because it is so harmful." They aim to correct the mistakes of their parents and vow never to do to someone else what has been done to them. However, some people think, "I am weak in this situation; the right way to solve this is to not be in this position but to be in the other position." There is a position of power and a position of weakness. We psychologically try to flip ourselves to the other side because then we feel better about ourselves. There’s the victim, the predator, and the prey. I hate being the prey, so I’m going to become the predator because the predator is never the prey. We see both of these reactions, and this is evident in the red pill and pickup artist communities. I was hurt, therefore I’m going to put someone else down to make me feel better.

There’s a lot of good stuff in this mentality. What’s interesting about a lot of the red pill content is that they get a lot of things right. This conception relies on a misunderstanding of what an egg is. An egg isn’t an insult; rather, it is merely the kind of comment that someone who was interested in her wouldn’t make. This is what’s really interesting about the pickup artist and red pill mentality—they do things to someone else, but the primary area of action is actually internal. They do all this stuff to women, but what they’re really doing is trying to change something internally. If my problem as a dude is that I get way too interested in women and don’t set boundaries, letting them take advantage of me, instead of working on that internally, I can engage in certain techniques to try to change my view of them. If my problem is that I value women too much, I can engage in a technique that changes my value towards them.

This is what’s really wild and not well understood in the community. A lot of these techniques are outward-facing, but the actual mechanism of action is internal. When I’m super into a person, thinking they have the nicest hair, are the kindest, prettiest, most compassionate, and I love the way they smell, those kinds of thoughts lead us down a path that turns us into a beta. To avoid that path, we need to start to devalue them. If I devalue them, I can behave in a more balanced way. This approach is not bad at all. However, the key thing is that you don’t have to insult someone to achieve this. You don’t have to put someone down, which is what some people in the pickup artist community do. They hunt for thousands of people and eventually find someone who is psychologically damaged enough for this [expletive] to work.

=> 00:39:45

The key to overcoming fear of rejection is to reduce your emotional investment.

To avoid the path that turns us into a beta, we need to start to devalue them. By devaluing them, we can behave in a more balanced way. This approach is actually not bad at all. The key thing is that you don't have to insult someone to achieve this balance; you don't have to put someone down. This person stumbled into the realization that the real source of nagging is not a traumatic reenactment where you are now in a powerful position, which is what some people do in the pickup artist community. They hunt for thousands of people and eventually find someone who is psychologically damaged enough for this to work.

Instead, it's about recognizing that when I negate my own interest in someone, I become more balanced, and that is really good. When we get overly invested in things, this person calls it negging. It's about decreasing your own interest, and once your interest is more balanced, you will behave in a better way. There is a lot of validity to this. The fear of rejection is so bad, but understanding that fear of rejection only hurts when you care is crucial. The more you care, the more the rejection hurts. People have sort of Darwinian evolutionary figured out that if they can reduce their caring towards someone else, they can make the fear of rejection hurt less, which is a fantastic segue into our next post.

The most important part of the game is not being emotionally invested. Emotional investment is occupying one's thoughts and emotions. You can't control how you feel, but you can control what you do. Where your actions go, your feelings will follow, and where your feelings go, your thoughts will follow. If you do loser things, you will eventually feel like a loser, even if you consciously tell yourself you don't give a [__]. Emotional investment is unattractive because people are attracted to lives that are more interesting, exciting, higher, and better than their own. If a woman knows she occupies your thoughts and emotions, she will assume your life sucks.

Secondly, emotional investment is unattractive because emotions are bad and scary. Our society acts like love is an emotion and our true selves are our emotions, but that's BS. Our value lies in what we can do when we are rational, what we've learned in our life, what we know how to do, and what we strive to achieve and be when we are clearheaded.

Emotional investment is when emotions occupy your thoughts and feelings. This is completely correct, but I would use the term attachment. In CBT, we use the phrase thought fusion to describe this quality. There is a situation where our emotions dominate our experience. For example, when I'm working with a patient who is suicidal, their emotion of hopelessness is so profound that it occupies the entirety of their mind. Their thinking is filled with suicidal thoughts, their actions are completely passive, and they become doormats who don't get out of bed. Their actions are shaped by this overwhelming emotional experience.

In my experience of working with people who are pickup artists, red pillars, etc., many of them start this way. A lot of this is about moving from an incel to a red pillar, from an incel to an alpha, or from a beta to an alpha. A beta is someone who has emotions, but emotions are considered bad. We want to be rational, not emotional. Being overly emotionally invested is a significant issue.

=> 00:44:01

Your actions shape your emotions and thoughts, so take positive steps even when you feel hopeless.

The emotional experience of individuals who are deeply affected by suicidal thoughts is so profound that it occupies the entirety of their mind and thinking. Their actions become completely passive; they become doormats, don't get out of bed, and their actions are shaped by this overwhelming emotional experience. In my experience of working with people who are pickup artists, red pillars, etc., many of them start this way. A lot of this is about moving from an incel to a red pillar, from an incel to an alpha, or from a beta to an alpha. If you look at a beta, a beta is someone who has emotions, but emotions are considered bad. The goal is to be rational and not driven by emotions.

Being overly emotionally invested is absolutely a bad thing, and not being able to temper your emotional investment is also a bad thing. I would call it attachment. I agree with the fundamental premise that if your emotions are running the show, they will drive your actions and thoughts. Rationally trying to tell yourself that this is not true doesn't work. There is a lot of positive thinking here because they say that irrespective of how you feel or what you think, you should focus on your actions because eventually, your actions will create emotions and thoughts. I agree with this 100%.

Where your actions go, your feelings will follow, and where your feelings go, your thoughts will follow. If you feel like a loser and do loser things, you will eventually feel like a loser. This is why, even if you're hopeless, I think you should go to therapy. The challenge of going to therapy is that people often say they don't know how it will help, can't imagine it helping, and don't understand the value of just talking about their problems. They might say, "I have a recessed chin, I'm 5 foot 4, I have no prospects, I'm a virgin," and they don't understand how therapy will fix these problems. Ultimately, it is the actions that matter, not the circumstances. When you go to therapy, your actions improve, you start to feel better, and then your thoughts will start to change as well.

If we're talking about something clinically oriented, then therapy is the right move. Many times, people work with a coach, and we have a coaching program that is quite successful and works well at this kind of stuff. Taking the action to engage with someone who will help you with your emotions and thoughts is very helpful. Taking the right action is fantastic, and people who come to me for therapy and keep showing up start to feel better emotionally, and their thoughts follow after that.

The bulk of the problem I see with a lot of the pickup artist, manosphere, and red pill thinking is that they start on solid foundations and have good experiential learning, but then they extrapolate and leave science behind. There is a big idea in these communities that these are scientifically based, but they are not really. Some of it is, but the majority isn't.

Let's understand why emotional investment is considered unattractive. Emotional investment is not an immediate turnoff. The science suggests very clearly that what makes investment unattractive is a discrepancy in emotional investment. When you're madly in love with someone and they don't know who you are, that is unattractive. But when you are madly in love with someone and they are madly in love with you, that is the most attractive. Think about the times when you've been madly head over heels in love. If the other person was madly head over heels in love with you too, would you be turned off? Absolutely not. In fact, that's what you want.

=> 00:48:17

Emotional investment is only unattractive when it's one-sided; mutual love is the most attractive.

The science suggests very clearly that what makes investment unattractive is a discrepancy in emotional investment. When you're madly in love with someone and they don't know who you are, that is unattractive. However, when you are madly in love with someone and they are madly in love with you, that is the most attractive. Think about the times when you've been madly head over heels in love. If the other person was madly head over heels in love with you too, would you be turned off from that? Absolutely not. In fact, that's what you want. For those of you in healthy, happy relationships, you'll sometimes find that you fall in love way too quickly, but since both of you fell in love, it's totally fine. Emotional investment is not unattractive; a discrepancy in emotional investment is unattractive. This is what we call creepy or cringe. Think about other times in your life where someone was deeply in love with you, but you didn't feel the same way—that's what makes it unattractive.

Here's my first problem with this kind of thinking: they make statements that are absolute and don't depend on the other person. There's no relationship, no understanding of the other person as part of the equation. A relationship is not about you being all this way and them being all that way. Human beings are not animals, although we are in some ways. The whole point of being human is that we may have a certain kind of nature, but we can run against some of our impulses.

When they make these kinds of generalizations that emotional investment is unattractive, it's important to remember that there is variation within the population. For example, if you look at statistics about genders or ethnicities, you'll find that there's far more variation within a population than there is between populations. This may sound confusing, so let me explain. If you look at ethnicities, people often say things like "Indians make good doctors." However, the difference between the best Indian doctor and the worst Indian doctor is greater than the difference between the average Indian doctor and the average doctor of any other ethnicity. Similarly, even though the majority of violent crimes are conducted by men, the gap between the most violent man and the least violent man is bigger than the gap between the most violent man and the most violent woman or the least violent man and the least violent woman. This variability within a population makes generalizations not useful.

If these generalizations were true, you wouldn't need psychotherapists. You could just have a set protocol where all psychotherapy would be the same for every single human being, or male psychotherapy would be different from female psychotherapy. There's a lot of individual variation. It's not that emotional investment is unattractive; it's that emotional investment is very attractive if it is matched by the other person, and that's a fact.

This is also why, in the pickup artist community, people adopt these kinds of ideas and, since they never want to get emotionally invested, very few of them actually enter healthy long-term relationships. They sever themselves from one of the most important requirements for long-term relationships. They optimize for the short-term gain of a relationship, like getting laid, and in doing so, they shoot themselves in the foot for the long game.

=> 00:52:24

Emotional investment is attractive when it's mutual, but focusing only on short-term gains can sabotage long-term relationship success.

Emotional investment is very attractive if it is matched by the other person. This is a fact. In the pickup artist community, many adopt ideas that discourage emotional investment, leading to few entering healthy long-term relationships. They optimize for short-term gains, like getting laid, but this approach hinders their chances for long-term success. It's akin to spending all resources in a video game to optimize early levels without saving for the late game.

Emotional investment is not an immediate turnoff unless it is unmatched by the other person. People are often attracted to lives that seem more interesting and exciting than their own. This leads to projection, a significant issue in the pickup artist community. When they claim that people are attracted to more exciting lives, it reflects their psychology more than it does women's psychology. They should introspect more.

Gift-giving illustrates this well. The meaning of a gift lies in the recipient's interpretation, not the giver's intention. For example, some women might equate the value of a gift with how much they are valued, but the giver might have different intentions. This discrepancy highlights how personal interpretations can vary significantly.

In relationships, some women do not need their partners to have more exciting lives. Many are fully capable of building exciting lives themselves. I've worked with numerous successful women, some earning hundreds of thousands or even millions, who have house husbands and are perfectly content. They are not seeking more exciting lives elsewhere, as evidenced by their openness in psychotherapy sessions.

The manosphere influencers often project their desires for a lavish lifestyle, driving fancy cars, and hosting women in mansions. This envy is within them, not in women. To understand what women want, one simply needs to engage in conversations with them.

=> 00:56:31

People are attracted to genuine emotional investment, not flashy lifestyles.

As a psychiatrist, I often hear from my patients when they feel like having an affair, and we work through it together. This discussion is more about what people find attractive. From my experience with reading about pickup artists and working with individuals who identify as red pillars or incels, I notice they long for a certain lifestyle. This is evident in the manosphere influencers, where people aspire to drive fancy cars, live in luxurious places, and hire women to create an illusion of desirability.

The envy lies within these individuals, not in women. To understand what women want, all you have to do is talk to them or look at research. Interestingly, women don't all want the same thing. They are individual human beings with diverse desires—some seek stability, others excitement, companionship, trust, or even just cats. Therefore, it's crucial to avoid making broad assumptions about what women find attractive.

Living an exciting life can be attractive to many people, but different individuals may be drawn to it in various ways. Emotional investment is often seen as unattractive because people are generally attracted to lives that seem more interesting and exciting than their own. This attraction depends on one's contentment; the more content you are, the less you care about seeking something better or more exciting. Scientific evidence supports this notion: when we lack something in our lives, we long for more, but when we are content, we don't yearn for better or more exciting experiences.

A simple example to illustrate this point is parenthood. Most parents are content with their kids and don't wish for them to be more exciting or smarter. They want their children to live their best lives. This contentment contrasts with the idea that people always seek something better.

The notion that if a woman knows she occupies your thoughts and emotions, she will assume your life sucks is incorrect. Eric Maria Remarque, in his book "All Quiet on the Western Front," suggests that anything a man does for a woman, no matter how foolish, will be appreciated if done for her sake. This idea is reflected in romantic comedies where men often debase themselves for women, and women are depicted as being into that.

When someone genuinely cares about another person and puts effort into making their life better, it is usually seen as attractive. For example, planning an amazing birthday, baking a favorite cake, or getting tickets to a favorite concert shows care and thoughtfulness, which are generally appreciated and not seen as unattractive.

=> 01:00:34

Being kind and emotionally invested isn't unattractive; it's just about being careful who you invest in.

A man often debases himself for the sake of a woman, and sometimes women are super into that. How do we know they're super into that? Because this is what sells romcoms, right? This is what's in all the romcoms. When you do something for the sake of someone, when you really think about someone, when you really focus on someone, when you put them first in your mind, I don't think that's unattractive. I think usually it's the opposite.

When someone says, "Hey, I really care about you. I want you to have an amazing birthday. I baked your favorite cake, I got tickets to your favorite concert, and I'm trying to make your life awesome today," I don't think the instinctive response is, "Ew, oh my God, I hate that, get out of my life." I much prefer someone who treats me like crap and devalues me at every opportunity. Now, there are people who think that way. Those are the people who are traumatized. Those are the people who, when they were growing up and their parents abused them, hit them, things like that, they said, "I'm doing this because I love you," and then they get confused about what the nature of love is. They freak out when someone does something nice to them because their associations of something nice mean that something bad is coming afterward. Or the reason that mom or dad is being so nice to them and getting them all their dolls is because they feel guilty for doing something bad to them earlier. Those people exist.

If this person believes this, I disagree with the general absolutism of it, but let's also understand that this person is coming from a valid place. If I am so right about this and they are so wrong about it, they are not stupid. No, they're coming from a very valid place, and this is what we have to understand. The people who believe this, it's true for them. The people who believe this are the ones who emotionally invested in a relationship that wasn't reciprocated. The people who believe this are actually when they were good of heart and they cared about another human being and they put that other human being ahead of them. They unfortunately ran into one of the human beings on the planet who was more than happy to take advantage of their kindness. They did everything for this person: "I'll pick you up from the airport, you can cry on my shoulder when your boyfriend is mean to you, I'm going to do everything that I can to make your life better," and somehow that means that you're not interested in a sexual relationship with me.

They've had this experience. There are many reasons for that. Sometimes women do take advantage of men; sometimes men take advantage of women. Sometimes human beings take advantage of each other. Very often, I think far too often, human beings will take another human being's kindness for granted. But I don't think that means that the whole race is bad or that you should stop being kind. It just means you need to be more careful about who you get emotionally invested in.

I think there's a lot of right stuff in here because when we get so attached to this person and our rational mind is telling us that, "Hey, this person is not reciprocating," but we love them so much, we have so much hope that we keep on investing in the relationship. We keep on hoping one day they'll see how beautiful I am, how much I love them, and then we'll be together the way we were always meant to be. I don't blame someone for doing that and then someone takes advantage of them. Think about it, right? There are a lot of people out there, probably me and you included, who would love it if someone existed solely for our benefit, who put us first, and who we didn't have to reciprocate in any way.

And this poor guy, he's so caught up in me that I don't have to do anything for him. He's going to keep on doing nice stuff for me. There are human beings on the planet, and each and every one of us is probably one of those human beings where our natural inclination is to take advantage of people who don't ask for anything in return. It's sad, but I think so many pickup artists, red pillars, betas, incels, alphas, whatever, were born because they honestly offered the best of what they have to give, and someone just took it and took it for granted.

Now, we get on to more stuff. Second, emotional investment is unattractive because, simply put, emotions are bad and scary. Our society acts like love is an...

=> 01:04:52

Emotions aren't bad or scary; it's our inability to handle them that makes them seem that way.

This poor guy is so caught up in me that I don't have to do anything for him; he's going to keep on doing nice stuff for me. There are human beings on the planet, and each and every one of us is probably one of those human beings where our natural inclination is to take advantage of people who don't ask for anything in return. It's sad, but I think so many pickup artists, red pillars, betas, incels, alphas, whatever, were born because they honestly offered the best of what they have to give, and someone just took it and took it for granted.

Emotional investment is unattractive because, simply put, emotions are bad and scary. Our society acts like love is an emotion and our true selves are our emotions, but that's not true. Our value lies in what we can do when we are rational, what we've learned in our life, what we know how to do, and what we strive to achieve and be when we are clear-headed. So, I think that once again, there's like elements of truth to this, but I think that this is generally speaking wrong.

Emotions aren't unattractive; it's just inappropriate emotions, unmatched emotions, unregulated emotions that are absolutely unattractive. Emotions aren't bad and scary. If they were bad and scary, none of the movies we would watch would have music. What does music add to a movie? It adds emotion. Watch a movie on mute without subtitles; you can add subtitles if you want to, but your emotional experience of the movie will be way less. So, emotions aren't bad or scary. Unregulated emotion, untempered emotion, excessive emotion, under amounts of emotion—those can be bad or scary.

The second thing is this idea that the only thing that we're good for is what we can do when we're rational. That's incorrect too. Let's understand this: if we look at the science of Optimal Performance, it does not include an absence of emotion. In fact, the opposite is true. We know that a flow state involves a uniformity or a combining of emotion and rational thinking. If you talk to people who are exceptionally successful, all of them have some positive relationship with their emotions. You can look at creativity. Why is music successful? Not because it's devoid of emotion, but because it captures emotion, because it transmits emotion. Why are authors successful? Because they capture and transmit emotion. They're cool ideas too.

Even if we look at things like sports performance, what makes a good coach? A good coach is someone who comes into the locker room at halftime when your team is getting crushed 28 to 3 and tells you, "We can win this," gives a good speech, and activates your emotions. Your best work is actually when you're emotional. When do we have the most breakthroughs in psychotherapy? Not when things are devoid of emotion, but when there's active emotion. Emotions are not bad or scary. The only thing that makes them bad or scary is we don't know how to deal with them.

If we look at what makes something bad, it is an inability to utilize it properly that makes it bad. Is fire good or bad? Well, that depends. Do you know how to use fire? Can fire be bad? Absolutely. Can it be scary? Absolutely. Doesn't mean that it is bad or scary; that depends on your capability. This is once again the common theme that I see in a lot of this pickup artist kind of stuff: they say that this thing is bad, but they label the thing as bad as opposed to my inability to understand the thing. This is like saying all fire is bad because I don't know how to use it. No, no, no, my dude. If you look at research on emotions, if you look at outcomes of people who are very successful, there is an integration of emotion into rational thinking.

The reason it's bad or scary for you, which I don't dispute if this person says it's bad or scary, I even think that they have a valid perspective because it's bad or scary for them because they don't know how to use them. Why do so many men think that emotions are bad or scary? Because we are actually deprived of opportunities to learn how to understand and harness emotion. We are actively discouraged from emotional competence.

=> 01:09:09

Men are often taught to suppress emotions and measure their worth by what they provide, but true value lies in being seen for who you are, not just what you can offer.

The discomfort and fear surrounding emotions, particularly among men, often stem from a lack of understanding and the societal discouragement of emotional competence and mastery. Research on emotions and the outcomes of successful individuals show that there is an integration of emotion into rational thinking. However, many men find emotions bad or scary because they have not been taught how to use them effectively. This perspective is valid and understandable given the societal conditioning that discourages emotional expression.

Men are often deprived of opportunities to learn how to understand and harness their emotions. They are actively discouraged from achieving emotional competence and mastery. From a young age, men are taught that emotions are bad or scary. This conditioning is not only limiting but also contributes to a broader societal issue where men are valued primarily for what they can provide, rather than for their intrinsic worth.

This societal expectation is reflected in various professions where men are seen as mere providers or laborers, such as soldiers, construction workers, and roofers. These roles often require physical sacrifice, reinforcing the notion that a man's value lies in his ability to provide. This mindset can seem empowering at first, but it is ultimately sad and limiting. Instead of accepting this premise and striving to be the best provider, men should recognize that the premise itself is flawed. They should seek out people who see their intrinsic value, as such individuals and communities do exist.

The manosphere and discussions around toxic masculinity often highlight these issues. However, it is crucial to understand that societal norms and values are not solely created by men. The patriarchy and societal expectations are also influenced by women, particularly mothers, who play a significant role in shaping a man's life. Therefore, it is essential to approach these topics with nuance and openness to criticism.

Personal experiences can also provide insight into these issues. For instance, dating someone who recognizes and values one's intrinsic worth can be a transformative experience. It can motivate individuals to strive for personal growth and achievement, driven by the belief that they are capable of more than they have accomplished. This shift in perspective underscores the importance of surrounding oneself with people who see and respect one's intrinsic value.

In conclusion, societal conditioning plays a significant role in shaping men's attitudes towards emotions and self-worth. It is important to challenge these norms and seek out relationships and communities that recognize and value intrinsic worth. By doing so, individuals can break free from limiting beliefs and strive for a more fulfilling and balanced life.

=> 01:13:28

Emotions are rapid analyses that can be incredibly rational, even when they seem irrational at first glance.

The really cool thing is that when I met that person and they did that for me, it made me not want to disappoint them. I was like, they believe I'm capable of something. They see something within me, and my life is surrounded by failure. They see something within me that is worth it. So, I thought, okay, let's give that a shot. Let's try to be something. If someone has these kinds of ideas and beliefs, we as a society often blame them for it. But you all have to understand that if you look at society and the way people act, it's much more about what people did to them than what they do. That's how we learn—monkey see, monkey do. Why do we have dialects? Because our brain is designed to absorb the things around us.

The main question we need to be asking when it comes to toxic masculinity is not what is wrong with this person, but how did they get this way? How did this person form? This is what I'm telling you all. I've worked with a ton of these people, and trauma is at the top of the list—sometimes by a woman, sometimes by parents, sometimes by society.

I think it's a wrong belief that emotions are bad and scary, but it's completely understandable that there's a vast majority of men who believe that most of our emotions are selfish, irrational, unrealistic, uncontrollable, and often downright evil. Emotions are fundamentally needy; they always want something, even if the want is to help someone. For example, if you see a beautiful woman and think, "I like her, I want to make her happy and do nice things for her," you're lying to yourself. You want things from her.

I think this is 50% true and 50% false, or what I would say is 50% of it is 100% true, and some of the conclusions are false. Emotions are selfish and irrational. This is true because emotions are not the product of rationality. At the same time, emotions can be incredibly rational. Emotions are rapid analyses that are not critically done but can be very accurate.

For example, I don't know if you all have ever been in a situation where you feel like you're being scammed. If you look at it rationally, there's no reason to think that this person is trying to take advantage of you, but your emotions can detect and process information that your analytical mind does not have access to. This can be incredibly rational. Once you explore the emotion, you will discover there's a ton of rationality to it.

I see this a lot in relationships where someone feels really guilty and angry at someone. You feel angry at someone for being sick, and then you think this is incredibly irrational. But the more you tunnel down into it, you realize you're angry because they are using their sickness to take advantage of you. They're only really 50% sick but are pretending to be 100% sick to make sure you do all their work for them. Their sickness is a vehicle for their laziness. In this case, your anger is completely justified.

This is the reality of what things commonly are. Your emotions are much more rational than we give them credit for. Usually, the irrationality of emotions is in their incompleteness, not the fact that they're irrational. Emotions are just very rapid ways of processing subconscious information, and that information can be wrong. It's type one reasoning by Daniel Kahneman using his model. So, I think that they're sort of irrational but also sort of rational.

Unrealistic and uncontrollable are absolutely incorrect in both cases. Emotions can absolutely be controlled to some extent. I don't know what you mean by controllable. Can you flip a switch and feel angry? Sort of. I don't know exactly what this means, but generally speaking, I think emotions can be controlled. There are processes to evoke and suppress emotions, and there are processes to process emotions. We know that our frontal lobes are capable of sending inhibitory signals to our amygdala, and that is the most scientific, simple proof that you can have that emotions can be controlled.

=> 01:17:44

Emotions are signals from our brain and body that guide us to fulfill our needs.

In both cases, the idea that emotions are uncontrollable is absolutely incorrect. Emotions can absolutely be controlled to some extent. While it may not be as simple as flipping a switch to feel angry, generally speaking, emotions can be controlled. There are processes to evoke and suppress emotions, and there are processes to process emotions. For instance, our frontales are capable of sending inhibitory signals to our amygdala, which is the most scientific and simple proof that emotions are controllable. We can control them.

If you're asking whether emotions can be turned on and off like a switch, it's not quite that straightforward. However, if you talk to many creative individuals, you'll discover they have processes to activate certain emotions and deactivate others. This is also true in psychiatry, where controlling emotions is a fundamental part of the job. We teach all of our patients to control their emotions.

The observation that emotions are fundamentally needy is a really good insight. Emotions are sources of information and motivation. In this sense, they are needy because they signal to us to move in a particular direction and fulfill a need. For example, shame motivates us to retract from society, and anger motivates us to protect our territory. Emotions signal our needs, and this is not necessarily a bad thing.

Another important insight is that when we feel charitable, we are often fulfilling our own needs. Half of human kindness can be selfish. In severe cases, this manifests as factitious disorder by proxy, where caregivers make their child sick to feel good about themselves. They might inject fecal matter into the IV line in the hospital, leading to serious infections. As a psychiatrist in a general hospital, you encounter some of the scariest and weirdest cases, such as patients in sepsis with fecal bacteria in their bloodstream, indicating intentional infection.

This community's observations are brilliant because they recognize that even kindness, typically seen as selfless, can be selfish. This insight is amazing and highlights the complexity of human emotions and motivations.

=> 01:22:08

Even kindness can be selfish—emotions are complex and can be both our greatest strength and weakness.

One of the scariest jobs on the planet involves witnessing some really bad and weird things. For instance, the ICU might call with a case where a person has a terrible infection and is in sepsis. They might say, "We cultured the blood and found fecal bacteria." This raises the question of how fecal bacteria get into the heart muscle, leading to the realization that it could be due to factitious disorder by proxy. This is super scary stuff.

In this community, there is a lot of brilliance because they make these observations and begin to realize that even kindness as an emotion can be selfish. This is amazing work and insight because we typically think of kindness as selfless, but that's not always the case. However, just because emotions are needy doesn't mean they are bad. There is also an association that emotions are a weakness, but this isn't necessarily true. Emotions can be a weakness, but they can also be our greatest source of strength. For example, revolutionaries often draw a lot of their strength and the indomitability of the human spirit from emotions, although some of it is rational.

Women also take longer to get emotionally invested in men than men take to get emotionally invested in women. There is scientific data to support this conclusion, and it is a fair statement on average. However, it is important to remember that there is greater intra-gender variability than inter-gender variability. While the average woman may take longer to get emotionally invested in a man, there are plenty of men who take a lot of time to get emotionally invested as well. Studies of avoidant attachment, which is about the lack of emotional investment, show that the prevalence of avoidant attachment in the general population is around 20 to 25%. This type of attachment is more common in men than in women, although this second statement could be false.

When it comes to attraction, there is also a lot of variability. Some people might be attracted to specific physical traits like big breasts and a big butt, but generally speaking, any breast size, butt size, or hip size can be attractive. There is a lot of intra-gender variability about what we find attractive. Even though men have evolved to seek fertile women, about 10% of men have evolved to be attracted to other men. For these men, breasts don't do anything for them; they are all about the "D." This internal variability within a population shows that there is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to attraction.

People often question the evolutionary advantage of homosexuality, wondering how it can be an evolved trait if those individuals don't reproduce. While we don't have definitive answers, there is a hypothesis called the gay uncle hypothesis. This hypothesis suggests that in tribal human societies, it takes a village to raise a child, and having non-reproducing members who contribute to the care and support of the tribe can be advantageous.

=> 01:26:22

Emotional investment makes us awesome, but be careful not to invest in someone who doesn't reciprocate.

They actually, not tits, don't do anything for them. They're all about the D, right? So that's true too. I think it just goes to show you that there is internal variability within a population. People are saying, "What's the evolutionary advantage of that evolved?" Absolutely. This is kind of why people are like, "I don't understand, man. How can you evolve to be homosexual because those people don't reproduce?" Great question. Now, we don't have definitive answers to this, but there's this really great hypothesis called the gay uncle hypothesis. That's not even a meme.

If you look at human beings, they are tribal in nature; it takes a village to raise a child. Let's assume you have two scenarios: one in which you have ten men who are heterosexual and one in which you have nine men who are heterosexual and one man who is homosexual. What this means is that the ten men each have children of their own. What is the survival rate of those children versus the survival rate of the nine men who have children and have one extra dude who does not have his own kids and is able to help raise the next generation?

That's probably why it's 10% because if it was one out of four, that would be a survival disadvantage. If it was one out of twenty, that would be a survival disadvantage. This is how evolution works. Chances are that having an extra working adult who does not have their own children to take care of is probably a net positive for the survival of the next generation. Do we have great scientific evidence of this? No. Could this be wrong? Absolutely. Is there a possibility that there's not an evolutionary advantage? Sure. Is there a possibility that homosexuality is a moral failing? Sure, it's possible, but I don't think that's what the evidence suggests.

These kinds of things, like weird scientific takes, show that emotional investment makes you stupid and saps you of your vitality and awesomeness. When we're talking about being overly invested in a particular person who doesn't reciprocate, I totally agree. But I think being emotionally invested in stuff is often what gives you vitality and awesomeness.

So, I'm going to ask you all a question, chat. Are y'all having fun? Also, gay women, absolutely, it doesn't matter. Are we having fun today? How are y'all feeling? Is this fun? Are we having fun because there is a lack of emotional investment, or is our fun, awesomeness, engagement, and vitality because we are emotionally invested?

I could talk like this: "Hey, today we're going to talk a little bit about blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah." Emotional investment is what makes us awesome. I don't know how to say this, but when you look at all these memes on the internet, like, "Look at this guy. Let's look at this guy. Oh no, no, no, okay, here we go." We're going to look at this dude again, and then I want to ask you all a question: Is he awesome, yes or no? And is he emotionally invested, yes or no?

Emotional investment isn't bad, but I agree that if you're too emotionally invested in a woman who doesn't reciprocate, then you will become a husk. Once again, these observations are correct, but the conclusions I don't agree with. Think about it, right? If y'all have been a nice guy, I've been a nice guy before. I've had relationships where I thought we were dating, and the person that I was dating didn't think we were dating; they just thought we were friends. You pour your whole heart and soul into this person, and does it sap you of your vitality and awesomeness? Yes, absolutely, that's fair. But it doesn't have to be that way.

When we're emotionally invested, that can—I mean, bro, I had a great honeymoon. It was awesome. There was a lot of emotional investment, there was a lot of vitality, there was a lot of awesomeness. Just because it can sap you doesn't mean that it is.

=> 01:31:25

Being emotionally invested can be draining, but it doesn't have to be all bad.

Think about it, right? If you've been a nice guy, I've been a nice guy before. I've had relationships where I thought we were dating, but the person I was dating didn't think we were dating—they just thought we were friends. You pour your whole heart and soul into this person, and does it sap you of your vitality and awesomeness? Yes, absolutely. But it doesn't have to be that way. When we're emotionally invested, it can be draining, but it can also be incredibly fulfilling. For example, I had a great honeymoon—it was awesome, filled with emotional investment, vitality, and awesomeness. So, just because emotional investment can sap you, it doesn't mean it is all bad.

If you're wondering how to know if you're dissociated or cut off from emotions, we have a deep dive into dissociation on our channel that you can check out. You can also check out the trauma guide, which has received really good feedback.

How to make her emotionally invest in you: For a woman to emotionally invest in you, certain things must happen. She must feel an emotional connection with you, feel accepted by you, see you as confident and resilient, and spend time with you. It's important for women to find you pleasant, friendly, good-looking, and compatible. They need to have an emotional connection to you and feel accepted by you. Confidence and resilience matter a lot, and they want to spend time with you.

How to not be emotionally invested: Realize you don't need to emotionally invest in every relationship. Have an interesting and awesome life that occupies your thoughts and emotions. Adopt an abundance mentality, understanding that this person doesn't have to be the beginning and end of all your relationships. Have boundaries and be unperturbable. Focus on your own fun first, but within reason. This is a good adaptation if you let other people take advantage of you. There's a lot of good advice here, but also some bad.

The reason girls don't sleep with you and what to change to spark intense sexual attraction instantly: Are we going to get an invitation to follow this person's Instagram for more information? To spark intense sexual attraction instantly, first of all, don't use the enter button so much. Did you know that the number one hobby that women find attractive in men is reading? I saw some data to support that recently, which is interesting. Grammar and punctuation are also very attractive.

Stop being so nice. There's advice like telling her to go screw herself, telling her she reminds you of screwing Grandpa who's dead, or telling her she needs to stop hitting on you or you'll have to call security. PS: Don't be a psychopath. This kind of advice seems more cathartic and therapeutic for the person writing it than useful. These feelings of anger resonate deeply, which is why such posts get upvoted. It's not about what's correct, but what resonates with people.

To elicit emotion from the girl, you need to make her feel actual deep emotions—happiness, sadness, real fear of losing you, validation, real lack of validation, anger, and surprise. This can work really well.

=> 01:35:39

Being perfect half the time is a fast way to get into a relationship and a sure way to doom it.

The advice being discussed is useful because it resonates deeply with feelings of anger. What gets upvoted is stuff that people resonate with, not what's correct. The post suggests that to elicit emotion from a girl, one must make her feel deep emotions like happiness, sadness, fear of losing you, validation, lack of validation, anger, and surprise. This approach might work well if you're dating someone with borderline personality disorder, where you make them feel validated one day and invalidated another day. However, as a psychiatrist who has helped many people break up, I can tell you that one of the most damaging qualities that helps you get into a relationship and also doom it to fail is being 100% awesome 50% of the time.

This behavior creates a random reinforcement schedule, making people addicted to the relationship. If these people develop confidence or become secure in themselves, or simply get tired of it, they will leave. Giving someone validation and lack of validation is a very fast way to engage someone in a relationship and a very prophetic way to doom it. The more unstable a person is, the more attractive this will feel to them, not in a "hot" way, but in a gravitational pull way. If you're in a relationship that you feel you should leave but can't, there's a good chance the person behaves perfectly 50% of the time and awfully the other 50%. This creates hope that one day the person will change, and the bad 50% will disappear.

"I can fix her, I can fix him" engages our goodness, kindness, and compassion. Sometimes, it does work, but generally, the healthier and more confident you are, the more you will stop putting up with this behavior. If you're the person who's 100% perfect 50% of the time, you need to focus on not making up for mistakes. One of the most bizarrely toxic beliefs is that you can make up for your mistakes. If you can make up for your mistakes, you are allowed to make mistakes.

A professor once said that you could use your grade on the final exam as your grade for the course. If you get an A+ on the final and have Fs on everything else, you still get an A+. This professor tended to give lower grades than others because when we learn we can make up for our mistakes, there's no incentive to avoid making them. What really gets people to change, especially in addiction psychiatry, is not making up for mistakes. Addictive behavior is propagated by the belief that you can make up for mistakes. "I'm so sorry, I was drunk, I'll never drink again, let's go to Cabo, I'll make it up to you." If you can make it up to them, you can mess them over again.

=> 01:40:24

You can't undo the past, so live every day in the best way you can.

I don't give a []. I'll give you an A+. It's an interesting thing I looked at, you know, a website aggregator that rates professors. This professor tended to give lower grades than others who taught the same course. When we as human beings learn that we can make up for our mistakes, there's no incentive to not make a mistake. What really gets people to change, and I say this as someone who's practiced a fair amount of addiction psychiatry, is not making up for mistakes. What propagates addictive behavior is the mindset of, "Oh, I'm so sorry I did it. I was drunk. I'll never drink again. I'm going to go and make it up to you. I promise I'll make it up to you." You make it up to them, and then all is well. And hey, if you can make it up to them, you can [] them over again. Really weird, really weird.

Now, if you do something wrong, I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't try to compensate in some way. I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't make it right. But be very careful because there's a very insidious belief that if I can fix it tomorrow, I can screw it up today. It's basically like procrastination applied to relationships. Be very careful because if you start to believe that making up for mistakes works, you'll continue your bad behavior. The right way to think about it is, once time is gone, it's gone. You can't truly undo anything you've done to another person. You can try to compensate, but you can't really reverse it. Any words that leave my mouth have left my mouth and they have the impact. Two things you can't take back in life: the time that has passed and the words that come out of your mouth.

Now, something cool happens once you believe that you can't really make up for your past mistakes. Then you start to live in a much more vital and important way. This doesn't mean you're doomed by your past mistakes. I say this as someone who graduated from college with a 2.5 GPA (technically 2.46) and ended up getting into medical school. I did fine. You can recover, but you can't make it up. No amount of A's in classes will ever remove an F, and that's how life is. It doesn't mean that just because you failed for a few years, you have to continue to fail. You can alter your trajectory, and the best way to do that is to recognize that you can never undo the past.

You have to be very subtle and careful about this because if you have a negative cast to your mind, you'll say, "I'll give up. You can't ever fix your mistakes, therefore stop trying." No, it's the opposite. Since you can never correct or undo your mistakes, it's important that you start to live every single day in the best way that you can because you never get a chance to go back and undo that. For example, yesterday I lost 100 MMR when I was playing DOTA. I can't undo that loss. I can gain 100 MMR today, but that means I'm at zero MMR and I gained 100 MMR today. If I had not lost that 100 MMR yesterday, then I would be up 100 MMR. That effect from the past always lingers into the present.

One of the scariest things is realizing that you can't take back time or words. 10 harsh truths you need to know about relationships. On a primal level, women are generally attracted to strong and manly men. Get your [] handled and don't act like a whiny [] ever. My challenge with a lot of these attitudes is that I don't doubt this person believes this for a good reason because this is their experience. The problem is that you can convey your emotions without being a big manly man. If you look at the majority of people having kids today, they're not manly men. They're not these swole, buff Instagram influencer manly men. The majority of people having children today are average dudes.

One of the biggest challenges I have with this community is that they don't differentiate between their personal incapability at something and saying that thing is good or bad. If you don't know how to convey your emotions, articulate your feelings, or be emotionally connected, and all you can do is be a big manly man, then you will select for women who are only attracted to big manly men. This is all couched with "approach a thousand women." That doesn't mean your formula works; it just means the other 990 that don't like it want something else. You have to be careful with this stuff.

Women have a dual mating strategy. This assumes that all women cheat for the same reasons. Is it common? I don't know if common is the right word. I'm not saying it's over 50%. Are there cases of people who have a steady provider and will have a one-night stand with an alpha? Sure, that's possible. This is a strategy that can succeed depending on what you're good at and what someone else is good at. I've worked with women who have affairs, and the number one reason I've heard in my office (and this could be a selection bias too) is not that this person thought, "Oh, my husband, I had sex with this other person because they were more of a Chad." It's usually a feeling of emotional disconnection and neglect. That's the number one reason.