Podcast - Modern Masculinity & Man-Woman Relating

PODCAST - MODERN MASCULINITY AND MAN-WOMAN RELATING

CONVERSATION TOPICS:

The Nice Guy Persona

It’s expensive for women to get fooled by men and their masks.

What is the nice guy trying to convince you of?

The Nice Guy persona is a control mechanism.

Wanting everybody’s approval makes cowards of men.

Limitations with mothers and women teaching men how to be men.

Most mothers and women in society are wounded in relation to the masculine.

Women who fear men’s aggression cannot train men to wield that aggression.

Missing fathers leave the burden of mentoring sons to mothers.

Fathers who are domineering and bullying end up prompting their sons towards the nice guy persona.

What is the example of a good, strong man?

I’ve seen men of valor still stuck in the Nice Guy energy.

Courage in life situations doesn’t always translate to courage in interpersonal relationships.

Niceness doesn’t create Containment.

Nice guys fail miserably at giving women Containment.

Dom-sub dynamic is still the best modality I know for teaching people Containment.

It’s crucial for men to learn to Contain their women.

And it’s an unmitigated disaster when men seek Containment from their women.

Tantrikas are some of the most difficult students for teaching Containment. 

The difference between Domineering and Dominance. 

The qualifications of leadership.

If a man is to lead a woman, her life under his leadership should be better than without it.

It should be in a woman’s self-interest to have her man leading her.

The only good reason for a woman to surrender to a man is that doing so is a positive experience for her.

There is only Spiritual Submission for everyone, men and women.

www.OmRupani.org

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:00

All right. Without further ado, Omra Pani, it's such a pleasure to have you back here for a second round on the Heart of Man. I welcome you. Thank you. Happy to be here. A lot of our listeners received so much value from our first conversation. And I want to thank you as well for everything that you'd provided us. A lot of people received value from the conversation of containment. And I would as well argue that has been one of the foundational elements that I've really received from your work. And when I came out of your seven-day retreat in Austria last year, one of the things that had stood out for me, and I as well recall mentioning that to you, that I perceive it was this very training that I would argue eradicated any last elements or remnants of the nice guy persona in me. And I would as well encourage any recovering nice guy to step into such a training for that reason. And within that, that uh initiated the curiosity for me to step deeper into this conversation and actually be in contact with you to explore this idea of the nice guy and as well where it originates from, and obviously how a man can as well step out of that persona. So this is the premise that I would like to call in as it relates to this conversation. So, Ohm, without further ado, according to your teachings, what is the nice guy according to you, and why do you see this being such a prevalent challenge for men today?

SPEAKER_00 1:35

I think the nice guy, in the in the way we use it, we are describing it, is it's a persona. And what is a persona? Persona is is a mask. Comes from Greek theater, where they would wear a mask to project the sound, sonic through sound, persona. So persona is a term adopted by psychologists that when somebody is wearing a mask. Now, this is tricky because I mean we can we can get philosophical about this and say, well, what is our true face? Aren't we all wearing masks? Aren't we all at least adhering to rules of society, to rules of politeness? Don't we have um rules of behavior? You go outside, you don't make faces at strangers, you don't stare. Simple polite things. We tell children, don't stare. It's not polite to stare. Children don't know, they will just gawk at you. They're fascinated. And we're like, don't stare. So at one level, yes, we are all housebroken. We are all we all know that how to be social, how to comport ourselves, how to be polite. So our our behavior is not entirely spontaneous. We are not all five-year-old children running through sprinklers all the time. So what does it mean to on top of to say that some some man, some guy has a persona? And I think it is a matter of degrees, it is a matter of layers. It is a matter of if somebody is wearing so much of a mask that their behavior is so much controlled and so much regulated that you engage with them and you get the feeling like I actually don't know who this guy is. You really do get a sense that they're wearing a mask. That yes, there is there is this uncensored part of us that at least our friends get to see. And the nice guy, if you encounter that thing, you feel this guy is so interested, so invested in controlling my response to him. Right. That's what personas are for. Why would you put it on? You're trying to control the other person's response to you, you're trying to convince them of something so that they will believe something about you. And if they believe something about you, they will treat you a certain way, or it will lend you a certain advantage. But that's a form of manipulation, that is a form of lie, that is a form of I'm not gonna show you who I actually am, I'm going to try and control how you perceive me instead. And if you encounter that mask on anybody, men are women, this is not particularly a masculine disease, this is a human disease. We are all liars, we all have masks to some degree. It's a matter of how thick is that mask. But if you encounter a really thick mask and you're like, I have no fucking idea who this man is behind this mask, that's not a good feeling. It's not a good feeling, man to man. You don't trust that man? You wouldn't want to collaborate with him. It'd be a bad idea to like really invest in that man because you don't know who you're investing in. Women obviously need to evaluate men for danger, for men misrepresenting themselves. This is one of the main reasons men are full of shit, is because we're trying to get laid. So this is a game men are playing all the time. I'm going to show this woman a version of me so that she'll sleep with me. All women know they're susceptible to this game. So it is in their best interest to really look at us closely and say, Who is this man really? It is really expensive for them to be to get fooled by men. Right? If a man is presenting a thick mask, a thick persona, and a woman falls for that persona, it could be even more expensive for her than it might be for another man who gets hustled by a man. That's the nature of masks in general. And I think in the context that I think you are asking and I'm answering regarding what is this nice guy, it is a it is a type of a mask. Now, what is the nature of this particular mask? What is it trying to accomplish? As the word as the word itself explains, it's trying to convey I'm a nice guy. I'm a nice person, I'm gentle, I'm kind, I'm ethical. Which means if you perceive me as such, you should treat me nicely. You should trust me. I'm so trustworthy. Right? There's a certain advantage to it if people think you're nice. People were like, Oh, he's such a nice guy. That's not a bad thing to say. When you genuinely mean it, he's like, Man, that's a really nice dude. I like this guy. This is not as a compliment. He's a good guy. Which, if you if you were to say it about a man, if if that was a genuine evaluation, what you're saying, he's a kind man, he's got a good heart, he's salt of the earth, he speaks the truth. I can trust him. Those are all good qualities. We as men should aspire to be the be that kind of a nice guy. The trouble with the nice guy, if it is a mask, which means it is not truly what he is, which also doesn't mean, you know, it doesn't automatically even mean the guy's evil underneath. Right. It's not like most guys who are projecting the nice guy persona are psychopaths underneath. They may actually be a pretty regular nice guy. An average guy. Maybe not too good, not too bad. Doesn't mean they're evil, but they're feeling this necessity that I need to control other people's response to me, so I am really going to show them this presentation of me. And when it gets the thicker it gets, the more shadowy it gets. It is a form of manipulation, it is a form of misrepresentation, and it is a form of trying to control and hustle the other. And it's not a particularly friendly thing to do to anybody. It is actually if you because you're lying, and if you're lying, you actually are not operating in good faith to create a good human connection. Right? And that can backfire, that can be disillusioning to somebody who's like, no, I that guy is just wearing a mask. And so again, if you were to go deeper, what is the nature of the mask? One of the characteristics would be harmlessness. So I'm I'm just such a harmless guy. You don't need to worry about me. I'm not gonna I can't harm a fly. I'm so soft and so sweet. You can trust me, I'm gentle, I'm harmless, I'm a good person. Again, if you are all those things, absolutely nothing wrong with it. But if you're if that's your presentation and you are something else underneath, that can be a red flag. And I think in the end it ends up being a handicapped to the person because every mask you wear, now you have to maintain it. It actually comes at a cost. If only these masks didn't come at a cost, maybe we could wear them without too much negative consequence. But the thing is, it's not just that nice guy is wearing a nice guy mask, the nice guy actually believes this shit about himself, and he's actually handicapped himself in certain ways. Let's make that more concrete. The nice guy may believe. I don't threaten anybody, I'm never aggressive. I'm just a sweet guy. I don't pick fights. Right? Pacifist, non-aggressive, gentleman. Okay. Well, you know what? As a man in the world, sometimes you need to show people your fangs. You need to show them your claws, you need to show them your fucking teeth. If you're going to be a man who is loyal to anything in his life, start with your own fucking children. Doesn't have to be anything else, abstract. You have friends and family, a wife and a child that you feel you need to protect. To protect them, when push comes to shove, you're gonna have to bring out your aggression. It costs to protect people. You can't be a nice, gentle guy in every kind of situation in the world and even offer protection to those who you who it's your duty to protect. So now which who are you gonna be? You're gonna be the man who protects his family, or are you gonna be the nice guy? Because, you know, if you're never aggressive, I guess they can rape and murder your family. You can just sit here being a nice guy. Is that who you want to be? Is that your ethos for you to decide? But I think this can be this can really backfire on people their identity of a nice guy. It is not exactly the most Um coherent identity that I never want to be unpopular, I never want to piss anybody off, I never want anybody to think badly of me. When did this become a masculine virtue? I don't want anybody to think badly of me. You have no idea how many men in my circle have expressed I can't express that opinion on Facebook. Women will get mad at me. I'm like, this is the extent of your fucking masculinity today. Women getting mad at you on Facebook is what regulates your fucking behavior. This is the extent of masculine valor today. Truly, be fucking ashamed of your masculinity that you have become such cowards that you think anybody someplace saying anything critical about you is the ultimate thing you need to protect. Right? While other people in your society, the men in blue and the men in camouflage, are on the front lines holding rifles, protecting your fucking freedom. You should be ashamed of yourself. That this has become the level of your courage and valor. Oh, I can't have anybody be mad at me. Certainly not on Facebook. I can't possibly express that opinion and be myself, even though I believe in that opinion. That's what I believe. I'm not gonna voice it. It'll make some people mad. So I'm gonna shut myself up because I don't want to trouble anybody and I don't want anybody to think badly of me. If that is your level of valor and strength and courage in society today, we are fucked.

SPEAKER_02 13:28

If I may just jump in here, Ohm. Um because I think I think that first of all, there's so much in what you had said, and there's a few things that I might just want to reflect back here. First of all, this persona gets adopted as I see it when the strategy had served us at a particular moment in our lives. Especially as I see it within myself, with a lot of men as well that I work with or speak with, um, I see that a lot of that originates from our relationship to our primary caregivers. A lot of it perhaps stems from the validation that we might have received from our mothers and essentially wanting us to be gentle, wanting us to be harmless, wanting us to um be this very kind and gentle boy. And for a lot of us as well, we've had difficult relationships with our fathers per se, where we have seen the reactive, uncontained expression of assertiveness or aggression or anger in our fathers. And there can be this very subconscious uh predisposition towards, I never want to be like my father. Like this is something that I hear within so many men. And so this is also where I see a lot of this conditioning originating from. So I guess I want to perhaps just expand a little bit on these premises that I've just offered as it relates to the origins of the night sky, particularly as it relates to the origins of the mother and the father, but also how a man can come into a process of individuation from that initial or early conditioning, so that he can actually step into deeper authenticity.

SPEAKER_00 15:35

Both of your points are absolutely valid. I see it many, many times at this conversation with so many men. Both the points on the part of the mother, and then from the mother onwards, continuing with the things other women in our culture and society are voicing regarding how men should be. So let's talk about that a little bit because it needs to be explained a tiny bit. Because it's a little bit like, as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intention. I'm not even gonna fault the mothers for saying, hey, what's wrong with teaching my son kindness? What's wrong with teaching him picking fights is not a good thing, being aggressive in school is not particularly useful. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. I think you should teach your sons to be polite, you should teach them restraint, you should teach them courtesy. But then there is the other side, and you're like, is anybody also teaching them the other side? And that's where the deficiency is. So I often say this in my coaching why women cannot teach men how to be men. Vast majority of the time, there are always exceptions. I think in the older days, 100 years ago, 200 years ago, because survival was so difficult, mothers and grandmothers knew exactly what the sons in their families needed to be. And they would slap the unnecessary softness out of their boys because they knew it wouldn't do in life, that their sons would get killed. Because it was the the feedback from nature and society was so harsh if you were weak. If you were weak, you might as well be dead. So even the mothers and the grandmothers knew the boy is too soft, he needs to toughen up. We don't have that culture anymore. So this is this is the thing, this is the trap we are falling into with so many single mothers raising boys and sons. And women are being our civilizing fac factor, and I'm not against that. I want women to be the beautiful, softer, courteous, more civilizing factor. We need that part. But what ends up happening is the best that good mothers can do for their sons is turn them into gentlemen. Be a gentleman, be polite, be courteous, be restraint. Absolutely nothing wrong with being a gentleman. Point being, who's turning that boy also into the needed savage when he needs to be? That's the missing education. Women generally, at least in our culture today, don't have their sights on that. In truth, they are afraid of it. They're afraid of masculine aggression, they're wounded themselves. They don't think there is any positive component to masculine aggression. They don't really believe in the necessity of the savage or the warrior. They believe a boy growing up into a gentle gentleman is perfect, is sufficient. And it isn't. Or it is, still it isn't. So that's a deficiency on the women's part. This is why women make lousy mentors of men. Yeah, women end up creating the kind of men they want to date. Even mothers end up creating the kind of sons that they wish they had for husbands. It gets pretty incestuous really quickly. They don't create, they're not creating sons to go out there and deal with whatever they face out there because that's their real job as a parent. Not to keep that son to her fucking bosom, is to prepare this son to go face the unknown of the world. That's not what the boys are being prepared for today. One of the main reasons we are fucked. As far as the fathers, either the fathers are missing, so there is no template. So that's one big chunk. We never got that template from a father who wasn't there. And the second part, as you said, yes, there are a certain number of fathers who are not good men, who are domineering, not dominant the way I would describe it. Dominant the way I would describe it would be the ethical leader, the good leader, the good example. And if you had a father who was a bully, if you had a father who was randomly aggressive, bad tempered, you'll be like, Well, I don't want that masculine aggression, that's really a bad template. And I don't blame them, and I don't want that for them either. So the real example of what it feels like to be truly a tempered, balanced man who also has access to his aggression is rare. And here's the key part, and this is the part, this is why I need the entire dominant man course. I think you have studied my modules in there. My example for my men in the course, where I love teaching from movies, because movies, everybody knows it's a common experience and easy reference point, and archetypes, beautifully expressed archetypes. So I'm like, I scanned the movies, and I'm like, what is a really good archetype character to present for the good father? And you know what came up for me, and I still haven't found a better example, was Gregory Peck's Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird. That's the good father. And people would initially look at say, Man, that's a pretty wimpy father. I'm like, watch closer. It's not about being crazy aggressive, it's not about beating your chest, it's not about throwing things around, it's not about losing your temper, it is about steadfastness, especially steadfastness in the face of danger and challenges. It is having the character to see your principles through. It is not backing down when you know you need to make a stand. It's not about picking up a gun or putting up your fists. An Atticus Finch in to kill a mockingbird is a supreme example of that. He seems like a wimp. His own son thinks my father's a wimp. He's not very proud of his father. Right. Till the first moment comes where a stray dog is coming down the street, foaming at his mouth. He's rabid, has rabies. And the sheriff comes to put the dog down. The sheriff pulls out his rifle, and the sheriff says, I'm not a good enough shot. He hands the rifle over to Atticus. And his children look at the sheriff like he's insane. He's like, Our father can't shoot. Turns out Atticus is the best best shot in town. He picks up the rifle, leans in, shoots the dog dead on the street. What does that mean? You don't back away from violence when it's needed. You don't back away from killing when it's needed. And that's just the beginning of it. Again, he's not himself aggressive, but the time comes when he has to protect the black man he's defending. He puts up a chair in front of his cell and he keeps guard at night. And a mob comes and says, Mr. Finch, step away. He says no. Nope. You want my my defendant, you're gonna have to go through me. That is masculinity. That's dominance. That's the correct level of aggression. You don't back down, you protect what needs protecting, you defend what needs defending. He doesn't even do it pointing a gun at any worry. He he knows he can't win. But he does what's necessary and he doesn't flinch and he's not afraid and he doesn't back down. That's the example of good masculinity, but that requires a tremendous amount of character. The man must have been tested someplace to be able to stand withstand this under pressure. He was tested and he passed the test. Right? That's what I want for all of us. May we be as brave as in his beautiful white linen suits as Atticus Finch. I'm not talking about we're all going to be SEAL team six members, warriors, going to war. No, that's a small class of really brave people, and I bow down to them. That's not every man. But every man having that character of his uh the strength of his conviction, being able to defend what he needs to defend, being able to protect what he wants to protect, that is character, and that is going to require aggression in some form at some point. And if you're so much of a nice guy that you never want to confront anybody, I think you're gonna fail at that.

SPEAKER_02 25:10

Let me jump in here for a moment. Uh there's a few things that are coming up for me. Obviously, there's this famous proverb that says, uh, it's better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener at war. And I as well consider the famous as well line from Jordan Peterson, um, which I believe as well directly ties to this, that you should be a monster, an absolute monster. And then you should learn how to control it. And there's a curiosity for me as it relates to this dangerousness that you're referencing, that a nice guy is disconnected from. Where would you encourage, where would you invite such a man to start to actually come into contact with that? Because I truly believe that dangerousness, that intensity lives in every man. And it's simply about, you know, like bringing that out from a man. Um, I guess one of the things that I'm already picking up on is a man actually has to go through difficulty so that he can actually come into contact with that sense of aggression, with that sense of primality. Would you say that is the answer to that? And if not, what else might be there?

SPEAKER_00 26:26

I actually don't think training men in primality is the for correct first step or even the necessary step. It may be a good step teaching men to go into the woods and scream and yell and push each other around and do boot camp-like drills, or even learn to hunt and clean meat. Not against any of that. But it is too external. I think what really kills the nice guy, what really kills us, is the internal, is the emotional. So if you've taken my I had two two short courses for men, which I'm going to fold into the new self-study dominant man course. I designed two conversations for men. One was grappling with a nice guy identity, and the other one was discovering or rediscovering our edge as men. And I would say essential for both of these conversations is see if you can build your tolerance to be disliked. I don't know whether going into the jungle and screaming is gonna do it for you. It's interpersonal, it's relational. It actually comes back to the ridiculous point I made earlier about men being afraid to voice their opinions on Facebook. It's the emotional part that kills these big guys. And I'm like, deal with the emotional part first. Beyond that, you want to do push-ups, you want to get into better shape, you want to work out, you wanna build your muscles, you wanna learn martial arts. All wonderful. Nothing wrong with it. All wonderful to increase increase your physical vitality, to increase the physical dimension of your masculinity by all means, absolutely nothing negative in it. Go for it. It'll increase your health, it'll probably raise your testosterone, it will build camaraderie with other men if you're doing it in a group. Beautiful things, but it is actually no substitute for what I think is the Achilles heel of the nice guy identity, which is other people are not going to like me for who I really am, which means I can't be who I am in the world, which means I'm gonna keep lying about who I really am to control your perception of me. And to me, that is the biggest falling that you don't like who you are, you don't know how to be who you are, so you're essentially gonna keep lying about who you are to control other people's perception of you, or you're so terrified that who you are will elicit disapproval from others, that that is where you're dying. I don't really care how big your biceps are at that point. Men who have been in the military are not immune to this. I have trained ex-soldiers who are terrified of talking to women and their wives who bullshit all the time because they are afraid of mommy's disapproval. The little boy is sitting under a mountain of six foot four muscles. Right, it is it is it is it is it is bizarre to see this up close. I'm like, you've done two tours of combat. Holy motherfucking shit! You have saved, you have carried men out of danger, and you will see this energy running in them. I'm like, I it is mind-boggling. You would think courage would transfer. You think courage, it really doesn't. It is truly bizarre to watch. I'm like, you have lived out more courage, and I wish I had the balls ever. That if I'm put in a danger, one-tenth of what you have faced, that may I face it with as much grace as what you have lived. I don't know whether I would have the balls, some of these stories. I kid you not. I have talked to men who were in Fallujah. It is idiotic, and I have dealt with this energy in them, and I sit there, I'm like, how is this possible? How is this possible? This man has done acts of valor that boggle my mind, and he's running this same bullshit energy. I'm like, they're gonna disapprove of me. I'm like, wow.

SPEAKER_02 31:12

Well, it's an interesting one. Holy shit. It's it is it's an interesting one. Like, what comes up for me as well is I I've been deeply informed by the work of Gabor Mate. And, you know, obviously, one of the like most famous statements of his has been that we'll choose as children attachment over authenticity. And I consider this is also one of the entrapments of the nice guy, that we fall under this persona because at a certain time it has provided us a certain sense of belonging, it has provided us a certain sense of safety, it has provided us a certain sense of acceptance. And I I'm observing, especially as well within what you're saying, that the fear or the shame, because it seems like those are the predominant emotions that a lot of nice guys struggle with, those arise in relational moments. Whereas if I consider moments of you know violence, especially in war, it's almost like I'll I'll cut off the almost. It's that they will they completely disconnect themselves from the relational component of life. Whereas, you know, if they step out of that environment, they connect back to that relational environment where it's almost like that first attachment imprint is starting to again take over and dictate them.

SPEAKER_00 32:34

I agree with you, and it's it is still startling to observe. It is, yeah. You would you would think men who have faced such grave, harrowing danger. But yeah, it is our human human character, human nature is fascinating.

SPEAKER_02 32:57

One of the things that I would love to just touch on, and then from there we can as well move over um towards, I guess, the path forward for recovering nice guy. But before we go there, an exploration that I would like to go under is this idea that niceness doesn't create containment. And within our first conversation, we focused predominantly on the subject matter of containment, which I would argue is a deep aspect and deep component of your work and a deep value that you've provided to the world. And one of the things that I found is also fascinating about the uh work of BDSM and as well, these archetypal roles that we explored of the DOM and the sub within the training is that it provides direct feedback of who you're being, how you're showing up, and as well what response this elicits in the system of the sub. And you can, again, it's such a direct correlation towards where any form of lack of containment within oneself, where any form of ambiguity is leading to a sense of distress in her. So I want to hand it over to you, and I would like to ask, um, I would like you to touch a little bit on the subject matter of niceness doesn't create containment.

SPEAKER_00 34:27

Well, that statement, we can just repeat that statement a hundred times. And this is this is, you know, it's there is no way of convincing. So you have been in my class. This is why you are speaking with such conviction. If on the first day when you walk to the door, if I told you niceness is not gonna create containment, you're gonna be like, let's find out. I think niceness should create containment. I think niceness is a good quality, and I'm like, please go ahead. Right. So, for those of us listening, you they should know this this sounds like a piece of ideology, somebody is saying. This sounds like idea. Niceness does not create containment for anybody who's been in my class, and for me who teaches class after class after class after class after class after class after class, where all I'm doing is teaching people containment every single fucking day of class, and then I'm having the submissives rate their DOMs. Yep, they rate their DOMs after 20 minutes after every scene on a scale of 1 to 10, on a how strong their containment was, and every single time the feedback is the same in every class and every pair, things that the Dom can do wrong that ruin containment, they're the same every time. They're a handful of things, niceness is one of them. Niceness doesn't work. Jitteriness on the part of the Dom doesn't work. Being in their head doesn't work, the submissive picks up on it immediately. But going back to the point at hand, niceness does not create containment. This is not ideology. Containment is a real phenomenon, containment is not a voo-voo concept we are just tossing around. It is a somatic event. When the submissive is contained, they feel contained. When in a three-minute scene they don't feel contained by what the Dom is doing, they feel it. And when the Dom switches and does something else that does create the containment for the submissive, the submissive feels it to the point where they will say, Up to that point, your containment sucked. And then you started doing that, and I felt held. So the feedback is scientific. It is in real time, it is between two people. I am not judging you on your containment as the teacher. Your submissive is, and it isn't in one particular submissive. You switch around and you partner with anybody and everybody in class, and this is a very PG-rated exercise. You can do it with the whole room one at a time for two minutes at a time. You get the same feedback over and over and over and over and over and over every single class. Men are women going in either direction. Containment is a real phenomenon. What creates containment is a real phenomenon. What doesn't create containment is a real phenomenon. And within that, niceness does not create containment. This is shocking to many boys who have been taught to be nice, to be nice guys, to be gentle. Nothing wrong with gentleness. Nothing wrong with being nice either. But if you want to create containment, it doesn't work. And I would say you don't need to give up being gentle, you don't need to give up being nice. But men should really learn how to contain their women. Women deeply need to feel contained by men. So you should learn this particular frequency as well. I think men I think a man being able to give reliable containment to his woman, that's a good thing. More men in the world being self-contained and being able to offer containment to women is a good thing. It'll make things better in the world. I don't know what more to say about that.

SPEAKER_02 38:44

What do you believe is the missing link? Because you know, as you'd already referenced, the nice guy um adopts a certain harmlessness or a certain gentleness to um almost provide this perception of safety. And containment is, uh as I would argue, about somatic safety as I perceive it.

SPEAKER_00 39:08

Um oddly enough, isn't ironic. So it registers in the body as safety for women, especially for women, for everybody. But I think women use the word safety, safe, safe, that they feel safe a lot more than men do.

SPEAKER_02 39:22

So nice guys do want to come across as safe. Containment is about actually creating fundamental safety.

SPEAKER_00 39:31

Yes, and nice guys fail at it miserably. Exactly. So nice guys are failing miserably at actually creating safety and let's expand on that.

SPEAKER_02 39:40

What is it? Is it the lack of self-containment? Is the is it the lack of um them being connected to their firmness, their edge, all of the above, or is there anything else that you perceive might be of value to add within this conversation?

SPEAKER_00 39:57

We can break it up into two big pieces. First thing is if they are running a persona, they're being inauthentic. That's the first failure to containment. Because containment happens. I articulate that there are two main pathways I see how we create containment. Primary one is actually through osmosis. I am contained, I extend my containment feel to you. Either either be there by touch, PG-rated touch, an arm around the shoulder, a hand on the shoulder. And if I am contained, I can extend that containment through you, you will feel my containment. Doesn't even have to be through touch. You can do it through voice, you can do it through presence. Great leaders, when they walk through the room, they contain the room. Great teachers, when they walk through the room, they ground and contain the whole room. You do it through your energy. The nice guy doesn't have it. Nice guy's running a racket. He's manipulating, he's calculating. He actually isn't at peace in his own skin. He's running a game. So if he doesn't have containment and he puts his hand on you, you're gonna feel creepy. You're gonna feel somebody who's who's got an agenda, who's not quiet and settled within himself. You'll feel it. Women feel it very quickly. They don't feel settled in that energy. That's the one part. And the second part comes back to the Jordan Peterson point, which is a bit more controversial and a bit more difficult to grasp. That your dangerousness is actually a key component in making somebody feel contained. We do not surrender into niceness, we surrender into power. This is not a very popular idea these days. You everybody would think niceness should be enough. Why isn't niceness enough is nice? I'm nice. Why can't you surrender into my niceness? Well, it doesn't create containment. Except embodied presence that includes your dangerousness actually settles the system. Right? So I call that aspect benevolent power. You don't want predatory power, you don't want psychopathic power, but you do want power and you want benevolent power, power that is on your side, power that is there to protect you. But it needs to be power, and niceness ain't power. And when there is benevolent power on the other end, our system relaxes because it means somebody's got my back. If they've got my back, it means I can lower my vigilance. Somebody making me the correct offer so that I may lower my vigilance is the containment contract that I am strong enough for both of us. Relax. I am strong enough to hold both of us. I am vigilant enough for both of us so you can turn down your vigilance. But if you're going to be vigilant enough, powerful enough, you have to be that. Nice guy isn't. He fails miserably at containment. All you nice guys fail miserably at containment. It's probably the main reason you fail with women. It's not that you're bad looking, or is that that women aren't don't like your sweetness or your politeness? Women actually love sweet, polite guys. But they don't feel contained by you when they finally get you in bed or they have you put your arms around them. They're like it doesn't turn any turn them on, doesn't make them feel safe as they do. That lack of safety also is like it doesn't make them soften in your arms. You don't give them containment. It backfires, the niceness backfires. And then even the women sometimes are possible, like he's such a nice guy. But they can't figure out what's going wrong. Yeah. They almost wish they would respond to the nice guy, their life would be easier. But their somatics don't lie, and even women cannot negotiate with their desires. Women can't negotiate whether they're feeling contained by a man or not. If they're not feeling contained, that's non-negotiable. They can't talk themselves out of it, even if they try.

SPEAKER_02 44:45

Yeah, I just want to attest to the value of this teaching, especially as it relates to providing containment and how that teaching fundamentally has shifted the way I pursue my relationships, the way I move through my relationships, potential partners, partners. And it's been profound for me. And I as well have to acknowledge that, you know, five years prior to as well coming into your workshop, I've been, you know, exploring Tantra, sacred intimacy, polarity work. So I have, I'm, I'm not foreign to the relational and sexual realms, but I had never looked at it through this lens of containment. I would say that there was probably already some elements, obviously, um, that were embodied or already instilled in me. Um, that I would say isn't something that is foreign to me, especially as well as a nervous system practitioner. Um, but the lens itself had gardened me a certain um attention and a certain focus towards something that was, let's just say, rather unexpressed. And within that, I've found tremendous value, uh, whether it's in the relational realms but as well professional realms. So I really encourage anyone um who's listening to this to pursue this deeper and explore uh these understandings of containment.

SPEAKER_00 46:15

And the second thing I as well want to add here is Well, I just want to just if I may say something to that. Just want to insert this. You know, this this has been a discovery for me too, and I just want to explain that a little bit to people. It was only when playing around in BDSM and playing around in the DOM subdynamic that I discovered this phenomenon of containment, and as you expressed, it is so loud and clear when a DOM is trying to contain the submissive that the feedback loop is so clear. This is why I can't get away from teaching people BDSM. Seriously, I could leave everything else aside, not really attached to I think BDSM is ingenious, but I actually don't know any other way of demonstrating containment teaching containment to regular couples, except saying I'm gonna take you into a posture scene and you're gonna be a dom and you're gonna be a sub. Can you think of a way outside of the Dom sub container in which to teach people containment? I really can't. I'm like, this is the fastest way I know.

SPEAKER_02 47:40

That's a good question.

SPEAKER_00 47:41

And if I talk to couples, I'm like, the man needs to contain his women. They're like, I don't know what that is. You want me to hold her? I can give her a nice hug. I'm like, how do I teach these people containment? The only best way I know is to bring them over and at least for a simple PG, PG-rated posture scene, guide them into the Dom containing the submissive and the submissive receiving the Dom's containment. And then I'm like, men need to provide this for their women. This much Dom subplay you need to carry over into your man-woman relating. This much. Without it, it's a non-starter, and it works. But this is why to me, man teach man-woman improvement and dom sub-exploration, they are they're like tied at containment. I simply don't know how to teach men and women what they are so desperately needing in their connection without at least bringing them over for one exercise in the BDSM realm. I'm like, please come over in the BDSM in my dungeon on this side of the carpet and learn what containment is. And if you don't want to touch the rest of BDSM, leave it, but take this back into your man-woman relating. This is why, for me, as soon as I discovered this and I saw it, I'm like, this is why improving man-woman relating and teaching BDSM has become inextricably linked for me. It's not that I want all couples to practice bondage rope and flogging, but I do need all couples to understand and practice the giving and receiving of containment and how absolutely fatal it is when women are not being well contained by their men, and how absolutely double fatal it is if by some some some bad conditioning and ideas the man is seeking containment from his woman. I'm like, your relationship is on the verge of dying if you don't fix this right away. But that if you if you tell them the words, they don't get it. They're like, I don't know what you're talking about. But if you if they get the somatics of it, they get it immediately. Oh my god, I've been asking my woman to contain me. This is why she's so miserable and frazzled, and screwing the gardener. Because it completely turns off her attraction to me. It completely uh she can't respect me if I'm turning to her for containment. Everything falls apart. Yeah, anyway, just wanted to insert that on why in this conversation, why why with you or with anybody else or in my own teachings? I always keep flip-flopping from man-woman relating to dom sub play, man-woman relating to dom sub play. It's not random. I'm not trying to sell you two courses, they are tied here. The containment. I don't know any other better way of teaching containment than to take people into a dom sub exercise.

SPEAKER_02 50:44

Yeah, I appreciate that. And it's a really as well good inquiry. Like, where else can that be taught? And yeah, frankly, I have no answer to it. I mean, uh, obviously, you know, within therapeutic sessions where I provide breath and body work, that is available and that is present, but it's not something I'm necessarily teaching uh as it relates to the relationship between me and the person that I'm working with, right?

SPEAKER_00 51:09

Uh, and and as as you pointed out, when you try to create containment through all those other energies, it doesn't work. And people may not realize they're not working. Because I have many people who are like, your caretaking energy doesn't create containment either. Your healing energy, your caretaking energy doesn't create containment either, by the way. That's a kick in the ass for all the caretakers of the world, for all the spaceholders of the world, for all the healers of the world, for all the tantrikas of the world. I have to bash my brains in every week when I teach a priestess training course, because I am training tantrikas, women who are used to doing session work, women who are brilliant at creating sessions with men, women who hold men all the time, and they're like, I know how to hold men, I know how to create sessions. They fail and they fail and they fail and they fail and they fail at creating containment. And I'm like, please get it through your goddamn skulls. None of your other tricks are gonna work for creating containment. Your tantrika isn't gonna work, your healer is gonna not gonna work, your Reiki practitioner isn't going to work, your massage therapist isn't going to work, none of it is going to create containment in your submissive, and they don't really believe me. They're like, This guy's an idiot. I'm good at what I do. I handle people all day long. Eventually they get it. They're like, oh shit, none of this is working. And you know how they because their submissive tells them day after day after day after day after day, nope, no containment there. Oh, you had him had me for a while, then you went into caretaking, or you had me for a while and then you went into your tantric bullshit, or you had me for a while and then you went into your massage and your healing touch, and the containment was ruined and dropped over and over and over and over. And until you've had that much feedback, you're like, it doesn't it doesn't get through their skulls. They're like, this should work. Yeah. This should work, but it doesn't. It doesn't.

SPEAKER_02 53:12

Yeah. I mean, maybe one last point from my side, and then I would love to as well transition over just to this as well conversation around like something that you'd already said, uh, which I found to be very interesting, the distinction between domineering and dominance. And as well, within that, I as well want to um just undergo a short exploration as well within upcoming course that you as well have around that in Austria. Um, but I mean, if I were just to as well consider the caretaking energy, fundamentally, it's not about the person that we're working with, it's more about ourselves and what as well what we're getting from caretaking another individual, how that in some ways we're seeking or sourcing a sense of safety or perhaps a sense of validation from that sense of being the savior, from being the caretaker, or maybe simply we're not comfortable with the person's experience as it's showing up in the moment. And that is what drives the behavior, which is you know the absence of you know, fundamentally actually creating a level of containment. So um, yeah, that that is just what comes up for me as it relates to what you had as well just said.

SPEAKER_00 54:21

Well, these are two big topics. We can talk about caretaking, or we can talk about the distinction between dominant and domineering, which one do you want to talk about first?

SPEAKER_02 54:32

I'm curious how long would it take for you to share the few words.

SPEAKER_00 54:37

We can do the caretaking first. It's a shorter one. Let's go. So I would say that part is true that oftentimes when people are caretaking, they are inserting themselves in it. They want to show how wonderfully caregiving they are. But here's the kicker: even if you're not doing that, if you even if you're like a nurse and you truly just put quality attention out, but it's a caregiving energy, it won't create containment. It is it is so fascinating to watch. And as soon as they switch over or switch back, the submissive will say, I felt contained, you dropped containment, and the person will say, Yep, I went into caregiving. So that's so that's that. Domineering and dominant, this is a disease both on women's side and men's side these days. Essentially, the difference between domineering and dominant is that domineering once again is self-interested, it is actually a non-consensual form of domination. And the dominant, the way we describe it, in a Dharm subdynamic, in a healthy, happy, functional, reciprocal, win-win Dharm subdynamic, the dominant is deeply interested in the submissive and creating a nourishing, fun, hot experience for the submissive. And part of that is holding the dominant position while they are in the submissive position. It's archetypical. Domineering means the boss babe of the world. The modern woman is domineering, they want the women to walk in and kick ass. But whose ass are you kicking? And does anybody want your ass kicking? Uh are you just being that in the world? Are you serving anybody with your ass kicking? Or that's just who you're gonna be in the world because you're just a bad ass. If you are, it's pretty narcissistic. You're just throwing around this domineering, pushy energy. Men can do that too. Men can be aggressive, men can be loud, men can have big personalities. Doesn't make them a leader. Doesn't inspire followership. They're just assholes, they're just abrasive. People want to stay away from them or take them down. Nobody wants to really engage with them. They're not actually serving anybody. Whereas real dominance is actually good leadership, which means the people who you are leading are benefiting from your leadership. Good leadership is about who is benefiting from your leadership. Good dominance is about is your submissive benefiting from your dominance? Are they more turned down? Are they more contained? Are they happier? Are they saner? Under your leadership, are their lives better? That's the happy contract, which is pretty much the theme, as we mentioned to talk before our conversation, for the couple's retreat. If you want to create a functioning hierarchical dynamic, it means the man needs to be a good leader, and that's a tall order. If you are a good leader, it means your woman's life under your leadership is better in every dimension. That's a big responsibility for a man. It is absolutely in her self-interest to have you as her leader. This is why we pick leaders, this is why we elect presidents. Not because we are nice guys, we're like under that guy, my life is gonna be better, my bank account is gonna be better, my life is gonna be more peaceful, my country is gonna be more functional. It's for me. I'm electing you because my life is gonna be better with you in office, and as soon as I don't think that, you're out of there. I'm doing it for me, I'm casting my vote for me. My betterment. It's all in self-interest. If a woman is going to surrender to you, the only good reason she should surrender to you is surrendering to you is a positive experience for her. At whatever levels. Certainly, erotically, if you're talking about BDSM, it's fun for her, it's more erotic for her. She will have experiences she can't have on her own. If she's surrendering to you relationally, it means in her submission to you in her relationship, her life is better overall in every way. Now, are you that man? That's a tall order. Because women have become amazingly proficient and independent and self-sufficient these days, and women very correctly ask what's in it for me. They should ask that. That's the correct answer. You should not. I I certainly am not encouraging anybody, any woman, to surrender to men out of ideology. I have no ideology. My only ideology is self-interest. So the only reason any woman should surrender to any man is because that makes her life better. And if you are a man who wants a hierarchical dynamic, who wants to be at the dominant position, you should create a dynamic so that whoever is in the followership position, their life is better, having you as a leader. Then it's a win-win. There is absolutely no ideology here whatsoever. Not the way I live it and not the way I teach it. I'm not saying women submit to men because the Bible says so. I don't give a shit what the Bible says. I don't give a shit what any holy book says. I'm like a completely practical person.

SPEAKER_02 1:00:04

A curiosity jumps out for me, um, which is it as well in your teaching in the um retreat, you had spoken about the fact that there is different forms of dominance and submission. You know, either it could be erotically or sexually, uh, relationally, and as well, we can even have the conversation around spiritually.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:24

I create I create basically three big categories, yes. One is spiritual, relational, and erotic. I think that pretty much covers it. And I think spiritual is the simplest one to explain, and it should be, which is we all bottom to God, we all submit to God. There's no such thing as spiritual dominance, there is only spiritual submission for everybody, men and women.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:49

Yep.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:49

And I think it is important. Totally. It is important for us to place something above us. I don't care what your God is, I don't need to know. I highly encourage you to have a God, even if it's the laws of nature, even if it's the great void. I don't really care what you place above yourself, you should have something you bow down to. Men and women, everybody. And I think that gives us the correct anchor for all that follows in relational at the relational level. And to me, the erotic is merely a subset of the relational. Now, at the relational, again, you decide which way you want to go. You may decide for an egalitarian dynamic. Make that work. I don't really care. You may decide the women should be in the lead position. Create that if you want. Many people in the BDSM community do. They have a female-led dynamic and the men are submissive and they're boys. Go for it. You may decide, no, you want the man to be in the lead position and the woman to be submissive to the man. Create that. But each and any dynamic you create, the only reason to create it is self-interest. This dynamic works for me. My life is better with this in this dynamic. That's it.

SPEAKER_02 1:02:06

And that really stood out as well within your workshop, you know, where we were around 40 people. And I it was very evident that um couples and as well individuals there were really interested in such a dynamic. And I think a lot of people can, you know, at this stage already understand, I guess, the value of exploring erotic dominance and submission. I mean, obviously, like certain individuals might not have um uh a kink as an erotic blueprint. So they might kind of get it. And at the same time, they're like, yeah, you know, I get it, but at the same time, it's not really my vibe. Um, but I think a lot of people might not yet fully understand uh what the value is of relational dominance and submission. So I guess, you know, if you were just to observe your students for a moment, what do you see is the value of having this dynamic of a clear leadership and followership role?

SPEAKER_00 1:03:02

So this is the tricky juncture for me when people ask me these questions. Because it's gonna sound like I am advocating that men lead and women follow. I truly am not. I truly don't give a rat's ass what your preference is, relational preference is. I really don't give a shit. Right? I will always throw you back initially to the big basic fundamentals, create whatever dynamic you want that is in your self-interest, self-interest, self-interest, self-interest. One second principle that is derived from self-interest, which is if two people are gonna come together and create a dynamic, and if both of them are operating on the principle of self-interest, with me so far? Yeah, self-interest, self-interest, which means okay, then this dynamic needs to serve both of their self-interests, it needs to be in mutual self-interest. Really, this is not a big leap. And this to me is the principle of reciprocity, it's the win-win scenario. I'm acting in my self-interest, I'm acting in my self-interest. Can we meet together and create something that is in both of our self-interest? Right? If you and I are friends, we are meeting in an egalitarian dynamic. Oh, I like having you as my friend. I like having you as my friend. We're equals. Excellent, great. Let's talk once in a while. Let's meet together next week, have a beer, shoot the shit. I like your company. Excellent. Self-interest, self-interest, egalitarian friendship. Right? Got a submissive man. Once a dominant woman really gets off on being dominated by a woman. A woman either is getting paid to dominate this man or she enjoys dominating the man. They meet, she gets paid, he gets his rocks off. Happy dynamic. See you again next week, mistress. Excellent. I trained these dominas. Sustainable relationship in both of their self-interest. Now, why would you create a personal relationship where the male is in the dominant position and the woman is in a submissive position? No other reason. Self-interest, self-interest. It works for me. It really, really works for me. Okay, and even here we can connect this. Like, why does this work for a lot of people? And why I think it is actually the most common configuration that is correct for most people. Now it sounds like I'm preaching. I'm not, I'm speaking statistically. I'm speaking statistically, starting from the most basic PG desire. Here's women, here's men. Women really need containment. For straight women in relationships with men, most women in Straight women in relationships with men would really like it if their men could give them excellent, consistent containment. In this PG desire is your first polarity. This desire doesn't go both ways. This is not an egalitarian dynamic. This is not you and me having a beer, and I get this round, and you get the next round, and we are equals. No. Women want their men to give them containment. Men really should give their women containment. And right here, the energies go in one direction. Men give containment, women receive containment. We've just created a polarization. Okay, are there other polarizations that make this thing functional? Right? And we proceed from there, and you decide. You decide what works for you, you decide where your joy is, you decide where you're in a win-win, where you can meet at more and more mutually beneficial, self-interested points. This is this is to me the correct way of creating a dynamic. Whatever you do, you do it because it works for you. Whatever you do, you do it because your life is more functional, your life is more sane, your life is more erotic. You like each other more, you're kinder and nicer to each other. Create a good relationship if it works for you. Design it your way.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:21

Beautifully articulated. Oh, we have been flying by with our time together. Uh, we're already an hour and ten in, and I would really uh like to land this plane now. And first of all, I just want to say thank you. Thank you for the time, thank you for the value that you've provided to the audience. And I trust that listeners will receive so much from our conversation here today. Where can listeners find you? And as well, what are the offerings that you would like our listeners to know about?

SPEAKER_00 1:07:52

Everything, every all the workshops I offer are listed on my website, omrupani.org. Go there and you can sign up for my newsletter. You can see the schedule of classes. The class I'm most excited about and getting the word out about is the couples retreat, in which men will be trained to go into their leadership and dominance, women will be trained to go into their softness and femininity and submission. So usually the BDSM training is a is a very the which is called BDSM Fundamentals, my seven-day course, is uh open, open level, a beginning level offering for everybody. In that one, I actually want to create a permission field for both men and women to come explore both their dominance and submission. I want to create all four quadrants. I want women to experience their dominance, I want women to experience their submission, I want men to experience their dominance, I want men to experience their submission. And the BDSM course is BDSM, it is mostly in the erotic realm. And I want that to be an offering for people so they can discover who they are, what they are, what they like. This couple's retreat is for people who know themselves a little bit. They are in a coupled dom, or they're at least deciding to come as a couple. It's a course for couples, you have to register as a couple. And in this particular training, I am training the men to hold the dominant position and the women to hold the submissive position because they know that's what they're creating in their life. So it's more focused. Right. And I'm excited about that. And because I'm able to go deeper, I have to. We talked about the three categories of dominance and submission are spiritual submission, relational dominance and submission, erotic dominance and submission. Three pieces. The spiritual part is actually the simplest. So this particular course for couples will be 50% about relational dominance and submission, and then 50% about erotic dominance and submission, which is the BDSM part. It's not a fully BDSM course because the relational part is more exciting to teach, and it requires more clarity and conversation because truly people understand BDSM better than they understand how to do a hierarchical personal relationship, and there's a lot of richness to be discovered there. I'm going to be presenting new modules there, so I'm really excited about it. Amazing. So those are the basic offers. I have other offers for pro-DOMs, people, women who know they want to be dominatrices. I have courses for that. They're all listed on the website. But the couples retreat I'm most excited about, and that's going to be in July in Austria, where you took the class with me. An hour outside of Vienna. And it was a beautiful venue. Beautiful venue, beautiful countryside, good food, room and board is included, so you can just be at ease and do this exploration for a week.

SPEAKER_02 1:10:58

Thank you, Ohm. I'll make sure as well to put that in the show notes.

SPEAKER_00 1:11:01

Omrubani.org. All the course descriptions are there. Please reach out if you have any questions. Don't be afraid. I know this is new to some people. I'm happy to get on a Zoom call. Happy to answer your emails.

SPEAKER_02 1:11:12

Well, that's so kind of you. Um, final question. Uh, in one or two minutes, uh, I want to again direct our attention back to the nice guy. And ohm, for any man who has been listening to this conversation and is done. He's done with the act, he's done with the hustle, he's done with the exhaustion of perpetuating this nice guy pattern. What is the number one thing you perceive he should be doing today to cut the nice guy crap?

SPEAKER_00 1:11:40

I have like a whole series of suggestions in my course. So the self-interested answer would be once I have my self-study dominant man course, come take that course. Uh it's gonna be cheap. It's only gonna be about $395, which is a throwaway price because I want to have um tiered offers for people who are not ready to come to an in-person retreat. I have a whole bunch of suggestions in there. The one I can leave you with will be the fundamental one, which is come to peace with who you are and let people see you for who you are. I believe at the nice sky, the center of the nice sky persona is this truly sad premise that who I am as I am, if I show it to you, you're not gonna like it. It's gonna be a loss for me. And I'm like, we as men, we need to take that chance. This is who I am. Fat, thin, old, ugly, big cock, small cock. At some point you're gonna be like, this is what I got. Here I stand naked, fat and lopsided, and this is what I have. I'm sorry. If this is not enough for you, fair it's fine. You like I don't like you. I'm like, okay. Truly fair. I don't you don't I don't owe your you don't owe me your liking. You don't owe me your desire. No woman owes you her desire, no woman owes you her approval, no man owes nobody owes you anything. And are you okay with that? Are you okay with like listen? This is all I got. Hopefully I can still have one or two friends, hopefully I can still be of use to people in some way. Hopefully, I can still find some place in the world. And I think in that humility, there's a relief and there's a honesty, and there is actually a there's a certain nobility, there's also a certain gratitude that you know, all in all, after all, being here is a miracle. Who am I to say this is not enough? And if you don't find me enough, okay. Okay, I accept. You don't want me as a friend, you don't want me as a lover, you don't want me as an employee. Okay. So be it. Stop trying to hustle people. Stop trying to control their responses and reaction to you.