The Power Of Female Projection Addressed By Dating Coaches
I have signed up for several free email newsletters written by dating coaches. These are mostly real dating coaches and not just Game advisors. I’ve signed up both as a man and as a woman. I have seen that dating coaches for men tend to be more Game-like and dating coaches for women are more relationship oriented.
Most of the dating coaches seem to have a female clientele. This is because women need the most de-programming from the constant message of “you go grrl!” and the accompanying lies and mistruths that go along with such propaganda. Men have Game and the Manosphere but as we are the far more rational and logical gender of the species, we don’t need as much hand-holding that the dating coaches offer.
It’s actually rather encouraging to see that underneath all the pretty words that these dating coaches deliver to women there is a strong element of cold, red pill truth. Here’s an example:
It’s often shocking to learn that men aren’t looking for the same qualities in a woman that you look for in a man. Ambitious, successful, strong – the traits in which you may take the most pride – are not your most important assets to most men.
It’s not that they don’t matter at all. But don’t lose sight of the fact that a quality man wants what he can’t get from his guy friends:
Someone who makes him feel good.
Someone who makes him feel secure.
Someone who makes him feel loved.
Someone who makes him feel sexy.
Someone who makes him feel trusted.It’s great that you’re awesome to your friends, generous to your family, loyal to your employer, and on the board of three different charities.
But if you’re not consistently making your man feel good when he’s around you, he’s going to disappear and find a woman who does.
This is direct quote from Evan Marc Katz.
Remember, this is advice given to women. It’s remarkable but I wonder how many women resist or completely reject such advice because of feminist, ideological grounds (“it’s wrong to make a man feel good”) or their own sense of fabulousness causes them to stick their heads in the sand.
Regardless, this is definately red pill stuff that anyone in the Manosphere would recognize. I give Evan Marc Katz a lot of credit for his courage to give such advice. He’s squarely addressing the whole projection thing. “If I’m attracted to strong and independent men, they must be attracted to a strong and independent woman like me.”
I covered that whole strong and independent thing already. It’s important to address the projection element that women continue to delude themselves into thinking that a man’s desires in a relationship are the same as hers. It’s part of the masculinization of women and it’s turned dating into a full-contact, blood sport. Game addresses quite a lot of this trend with effective techniques and strategy for a man to present himself in a more attractive light to women.
It looks like that some dating coaches are teaching women a form of “Girl Game” and that “Game” is about being more feminine and more accepting of men in general. If this is indeed the case, I think it’s important to support these kinds of businesses with referrals.
Another dating coach for women over a certain age is Bobbi Palmer. Her language has a lot more of the “you go grrl” attitude but she does give some good, realistic advice for single women. For example:
• What beliefs or feelings do I have that may be making it harder for me to accept men with kindness?
• Where did these beliefs originate?
• Do I have a “type” that I find myself attracted to yet they never seem to work out?
• Are the men I’m choosing turning out to be losers or disappointments?
• Do I rely on chemistry and make judgments about a man’s viability soon after meeting him?
• Am I giving the nice guys a chance?
• Is my vision of my ideal man a true and realistic representation of who and what I need in my life today?
Bobbi is much more diplomatic, of course, and I don’t think she’s quite taken the red pill. Hell, she quotes that infamous Manosphere nemesis, Oprah Winfrey. I strongly suspect that Bobbi is a lot more direct with her clients in person than her rather politically correct blog postings would indicate.
Us Manosphere guys tend to be ruthless with our words should we be put in the position of giving advice. Imagine being a dating coach and attempting to address two generations of girl power while trying to get new clients. Not an easy prospect, I would imagine. I also wonder if too many dating coaches simply don’t understand the power of biology and resort to the same old advice based on current (failed) social expectations.
The Private Man 
It’s impossible to give women advice they don’t want to take.
If sugar-coating reality gets them to swallow, then it’s a good pill.
What’s remarkable to me is that these adviser to women absolutely, completely miss the most important fact about attraction, which is fully known and discussed in the manosphere: that there is such thing as a SMV, that it varies markedly between individuals and that the better looking a woman is, the higher the SMV, and the more male demand for her.
The closest that one adviser got to this was the woman advisor suggesting not to make a quick decision based on chemistry. I guess its safe to suggests that men have different SMV.
If women understood the all-importance of their SMV and could accept this, a lot of women’s misery could end. But did the advisers say that? No. Because they know that women would not take the advice because the truth is so unattractive to them.
What these advisors SHOULD be saying can be summed up in two sentences.
“Lose all the weight you can possibly can and be pleasant to be around. That’s all a guy wants.”
But no, that’s all lost in this PC gobbly-gook.
The truth is indeed unacceptable to most women, hence the dilemma that dating coaches face.
SMV is a concept that will unlikely be completely understood outside of the Manosphere. Yet enough elements of this concept are somewhat known outside our realm of logic and reason.
As well, we don’t know how honest the dating coaches with their clients in private. Perhaps there is more truth revealed behind closed doors, so to speak. The marketing materials – those free emails – must be extraordinarily diplomatic and politically correct so as not to shock potential clients with some ugly (and overweight) truths.
for lolz go here. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/relationships/news/article.cfm?c_id=41&objectid=10729333
not much projection being addressed there. This is the culture I live in, hyper-manginic. Got my plans to ex-pat in the next few years, needless to say…
Huh. It would not surprise me if there maybe more single women in the 40-50 bracket than single men, unless this is corrected by the manosphere demographer Darlock. But if you take into account that a woman’s SMV, on average, falls much faster in time than a man’s SMV, I would stlll think there are far more 7 and 8 men in the 40-50 racket than women.
It really never gets better for men. But if you are a woman who was a 7 in her 20’s who rode the carousel and got fat enough to become a 3 to 4 in her 40’s (the rule where I live), you might as well stick a fork in yourself.
Thanks for the kind words. I think it’s important to tell the truth, as opposed to sugar coating things. Glad you agree. Can you do me a favor and remove the PDF? That’s intellectual property that’s only available by subscribing on my site, thanks. Keep up the good work.
I took care of it.
“This is because women need the most de-programming”
Ain’t that the truth. I’ve found you can’t – even when she has explicitly asked for the truth from a man’s mouth – get even one sentence into a game/evo-psych explanation of mating behaviors before a woman will flip out yelling and screaming about how wrong you are and how women would never fall for such a thing.
Beta guys do this too; I covered this in my first field report, they put up an irrational front _moments after_ I opened a set with a cheap neg about their Louis Vuitton purses.
http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/field-report-geek-game/
Pingback: The Prime Directive of Relationships | The Badger Hut
Pingback: Why women are afraid to pump up men’s egos. « Haley's Halo
Pingback: The Hits Just Keep On Coming | The Badger Hut
Awesome points.
The masculinization of women? Women have always been masculine. It’s not new. Perhaps you’re scared of your own femininity otherwise you wouldn’t write blog posts by way of convincing yourself.
“I wonder how many women resist or completely reject such advice because of feminist, ideological grounds (“it’s wrong to make a man feel good”)”
That is not what Feminism is about at all. I hope you haven’t invented a culture based on your misunderstanding of Feminism. It’s unfortunate that you seperate the genders the way you do because people are a lot more varied than that.
Oh boy… shaming language, snowflaking, denial of the true nature of feminism…
It’s a three-fer of ridiculousness!
How does the Kool-aid taste?