The fine line between the Idealists* and the Survivalist*.

There are people who fall seemingly smack bang middle into the Survivalist* and the Idealists* definitions when described by the most obvious and common differences or seem to be the Idealists* with the Survivalist* traits or vice versa.

Some the Idealists* may take from the Survivalist* the ability to completely ignore people they are not in love with without feeling an ounce of guilt about it. Their rejection is painless because they don’t if or but maybe about it, they just figure “nope, not interested, next!” and they reject people before they even notice they’ve been rejected.

There are also very handsome “catch” -type the Idealists* men who have learned to reject the Survivalist* women efficiently, and learned that if you can’t reject them, they must DOMINATE them. While female the Idealists* feel SERIOUSLY reluctant to dominate their male partner due to it being unmasculine to her; she may allow the Survivalist* men dominate her, which makes a Idealists* female submit where she wouldn’t naturally, and the Idealists* male to dominate where he wouldn’t naturally dominate.

Agreement to prioritize family over sex.

Another confusing element in some “catch” the Idealists* men is that they have submitted to the idea that women don’t want sex, and if they wish to be perfect husbands (as they tend to want to) they will submit to the notion of their life exists for the purposes of the family, but IF they could secure the love of a woman who wishes to “use them” for sex rather than as a family man, they’d accept the idea screaming hallelujah and liberation.

the Survivalist* has relationships for their birth family and (childhood) friends, not for sex, and they insist their partners accept this role in their life. As the Survivalist* women are VERY hands-on compared to the Idealists* women, they tend to be the ones who get to marry the high-level Cat-men, who have learned to cope the best they can. What’s more, these type of men will OFFER this same deal to the Idealists* women: “Here’s my hand in marriage, I will guide you, give you children, protect your children…” and the Idealists* woman feels nothing but confused: “What? Uh, where’s the sex? Let’s just do the sex part for now. What? No sex? What ARE YOU?!” the Idealists* women don’t even understand a man is interested in her if he tries to skip the sex part and marry her straight away as a high-level the Idealists* man truly in love might attempt to do.

the Survivalist* tries to establish (and offer) security, and the Idealists* wants to establish (and offer) pleasure.

The Survivalist* may have noticed that the best way to get a self-confident the Idealists* to protect them is through giving them mind-blowing sex. The Idealists* may not be too… Experimental with their sex stuff, they can be quite happy with steamy missionary, because they’re not worried about how well they’re doing at sex. It’s just what they do naturally. The Survivalist*, however, they can go to lengths to make their sex game stellar. I’m not saying that the Idealists* doesn’t put effort into it (they certainly play on their looks A LOT) but the motivation is different. The Idealists* doesn’t look for SECURITY, like literally someone to protect them, they don’t use sex as a MEANS TO AN END like the Survivalist* does. To the Survivalist*, sex is a tool to get what they want, money, power, family, clothes, and status – all of which, to the Survivalist*pells out “security”, which is NOT why the Idealists* does anything. The Idealists* prioritizes fun, excitement, and experiences; pleasurable feelings of all kinds over security ANY DAY of the week.

Ultimately, both types can want the exact same thing, but their emergency-level priorities differ.

Both the Idealists* and the Survivalist* want to get to the SAME ultimate bliss end goal, but while they’re in an insecure position (whether they’re seeking security itself or a secured source of continued pleasure) they are compromising on different things while getting there. The Survivalist* don’t care much for sex as long as security is there. The Idealists* will sacrifice sex, too, if they get a good intellectual company to compensate. The Idealists* will also compromise on PERMANENCE, where the Survivalist* will not (want to), as in the Idealists* will form temporary bonds when they can’t find the ultimate bond, thinking “this will do me for now” or “see how it goes; maybe they’ll be better than I expect, I can always dump them later”. The Survivalist* compromises on how much effort they need to put in manipulating the other party to stay with them; how much work will they have to put in to keep the girl/guy. The Idealists* will sacrifice their freedom for temporary pleasures, but may soon find themselves trapped in a situation they didn’t anticipate to become a long-term thing.

The Survivalist* does not fantasize of love everlasting. They don’t truly BELIEVE such a thing exists. That’s what makes them insistent on banking on permanence over true love. The Idealists*, however, truly believe in perfect everlasting love and suffers every day that they don’t live with this person of their dreams. That is why they will break any relationship that they know not to be what they’re seeking, quite happily, just to free themselves to go look for their ultimate lover. The Idealists* always feels the Survivalist* settles for less than what is available, while the Survivalist* feels the Idealists* are crying for the moon of the sky.

As the Survivalist* does not believe in this ultimate love that the Idealists* is always seeking, they don’t feel like they’re compromising when they’re getting into permanent relationships, they simply believe they’re established and settled. The Idealists* does not feel that way UNTIL they are with their ultimate lover, their True Emotion Mirror, perhaps because they know what it is or would be like out of past life experiences with one.

Priority relationship: the Family or a Lover?

This one is a good divider; As the Survivalist* prioritize security over all else, their primary relationship is with their own blood family members, who, to them, are the most SECURE, safe relationship (if they have a family left at all. If not, they try to establish something equal to it). The Idealists* always prioritizes their MOST PLEASURABLE relationships. In childhood, it’s their parents, in their childhood and teen years, it will gradually sift to their best friends, but in adulthood, it will sift to their (best) sexual partners. This sift does not happen in the Survivalist*.

Therefore the ultimate difference between the Idealists* and the Survivalist* is the past life experience of Ultimate Love.

The reason why it’s so difficult to put these two types into categories, and why the separation is so elusive, yet SO OBVIOUS that the Idealists* especially can tell rather easily which type is which, is that the difference is based on the past life knowledge of what true love is for them and why they seek it. Clearly, the Survivalist* has experience of what it feels like to be in a secure, safe marriage, but this, to the Idealists* is no longer good enough. They’ve experienced the Ultimate secure marriage, which is profoundly sexual, loving, full, pleasurable, filled with lust and joy, the fantasy fiction movie -type that then ends dramatically on some dragon attack or some dark overlord crawling out of the depths of Hell itself to interrupt it all. You know the stuff. To the Idealists*, this is real, but the Survivalist* kinda laughs at it and thinks it’s simply that – fantasy fiction.

But no. It’s real.

Unfortunately, the Survivalist* also doesn’t understand that if they see a couple or particularly a polygamous group in love like this, they can’t just put their hand up and say they want in and expect to be included. They think everything from a security and unity perspective when the Idealists* has a few hoops to jump through and a thousand disqualifiers before they consider anyone a party to their perfect love affair. These qualifiers are not the same for everybody, but the Survivalist* seriously need to learn to respect them… And the Idealists* needs to learn to play the game when the Survivalist* have no respect for their privacy.

Which one are you?

Which is more important?

1. Pleasure (emotional, sexual, and intellectual…) (With a primary source of security: secure income.)
2. Security (primarily physical security and security and status as a community/family member)? (With the primary source of pleasure: food and family relationships.)

1: the Idealists*

2: the Survivalist*

Subscribe to get a Daily Message