Cold differentiation, fusion and stuff.

[Burgbud]

(Kett) Burgbud, really? M... Not caring about/appreciating the other person's triumphs (the million dollars) unless and until they meet your own intimate needs (the milk) doesn't sound differentiated ... it sounds intensely selfish. Is that really how Deida sees the feminine? Am I missing the point?

He was only describing what the masculine should strive to be like in that case. He's calling for the man to be utterly differentiated. The example is extreme to make the point.

Whether the woman is differentiated or not can't be determined from that scenario.

Still .... you may not be *dependent* on your mate's response to be happy ... but it still feels good when it's forthcoming .... and what kind of schmuck wouldn't want to rejoice in their partner's joy?

The point is, it's a test.

In a more real world example, let's say your H comes home thrilled after accomplishing a miraculous feat of software engineering. He tries to explain it to you but you just aren't getting it and for whatever reason you're just in a mood so you blow him off.

Case A: He's unconcerned by your apparent lack of appreciation for his genius and continues about his day just as thrilled as before he talked to you.

Case B: He's bummed by your inability to connect with and appreciate his accomplishment. He doesn't react toward you at all but continues about his day significantly more subdued than before he talked to you.

Without worrying about who's right or wrong or what's acceptable or satisfactory, in which case would you find your H more attractive? Project both cases into long term behaviors. If your H consistently behaved as in case A, would you find yourself significantly more attracted to him than if he was consistently case B?