Mojo - what CeMar wants is a woman who will appreciate him on the level of "male candy".
It would be much easier if that was true. Unfortunately from what he has written before (see below) I do not think that's what he wants either.
Cemar - I believe that maybe what I should have said is soul mates instead of lovers. What I want is the highest form of relationship, an all inclusive relationship. Companionship is NOT a complete relationship, it is much lower on the ladder. I want a relationship that IS companionship AND lovers AND best friends and (fill in the blank). If that is what soul mates are, then I guess that would be it.
Personally I think the Alpha male terminology is thrown around way too much without a good definition of what it means. I do not think alpha male characteristics are necessarily "good" (or "bad"). It's kind of like the guy who likes to fight. Some women are attracted to that characteristic (seeing them as strong) and other women are not (seeing them as stupid). IMO neither viewpoint is really right or wrong; it is just a different way of looking at it. (Assuming the guy is not a bully and is not just randomly picking fights. My Grandfather, who I adored, was the kind of guy to get into fights so I am familiar with this behavior. Honestly I am not even sure that it attracted my Grandmother as much as it did not turn her off either. She was known to get into fights as a kid so maybe it was a kind of kindred spirit thing a la "The Quiet Man." Plus she basically ruled the roost at home.)
Anyway... my point would be that whether you are alpha male or not, being confident and sure of yourself whatever your personality is the way to attract HEALTHY attention and create a HEALTHY relationship. That's why Deida's concept can work for anyone - the point (from what I can tell) is to have a purpose which keeps you focused on something in your control, gives you something to work on when other things in your life fall apart, gives you strength, etc. Whether that activity is overtly masculine (military, career, etc.)or not (art, politics, family, etc.) the point is that you are self reliant and self validating. Ironically by lifting the burden of validation off your partner, you actually FREE them to validate you.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
That's why Deida's concept can work for anyone - the point (from what I can tell) is to have a purpose which keeps you focused on something in your control, gives you something to work on when other things in your life fall apart, gives you strength, etc.
I’m not sure that is exactly what Dieda means, though it sounds a little similar. The problem I see in your definition is that such a purpose sounds more like a distraction from the stress of chasing a woman, thereby reducing dependence and appearance of neediness. Dieda does not say that. He says a man should pursue his purpose for the sake of the purpose. If a woman is attracted to that purpose, then all is well. If she is not, then she is the wrong woman, go find another.
Whether that activity is overtly masculine (military, career, etc.)or not (art, politics, family, etc.) the point is that you are self reliant and self validating.
Ok so far....
Ironically by lifting the burden of validation off your partner, you actually FREE them to validate you.
... up to this point. A relationship can work like this, but this idea can also be a setup for trouble. If the intention is to free the woman of burdens so she can better validate the man, then you are back into the enmeshment loop.
The problem I see in your definition is that such a purpose sounds more like a distraction from the stress of chasing a woman, thereby reducing dependence and appearance of neediness.
Good Point. I should have been more clear. What I meant was the side effect of having a purpose is that keeps you focused on things in your control, etc. And it does not reduce the appearance of neediness, it eliminates neediness.
I have tried to simplify Dieda's concepts as I understand them.
but this idea can also be a setup for trouble. If the intention is to free the woman of burdens so she can better validate the man, then you are back into the enmeshment loop.
You are exactly right. If the INTENTION is to free the woman of burden so she can then validate, that is a recipe for disaster. Rather the INTENTION is to fulfill your purpose and a side effect can then be that the burden is lifted from the woman.
Cemar,
Here's an example of how pursuit of some goals can actually keep you from the goal.
In college my freshman year I had three roommates. I and 2 of the roommates had other friends and made other friends along with getting along as roommates. One of my roommates had a best friend on Campus and they had PURPOSELY not lived together for the reason of believing that you needed space in friendship. So the three of us had other friends and viewed ourselves more as roommates even though we were also friends. The fourth roommate was constantly nagging and whining to us about not having friends and about wanting (DEMANDING) us to be her friends. All the time "Why won't you be friends with me?" and "Why don't you like me?" She actually was a fairly nice, normal and fun girl but the constant whining and neediness made all of us NOT want to be around her. I told her "We like you but we think you need other friends. You are on a campus of 50,000 plus students. Go out and find some friends." We were friendly to her but it is hard to be friends with someone when they cannot just relax and hang out. If she could have just relaxed and hung out with us without whining and nagging, I think we all could have been friends. Instead we could not wait to get away from her and many times would not go back to our room because we knew she was just waiting there for us.
My point is that her GOAL was to be our friend but in the end the doggedness she had in DEMANDING that GOAL from us is what prevented us from being friends with her.
CEMAR - please let me know whether you understand the meaning in that last sentence or not.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
He says a man should pursue his purpose for the sake of the purpose. If a woman is attracted to that purpose, then all is well. If she is not, then she is the wrong woman, go find another.
Some women think they like the "purpose" when they marry, but tire of that purpose after many years of M. BTDT.
Go find another (woman) conflicts with some people’s values. Go find another doesn't deal with the broken pieces of a couple's lives that remain after one finds another and maybe the other doesn't find anything but loss.
I liked some things in both books "Wild at Heart" “TWOASM” but I didn't see either book as a complete model to follow.
I heard find your own goals, don’t depend on a woman for self-worth. I think the book overstated that concept. I think find your own goals and don’t get all/most of your validation from a woman, but get some from work/personal goals an remember you have a W, don’t exclude her needs.
my point would be that whether you are alpha male or not, being confident and sure of yourself whatever your personality is the way to attract HEALTHY attention and create a HEALTHY relationship.
I think that is good advice. I've been mulling over the whole Alpha concept. For myself personally, yes, I can find that very sexually attractive but I have never had a close emotional bond with "that type." The R with my H and all my other close R with men have been with someone who I consider "sensitive" and "emotional." In this sense, birds of a feather flock together, not opposites attract. I think it is much harder for a woman to truly love a man that is Alpha. Maybe I am wrong. That just seems to be the case for many women I have seen. My friend who is getting separated is M to what I consider a pretty Alpha guy and he is no longer attractive to her because as she says "I want someone I can be cute with, that I can share stuff with, that is just willing to be more emotional." I think pushing all the Alpha behaviors on this board might actually backfire in the long run. Yes, it is great for short term sexual attraction, but not the basis for a long-term M. Of course the irony being the more sensitive man is also not the best sexual match for the HD woman. I'm living it. Again, life ain't fair. LFL
Some women think they like the "purpose" when they marry, but tire of that purpose after many years of M. BTDT.
Go find another (woman) conflicts with some people’s values. Go find another doesn't deal with the broken pieces of a couple's lives that remain after one finds another and maybe the other doesn't find anything but loss.
glad to see I'm not the only one that doesn't think that this character "walks water", so to speak.
don't forget: don't ejaculate, or your wife will lose all respect for ya.
This is an excellant post. This helps me to define more what it is I must do. I still don't have a freaking clue as to what my true goal is. If I had my choice, I would change careers, but I have the financial responsibility to family to think of first (although Deida says to put ourselves ABOVE the families needs).
There is just one problem with all this, there is an assumption that the fish can smell the bait. What if they can't smell the bait or see the bait?
"There is just one problem with all this, there is an assumption that the fish can smell the bait. What if they can't smell the bait or see the bait?" Have you ever known of a fish that couldn't see, smell, or otherwise sense the bait? Fish are attracted to bait in some manner...if it is presented to them, otherwise there'd be a lot of dead fish floating atop the water due to starvation.
If I had my choice, I would change careers, but I have the financial responsibility to family to think of first...
How many of us really lucky enough to have a job doing our life’s passion and get paid for it to boot? Especially is today’s ever competitive economy. But is that really the case for you? If you place the desire of your wife for you as your top priority, then does it matter so much what kind of career you have, as long as you are relatively content? For you, wouldn’t that job be just a funding mechanism for you to equip your fishing toolbox? Maybe refining and honing your fishing skills is your goal and your job is just a means of achieving that goal. For others, this may not be true.
...(although Deida says to put ourselves ABOVE the families needs).
Are you sure he said that? I think he said that a man needs to wholeheartedly pursue his goal in order to better achieve it, in order to share more of the fruits of his success. That does not necessarily mean a man puts his career above the family. To me, it means the family does comes first, but a man does that by being the provider. To provide well, he must be steadfast in pursuit of his goal…. to better provide. Remember, Dieda also says the woman provides the inspiration for the man to pursue his goal (I interpret “woman” to also include family). So isn’t pursuit of the goal really done for sake of the family?
There is just one problem with all this, there is an assumption that the fish can smell the bait. What if they can't smell the bait or see the bait?
I want to ask you one more time CeMar – do you have a problem interpreting communications from others? You seem to have a tunnel vision way of looking at statements with very little room for subjectivity. It’s almost like you can only interpret things in the very literal words in which they are written. Your last statement is an example of this. It is sooooo literal.
I do not mean to fault you for this, but it would go a long way toward explaining why so many of the same comments from so many posters seem to continually not register with you. It would also help us here on the board to better understand how to communicate with you.
Do you know if you have such communication problems? Has anyone ever said anything like this to you, especially something like Aspergers or autism? What does your wife or your parents say about this? Give me a direct reply to this question.
