Don't know how to edit the post to correct this error

"Setting boundaries like saying she's not allowed to text/see other particular men is also mate guarding to some extent"

Mate guarding is superficial. Boundary's are internal. Let me explain.

Above plate level and beyond is when you start to screen bad behavior.

She does something you don't agree with, then you demote her back to plate status. Its a internal response to unagreeable behavior. By your actions you treat her like a plate.

Mate guarding is what betas do when they panic or don't get what they want. They lash out externally to the chick. For example, a women higher on your commitment list is cheating on you, or showing confirmed red flags. A appropriate response to that would be demoting her to a plate internally and (acting accordingly). Just not bringing her to the standard, commitment, and benefit you would bring a better chick to.

A mate guarding reaction would be you spamming her and calling her out on it, or preventing the other from seeking additional mates, or prevent potential additional mates by some blocking behavior.

Its like knowing a dog is not a sheep, and treating the dog like a dog.... vs trying to raise a dog to be a sheep, knowing its a dog and not a sheep.

Before commitment, you rarely ever need to vocalize your boundary's. A strong pull works better to create a sense of "demotion" to the other party. A obvious pull would be more effective at helping the other "understand" the mistake, and work to make it better if the other is truly all for you. Then a push after effort or good behavior is shown to make your standard clear. Even a light 'compliment' on good behavior in a push works more effectively than mate guarding when done right.

You keep screening a chick with this demote/plate framework for red flags, and eventually promote her to LTR. This is the first step to setting the boundary's for yourself. By then it should already be clear without words what your boundary's are. She should "get it" and you wont have to externally push rules and boundary's or guard anything because she will be guarding herself by herself. You also vocalize your boundary when commiting. Setting her red flags the precedent and hard line. If she crosses it, then she's done.

I don't think there's a difference. They just stem from different sources. In mate guarding you are trying to ensure paternity. In boundaries you are trying to ensure your mating strategy.

When you become exclusive, do not give way your only bargaining chip lightly. When she pushes for it, you let her know upfront that you are not exclusive with girls who... party with other dudes... hang out alone with other dudes... call their exes... broadcast sexual availability on IG... get slutted up and do girls night out... etc. Don't be controlling about it, just frame out what is required for exclusivity from you.

This isn't mate guarding. Mate guarding is related to a specific person, not a generality. If she wants to be your girl, then she is expected to mate guard herself for you. You're not going to say shit about anything she does. If she crosses the line, demote her and go fuck other girls. Mate guarding is when a hot guy comes up to your party at the bar and all the betas put their arms around their girl and give her a peck on the cheek because they feel threatened and they want to claim their territory. It's throwing a tantrum because you thought she was flirting too much with Chad at the company picnic.

Setting boundaries is done so that you don't need to mate guard. You can establish terms, and whenever she wants to bounce, you have a clear line in the sand not some ambiguous shit based on feels. The reason boundaries get harder to set is because guys cave and set bad precedents. Plus the following conversation goes much smoother if the lines are established from the beginning of exclusivity.

Girl: "I would never think of Gary that way. He's my good friend from high school. I'm just going camping with him for the weekend. Don't you trust me?"

Me: "Of course I trust you, but I'm not exclusive with girls who hang out alone with other dudes and then get drunk/high and sleepover with them."

Girl: "You're such a controlling bully."

Me: "Feel free to do whatever you like. I won't try to stop you. Gary sounds like a cool, fun guy. If you decide to go camping with him, we won't be exclusive anymore."

Girl: "Why are you so jealous of Gary? Why are you so insecure?"

Me: "I know you would never fuck Gary. If anything I think you're being cruel. I can't imagine being him and drooling over you all night, having to look at you walk around with that amazing ass and never get a taste. Regardless, if you decide to go, we won't be exclusive anymore."

Girl: "He doesn't see me like that. We made out once in the band room, but that was years ago. He's got a wife a kids now, and he would never mess that up. Besides, they're having lots of problems and he really needs a friend right now."

Me: "Are you still talking about this? Nothing you could say could convince me to be exclusive with a girl who does sleepovers with other dudes. It is a code that I live by. You should figure out what you're going to do and let me know."

Her goal in the interaction is always to get your buy-in and approval so that she doesn't feel guilty about it, and the precedent that this was allowed in the past is established. Never give her that. If her date with Gary is that important to her, then she wasn't a keeper anyway.

Enforce boundaries....... that's mate guarding up to a point, but it shouldn't be in a weak way.

It's not hovering around her, it's clarifying that she has to be faithful.