The Five Levels of Relationship Operating System

    Like computers have operating systems so do we. In this episode I tried to explain how our O/S affects our relationship.

    This discussion is based on the following blog post;

    The Evolution Of The Relationship Operating System



    Welcome to honest talk about heartbreak, dating and relationships, relationships, the podcast helping you navigate your path to happy ever after with your host, Rob McPhillips. So basically, we were talking tonight about the evolution of the operating system and the operating system is the cultural narrative for how relationships. Function for the narrative around what a relationship means, how it’s formed, how why expectations we should have and how we can fix it if if if it goes wrong. So we looked at the level so level one is basically the caveman level of tightwire I want.


    Level two is the more civilized a sense of like we have to be here in within civilization, we have to take care of other people. And so it’s the deal making level where we make deals of maybe it’s not a so we might see this level now in terms of a golddigger relationship or a sugar daddy sugar relationship where someone marry someone for. Some other reason than than love or attraction level three was from about a 12th century, I think up until now the prevailing cultural narrative has been that we marry for love, that we marry because we meet the person that sets us alive and we fall in love and they are the one and love.


    So I think we move to level four when we recognize that the fairytale myth doesn’t work to level four is about a level of confusion. It’s recognizing the narrative that still culturally we have. Doesn’t work, and it’s more of a pragmatic response of that doesn’t work. So what will and I think the movement to study relationships, I think people like Harville Hendrix, people who’ve advocated more progressive relationships, has an open or polyamory and that kind of relationship. Our reactions to the recognition level three doesn’t work.


    So the minor upgrade to to that is recognizing that its skills and knowledge that can help us to develop our relationships, and it’s the recognition that we can no more, that we can impact our relationships and level the next evolution is the sense of we recognize that our life is essentially a story and it’s every story that’s given to us or it’s a story that we create and it’s recognizing that we don’t have to take the narrative that we’re given culturally, but that we can transcend that and create our own narrative.


    And so it’s it’s taking. Our life and our situation and making a story and recognize that we’re consciously using that as a construct until. We find data that contradicts it. And so it’s recognizing that we create narrative in terms of. What things mean to us, and it’s just being consciously in control of that. The idea is that it’s a buffet of ideas, so we all can bring and share our own perspectives and our own ideas and you take what you want.


    So there’s no one, right? There’s no one. We’re not here to convince anyone. We’re not here. No one’s right. No one’s wrong. It’s just an idea where we can share ideas and take from whatever is useful to the main room where we are now is recorded. And the audio with the main room will be a podcast. So you can catch up on any of the meet ups by looking at any of the past on a podcast.


    You can look at any of the past ones and catch up on any that you’ve missed. If there’s a problem with the breakout room, you can leave the breakout room and come back. I’ll be in the main room and I’ll help you reassign. Also, if you if you have an Internet connection problem and you get dropped out, then I’ll be in the main room and help you get back into your breakout room. I’ll give you a link for feedback later.


    So any problems or any ideas for future meet ups? Like I said earlier that we discussed in December, we got the Christmas party, so share any ideas.


    Also, just want to let you know in the new year, obviously there’s going to be lots of people starting dating.


    It’s a time when New Year’s resolutions and people decide to start dating. So I’m going to be doing the pilot study last month. And so start dating. Right. Is going to be opening in just in between Christmas and New Year’s so people can get started. And that’s basically a there’s details on that on make relationships simple dot com. And if you go there, if you look at the start dating. Right, that’s a month long training in online dating messaging coming soon is just finalizing the curriculum for relationship mastery system, which is going to be like the start date in what is a cut down version of that or cut down version of part of that.


    But the curriculum is a system of relationship building that’s going to be coming in January. Right. So now so the topic of tonight is the evolution of the relationship operating system. Now, in order for us to be able to discuss it, I know it’s kind of a. It’s an abstract idea, and it’s maybe not. Immediately obvious what it is. So first of all, I want to just clear up any misunderstandings or not.


    Not not knowing what a relationship operating system is so that we can go into the breakout rooms with some solid idea of of what a relationship operating system is. So if I if I mention relationship operating system, who thinks what’s. How does that apply? Or is everyone clear that it was in the blog post or Spain, so I can explain a bit, that would be great because I don’t think I fully grasp the concept.


    Yeah, OK.


    So basically, I like if you look at your mobile phone, it has it’s got hardware. So that limits the scope of the camera and the ability of what it tells the speed of its processor, things like that. It has the IRS or Angel or whatever the equivalent Android is of the operating system. And then within that, it has the apps and the apps allow you to use the phone to do specific functions, so like message or take pictures or whatever is now my.


    My proposition is that we have humans have a similar set up, we have genes which are genetic or genetic capability, what we’re going to be the colorize, we have the skin color, the person, the temperamental factors.


    So that’s the hardware. We can’t there’s bound to within which we can change that. The and then on top of that, we’ve got a relationship operating system. And the operating system is the set of frameworks and beliefs that we have about the world and more particularly about how relationships work. And so that said, basically in a relationship, when you react without really considering every element and nuance of the interaction, which is basically how we interact most of the time, then we’re working from on autopilot.


    And when you’re walking on autopilot, it’s from the operating system.


    Does that make sense? We’re trying to analogize the humans way, working through the use of technology.


    Yes, it’s basically a computer. The operating system mediates between apps, which is skills in humans and the basic hardware. So in order to for a human to function, they have to have a view of the world, a set of beliefs and rules of thumbs. And so those rules of thumb are what we operate on, unless we give a lot of focused attention to a specific instance. So what would be the what would we what was the aim of the debate?


    What specifically out of this concept?


    OK, so the evolution of the operating system is the five basic is the way that I see that relationships have evolved. So initially, when you go back to caveman times, it was I want an answer to the cavemen, you know, dragging a woman by the by a hair and with a club taking what you wanted. So the next evolution was we civilized, we we civilized. Then we realized that in order to get this, we had to do this.


    And so it’s about we’re looking at how do I get what I want? What do I have to do? What do I have to give? We don’t have to pretend.


    And so when you look at like pick up, pick up and chat up lines, that’s basically what do I have to do to get what I want.


    The next evolution is the romantic.


    Operating system, which is the idea of I feel like this, therefore it must be love and therefore it must be fight, the next evolution was really evolved from a confusion where with political with the rise in independence and equality of women and I not knowing what to do, kind a sense of confusion of what are the rules, what, what, how these things work. And so then it’s it’s. The use of skills within that, and I believe that the next evolution is a personal narrative based.


    So does that make sense generally? Yeah. And is everyone so vacay with the basic concept, when you say operating system, do you mean underlying beliefs then paradigm? Yes.


    So when I talk about the fairy tale model, that is a framework that is a that is like operating system free. Is anyone else? I know this is quite strange.


    Explain the artisan in the master samples.


    OK, thank you. Um. Let me let me see that he said basically, I know, right?


    I so basically that is that if the value model of where you go from here to here.


    So the line is. Once you’re free or operating below the line, so it’s it’s subpar results. OK, so I’m sorry, I’m not saying that was the mastermind looking at the wrong one. Is that the one on the very top? Yes, four five point Zero Mostel and four point one one. OK, inscription the fine and artisan consolidate to make sure I cross it right.


    OK, I’m seeing a different image, but I do know that there was the Arsenal master. Basically, artisan is basically master is someone who’s gone past artisan level. So it’s a higher level of a more effective operating system. And this is on the operating system. Post an evolution of relationship operating system. Yeah, it’s the one on the meetup post. Oh, I may have posted a slightly different one. I’m sorry. No, no, no, it’s okay.


    I had no sorry. It was my fault. I picked the wrong one. Oh, my. That’s a changed one. Okay. So so basically, it’s like caveman settlers in civilization. Okay, so so someone who’s operating at the caveman level, they’re the prescription for them to to get to the next level is to have empathy to the caveman level, doesn’t have empathy and settlor level is to level of within a civilization and aspiring to want more than that.


    Kind of like what’s given.


    And then the dreamer is the kind of romantic dreamer. But the the next that prescription is to challenge and think a little bit more critically. Okay, that makes sense. Yeah. Okay. Right. So the topic of the breakout room is. To really consolidate the idea of the relationship operating system for you, what you understand of it and how it can impact relationships. So maybe in personal experiences, if you see somewhere where it’s impacted your relationships, if you see other people operating from certain levels.


    That will be another example. Does that make sense to everyone? Just released through the lake that you are basing this on into the chat so that we can just make sure. Well, yeah, we’re looking at the same time.


    She should be the first link in the chat and I will post it again. Chat. Okay, go. Okay, so the topic is really discussing what a relationship operating system is doesn’t make sense to you. What do you understand it?


    Because our understanding each side is a kind of foreign concept, you understand, because I think it’s OK, I’m repeating someone’s audio.


    And so what what what you understand, Biak, and what impact it has on relationships. How does that make sense? OK, I will. Just one more time, please. OK, right, quick show of hands.


    Does a relationship operate? The system makes sense. Do you have a vague idea of what it might be? Hands up. Hands down. Hands up, if you have a vague idea and you can use the reactions if you haven’t got camera on.


    OK. Right, OK, right, so so you sorry, Sandra was not. Yes, yeah, OK, so. When we function, we function most of the time and rule of thumb, we function without thinking. So when we’re driving, we learn to drive and it becomes automated. So initially, it’s really awkward and it’s learning the skill and we have to constrain everything we do. Like, I don’t know if anyone else, when they’re parking has to turn the music off so that they can accommodate things at once.


    So. The relationship operating system is what do you function on when you’re not thinking about it, when you’re just relating, when you’re when you’re thinking of what your partner does or has done? What are you referring to? You know, when people say they should do this, what are you referring to? So it’s gut instinct or rational thought. So where’s the gut instinct coming in from?


    OK, so it’s the belief somewhere you have to have an expectation of what a relationship is, certainly of how it works. That’s the relationship operating system. OK, right. OK, we’re going to go to the breakout rooms for 12 minutes. When you get a link to come back, don’t come back straight away because you still got a minute of the conversation. Welcome back. OK, so. How about room one? What what was your discussion, what was.


    Any questions or examples that you can share?


    We wondered if people had different operating systems would be compatible. Interesting question. Yeah, it’s definitely going to. Yeah, I think it would be the basis for a lot of conflict and a lot of misunderstanding of relationships, so when someone’s at one level and you’re got different expectations.


    OK, so what was what was your conclusion that you came to? Well, I was wondering if people have in different operating systems mean that they have different fundamental values, in which case I thought they might be a clash, but a roof that sometimes people might not clash. I don’t think that they necessarily have different values because I think values are slightly different, then they’re more personal and that’s more personal narrative, whereas what we’ve got on the operating systems is basically cultural narratives until we get to to the level five.


    But what they have different expectations if they’re coming from a different cultural narrative.


    Yes. Yes. I think there’d be different expectations and different rules of how you play like the game of relationships. When I’m talking about the kind of relationships I’m talking about the infinite game that we’ve discussed before, not play the game to get a reaction. So, yes, I think that they expect different things to behave in different ways. So. Know, I think ultimately that would that would create a lot of problems and a lot of unresolvable problems.


    But I don’t know, I haven’t I’ve never really looked at that specifically in context of the human operating system.


    OK, anything in Renfree? I was just going to say something else for sure. I just thought that if someone was a real hopeless romantic and stuck in whatever number three that is, I just thought that the person that had actually evolved more might be able to help them see a different way, that they would be a sort of learning. And as you come together in the depths of your relationship, that you would actually develop and learn that. So they would be able to do the romantic gestures, you know, and do some of that stuff.


    And you ask for that thing. I mean I mean, I remember asking my husband, I said, so when you asked me to marry you, I would like to have 12 roses. And I thought, I don’t care if I have to ask you. I don’t expect you to understand. That’s what I would like. So I’m asking you. And it didn’t take away from it being unromantic, but but I think he was just much more pragmatic than me and was very happy to do that for me.


    So I think there is a way of those things coming together. And I’m actually working symbiotically. That’s that’s what I wanted to say.


    Obviously, it depends on whether the other person is, you know, the problem with the romantic level and this is romance, but it’s the view of relationships is that sometimes people are stuck on that and they don’t want to let go of the prince or that which. Means that they say, okay, so we were going to remove free. Just to randomizing. He was in Renfree and what conclusions, questions, discussions did you have? OK. Was that was that your group, Sasha?


    Mine is for. Do we have anyone going to discuss from from Group three? OK, we’ll move on to group.


    And I said, Group four, we suffer Cipha, I’m terrible with pronouncing, I suffer suffer like, yeah, I’ll probably still bitter about apologies or the four letters can can be butchered in many ways.


    OK, did you have something in. This year, we had lots of questions raised. We went we got quite philosophical in our group. OK. And it was about what do you compromise and accept and what do you just run away from right away? I guess the person asking most of the questions was what? Come on, help me out.


    Well, jump in if you want to, but like some people don’t want to talk outside the breakout room. That’s fair enough. But if if you were in with Cypher and wants to jump in. I think we were we were talking about the picking up and the compatibility thing as well. And we were wondering it again if if people with different operating systems would be and whether it would more, then that obviously developed into the conversation about. What people would compromise on the narrative would would be a red flag, I suppose, whether that was possible to overcome.


    OK. All right. OK, so all right, so. Compromise, there is a price I’ve written to paste, so I’ve got a view on compromise. I’ve also got a few red flags and. I don’t really believe I think people who are looking for red flags, this is too much. You have to be obsessed about it.


    And I think it’s more about being yourself, not being. If you are, I think people can only hurt you and your vulnerabilities, and I think if you’re you can relate in a way that makes you strong.


    Okay, so we had one other point, Rob.


    Yes. Before you go. And that was about the individual coming to the point of realization within ourselves as to what actually is and which is a relationship for us.


    How do you recognize that? OK, so what do you want to do if you don’t have an idea as to what that means for you, how can you assess it in a relationship that that relationship actually does that for you? OK, so technology metaphore, it would be like running diagnostics, I suppose?


    Yes, exactly. OK, yeah. OK, so do you get that each relationship operating system? Will relate to a certain type of relationship. So the each layer has a more limited relationship. And so so individual needs.


    So we did we did think that because we were thinking about whether a person would if they whether they would actually a different operating system with different people inside, yet they also compassionate.


    OK, so people will be different within different relationships, because a lot of how we act in a relationship is how how well we’re feeling like when we’re generally unhappy. We know that that’s the general unhappiness and then we’re going to look we look for reasons to explain our unhappiness. And so if we generally are unhappy and it might be some work stress in us with tired, we’re not operating our best, we’re going to look and be irritated at our partner and we may be blaming our partner for something that’s got nothing really to do with the real cause is how how we’re operating personally.


    So. And when you’re in a better state and you’re really happy, you feel really, really, really good, you’re going to operate at this level, which is then going to race how someone else behaves in that relationship.


    So. In individual, so is going to is going to change, I think the operating system is more about the limitations of of what you believe about relationships so individual.


    So that’s more of a universal capacity to produce a satisfying relationship. The individual needs are probably more among the skills it would depend on an individual need was if if an individual is something that we all need to to varying extents, then and to some extent the more.


    Fred, you are and really what the operating system is, is is about how tired you are to dogma, how much you believe your relationship is limited by a certain set of structures. So the ultimate is you create the personal narrative based on your level of personal evolution. Does that make sense? I don’t know whether this ties into this discussion exactly, but a matter would have made it the weekend that we were talking about going on dates with various women and stuff and.


    I’m a man, I’m quite a joke and quite humorous. Obviously, you’ve got to use the humor and in the right platform and stuff. And so we may tease that issue as well. Let’s have a little joke around and thank you is very important, but. When we can come to agreement about, well, when we’re finished chatting to a lady in, we always feel like we have to perform, make sure we have to honor where they have to.


    Make them laugh, so it’s like every chequing thing has to be some sort of joke in some way or and, you know, we try and impress them in some way. And like they said to me, it’s like you’ll sit there at the dinner table when you’ve taken them off for a meal and they literally have to sit there and that’s all you have to do, whereas we have to be the one who’s who’s on stage, basically. And I was like, yeah, I never really looked at looked at it that way.


    But you’re right. And those that relate to the operating system or is it just don’t know?


    OK, I think that’s very relevant. I’m going to open this up to see if any of the women on the group have a comment to that.


    Do you feel like a man needs to perform the offensive that we just set the book? No, we get dressed. We all partake in that. We put ourselves in these ridiculous clothing and wear these stupid shoes. We can’t walk in. And ourselves up so that Super Paul and for guys, the other side is that you just got to show yourself. And the problem is if you if you spend a lot of time performing, which, in other words, may not be yourself, that will only last so long because you are performing, you are not yourself.


    Sure, if you want to meet someone, you’ll be yourself. OK, and so so when we’re looking at cultural so what I saw there in two different perspectives were when you look at.


    Like the animal world, there is kind of a mating dance.


    And I think that’s really what Alan Greenspan was talking about that day and and I do think that’s related to the operating system is feeling that your value is is in in what you’re bringing to it. But then what you’ve said May is also. Like, do females feel that they have to present themselves in a certain way?


    So, Sheila, Sheila got your hands up. I think it’s perception from both sides. So from what I’m saying, you know, as a male, they feel that they should be making the female laugh at the end of the night and everything. And you’re right, it’s it’s a mating ritual. But I think that’s their perception. And I think that goes back to yes, I think it is the operating system because the operating system is based around your framework, your life experiences, what you’ve been you’ve been brought up to believe, whether that’s the way you’ve been brought up or whether that’s from watching TV films, reading books, magazines, whatever.


    And I think from a female point of view, again, it’s perception. And I think, again, from what society tells you, it’s how a female should. Behave, it’s not necessarily I think, as you evolve into that higher level of operating system where you become an artist and a master, I think when you’re more comfortable in your own skin and become more self-confident, you stop operating on that romantic operating system and you stop behaving, behaving in a way you believe you should be behaving and you become more yourself.


    I’m not saying it’s easy, but I think there’s a stage where if a relationship is going to work long term, you have to be yourself because otherwise you’re going to have to perform for the rest of your life. Hmm.


    Yeah, I mean, I agree with that, and I think that’s a very good example of the operating system and how how it manifests. So. I.


    I think there’s I think there’s a balance because because if you if you don’t just go out because because if you if you don’t.


    So definitely I know definitely this is a now because the dating. Like the dating ritual and whatever is weighted that men have much more to, it’s much harder for men. And so they’re. Is. There’s some level of like if you’re a dinosaur and you’re with, you know, maybe a thousand other people in the catchment area of someone that you’re looking today, in some way you have to stand out. So there is the ability to present yourself and express yourself well.


    Too, and it’s not necessarily so so there is like I think those arguments that if you prefer if you feel that you have to perform, then you are always going to have to perform. But there’s also the balance of you have to show. Your characteristics, so. Alan is a bit of a joker and he’s got a sense of humor and he wants to show that across. But I think so. I don’t know if you want to jump in, Alan, or anyone else has got a thing, but I think there is this this is about the nature of dating is artificial.


    Because it’s not something we’ve ever done culturally. And so what you have to do is you have to show what makes you an individual, but you’re having to do it within the limitations of technology within. So basically, if you’re online dating, the only way that you can capture the whole sum of who you are. Is in like your profile when your first message, because that’s basically all the contact someone has. And so. I think this is about.


    You have to be yourself. But equally, you have to put your best foot forward, you have to be able to express who you are authentically, but in a way that captures someone’s. This is why I believe that messaging is like 80 percent of dating, being able to express yourself and being able to spark conversation. So does anyone else want to speak on that?


    Because I think this that I had an interesting message with someone I actually met in real life around a friend’s house, and he said, oh, I’m just trying to shake my my tail feather. Yeah, I guess that’s what you’re doing. That’s quite funny. And then I remember meeting another. I said I thought you might help me because I’ve got loads of stuff that I was struggling with oil, and he said, Oh, I’ve learned that women don’t want that.


    I just thought, gosh, that’s I would have loved any help you to give me. So I just think. Absolutely a different rules. Yeah, I mean, those 30 a 30 year age gap between those two people and I think I think things change as well. I think women expect different things at different times. You know, I don’t mind a challenge.


    I don’t want to carry my bag. I should that at all of this. Happy to have the help. But I may be a modern woman who think that was wrong. I think it’s great. So, again, it just is funny, isn’t it? Well, relatively young. I don’t mind helping me with my career.


    I was to. Yeah. I think it’s nice to offer to help each other. So, you know, striking.




    I like think he’s shaking his peacock feather at me. I call it off. Oh yeah.


    But what’s interesting about is that you’re you’re reflecting more of the challenges of online. Is it possible to kind of recognize what’s a good profile? The profile is just a broad, literally metrics of the of the person height, weight to integrate visual. Look, if they have photos, it doesn’t say anything. It’s difficult. We can do is provide relatively basics. The photos kind of says it already. Like when I’m surfing around and looking at the photo is a guy frowning is the individual place.


    He’s actually out enjoying himself. It’s a picture, speaks, speak, speaks a thousand words. But what I tend to be challenging would be what you do engage with. I’m talking because sometimes when a guy contacts me, I’m looking at his profile that OK, it’s not a no, but it’s not. I would have jumped on it. But it’s once you start talking, even with a guy that is very good looking, you’re trying to them if they can’t produce.


    And it’s not easy because online just chatting just just by text, there is just one form of communication is only reading the text. There is no nonverbal communication, there’s no nothing else is purely what you write in text is nothing else. So you’re going to make it interesting. And if you stick with dating methods, in other words, that cover the weather, let’s cover up, I don’t know, countries where we troubled. If you cover the very basics, it basic feels like an interview is very dry, it’s very boring, but this is down to each individual.


    But myself, I want to meet a person as opposed to a robot. Go say hi. Tell me a bit about yourself. What holiday have you been? What do you like? Fuji like films. You like all the classic stuff. I want to know your day. What makes you excited, what things happened today that made you laugh or what things made you cry or I want to know the person and they never ever able to break into who are you?


    What have you done and what are you thinking about that? Oh yes, I’ve been on holiday and I have this amazing car and I have a house and I don’t care. It’s useful. Good to know. But I want to know the person that’s the person I’m going to get stuck with if I’m going to live with them. She may actually show the opposite. What you’re talking about there is someone who he’s got got into and what you’re saying is you don’t like it, it’s shallow, which is the cat and mouse and all that business.


    And I know I’m only an individual, but I do have quite a large circle of friends, all all of different ages. And there’s there’s about half of us that are single, so. Know people in different scenarios, different situations, different places, and the connection that we are good friends, but the experiences is the same, you know, you’re meeting the same person, but they look different from somewhere different because they don’t have anything about them.


    And. And it goes back to the impression impression thing and. You’re making an effort to of these me sex is about relationships and your children. There’s no there’s no mutuality. And then most in the vast, vast majority of people who they met over the last couple of years and same with same with friends, it’s all shallow. And that’s that’s a problem. How do you think you can break out of that? That’s why here. Did you feel how material that is, what is what is most essential?


    You do need that because you need a big mansion to be able to form your reputation?


    No, that’s what I’m saying. It’s quite the opposite that those things are shallow. But women are you talking about going into expressions of feelings and true interests? They don’t do the. And I’m speaking from my personal experience of friends, not not every every one. I’ve got a sister shingled and she tees off the same impressionist as I am. And she she’s saying that reflect on what you are saying and make. But to just show and superficial. Almost like nothing underneath it.


    It just it depends on where you’re meeting these people as well. I mean, even today, I don’t know if you’re meeting them in in a pub or club. I mean, there is an element of surprise. No, I think it’s I think context and environment is important. If you if you meet somebody and if there’s a common interest, that’s the beginning of at least some kind of commonality, some kind of common ground. Because, you know, if you think of friends and take out the equation of, you know, I want to be in a relationship, but think about how you make friends, you make friends within a context.


    And I think context in everything environment is really. Makes us who we are. We react because if we win a certain kind of environment. And I think that the equation completely agree, I think I think that’s true, I think context is because we behave in a certain environment. But what you’ve got in the context of online dating and why a lot of people don’t like it is because it is artificial. It’s something that we’ve not really done before.


    And so I I think it does matter what profile you have.


    I think I don’t agree that profile is a context. I think the trouble is with online dating, it’s it’s too broad. And I know people have made successful relationships. I’m not denying that. But but so many people have. And I think it’s too broad a platform. And I don’t profile in the context. I think maybe if you say I mean, you’re going to meet Buddhist’s and I and it’s going to be on a British website, then that’s some context for a dating Web site.


    You could be anybody.


    What I was going to say is I believe that the profile makes a difference because. What what that is, is the is your ability to set the tone, and so I believe that a good profile sets a context and it sets a context for a discussion and a good message sets a context. So it yes, it’s different. But what you’re doing is you’re you’re creating in this artificial environment, you’re creating a context for discussion. So.


    That’s you know, that’s what I believe is really kind of the skill of dating, I have here a profile of a gentleman who says I am looking for a godly or a God fearing woman.


    I have sent back a hello to say hello. I am so sorry, but I’m neither godly nor God fearing. So I bid you farewell. In other words, he and he could be a very nice gentleman, but that is his greeting. And so I have cut myself out. So I think that was sweet. Yeah, I’m just I’m just using it to illustrate that if you are too precise in terms of what you say, you may end up never having any responses.


    You have to be careful what you put on your profile as well.


    So, yes, context, but it has to be, I think, broad enough to encourage some responses to say I may give this person a try. Let me try me. It may not lead to anything, but at least they haven’t put up so many barriers that I feel that I can’t get through to to this person. There is nothing that we have in common. We may say good morning. And that’s as far as it goes, because we can’t we just don’t have anything to talk about.


    I think the nature. Of online dating is that you have everyone. So what? So what you’ve got is where, you know, like before you meet someone doing whatever, that’s within the context and that’s a subset. So what you have on online dating is you have everyone and you’ve got to recognize that most of the people are going to be superficial. Because most people are, and it relates to people, human operating system of the level that they’re on most people.


    So when you look at what makes a man attractive from research, we know it’s about access to resources, that women are more attracted to someone who’s powerful than someone who’s rich, someone who is successful.


    And while personally, individually, some of us may have override that and look for the deeper context, what someone actually makes like the instinctive feeling of attraction is found to be women who are attracted to access to resources. And this is like evolutionary psychology. So when we’re looking at death, you’re not going to get that from a profile. And when we’re talking about context and and that’s like all the dating site can do as an initial introduction. But the depth comes later.




    Sorry, yes, sorry, what I was going to say was that, yes, if yes, you talk about access to resources, but if I can put it very crudely, if you had this guy and I’m trying to paint a picture here standing in front of his big Mercedes or Porsche, which was parked in front of his villa, a massive V shaped shirt, hair bulging out, maybe bling, you know, and stack of cash next to him and, you know, big black mustache.


    Are you telling me that, you know, some trouble? Yes, I got the all of a sudden I believe in God. I mean, just I mean, he’s got access to lots of resources seemingly from his picture.


    So I think you may talk about resources, but I think there is there is sophistication there as well.


    So they’re not trying to similarly, a guy who looks like a nice chap but happens to have. Please give me 10 P to go and buy. McDonald’s isn’t exactly going to she’s not exactly going to think all my dreams.


    But then I think I suppose what I’m saying is that I’m not sure that is as clear cut as that person, but I think there is access to resources. Yes.


    I mean, he needs to be is a bit like a sane guy says she needs to be good looking. So are you looking for the next supermodel look alike? I mean, you know, that’s what women tend to be conditioned to think, that that’s how they got to be and they haven’t.


    We have a broad range of what we think is pretty or what we think is attractive, as in couples who where the woman is the breadwinner and the man has been taken on the part time role. Yeah, but yes, so I’m not saying that the fact that someone has lots of money means that everyone can be attracted to because, you know, like you said, there are other mitigating factors, like if someone seems to be arrogant and someone seems to be boorish and boring and uninterested, those will.


    So what I’m really talking about is it plays into next week’s film, Senex. We’re talking about Helen Fisher’s study of the history of the evolution of relationships. And so she goes into great detail about attraction and. So so are not saying women are off the money, I’m saying that research shows us. That is one of the most powerful detractors is the whole basis of evolutionary psychology, is that men want to perpetuate their genes. Women want to. Have access to resources in the patriarchal history of our society that is has been the story that women have been denied independent access.


    So it’s not I’m not saying that women are only after money. I’m saying that when we look at research, yeah, it’s kind of security is feeling. So basically the evolutionary psychology argument is that men need to know that the woman was like if a baby was his baby and women needed to be protected from invading tribes and things like that.


    And so that is the prevailing. View of a perspective of evolutionary psychology is the first operating system to them.


    Yeah, yeah, pragmatic.


    So to the hope, sorry, yeah, just add to that, I mean, last year, relationships had all been guys less to make. No, that that’s an issue, otherwise it updated them. But so it’s not just as every individual is after different things, depending on their position in life and what they’re able to to offer and what they’re able to do. If a woman if any person is struggling, they will need if they are going to have someone else that is introduced into the life that is going to help them to survive.


    If the guy like myself, like my previous relationships, I helped prop the people up, I help financially support them occasionally. So it’s not as black and white I dated. Yeah, to be honest, considering how many times I’ve been hurt and let down by these guys. Yeah. Is my criteria to a degree now I feel. But I know probably back in the dating game, I do feel it’s important that a guy should maybe more than me because I’ve been stung three or four times with guys that’s more than happy to basically live off of me.


    So it’s really not as blackamoor, OK, because I can I can I say this because I feel I’m being misunderstood. I have to say this blackamoor I’ve said to the driving research of psychology is that generally. Women find access to resources is one of the psychologically proven things that women find in children.


    Yeah, so I’m not saying women are after money and I think maybe that’s how it may have come out. But I’m saying that when you look at what a man finds attractive, what women find attractive, the features relate to a woman can produce healthy children. A man can make me safe and ensure my children live. So this doesn’t relate to individually. This is a universal. Like the instance that we have on the instincts that help us to survive.


    So it’s not a based on personal, but when you look at. A few thousand people, these are like the common a major criteria, but it doesn’t necessarily mean individually. OK, so we’re not talking about individual that relates to every everything is just the underlying factors.


    Is that clearer? OK, so we got to I think that was rainfall, was it? So we still we still got room 502. If anyone has. But. OK. So. All right, so now we have relighting the operating system to personal situations, so if you look back on your personal.


    Relationships or relationships that you’ve observed? Can you see an impact of the relationship operating system maybe functioning at different levels or how that may have played out in personal relationships? Does that. Does that make sense? They very clear on the question. So so, OK, so what we’re looking at now is how the relationship operating system, how you and your partners or those of people that you’ve observed in relationships, how do their operating systems relate to. Problems or how has it impacted the relationship?


    OK is frankly. Rob, was there a link to the levels of. Of operating system. Yes. Should be I will copy it again, should be in the chat, but I’ll just.


    OK, so we’ll go into breakout rooms for 10 minutes.


    What we’re talking about, I kaso so talking about how does the operating system, how has it played out in relationships you’ve been in or relationships that you’ve seen?


    And we’re back. OK, so rather than go room by room, does anyone can they see how their relationship operating system impacted their relationship with someone that they’ve seen and how? Also, can you can you see what level of operating system someone was writing from? We were just talking about how does everybody go through the romantic stage and I just said, no, they don’t. I think they don’t.


    It’s not like it is not like a hierarchy of needs is that you can be set up at different levels. You don’t work your way up and down. You are. You know, you don’t have to have gone through one, two and three to get to four. You can be at four just because of your life. It’s not it’s not like a. In many ways, it is because it can be I think there are people I think the default of our society is the romantic.


    I think I think you have to override unless you’ve grown up in a very progressive with people who read lots of personal development books and very open to that kind of thing. There’s been a lot of discussion while you were a child. I think most of us have come in on the romantic level. I think there are people who function below that, like I think there are still people function operating system level one, the people who are rapists and abusers. It’s basically the operating system there.


    They’ve come from that they’re operating from. Yes. So that wasn’t actually the next question of of how has mine changed? So I’m not sure we’re going to have time to get to that.


    So I just I just I mean, just I just said that I wish I had had an experience of falling in love recently with all that that goes with that. And I let that last a week before I realized that some other operating system kicked in. And I just thought, no way, I can’t do this. This isn’t got quite enough fluffy, you know, whatever. So I’ve obviously shifted upwards from romantic, but I don’t quite know where I’ve got to that.


    But it was interesting to go through all the romantic bit and then just go, no, look at it a bit wider, get some get some reality in here. So I’ve obviously shifted. So something else, but I don’t know which level I trust more romantic this anymore.


    I think you can go along and you can enjoy the thrill of it until you realize there is a reality somewhere when you know someone deeper.


    Yes. So does that mean you’re still operating at a different level? You’re you.


    Yeah, I would say that, yeah. So that’s OK. Well, give me a six go.


    OK, ok. I’m not sure what six yet. I well I don’t know.


    It says narrative on here. I’m looking at your diagram. That’s OK. Yes. This is so, so it was one to one to six and then I four actually four and five are actually the same operating system. It’s just you said on the next one it’s four point one. Oh yeah.


    That’s why I got confused because the words that go with this diagram today, not only do I confuse everyone when I come up with a new concept, but I also do it in writing.


    That’s that’s absolutely fun. We’re all learning together. I think I think I’m I’m, you know, more of that artisan artisan operating system. But I do think that even the you know, the the more the higher up when you go. I think you do still take. Elements of the romanticism with you, but I think you’re more realistic with it. Yeah, I think Level four is basically confusion because you’ve come in from the default romantic narrative that we’re all given from our culture.


    But you’re recognizing that doesn’t work. And so I sense a level of confusion is because in the same way that religion has developed the mythology since Christianity. When I’m talking about Christie, I’m not specifically talking about Christianity, but I don’t think in the last 2000 years, definitely in our Western world, there has been a mythology that fits our on technology. So it’s not technologically without run on myth. And in the same way our relationships, we haven’t developed a new mythology of the fairy tale because I think that suits like the economic interests of the media and those who perpetuate the cultural who control the cultural narrative, really.


    So are you saying that you can bring elements of romance to a higher operating system?


    Okay, so I’m separating between romance as in. Yeah. All levels. You can buy flowers and be romantic, but it is a difference between being romantic and believing that your relationship is up to fight. And so the defining level of the operating system free is a belief that it’s fated, you know, because they’re the one if they love me, they do this.


    Well, you don’t have to work at it because, yes, it either works or doesn’t. And if it doesn’t work, we can’t fix it. We just have to move on. Yeah. So level four is a recognition that you can impact your relationship in your behavior, in earning skills.


    Why is the ethical on monogamy in level four is not a rational change of rules. I mean, it’s going to be yeah, he is working from the bases, the romantic view doesn’t work. So I still want to sleep with other people, so therefore let’s. Just like you like, whichever format of that that you have. But I think it’s it’s a pragmatic reaction to romantic relationships not working, so to be clear on separation between romantic behavior and a romantic perspective of a relationship.


    So this is this is quite a and it’s. This is sort of an idea that I’ve worked from from from seeing in lots of different relationships and I’ve had the operating system I did for four years, but.


    I’ve never really I haven’t really articulated been able to express it really well, and so some of it is coming across confused and there’s nowhere I can go to to look like this person to explain it better.


    So it’s I’m trying to explain the way that I see it in a way that makes sense. I definitely do get what you mean when you say that that forced confusion, because, I mean, I’ve not been in a relationship for I suppose you could classify a long time by this month, some days, I suppose. And that was the that last interaction relationship, whatever it was, was the time when I realized that the romantic perception of relationships doesn’t work at all very long term because you lose your mind.


    You don’t know who that person really is. You just think you do. And it’s not if anything, you just feel very out of balance with your own true self. Anyway, after I realized that that wasn’t something that was going to get me what I truly wanted in regards to a long term marriage will have whatever it would be. I was very confused. I was like, well, can’t based on this, what kind of like what else is that like?


    What is the next step for me? You know, I went through probably about a year to be confused. Like, I don’t know what relationships are because I was so fixed on that romantic view. It’s only until now that I went through my own best of all of my personal growth and things like that, that I realized that you have the power to influence the relationship and that the one is the one who you choose to be with, not because it was written in the stars, so to speak, if that makes sense.


    Yeah. Yeah, so I think there has been no I haven’t seen any. That I suppose, like the polyamory, all those those type of open relationships, they’ve tried to rewrite a narrative.


    And I suppose Harville Hendrix there, workwise is in terms of rewriting the narrative of relationships, but there’s been no cultural. And when I talk about like Hovell Hendriksen, a bestseller and I’ve sold millions of books, but it’s still only a tiny fraction of people in the general population. So it hasn’t had a cultural gap. But yes, there’s been no. So I think the only way that you can move from that confusion is to create is to recognize your own personal narrative for that relationship.


    Is there anyone else seeing how they’ve evolved along it or how they’ve how it’s impacted their relationships?


    Yeah, I think they were from the past, I was at four 11 and I think that I can make things work, I can get along with anybody, I can change things.


    And in fact, some, I suppose, Bolton or stupid enough or naive enough to think I could change other people as well, which obviously comfortable because that’s up to them to change. And the idea was that, you know, we both play our part and things will develop and will become better because we’ll both try because of the people.


    And all of those things were true except the change with and over time, change didn’t happen and change didn’t happen. You can’t get fulfilled emotionally. That is heartfelt anyway. And even then was perhaps to ignorant or stupid to kind of realize what was going on. You can’t accept this is this is the way you get married. You don’t break up a relationship.


    And, you know, and, um, and while that is true, I didn’t quite so far as to say, but clearly there must be a problem how to fix it either. Which goes back to your operating system. First used to be self reflecting, being able to look at it and say, actually, there is a problem here.


    Is it with me? Is it with the relationship that we need to kind of, you know, we need to work on looking to resolve it? And then if you ultimately cannot resolve it, then, yeah, perhaps is coming to an end rather than just stumbling along, as you will do with Florida and thinking, oh, I’m going to try harder.


    I’ve got to, you know, to listen to that, which ultimately yields itself.


    Just been my experience anyway, as far as I can relate to the operating systems here and my mom is exactly the same.


    So I’m wondering how many people went into a relationship, probably young, and believed that it would work. Just if you can.


    If you can. Like, big enough, a workout. OK, thank you for sharing that, does anyone else have any examples or.


    Or anything that comes to mind, Senator, that. Let’s say I just had to mention this, I was about the arranged marriages are in the medieval section and I actually know quite a few people that are in the right place and. And I’m not saying that they’re all slightly medieval in some ways they’re their connections, but that that I mean it. I mean, possibly, you know, just it’s just it’s actually show that that the way we do things in our culture is actually better than the right charges these days.


    I’m actually very happy to say that I do irregularities tied together.


    Boingo actually arranged marriages to stay together longer.


    The reason they’re in level two is because they’re more pragmatic. And. Maybe it’s unfair, it’s culture. It comes from Entemena in with. Nobody really had their partners, I think. For probably about the 18th, 19th century, or very few people did. So that’s really why I’ve got in the pragmatic in terms of it may not that arranged marriages, whether it’s whether it’s. Whether they work better is unclear because part of it is because they have less expectation.


    But Sheila has got something to say.


    I was wondering whether there’s actually any data to differentiate between who arranged marriage, where both sides have the choice, whether the arranged marriage is more like arranging the first date, you know, progresses. And the and the the the understanding from both sides is that we would lead to marriage and the difference between where. Probably the the female, the late the woman or the man actually don’t really have a choice. It’s just it’s what the parents expect and culturally, that’s what they accept.


    I wonder, does any data between those different types of arranged marriages?


    I’m not sure. There definitely is data that I’ve seen that shows the actually arranged marriages work better than than when you choose your own most relationships now. I can’t tell you exactly, but most have some element of consent, a few that have little consent, but I will I’m working my way through hell and fishes, but that we’re talking about next week and there may be some of that in there. And if I if I come across anything, I’ll remind me and I’ll I’ll let you know you.


    Anecdotally, though, there seems to be an evolution occurring within the domain of arranged marriages wherein, yes. The families do the. The assessment of potential partners, but in the past, whether it was a matter of it’s done, we have agreed and the alliances are now struck and you go ahead with it. There is seems to be a lot of choice now wherein both parties are allowed to interact and decide on that basis whether they are compatible or not and want to go forward.


    So I think even the arranged marriage marriage scenario is evolving to incorporate some of what we are talking about in terms of romantic connections as being an important part of.


    Of a partnership of not forming a relationship. I also wonder whether age has any anything to do with it, because I think sometimes modern arranged marriages nowadays, you know, both sides for men and women, you the more educated people are, they want a career first and they get older and they find it is more difficult to find a partner. And therefore, they do sometimes go to the root of the parents. You know, they’re more open to the idea of an arranged marriage.


    So I’m wondering whether, you know, modern day arranged marriages are actually more successful because it’s different from when a Sandra was saying, you mean from a young age, it’s what your parents wanted. You wouldn’t necessarily have consent from both sides. But as you’re older and you’re looking for a partner and you haven’t found a partner. One option is to ask your parents to help. And also, when you look at modern matchmake services, there are people that pay thousands, you know, to be introduced to people.


    I think also pick up on your point, Sandra, is also most cultures that actually had some, although it seemed like it was arranged that a common language culture is. But there is one, for example, that they were allowed to use to kidnap the bride. It was set up and they would kidnap the bride and she would live there for two or three days and she could then back out. And so, so often we can often look at cultures that we don’t understand and think that they are more of a whole different or more brutal than than ours.


    But often they have subtle nuances to them. Yes, so that’s that’s an interesting. I had a friend or I’d over an arranged marriage, like not in the sort of, you know, some of the the sort of negative sense of what happens. But if you had to have parents that you really trusted and had a really open relationship with and they said, oh, we know such and such, and we think knowing you so well, we think you two would make a really good match.


    It just takes so much pressure out of the situation. And if you were attracted to them as well, it’s just easy.


    So my situation, well, it would be pretty cool if that’s a bit like an office Christmas party.


    So maybe we can maybe that’s an idea for the virtual Christmas party.


    I was yeah, I was I was going to lunch and I think the modern the modern equivalent is like this, married at first sight and things like that.


    And so. Any any other reflections before we. Wrap up. I don’t quite get level six, I just I’ve just been reading is this not really what it is that have you written something else?


    It was refined and certainly level six became level five. So level five or six is essentially the idea that you create your narrative of what a relationship means.


    What do you mean by narrative narrative? It’s a whole mixture of all sorts of things. So put together with your partner.


    OK, so now it’s a little bit more individual than that. So the it can be it can be part of it, but each level is basically a narrative. So when you look at the romantic, the narrative is the fairy tale.


    And so that same relationships are really made by made by child and made by God or Eros or whoever and starts fights outside of our fight. So that’s a narrative. The narrative of for is Erva like this individual. So what you’ve got is splintered off.


    So you’ve got the feminist narrative about relationships, that patriarchy, male domination, and we shouldn’t stand for that kind of thing.


    You got red pill theory, which is women have of like. Women want independence and equality is ruining everything and that kind of narrative, or there’s the narrative of personal development, we can learn how to make it better. So level five is. You make the story of what the relationship means. So you’re creating your own mythology. Does that make sense? OK, so of. So it’s basically, rather than the fairy tale, you create your own.


    Of what it means and recognise that it’s an artificial. Construct, but it’s one that you’re consciously making until you have some better data to go on. Arina? Yes, but isn’t that sort of, in a way, going back to level one? Because you’re making up your relationship the way you want. It’s not making a relationship, it’s making the narrative of how relationships work. So the difference between level one, level one is taking what I want.


    The world is there. I take what I need. Level five. It’s more about its being more and more involved, partner. So it’s not regressing to the state of just going to do what I want. It’s right. Since the state of what is more is the role relationships play in my life, what the relationships mean to me. And so it’s not changing the behavior within the relationship, but it is is recognition that the other person is in the relationship because it enhances their life like you are.


    And does that make more sense?


    Yes, it does make sense. I just wanted to I just wondered whether it was basically going back to level one. I do understand the love behind it.


    Yeah, it was quite perceptive that you picked that up, but it’s not the different sea level. One is is like I want. It’s all about me. Level five is is transcended that where it’s more evolved version.


    I say level one is more like I want and I don’t care what you want. Basically a level five. I can see what I actually want. Yes. The evolution is recognition like level two is recognition. They want something. What they hell do I make until you level five, six more is more evolved. So would result in more evolved. How you. Thank you. You know, another way to look, I know you’re using the kind of like an operating system as a way to understand it, but I think there’s probably a lot of holes that can be put in the same place as a way to understand.


    It’s a lot like a child, for example, level one before the toll, anything barrier on how to get what they want. And it can sort of progress all the stages as the whole bad behavior and better ways to deal with people in life.


    And I think that’s. Well, I guess what I’m saying is that if people are struggling with that matter, for all the metaphors can be so used as well to try and understand it.


    Definitely. I just want to pick up on what you said, because that’s a really good point in the developmental stages of children and. This is really the cultural development since the development of societies. Such is like analogies, so the operating system is a metaphor that I felt the best described it, but. The concept and how it plays out. Isn’t defined by the metaphor, the metaphor is just trying to explain. But yeah, so if anyone has a better metaphor, it helps them.


    But it’s really about culturally. How cultures develop in their understanding relationships that make sense. OK, so is it any other questions or points that are unclear? All questions of how do we relate this, what we’ve got, regardless of the future’s bright light, we can all be on different levels. Now as the cultures you’re saying, quote, just kind of running on three, generally speaking, more than they can be people lower and both, although.


    Yeah, yeah.


    I think that that wasn’t necessarily always the case.


    And it doesn’t necessarily mean that civilizations and cultures are going to get better and better. No. I think generally society progresses, I think I think generally people get better. That’s a personal opinion.


    I think there’s always been people that have worked on all levels. Like, if you if you will look back at Jesus, put people like that. Operated independently of their cultural programming. Equally, there are I mean, when you look at Donald Trump. Like what appraises? Would you put him out in terms of. What show would it be like number two or the address and phone number tonight? Zero. It doesn’t occur. It doesn’t exist.


    I would I would say the man in writing the deal is level to his level. One in terms of all I care about is me. I think he recognizes he has to give something even if it is just hot air. But that’s not the state I would I would beg to differ that that’s not an evolutionary stage in terms of relationships, because he doesn’t forge any relationships on that basis. He just uses. He does takes. Yes.


    But I think that’s the level of level two is. And that’s why maybe arranged marriage is perhaps unfair to be there, because the level two is OK. What do you do? I have to make that’s the essence of level two. And so the right level, level one is where the other parties unwillingly being dropped into something or it’s not like you might have level one somewhere else in his life. But I don’t think that, you know, that main relationship, there’s definitely a willingness of the other party to be there because of, you know, whatever is hot off it or whatever.


    Yeah, I mean I mean, when you look at who can still fill jobs in that with. Even though most people have displeased him just because he’s got the power and access to to offer people what they and they think they’re going to gain from it.


    Yes, so. It’s it’s about society evolving more in in the sense of. The culture is the mass of the culture. Does it evolve? I think. Slowly, I mean, when you look at uninterrupted, still get 70 votes, whatever we individually might think of him, so. You know what, I don’t know what that tells you about the cultural divide. I think the Internet has caused a bit because the Internet obviously offers tremendous access to information.


    But I think it has massively affected culture and deceptions and and it is a good thing that it shakes boundaries and it questions things. But obviously, it can also cause quite a lot of problems as well with people who had to filter the information.


    And I think if you look at dating or politics or anything, I think that is a bit of a weird. Epoch at the moment where I think I think civilization has to come to terms with that before we can then move on again. I think we’re kind of trapped a bit and it’s sort of a ridiculous example at the moment. Yeah, I mean, like social media is now at least partly defines the culture and social media is based on like it’s known like a social trilemma.


    The outrage and anger and hilarity comes out more in social media. And so that has some impact like there is there’s a lot of conspiracy theories about politics and politicians and which Trump seemed to be the the least bad option. By Sunday, would you be on the operating systems just so I could get clarity on what the difference is on the different levels?


    Yes, OK, yeah, that’s a good point to wrap up. So I’ll I’ll do that as I wrap up. And then if you’ve got any questions, just just make a point.


    I also think that it’s also about the legal standing of women, you know, and how how women our culture can be influenced by the legal status of women. And I think, you know, if the 20th century women have taken on a much higher legal status, but I think we’ve still got a long way to go and that has influenced culture. And going back to Trump and many, many female supporters in a so-called democracy voted for Trump. But I think they even though they had a strong legal status, they they didn’t value, they kind of still felt that their place as a woman was by the side of their man.


    And and so in their heads, they were, you know, and he’s put in place an anti-abortionist and a legal representative. I don’t know what title she has. And of course, a lot of women have come that they don’t quite understand what their what their legal status is. I think the law and how it perceives women in particular, not men, but women, actually plays a strong part in culture and and how women perceive themselves. Yes, or.


    Isn’t there something going on and on the narrative, the narrative changes little. And it’s also about the undermining of public figures. I think that this is the thing to the demanding of expats and conspiracy theories as well, and the undermining of anyone in any position of power. Everyone sort of piles it. And Twitter is one of those things. And you kind of got to this this state where we think that everyone’s opinion is equal. Obviously, if you had a health problem, you’re going to be far better off going to a doctor who’s been to medical school and trained for five years than you were just talking to Dave in the pub or something about what’s wrong with you.


    But so you can’t let people and I’m tired of talking to people about this because obviously you have to respect people’s opinions as well sometimes. People have experts, and I think that’s something that has been undermined, which means that that you don’t have anyone said. There’s a difference, I suppose, in some respects, because we’re talking about dating now, aren’t we talking about the relationship between men and women? Yeah. If I can, I’m talking about society and our society has changed and the and on the Internet, obviously the fact that people don’t trust people is divided into dating that we were talking earlier about, about men being blind, not fitting in.


    They have to posture. And that sometimes is because no one wants to open up. You know, you you use humor sometimes to make someone to want to ace of spades is the way I like to think. You know, it’s interesting each other, I suppose, and that pervades.


    And today I’m just trying to together, I think. Essentially, what we’re struggling with is we’ve gone from a village of 150 biologically, or we can cope with its relationships with 150 people like no, 150 people. That’s the village. That’s the village that we’ve lived in up until 150, 200 years ago. And. So we always knew those 150 people that we’d meet, we knew them, so we had that trust that we knew that we were going to live with them for years, whereas now we’re interacting with people that we never going to see, we’re never going to come into contact with.


    And so we lost that trust of that relationship. And so I said, pick up on your point. I did the shift from three to four. Is fundamentally, I believe, is caused by the ability, the moving equality, the driving independence of women has been the driver to me because the romantic myth. Works. It works when everyone so like basically patriarchy. Is. Designed to cater to men, it’s designed to cater to men’s fears. And so women lost their independence because women having independence meant that they couldn’t protect like a man could, so so basically the limitations of women come from the place of wanting to ensure that a woman is controlled so that your children are your children and by making them dependent on men.


    You then? It give man more of a sense of comfort, does that make sense? And so, I mean, it really took the First World War when we needed women to to play the roles of men for. Women to to get.


    The vote to get the right to their own money and so what we’ve looked at is really it’s the 50s when women were in a position that they could have divorced where they wanted from a relationship, emotional fulfillment rather than a staying together.


    Some need. And everything since then has meant that when women have driven this, the divorce, like 65 percent of divorces originate from the from the woman.


    And so that’s really what’s created the evolution of the society from free to for.


    So. And I think I’ve covered the points. Does that make sense in since so yes, I think the problem we now have is a general confusion over roles. And that’s why I think we need to I don’t think there is going to be a. Cultural, I can’t see a cultural mythology or narrative coming in, and so I want all I can say is, is you create in your own narrative of. What the of how a relationship works that cover what you were looking for, Betty?


    And does it make sense? Yes, thank you. OK, well, thank you, everyone, for being here, is there? If anyone has still some questions, because I know this is quite an abstract topic in terms of how it relates to our personal relationships. Just the thing I would say is how it relates is.


    If you look at a problem. And you look at where does this problem come from? What was I believing? So when you look at a problem, the problem has an anatomy, it has expectations, it has an outcome, and where the outcome is different from the expectations.


    It’s looking at what the narrative was for the expectations. And what does that fit with the reality of the situation? And so when you look at a problem in the relationship, it can help understanding what your expectations were about. It tells you what, not what your operating system is. If that makes sense. So this is about the evolution of the operating system and so there’s a bit of a thing. And next week we’re looking at health issues worked, which is essentially a.


    How she looks at the history, she’s an anthropologist. She looks at the history of relationships, different how relationships work in different cultures, like whether it’s patriarchy or whether it’s matriarchal societies or relationships that have a belief in a God or have a belief in some other system and how that impacts. The nature of the relationships and attraction and why infidelity is so common.


    So it’s going to hurt doesn’t this all come down to effectively understanding that you can change yourself so you don’t have to realizing that you may be scripted in some ways because you just have automatic beliefs in something and to question it, but also that the change needs to be balanced with your principles or your values in life, because there is only so much you can change without invalidating yourself, so to speak. So, for example, I will change to be a slave to my partner because that’s what my partner wants.


    So you may change and change, but then if you are, I think the principle of self-respect, then effectively that relationship is to a broken one, however you look at it. And so I think there is a balance between changing and changing things that that require change, but also understanding where to draw the line that that’s a line you should go beyond, validate some values on principle of life, if you like.


    And I think in all of those, does it matter whether you look at it from a religious point of view or an arranged marriage or whatever else? I mean, it’s always the same in a way. When I was saying I mean, I got introduced to my wife, I didn’t beach or something. That is just for a family. It was an arranged no forced to get married. And it was just a case of, you know, you think you may like each other.


    And I’ve seen lots of girls before. And, you know, we just we just suppose it’s just whatever. I don’t know. But it didn’t work out at the end of the day. And it’s not because we were introduced or I think it was because we didn’t value the relationship with the relationship.


    I don’t think we just played our scripted parts and expected things to work out and things didn’t work out. They didn’t do anything about it.


    So change sea change, but change up to a point I think is going to make something that’s a really good point in that I think I think one of the great crimes we’ve we’ve had is civilization is how we treat homosexual people.


    And because they didn’t fit the values and so in many ways, all kinds of people like until I mean, when you look at the whole of human history, most homosexual people had to hide had they couldn’t, can never be accepted for some cultures. Still to. Yeah.




    Yeah, I mean, look how many people that have been forced to marry that should never have been should never be married and always there have been problems because people’s personal values don’t fit the cultural values. And so what there’s been is an attempt to control people, to control the narrative so that of what is is right. And so, yes, I think you’ve picked up on a good point is that essentially is building the. Narrative that fits your values, because that’s the narrative that’s going to work and the narrative when you try to take a narrative that is contrary to your personal values.


    You are there’s an inherent conflict and that conflict is never going to work out, so, yeah, that’s that’s well, yeah, that also has to be in those values also have to be aligned to the true principles.


    Yeah. I mean, I call it true principles of Universal, but I mean, it’s just things that we all know to be true and inherently we know it and I don’t know why we know it, but we all to and those values are aligned with those and in a balanced way as well.


    So, for example, we don’t know. We should be cooperative and helpful, but it should be balanced against not being a doormat. You know, so you have to have respect for others, but you also have got to have respect for yourself as well. Be helpful but don’t, because as it may be to be assertive. But don’t be rude, you know. Don’t be a bully, that sort of thing. So there are certain balances in life and there are certain principles in life that the opposite of it makes creates a broken society.


    And so if you try and live your life with those principles in mind, one of the things I found is that doesn’t matter what the circumstances you are in, the decisions you make to always be correct, because they were founded on principles, if you can. But whenever it’s not correct, you find that you’ve broken a principle somewhere. It doesn’t realize perhaps, but you nevertheless broken it. So as long as we all know about honesty, integrity and all the rest of it of patience, fairness, understanding, tolerance, you know, all these things are important as well.


    It certainly helped me when I was going through my divorce and noticed it’s a very emotional time. And when I was able to kind of calm down my emotions because I could feel myself getting emotional, calm down, and then make a decision, one sort of calm down and think it through and say, well, am I being fair? Am I am I am I just being attacking back rather than being considered? Or am I just reacting to a situation or just getting caught up in the moment?


    I find that then I can make the decisions I made I can live with and I feel comfortable with. And I don’t have any problems with it because because no matter what the other party things, I feel like the right thing. And I’m quite comfortable talking about it because I can defend it, you know. That’s what you brought up really is where there is the conflict between being cooperative and being a doormat, for example, where there seems to be a dichotomy, that really is a sign that your operating system needs to evolve.


    And it’s it’s when you can it’s so when things feel like so. So we talked earlier about needing to impress and. Being yourself, and so there’s that dichotomy is is the need to evolve that part of the operating system?


    Yeah, that’s it. I mean, I looked at them as Morris paradigms of life. So this is your views of how things are in life, but that’s just your view of how things are. Reality may be actually different. It’s just the way you see the way things are. And sometimes the way you see things aren’t necessarily the way things actually are. And so that comes back to your own descriptive values as to how things ought to be and how things should be.


    So in a relationship, I guess you need to, first of all, check that those are in line with the principles we just spoke about the true principles, my fair person, my tolerance, my understanding the other, but also at the same time as you change, am I breaking those values? I think if if you can do that, then it doesn’t really matter what relationship.


    But there is a relationship between a spouse, child, a boss, the worker. It works out correctly every time. It doesn’t matter what decision you make and under what circumstances you make that decision, it will always be right.


    That’s what I found. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for that. That’s really helpful.