I'm curious how you square this mindset with Stormbringer's, which is that it is the woman's job to seduce, and that approaching is not masculine?
These things are not incongruent. Quite the contrary. They are two sides of the same coin. Think for example of a great work of art that you personally find beautiful or inspiring. Something that speaks to you; that moves you. Is that work of art not passive? Is that work of art doing something or extending effort? Nope. It simply exists. It has an energy that makes an impression in your psyche. Something about its existence stirs something within you; moves you; inspires you...
And so it is with a beautiful woman. Her seduction of a man is passive in nature. She exists. There is something inherent in the way in which she exists in the world that draws men toward her. It is effortless at its core. It is pure. Perhaps it is her beauty, perhaps it is her smile, perhaps it is a certain joy and lightness of being that she exudes, perhaps it is her kind heart or her sweet nature or her wit or any number of other factors that create a constellation of traits that impart upon her an allure. And there will be men who are attracted to her, who are intrigued by her...and these men are the ones who approach because when the men approach the seduction is already progressing.
Assuming that you want a monogamous LTR, have you considered that the type of men you date (the player type) have a high risk of failure in an LTR?
Is it simply because those are the only type of men who turn you on? For example, thin women do not appeal to me, the boner factor just isn’t there. So is that it? The player type is the only one who gets you juiced so you accept the inherent potential failure risk with that type of man?
Augustus it is always a good conversation with you. Cheers.
As to your questions the answers are Yes but No. I shall explain. As I have noted elsewhere on the forum in past posts I have two overarching themes that color the way in which I view dating prospects. They are (in this order):
1. Do I desire him sexually? Answer must be yes.
2. Can he lead me? Answer must be yes.
There are many things that factor into answering those questions. Looks, fitness, stature, sex appeal, social skills, does he have his shjt togetherness, business acumen, intelligence, wit, style, confidence, etc., etc., etc. Those traits that combine to answer my two questions are things that I individually value. It is the composite that determines the answer.
Now. Obviously the men who appeal to me personally have wide appeal in the marketplace. Without a doubt. However I do not worry about that. I know with conviction that my value will reveal itself through interactions (that the man initiates and drives *investment*). I know that the man will whittle down his other options as he recognizes what I bring to his life. The selection process is mutual.
At the end of the day the vast majority of men want something meaningful in their lives. They want a confidant, they want a lover on an emotional level as well as a physical level, they want intimacy. They want a place of respite and recharge from all the exertion of the dragon-slaying that men do. They want to be known, they want to be understood.
But finding a woman who meets those deep emotional needs is unusual. So when a man comes across such a woman, no matter his trajectory in the dating realm, something inside him stirs and responds to the way such a woman exists.
Therefore the player archetype, who has experience and knowledge within the "game", and with myriad women, will recognize rapidly when a woman is of a different constitution than the crowd. It will be obvious to him based upon his experience and his curiosity will be raised. She is at once a mystery and a challenge because she is unique. She will have solidity and substance beneath the shallow appeal of her physical presentation.
So yes the player types, when looked at against the backdrop of the general marketplace are a low percentage bet for success in a monogamous LTR. Until they run into the right woman. And then all bets are off.
I have had deeply meaningful multiyear relationships with such men. I appreciate the challenge inherent in my inability to conquer them - this keeps me engaged and keeps me desirous, and they appreciate their inability to control me. This keeps them engaged and desirous...and intimacy is built along the way while desire is enhanced over time.
I wouldn't have it any other way. I'll take my chances on a sexy player any time. I know I am a worthy adversary and respected partner for such a man.