I see men as people, and I view the person Iβm dating as my partner. Not an object. That makes the idea of paying someone to teach me how to emotionally manipulate or abuse a man unappealing, even if it means I βwinβ him
I see men as people, and I view the person Iβm dating as my partner. Not an object. That makes the idea of paying someone to teach me how to emotionally manipulate or abuse a man unappealing, even if it means I βwinβ him
Well said!
Truth.
This is also what Iβve never understood about the PUA stuff from the other end
Seeing men and women as "value" (e.g. high-value or low-value) is entirely an ugly transactionalism that infests the male viewpoint. Even before the manosphere I knew plenty of guys that only thought about their worth this gruesomely. Capitalism has really done a number on us. π°
I don't know if there will ever be any major inroads into the male psyche about all the non-transactional benefits of companionship - company, mutual assurance, simple validation, etc. etc. - but I think there are men out there that do understand such things even without easy language to articulate.
There definitely are!
Dozens of seasons of The Bachelor and The Bachelorette have turned dating into competing with your peers instead of getting to know someone.
I think there's an implicit assumption you're making here that a progressive bro role model is like some politically correct pick-up artist, and I don't think that's right.
The worst of it is is that every social and technological trend is teaching us to be worse at understanding each other, by offering ever-lower-friction forms of validation; and I think the uptake on these things is quite a bit higher among boys and young men than among girls and women.