I really find it " stupid " when men on media try to " launch " new words that describe romantic approaches or ones that refer to new ways to get women ( rizz ) as if it isn't already showed by our society at some time especially when there is a cultural shift.

Even movements and subs that are targeted to men like red pills seems to think they are unique or at least have a unique philosophy. The reality is our culture and society already gifted men every way possible to get a woman while keeping certain behaviours active cause they help on the long term ( masculinity and not simping) .

It's really like this:

A man who want to succeed sexually need to match the woman's attractiveness and make sure to not inflate her ego to keep her self esteem on a logical level and therefore avoid entitlement . And this is why a man who f*ck a lot of women don't show a lot of emotional interest and believe that if he match a woman's attractiveness, it negate her advantage and put both of them in the same boat , therefore his sexual needs can be satisfied just by convincing her ( SOME use commitment as a way to negotiate and it's not a manly think to do ).

So basically: sexual success for men = meeting women's attractiveness + not putting women on a pedestal.

Now , for men who don't want this but prefer relationships . It's the hardest generation as a man to be in romantic relationship with a woman but as sad as this sound ( which is ) resources and looks can guarantee a man at least 2 years of a relationship without nothing else and the level of beauty and sexual performance of the woman increase simultaneously with your resources (I then would say emotional intelligence play a good part ) . Especially with the constant pressure on men to perform romantically, you need to put all your resources ( money + time + emotions ) as an investment that may or may not deserve it ( aka the girl ) which mean that men really need to be careful about the woman they choose and I would personally tell men to always put themselves first in this situation and always be more picky cause the relationship after your decision is mainly working due to your resources.

So about relationships for men = Looks ( 30% ) + your resources ( emotions 30% + money 40%)

Now, most of you would say that they already know this , which lead to the other point . Aka how men who don't have this succeed .

Now , sexual success become so difficult but "marriage " success can still be available and it's displayed in most movies and media this way :

1_ financial success or at least a huge difference in the financial level between the guy and the girl : Yea a 300k year is enough to have a romantic relationship regardless of anything else but most of the time , the guy is basically treated like an ATM ( remind me of social media posts where the girl only post the gifts but never the guy )

2_ Social success : guys who are extroverts and have a huge social network that make the woman feel safe and attracted to his personality regardless of his looks. Which represent the example of people here saying they saw attractive women with average but funny men .it's mostly not the funny part , it's what him being funny led to ( mostly social success)

3_ emotional slavery : as sad as this sound , but most women ( + 32 yo ) get so much adrenaline and crazy experiences in their 20s that they can barely stand another relationship when it's about the guy or equal. Most of you can recognise this kind of relationship easily , the man always apologising and the never stand for himself, basically a yes man .

90 % of men who are sexually successful fall under the first type . 90% of men who are in a relationship or who were in one with women fall in one of those 3 types . So i really don't understand what most " dating coaches " are trying to do? You all litterally just recycle those words and put new words to describe them ( rizz , sugar daddy , beta bux , toxic masculinity free ...)