I've been reading this forum for a little while. I find the evolutionary biology discussion extremely interesting. The theory is to reject social constructs that sway the "biological balance" between males and females.

I've read a lot about the shit tests, and maintaining frame - namely, that the man can't be shaken by the woman. Further, I've seen many posts where it's also said that men have to have the air of abundance, namely, let her know that you can and will walk away. Don't let her rule you.

I've also read about hypergamy, and how that is the driving biological force for women. They don't really "love" you, but rather, what you do to them (i.e. status upgrade, providing, and satisfying their lust for alpha).

On another page, I read from an author that women cannot love men the way that men love a woman. Man sort of has a loyalty to the "love" itself, it's unconditional. The woman's loyalty is to, really, your manliness (or if she's hit the wall, your sufficient-beta-ness)

There's also the concept of unicorns. So, we have all read or heard or seen instances of women standing by/with their man through "thick or thin." Guy gets paralyzed, loses job, etc.

What are the evolutionary biology factors at play in these circumstances? Is it simply a matter of, despite these set-backs, the man maintains frame?

I guess my real questions is: essentially, is it never permissible for a man to show weakness?

The man's idea of love is unconditional. The woman's is not. He's looking for apples, and the only thing she's selling is oranges?

tl;dr: I'm new, read a lot. If women cannot love a man the way a man loves a woman, is love as men see it truly an illusion?

I'm not sure if I'm still too new so that the robot will eat this post

P.S. - it did eat it, so now I guess I'm posting here on askTRP.