Xuantian 1: Ancient Xuandongtian

Chapter 299 Love and Patterns
—A man's core desire is never "to get a ticket through the selection process," but rather "to be seen, responded to, and favored equally."

1. A woman's "screening method" essentially deprives a man of his emotional agency.

When a woman says, "You have to impress me first, then I'll get to know you," her underlying logic is:
By placing oneself in an "absolutely superior position," a man's affection is merely a "bargain to be tested," and his efforts, patience, and sincerity are simply materials used to "meet the standard."

By taking complete control of the relationship, a man's emotional needs (to be responded to, understood, and liked) are relegated to a secondary position after the prerequisite of "touching me."

And this is precisely where the man's pain lies: it's not that he doesn't want to put in the effort, but rather that he doesn't want to be a "test-taker."

His affection wasn't for "passing the test," but for "being seen by you."

When he realizes that his feelings are just a "filter" for the other person, the humiliation of "I tried my best to get close to you, but you don't care who I am at all, you only care if I'm good enough to lick your boots" will directly extinguish all his feelings.

2. The woman's "surrounded by resources" naturally shielded her from this kind of empathy.

Being constantly in a position of "being pursued and chosen" can cause women to lose their ability to perceive "actively liking" someone.

She was used to "men pursuing me, coaxing me, and proving themselves," and accepted the rule that "women are the ones who are favored, and men are the ones who give."

She couldn't see the vulnerability in men: a man's passion can be worn down by indifference, a man's sincerity can be worn down by the "waiting for the best price" selection process, and a man can also be afraid of "I like you so much, but I don't even have the right to be treated as an equal by you."

She couldn't understand this sense of powerlessness because she had never been the "proactive one," nor had she ever been treated with a "selection process" by someone she liked.

3. Why are the "screening mode" and "two-way approach" dead ends?

The underlying logic of these two models is contradictory from the very beginning:

Women's "Filtering Mode"

Utilitarian evaluation: First, see if you're good enough, then decide whether to like you.
When a man's affection is used as a "tool," his subjectivity is diminished, and he either becomes a sycophant or disappears completely.

Men crave a "two-way journey"

Emotional resonance: First I'm attracted to you, then I hope you're attracted to me too.

Both parties are equal "subjects," and liking is a two-way flow, not a one-way begging.

When a woman enters "screening mode," she essentially closes the door to a "two-way journey."

—Because in this model, men are always “passive test takers”, and their emotions are rarely responded to, let alone “being liked equally”.

4. Regarding the fact that true resonance is "rare and hard to come by".

This mutual attraction, where "I like you and you happen to like me," is not something that is "chased" but rather something that is "met."

Its premise is that both parties relinquish their roles as "screener/examinee" and return to an equal footing;

It means "I see your good qualities, and I hope you can see mine," rather than "Give me all your good qualities first, and then I'll decide whether I want to even glance at you."

Women want to be "moved," while men want to be "seen." But when women are always in a superior position, it becomes a luxury for men to be "seen."

(The sense of entitlement from a high-level perspective obscures the inherent goodness of things.)

The power of selection is never inherently fixed in the hands of women; it belongs only to the party that is "scarce and has more choices."

1. Why can outstanding men directly "cut off" the woman selection process?
The phrase "You have to impress me first, then I'll get to know you," spoken by a woman, is essentially a privilege granted by the supply and demand relationship.
When she is surrounded by suitors and has plenty of choices, she has the leverage to completely shift the initial costs of a relationship to the man, while she only needs to be the "evaluator".

However, this privilege only applies to men who are "less valuable and have fewer choices than her." Once a man's value, scarcity, and choices all surpass hers, the supply and demand relationship will instantly reverse:
1. Men's time is more valuable, and they simply cannot afford the long process of "winning you over first and then letting you get to know them";

2. For men, a woman's "screening criteria" (such as sincerity and emotional value) are not "must-haves," but rather "optional."

He doesn't need to prove himself to a woman who isn't that enthusiastic about him.

At this point, a woman's screening process will be shortened or even rendered ineffective, because she is afraid of missing out and that the man will be snatched away by a more proactive and responsive woman.

To put it bluntly, she only dared to use her "reserve" and "selectivity" on men who "couldn't live without her."

II. Why do women often fail to even pass the minimum standard in men's selection criteria? "Lack of experience" is the most accurate reason.
Many women spend their entire lives as "selectors," never developing the ability to "actively cultivate relationships," and naturally cannot adapt to men's selection logic.

1. The underlying logic is completely misaligned.
A woman's selection logic is "emotions first": Do you love me enough? Are you sincere enough? Do you put me first enough? She only needs to judge "whether you give me enough", without having to give anything in return.

The selection logic for excellent men is "two-way value priority": Can you provide me with equal emotional value? Can you take the initiative to understand me and respond to me? Can you be on the same wavelength as me, instead of just waiting for me to coax and take care of you?

Many women are used to "taking in but not giving out," and when it comes to giving or responding, they have nothing to offer.

2. Completely lacking experience in "low-level operation".
She's used to men taking the initiative to start conversations, make sacrifices, and advance the relationship. So when it's her turn to take the initiative to understand men, express affection, and demonstrate her own value, she panics.

For example, if a man says, "I hope you can understand me," her first reaction is not "How should I respond?" but rather, "He doesn't love me enough, why should I take the initiative?"

She had no idea that, in a man's selection process, "taking the initiative to respond and approach" was the minimum acceptable standard.

3. Treating "screening privileges" as an inherent right.

Many women mistakenly believe that the "high position when being pursued" is something they are born with and can use no matter who they are facing.

But outstanding men don't fall for that.

He'd seen too many women who only knew how to put on airs and wait to be coaxed. What he wanted wasn't a superior examiner, but a partner with whom he could have an equal dialogue and a two-way journey.

While she was still playing the "you have to impress me first" game, the man had already turned and left, because there was no need to play this exhausting game with her.

Third, in essence, this is a "power game determined by supply and demand."

“Even among men who are good enough, there is a lot of room for selection.”
It exposes a truth that many women are unwilling to admit:
Her selection privileges only apply to the "ordinary men's track".

Once you enter the race for outstanding men, the rules change.

—It's not her who selects others, but others who select her.

The reason why two-way collaboration is "rare and hard to come by" is precisely because it requires both parties to transcend the roles of "selector/examinee":

It's not that I'm waiting for you to chase me from a high position, nor that I'm desperately trying to prove myself from a low position. It's that we both have the right to choose, yet we're still willing to take the initiative to get closer to each other.

To put it bluntly, the selection process for women is essentially a "privilege exercised against the weak."

(Even if it was what she thought)
She can only maintain this high position when "men are less valuable than her and cannot live without her".

Once she encounters a truly outstanding man with real options, this set of rules instantly becomes ineffective, and because she has never practiced the ability to manage relationships on an equal footing, she naturally fails to pass the test.

—Limitations of single-mode and the rationale of dual-mode

1. People with a single mindset, regardless of gender, are inherently unlikely to achieve true happiness.
Sticking to only one logic in relationships, whether it's a man waiting for both sides or a woman only doing selection, is going to extremes, and this path is inherently unworkable.

2. Men who only engage in a two-way exchange and never take the initiative: They will basically never get the results they want.
Truly high-quality women are usually pursued by men who actively seek them out. They won't wait for you to reciprocate. If you just wait, you'll most likely never meet one in your lifetime.

3. Women who rely solely on "screening modes" and don't know how to respond: will never find truly outstanding men.

Truly outstanding men who have the power to choose will not accept a long, passive, and exhausting selection process. The more aloof you are and the more you only test others, the less likely you are to retain high-quality people.

4. Truly wise people don't choose between two options, but rather embrace both.
Men: On the one hand, uphold the bottom line of "mutual attraction," not becoming a simp or losing dignity; on the other hand, use normal initiative and pursuit in the secular world to approach women.

Women: On the one hand, they uphold the bottom line of "screening and self-protection" and do not settle for just anyone; on the other hand, they interact and respond with a "two-way approach".

5. Only by being compatible with both modes can the probability of happiness truly increase.
Relationships aren't black and white; you need to have principles, but also realistic approaches. Taking both into account makes it easier for a relationship to succeed.

—However, even so, happiness remains like the bright moon in the sky, desirable but unattainable.

It is controlled by a power at the level of the Heavenly Dao.

This level of control is comparable to that of nuclear weapons, and belongs to the absolute sovereignty of Heaven.

It bestows it upon those who are good by nature but have no way to be happy, and it also takes it away from those who possess it in every way but are corrupt in nature.