*The* Fundamental Law of Sexual Attraction

[Trader]

We are all guys - we all love beautiful girls.

But I also wanted the girl to have something else: I always was attracted to the beautiful girls who were really *girly* - for lack of a better word. Those were the girls who were really submissive, who would not try to compete with guys in academics or sports but focused on shopping and clothes. Girls who instead of arguing back with you, would just giggle. Girls who naturally let the man lead.

I'm sure you all know what I am talking about.

I always had a sneaking suspicion, and I'm sure all of you did as well, that the most *girly* girls always ended up with the most *masculine* males.

So 3 years ago - I finally told myself: 'Enough is enough. I want the really feminine girls - those are the ones I want. Well then I must become masculine. And how do I do that?'

What does it mean for a man to be masculine ? What does masculinity mean EXACTLY?

Then I stumbled upon Pook's epic post: 'The Secret of the Jerk'

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17008

Pook says masculinity gets the beautiful submissive girl. And masculinity can be achieved *naturally* through high testesterone levels.

To test this, I then became celibate for 21 months and lifted weights - my T-levels went thru the roof. I definitely become more aggressive and active, and of course I ended up attracting more girls.

But I felt something was missing. Is masculinity JUST a testosterone rush? There must be something else to it.

What is masculinity exactly?

And then Pook mentioned the book Sex and Character which described the *main* law of sexual attraction.

Basically it says that just because you have a penis, doesn't mean you are a man. Just because you have a hole, doesn't mean you are a girl. There are 'feminine' men and 'masculine' men. Just like there are tomboys and girly girls.

So a man could be 85% male, and 15% female. Or he could be more androgynous, like 60% male, and 40% female.

The law states that the male naturally attracts his compliment. In other words, a masculine man who is 85% male and 15% female, would end up attracting a really feminine girl, a girl who was 15% male, and 85% female. And those are the girls I want!

But what determines the % of masculinity in a man? I read the rest of Sex and Character and I finally found the MAIN component of masculinity.

What is masculinity?

INDIVIDUALITY

Individuality is seeing yourself as a unique person who is SEPERATE from the crowd therefore

1) I am an individual - I think for myself (not how the crowd thinks)

2) I am an individual - I do what I want to do (not what the crowd wants)

3) I am an individual - I do not care what anyone (the crowd) thinks

4) I am an individual - I do not give a damn about anyone (the crowd)

5) I am an individual - I do not rely on anyone. I rely on myself

6) I am an individual - I am an original - I do not copy others, I express my individuality

7) I am an individual - I have my OWN tastes - I take what I want

Notice how all those traits manifested to their extreme, are found in the jerk? Pook said the *jerk* is just the extreme male. I take it one step further, yes, the *jerk* is the extreme male, because he has extreme levels of INDIVIDUALITY.

Notice how all the really feminine girls tend to LACK individuality? In other words, they seem to mentally be unable to detach themselves from the crowd. They have no sense of self, they do not know what they want, they tend to want what others want. They care so much about what others think of them, they copy others (i.e. fashion, music tastes).

Obviously, I have just described the extremes. No male has 100% individuality, and no girl completely lacks individuality.

So for the past couple of years - I worked hard on developing my individuality. And I have *proven* the law correct. I simply do not attract unfeminine girls any more. In fact, I seem to now have some trouble dealing with the unfeminine girls - we seem to conflict with each other. I tend to attract and get along with the more feminine girls now. What a shift.

Individuality is the main component of masculinity. Individuality is what gets you the feminine girls.

 

[realsmoothie]

Huh. When I think of masculine guys, I think of stuff like football and the military... cultural institutions where masculinity is frowned upon like no other.

 

[trent81]

In today's day and age, the gay looking, talking, and feminine guy is gettin all sorts of asss. Throughout history, the feminine guy has always been gettin laid. It's crazy. How do you explain the feminine dudes who are gettin women left and right? Masculinity works against me sometimes. I have girls who are afraid and think all I want to do is fuvk. That I would be controlling and would beat them if they did something wrong. You can be too masculine.

 

[Jitterbug]

What Pook said makes logical sense, but that's not what I see in real life down here. Most girly girls I know, if they're at all partnered, are with quite feminine & emo guys. The really masculine blokes, bar the sport stars, are often either single or with masculine-ish women.

 

[zekko]

I read somewhere, I think it was in "Secrets of the Alpha Man" by Carlos Xuma, that women are most attracted to guys who are 70% masculine, 30% feminine. In other words, you don't want to have a TOTALLY masculine outlook, or you will be perceived as a callous brutish ape with no common ground with females. People have a number of interests, and you want them to be MOSTLY masculine, but not totally. It's okay, even desirable, for a guy to have a softer side, just as long as it doesn't dominate their personality and they're not wimpy.

I've recently been reading about the lives of various rock stars. I was amazed at how the women who were attracted to Jimmy Page (Led Zeppelin's guitarist) all described him as quiet, demure, beautiful, and feminine. They said all the girls loved this and totally fell for him. I know he was famous but I guess it means there's more than one way to skin a cat.

I know there is a certain philosophy espoused here in the DJ forums, and in the seduction community in general. But guess what? Outside of here real life is going on, and believe it or not guys are getting laid anyway, guys who do not fit the mold of what is held up here as the model.

 

[jeffthechef]

completely disagree...

Your ego has basically taken over your life. And I've read articles in the dj Bible about killing the ego as is also preached in Buddhism. We are all the same. You are not special. You are not different.

1) I am an individual - I think for myself (not how the crowd thinks)

I'm sure many others think they think for themselves. And many others probably do. And i'm sure anyone can think for themselves since they have their own mind.

2) I am an individual - I do what I want to do (not what the crowd wants)

Same as above.

3) I am an individual - I do not care what anyone (the crowd) thinks

Dangerous thought process. Sure, we shouldn't live based on the thoughts of others. Nonetheless, we should take into consideration what the crowd thinks because there is a chance they're right. If all the people i knew told me i was being an arrogant jackass, then i probably was being one.

4) I am an individual - I do not give a damn about anyone (the crowd)

I'm sure you give a damn about your family and friends. And why shouldn't you give a damn about strangers too? Compassion for others is one of the greatest moral values. It is people who think like you that make this a cold world. They're human just like you, why not care about them?


5) I am an individual - I do not rely on anyone. I rely on myself

Nope. This is impossible. Sorry to tell you. Every living thing has depended on everyone else. I'm sure you have a job and buy food, clothes, etc. Someone had to make those things. And someone fed those people. And so on...Even if you were to go into the wild and live by yourself, you would still rely on nature. We are all dependent beings that lack inherent value. Our value comes from the interconnectedness of all things.

6) I am an individual - I am an original - I do not copy others, I express my individuality

Hah. Lots of people think they're "original." You have definitely copied others. Your major ego has definitely been shaped by society.

7) I am an individual - I have my OWN tastes - I take what I want

Sigh. Everyone has tastes that are bound to be the same as others. I'm sure many others take what they want. And wanting makes you dependent, again.

I don't think you explained it very well. I think you mean independence. But even a man's independent behavior can only go so far. We are all interconnected. Your independence should be balanced with your dependence. That is why people who live in solitary confinement go crazy and clingy people get dumped.

I remember you saying you were showing the extremes. And that is probably why i disagree. Extremes are never good. Moderation, the middle path, is the best.

"To go too far is as bad as to fall short." -Confucius

 

[Mr. Me]

>>What is masculinity? INDIVIDUALITY Individuality is seeing yourself as a unique person who...>>

Yeah, yeah and effeminate homosexuals and trannies can be individuals too. As can women. So much for that being such a main component of masculinity.

It's like saying feathers is what makes a duck. It's really the other way around.

Getting tired of reading specious reasoning being put forth as real theories in these forums.

 

[Mr. Me]

>> even a man who dresses like a dandy or crosses his legs must have AT LEAST adequate alpha game to pull in a regular stream of hot women.>>

What they have when they come across as dandies is "mystique"; the woman isn't sure if he's straight, bi or gay, and that can act as an attraction device. Oscar Wilde had that quality, for example, attracting a circle of people to him. So does Mystery attract women when he dons his weird outfits.

>> Feminine traits can certainly be balanced by supreme alpha-ness and inner game; otherwise glam-boy rock stars in makeup and tights would never get laid the way they do.>>

They pull because they're bad boy edgy rock musicians and enjoy celebrity status, if it's local celebrity status. Plus they're "pretty boys", eye candy to the girls.

Authentic masculine traits however do more then pull. They keep the woman around. The above types aren't always so capable of doing that.

 

[Trader]

Read this post carefully. As there has been some misunderstanding about my original post

In today's day and age, the gay looking, talking, and feminine guy is gettin all sorts of asss. Throughout history, the feminine guy has always been gettin laid. It's crazy. How do you explain the feminine dudes who are gettin women left and right?

Note CAREFULLY what I am saying. The law of sexual attraction states that if you are a very *feminine* man such as 60% male, 40% female, you CAN get *ass*

BUT the *ass* you get will be the more dominant girls, the 40% male, 60% female girl.

So if you want a really submissive/feminine girl (10% male, 90% female), then you must be very dominant as well (90% male, 10% female)

Think about the married couples you see - one is always dominant, and one is always submissive.

I read somewhere, I think it was in "Secrets of the Alpha Man" by Carlos Xuma, that women are most attracted to guys who are 70% masculine, 30% feminine. In other words, you don't want to have a TOTALLY masculine outlook, or you will be perceived as a callous brutish ape with no common ground with females. People have a number of interests, and you want them to be MOSTLY masculine, but not totally. It's okay, even desirable, for a guy to have a softer side, just as long as it doesn't dominate their personality and they're not wimpy.

Let me be very precise here. If you want to maximize the NUMBER of girls who are interested in you, then I agree, a man who is 70% masculine and 30% feminine is most optimal BECAUSE most girls are not hyper-feminine, they are around the 70% female 30% male range. But honestly, I don't care about attracting the most NUMBER of girls. I don't care about numbers. I just want the rare extremely feminine girl (90% female, 10% male) , and they are attracted to the extremely masculine man.

And yes my experience collaborates with your post. I realized that I often don't click with many girls now because I am too masculine. There is always a price to pay.

I've recently been reading about the lives of various rock stars. I was amazed at how the women who were attracted to Jimmy Page (Led Zeppelin's guitarist) all described him as quiet, demure, beautiful, and feminine. They said all the girls loved this and totally fell for him. I know he was famous but I guess it means there's more than one way to skin a cat.

I know there is a certain philosophy espoused here in the DJ forums, and in the seduction community in general. But guess what? Outside of here real life is going on, and believe it or not guys are getting laid anyway, guys who do not fit the mold of what is held up here as the model.

The law of sexual attraction states that masculinity is determined ONLY by your level of individuality.

So if you have high individuality but you dress like a pretty boy, you are still 90% masculine and 10% female. And actually, this is what I do, as this creates paradox which girls love. They see you and you look like a girl with your fine clothes, but your mindset/personality is so masculine. This was the essence of the dandy.



So to sum up, yes I agree there are so many ways to get girls. But I am not talking about getting girls in *general.* I am talking about a specific type of situation, getting hyper-feminine, submissive girls attracted to you.

And I believe there is a natural law regarding that - the hyper feminine girl is attracted to the hyper masculine man.

I believe this natural law of sexual attraction holds true. I look at the girls that are attracted to me (as in, want to date me) and they are now more feminine than in the past.

Also - have you ever heard girls say: 'Oh he is not MAN enough for me.' And what do they mean by that? I was not really able to figure that out until now. Basically they are saying that the man does not have a high enough % of masculinity (individuality), so to speak, to be compatible with the feminine girl. If the girl was less feminine and more *butch*, there would be no problem. Alas, girls who know *how to be a girl*, expect the man to *man up.*


NOTE: I acknowledge fame, money, and looks as being factors in attracting a mate, obviously. But these things have nothing to do with sexual compatibility. That's why so many men in the US are complaining, the girls may be beautiful but they are so masculine, that they feel they are *incompatible* with these girls. There is this natural law of sexual compatibility, which to put it crudely, if one person is dominant, the other tends to be submissive. I do not expect any argument regarding this point.

 

[Trader]

What Pook said makes logical sense, but that's not what I see in real life down here. Most girly girls I know, if they're at all partnered, are with quite feminine & emo guys. The really masculine blokes, bar the sport stars, are often either single or with masculine-ish women.

Jitterbug, what do you mean the *really masculine* blokes?

Remember, the key to masculinity is not related to his looks, his muscles, whether he is an athlete or not or how he dresses.

It is his level of INDIVIDUALITY . I cannot stress this enough. This is what took me FOREVER to finally figure out.

An emo guy who is skinny and wears pink can have super high individuality and thus be masculine.

A superstar athlete or military man can have low individuality and thus be feminine.

Do you know those guys personally? Try testing this theory with the guys you know. Do the guys you know, who have high individuality, date bossy aggressive girls? In my experience, NO.

 

[Colossus]

Independence is a masculine trait, but you're using it to define masculinity, which is kind of a jerk-off exercise.

First of all, many aspects of masculinity and femininity are culturally defined. You are going to see variance across cultures and even different social levels.

Second, I don't buy your oversimplification of hyper-masculine males attracting hyper-feminine females. There are far too many variables in attraction to try and distill it down to a simple principle. How would explain all the sensi-boys who pull gorgeous, cookie-cutter modern girls? I see pussified men every day who would probably break if I farted on them hand in hand with 8's, 9's, and 10's.

I think what you're on to is that most men tend to attract a certain "range" of women. There is a certain 'type' of girl you generally attract based on how you look, how you carry yourself, who you hang out with and what you display materially. Everyone is familiar with the high school scenario of the loudest, strongest, most popular jocks getting the dittziest girly-girls. But you're equating this type of girl with femininity which is just projecting your own own tastes onto a categorical definition.

With women, as long as they are attractive guys will want to fvck them. Most of us don't discriminate based on social level or fashion sense or even what she fvcking does for a living. Because women tend to be LESS individual and more socially cohesive, the chief difference you see will be in their looks. In other words, if a girl is cute enough, she'll attract all different types of men. Men don't generally attract a wide range of social stratification in females; with the exceptions of the rich, famous, or extremely good-looking.

The moral of the story here is you are just asserting your preference and trying to prove some imaginary rule. Pook had some great academic insights but they don't always translate to real life.

 

[radiodude]

Here is something then I am curious about:

If the female is more dominant and the male less so, then does the female desire the males lack of dominamce in favor of her own just as a dominant male attracts a submissive female?

Furthermore, in this sort of pairing above, if the submissive male still does masculine guy type things (hobbies, interests, etc.) and the dominant female still does girly things (hobbies, interests) then this must make them perfectly compatible and nothing is wrong.

I know men who are definately male, dress as such, talk as such and their woman is definately female, dresses as such, does girly things but she is dominant and he is submissive, they still seem perfectly happy togeather.

I say this because there are then two factors at play here-

Either men are SUPPOSED to be more dominant ALWAYS, than their woman. Meaning a man always has to become more dominant if he isn't. Or, you should find someone of your own percentage-equation and simply let that be the way your life is and be happy.

 

[Trader]

Second, I don't buy your oversimplification of hyper-masculine males attracting hyper-feminine females. There are far too many variables in attraction to try and distill it down to a simple principle. How would explain all the sensi-boys who pull gorgeous, cookie-cutter modern girls? I see pussified men every day who would probably break if I farted on them hand in hand with 8's, 9's, and 10's.

Hold on. I didn't say that pussified men couldn't get 8s, 9s, and 10s. I said that pussified men could NOT get submissive/feminine girls.

Femininity does NOT equate to hotness. There are tons of hot girls that are so unfeminine - a la US girls. That's why Asian and Eastern European girls are so in demand now, they are submissive, and submissive is the main component of femininity. A girl can only be submissive if she lacks individuality.

Think of it this way: masculinity = individuality

femininity = lack of individuality = submissiveness (this does not necessarily coincide with looks)

I agree that there are other factors such as money, fame, and looks, that go into attraction.

But take a look at yourself. There is something more fundamental going on here when it comes to RELATIONSHIP attraction (I'm not talking about one night stands, since we will just screen girls on looks). There is something more than looks, fame, and money operating here.

Why is it that some hot girls, you just don't want to have a relationship with? Whereas you will date another hot girl? It is something MORE than looks, or fame, or money.

Have you not experienced this yourself?

And you will say: 'Well duh, it is her personality that counts too, don't forget that.'

But what is it about her personality that attracts you or repels you? More specifically, it is the amount of INDIVIDUALTY (masculinity) in her.

If you are 80% masculine 20% female, you are going tend to *click* and be compatible with the more feminine type, 80% female, 20% male.

Just take a look at your parents.

If your father was extremely dominant, like mine was, well then yes, my mom was extremely submissive, as expected.

Now you might say: 'well my father and mother were about equal in terms of dominance.' Well that does not violate the law. 2 people who are close to 50% male, 50% female, can be together too.

 

[Zunder]

What about this guy that played the Vampire that the chicks are all going crazy about these days. I think "Twilight" was the name of the movie. Someone will know who I mean.

I seen pics of the dude all over magazine covers, and he wears eye makeup for fvcksake...yet the chicks are digging his ass and drooling like the dog in CUJO.

Clearly women are fvcked in the head, 'cause they seem to switch from wanting the Steve McQueens to the fem type of guy I mention above at the drop of a hat.

Who knows.

 

[backbreaker]

um..yeah....no

 

[backbreaker]

the one thing that helped me or rather, boosted my game is I am extremely comfortable in my own skin.

I know what I am and what I am not and I don't try to pretend to be something that I'm not.

I accecpt me for who I am. I do work out but I'm pretty preppy and I am a nerd when it's all said and done. I love history. I like the piano. I like me. I like being me.

In the past, I've dated/scrwed some women who you would never imagine me with for the simple fact that i'm comfortable in my own skin. There was one girl who was what.. 21 and my nick name for her was menice to soceity. she was really cute but was really thuggish or thought she was. and she would make fun of the way i dressed and talked, but addmitted she was attracted to me becuase I was so different and didn't give a ****.

 

[Trader]

Here's my recipe for success... I liked those women too, that's why I'm now the proud owner of a girly girl

That's hot

1. Be able to provide serious adventure with a mix of mischief... women like that bad boy adventure type... mmm like mad max, han solo, james bond, the new kirk, the district 9 guy... I mean think about it: they are all on an adventure that you would love to be a part of. Women think the same way. This cannot be accomplished at a 9-5 (M-F) office job, your life must become an adventure.

I also noticed this trait in girly girls too. They need fun and adventure MORE than the average girl. They get bored so easily. I think the reason is because girly girls are a lot more *passive* than other girls. So they are really really attracted to action, adventure, and movement, they like the active man.

2. Brand yourself. Really you're not an individual unless you have your own style. Wear clothes from another era, stick out. Make your own clothes, wear your own name. Then your an individual. Follow along with others advice as to what is cool and then your a copy. I have an extremely distinct look and style. If any of you ever saw me IRL you would instantly be able to pick me out, I can be spotted from orbit.

I agree. My unique clothing style definitely helped me catch their attention. Again, I think it's because the girly girls are so used to following the crowd, they expect the guy to be the exact opposite, an individual, who stands out with his own style in clothing.


Hey Fuzzx, did you notice that with girly girls, you can *get away* with so much more? It's like, they expect you to be the leader, and so as long as you do things and say things with balls and individuality, they will submit to you. So many times I've said things that she did not agree with, but she just giggled it off, instead of challenging me.

Your post was spot on - repped

 

[Mr. Me]

>>If the female is more dominant and the male less so, then does the female desire the males lack of dominance in favor of her own just as a dominant male attracts a submissive female?>>

Yes. Aside from control freak women who desire control over the relationship and so, find submissive men to rule over,

There are what we can traditionally label as "masculine" traits and "feminine" traits, right? "Aggressiveness", for example, is considered a masculine trait, whereas "Nurturing" a feminine one, true? Of course, these traits are interchangeable gender-wise, but they're still considered to primarily be of one gender. People of both genders have these shared traits in different degrees. Now here's where the OP's observance comes in:

Relationships between the sexes are constituted of male-female dynamics. Even in same-sex relationships, there is one partner taking on the more masculine role, the other, the more feminine role. In both homo and hetero relationships, it's like a see-saw. If the male abdicates some masculine traits, the female will feel the need to fill that void by upping her masculine behavior, and vice versa. Here's a perfect, common example of that:

The guy stops being a "leader" by not making decisions as to where to take his date. Instead of making the plans, he defers to her by asking her "Where would YOU like to go?" She then takes on the masculine role of "leader", being forced out of her feminine role of "follower", to make the decisions.

Not that she's comfortable doing that. After some time, she will begin to resent being forced to take over the masculine role. And you know this is true, because we know women will dump guys if the men become submissive like this.

So there is, as the OP suggests a rebalancing of sorts if one partner is 70/30, the other seesaws to 30/70. or experiences a rocky relationship.

 

[radiodude]

>>If the female is more dominant and the male less so, then does the female desire the males lack of dominance in favor of her own just as a dominant male attracts a submissive female?>>

Yes. Aside from control freak women who desire control over the relationship and so, find submissive men to rule over,

There are what we can traditionally label as "masculine" traits and "feminine" traits, right? "Aggressiveness", for example, is considered a masculine trait, whereas "Nurturing" a feminine one, true? Of course, these traits are interchangeable gender-wise, but they're still considered to primarily be of one gender. People of both genders have these shared traits in different degrees. Now here's where the OP's observance comes in:

Relationships between the sexes are constituted of male-female dynamics. Even in same-sex relationships, there is one partner taking on the more masculine role, the other, the more feminine role. In both homo and hetero relationships, it's like a see-saw. If the male abdicates some masculine traits, the female will feel the need to fill that void by upping her masculine behavior, and vice versa. Here's a perfect, common example of that:

The guy stops being a "leader" by not making decisions as to where to take his date. Instead of making the plans, he defers to her by asking her "Where would YOU like to go?" She then takes on the masculine role of "leader", being forced out of her feminine role of "follower", to make the decisions.

Not that she's comfortable doing that. After some time, she will begin to resent being forced to take over the masculine role. And you know this is true, because we know women will dump guys if the men become submissive like this.

So there is, as the OP suggests a rebalancing of sorts if one partner is 70/30, the other seesaws to 30/70. or experiences a rocky relationship.

So, since a naturally masculine/feminine woman/man desires the more masculine role, for example, there isn't any disatisfaction on her or his part. It's when HE or SHE doesn't live up to HIS or HER natural needs in the balancing act that things get rough forcing the other person to compensate.

I guess I don't entirely agree with this premise in that yes I know men and women have different traits, people are unique, etc. But I still hold a view that women are naturally more submissive, whether they show it or not in their personality and in fact want a man who will out-dominate them.

So, I think it's dangerous to say that if things seem natural, meaning she naturally takes control and he doesn't, that it's okay and everyones happy.

 

[jeffthechef]

Thanks for dodging my post.

I assume I was right.