the whole concept of non supplication, taking control, alpha male and all the other various "western gaming concepts", the Japanese men have been doing them for centuries and are still doing it.

Some how in Western society, men have transferred their power to the women due to media, feminism, social pressure, and equal right etc, that most of us see this seduction concept as something new and inspiring.

If you go to Japan, observe how the men treat their women, you'll realize how much seduction concept shit they are doing without even knowing them.

Well let's not forget that any "alpha" qualities in some eastern cultures that may seem admirable were in some part born from the negative aspect that you neglected to mention. Women were subjugated to even greater degrees for a longer period of time, and in some areas still are considered to be lesser beings. Being alpha does not mean thinking women are not human or lower in value as humans.

_________________
These hos ain't loyal

DJ_Z, I agree and not to mention the concept of honor, it's on a completely different level, actually the whole cultural difference is too big to compare. But, it's a good point OP. I'm always fascinated by our social conditioning, especially since the MTV and internet came into play, it's amazing how fast things are moving since.

_________________
rAFC and yes, I'm a chick.

I have bursts of being a lady, but it doesn't last long.

Japanese men also lack a true form of autonomy, they are being treated like little princes by their mothers. They can do their version of being alpha because it is a deeply patriarchal system. They would not survive in western societies. Their wives basically take over the mother role.

_________________
You can't buy sophistication.

Actually, it's the same here, except they bitch and nag The mother-child relationship is deeply ingrained in married western couples as well. The question is whether the child is well behaved or misbehaved that sets the upper hand in the relationship, either way they're both pretty miserable with these dynamics.

_________________
rAFC and yes, I'm a chick.

I have bursts of being a lady, but it doesn't last long.

I think most men have some catching up to do about that. Financially independent women want two very contradictory things: a strong non-complicated shoulder and being treated with empathy in a relationship. Being too much of A means refusing to take up some responsibility, being too much of B means being a push-over. In both cases, most of the time you will lose the woman. And I did both in the past, so I'm talking about some painstaking real-life experiences.

The old idea about a stable little family of mom, dad and the children still attract women, but they will not invest the same amount of energy to let it happen. That explains the high ratio of divorces.

_________________
You can't buy sophistication.

Spot on! Have you found a middle ground yet? I had an interesting discussion with Mack 2.0 about this. He suggests the only way to avoid this dynamic is to be a daddy with a dick, which most normal guys looking for a partnership and 50-50 relationship are uncomfortable with. The other options outside that is being the well behaved child - AFC or misbehaved child - the badboy. But imo neither of these models are actually satisfactory for at least one party involved, so what's left??

_________________
rAFC and yes, I'm a chick.

I have bursts of being a lady, but it doesn't last long.

My best friend is the archetype of the badboy. He slept with +- 120 women (true story age 39 y), but he never can keep a girl. They all grew tired of his unability to be stable. Badboys stay alone.
You just have to be bad to attract women, but in a LTR women also seek confirmation all is well in their own little world. Being in a LTR means just showing your fullness of your personality, so also showing your sensitive side, but still being strong and confident when your girl needs you the most. And the objective is in fact being in a 50-50 relationship, but the man still has to be the man and the woman still has to be the woman. You do not have to be duplicates, you have to be a team with each their own tasks.

I did not find the middle ground because no woman until now could keep me interested. I just went for the wrong sort of women, I'm now hunting one who is cultivated and independent, women like her are for me the real deal.

_________________
You can't buy sophistication.

This is interesting.

I'm too young to have from-life insight, but it seems that one must completely embody the 50-50 relationship. The man must determine his boundaries, and fully uphold his responsibility, but be quick to mark out his territory. He does only his part, if cooking doesn't fit his concept of a 50-50 relationship, then he won't take that on, lest it lead to a greater imbalance. Seems like a hyper-vigilant sort of life, constantly doing exactly your share and no more.

I do not think it takes much vigilance. The reason why I became involved in the pua-scene was because I knew something was wrong how I handled women. Being a pua means to sort things in your head, to be a balanced person and act accordingly. The reason why I fucked up in dating or relationships, only had to do with my mental state. Being balanced+choosing a somewhat balanced woman = balanced relationship. There is nothing more to it, but many people do not realise this. Being a pua meant for me that I finally reached adulthood. Knowing myself, acting confident in the world and charming women because they are just that great.

I find 80% of what I read in Mystery/Style/... complete nonsense, because it doesn't sound that mature. It evades the necessary directness when it is needed the most. 20% is great material when it deals with the inner psychology of women and attraction. So yes, you can wear silly hats and do magic tricks, but that does not improve yourself. My 2 cents.

_________________
You can't buy sophistication.