RendHeaven

???

Hey I just read your comment on soosmiteah's journal, and wanted to casually respond without derailing her journal... I hope it's ok if I post here? I think that this is the biggest issue that anybody with any great idea will face... Streaming/Video does not erase this problem in the slightest - even on twitch you'd be competing for eyeballs day in and out. I have a buddy who's been streaming his video game playthroughs on twitch for years now and only gets like 3 viewers per stream lol (now to be fair he's doing a lot of things unoptimally, but my point is that the struggle for eyeballs is universal and inescapable). This is fucked up but 100% valid lol. I've noticed a really interesting phenomenon (at least on this forum) where female members on average gain nearly double the followers as their male counterparts -per post count (ESPECIALLY if they have a face-shot in their profile image). I can only theorize, because the "facts" of this matter are vague, but I am guessing that female members effortlessly follow each other out of a sense of empathy and shared perspective, while male members will also follow female members because of pretty profile face shots. I mean there are girls on here with content post counts in the low 100s that already have almost 10 (majority male) followers, like dwarniel, barbara, jessichell, etc. They all have extremely high post-to-follower ratios! On the contrary, I find that women don't follow men as often due to a disconnect of perspective (not to mention that there are many many more men here, so if a woman is to follow a man it's more likely that they'd go for someone established like Nahm rather than a nobody with only 100 posts). In other words, I don't think it's possible for a new male here with no prior clout to replicate the high post-to-follower ratio of a semiattractive girl after just 100 posts, (unless each post was somehow GODLY in quality a la TJReeves or BeingFrankYang) and I think we can reasonably attribute this disparity in attention to visual appearance... All in all leads me to the half-baked conclusion that "looks," especially if you're a woman, is definitely a valid way to get your message more heard. That's not good or bad or right or wrong, it just is what it is...

Dear God this entire post speaks to my soul on a molecular level. My parents had the exact same parenting "strategy" as you're describing... and I've dealt with the same personality shadow that that produces. I'm determined to end the generational ignorance here and now: I'm prioritizing trust, acceptance, and love over "correct action" with any children I ever have responsibility for.

Smile with your eyes. Words come and go

@Flowerfaeiry yeah pretty much

I'm so relieved that you're gay lmao

Interesting... can you elaborate? This goes against conventional wisdom, do you think you can anticipate counterarguments and articulate why "emotions = logic" nonetheless?

Lol there just happens to be a new episode addressing this exact question... But long story short: Love = Acceptance. Acceptance = To Embrace. To Embrace (in the Highest sense), is to Contain Wholly. To Contain Wholly is to exclude nothing. God, as All Things, excludes nothing, and thereby Contains Wholly (All Things). Therefore, through simple substitution, we arrive at the insight that God (as All Things) literally equals (The Highest) Love.

~~imagination~~

lol

@MatteO22 You seem to have a giant shadow against submission. Consider that submission (coming from a pure heart) IS ultimate feminine empowerment, but I don't believe you recognize this since you work so hard to denounce and disown it. Not to mention that you made the connection between submissiveness and inferiority, to which I say, "says who?" Be careful of conflating the full scope of submissiveness with our stupid cultural notions of submissiveness. At the highest level, all finitude submits and surrenders to Infinity, and such an act of submission is Greater than any petty human domination. Likewise, all degrees and gradations of human submissiveness mimic this Divine Process (some degrees and gradations more pure than others). When one realizes this, there is no room left to ascribe "inferiority."

To "come to [any] conclusions" IS to define. Without first defining (explicitly or otherwise), there is no thing of which to make a conclusion out of. So you can't really separate definition from conclusion, which you seem to want to do. It's like you're saying: "better to draw a square that isn't a quadrilateral." --- But maybe I'm being overly technical, I feel I understand what you mean to say

I agree with the bold, but let's be real - there does seem to be a strong correlation between self-identified femininity and sexual submissiveness. No, that doesn't mean that the feminine is weak, lol. I never said that. It's just an acknowledgement of general social trends, void of value judgement. So, does all femininity literally equate to submissiveness in a one to one ratio? Obviously not. But at the same time, to say that femininity "has nothing to do with submission" is naive.

@Raphael AUGHH THE DISCOMFORT BURNSS

Bingo. Might as well try it... you're not alone... --- @Bob Seeker On it

~~just being feels sooo gooood~~ ?? ?? ??

Of course! But how often do we see this?

I feel like this is a toxic judgement, but my instinct is to agree. From my POV, every single heterosexual male "friend" that a conventionally attractive woman has is covertly gaining proximity in hopes to fuck. While I continue to (lightly) hold this belief as true, I won't weaponize this "truth" to judge women's decisions. To me, it's a no-brainer for hot girls to instantly disown their straight male friends - "if I were a hot girl..." I'd say - but then I stop, because maybe she has different needs than my myopic male lense of worldly sense-making. And so I honor her autonomy.

Pardon me as I rant about myself for a few paragraphs - I had a similar thought once. I thought my niche could be to "Help young straight men realize the virtues of SD stage green" - "virtues" including all things social justice but also including helping them to get in touch with their emotions, to help them be less forcefully opinionated, more open & listening, energy work, and helping them to feel firsthand the power of expanding your circle of concern outwards to others, etc. And I thought that my medium could be youtube, since that way these guys can literally watch me embodying strength + happiness (instead of conceptually preaching at them through an article, not to mention our generation is addicted to youtube lmao). I thought I'd be in a unique position to cover this area of self-help/spirituality, as I've been that abrasive SD orange guy during my high school years. Also, I have the optics (straight male, capable of debating rationally if need be) to convince those very people who need help the most... orange hates listening to green. But maybe they'd listen to me lol. And every day I hear more and more people (especially women, but also people like forestluv) complaining about the lack of feminine integration in the male populous... I'm personally still conflicted though, because in hindsight that vision is small-fry compared to my true potential. Teaching orange about green feels like babysitting when I could be building a rocket to mars. But maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, I don't have actual results in the social world yet so maybe I'll have to do some babysitting first. --- Tl;dr - yes teaching SD is 100% valid, if not an excellent way to start out. Quite the opposite. You're far too broad. Try to narrow it down to address a specific problem you see in this world. Why you? And who's gonna listen to you? What specifically do they get out of it, and what does the world get out of it? --- I also want to mention that you have one of the few journals on this site that I actively look forward to reading. I don't mean to box you into writing as a medium with this comment, rather just trying to point out that you have a unique strength. More specifically, your strength isn't necessarily writing per se, but something more like presentation - you tend to dig deep consistently, because that's just who you are. You simultaneously showcase your "flaws" but then have a meta-awareness of how you're bullshitting yourself, and then you proceed to forgive and embrace. It's like watching Self-Love work being done in real time. Usually people only show the before-and-after (I'm guilty of this myself) but you're enthusiastic about the during. I recommend therefore, that your LP should incorporate this strength - presenting to the world your during-process, as opposed to a stark before-and-after. If you go forward with this advice, not everyone will come along for the ride (let's face it: many people just want a simple before-and-after), but your target audience will be 1000x more loyal to you, and I'd bet your impact and self-satisfaction will multiply likewise

Believe it or not, these qualities are not mutually exclusive with the act of "picking up" women. In fact, the real "art" imo comes from deeply embodying these qualities. Sadly, correct. I believe you. Just keep your heart open - virtuous men exist

@mivafofa EW, DEAR LORD. I deeply apologize on behalf of all men

Has this actually happened to you?? Because that "pick up artist" is a garbage, shit-tier picker-upper (not even an artist lmao). The whole point of pick up (done right) is that the man meet all of the woman's emotional needs first and foremost!

lolol

@ivankiss So has she taken the guy up on his advances?

Mhm, it fucks with me sometimes when I understand that nothing is not-mastery - or more directly, everything is mastery - by virtue of sheer existence alone. And yet, sometimes we are able to distinguish what seems to relatively be not-mastery (a noobie at a craft making obvious errors, lacking experience, holding back, etc.) So what really is the core of "mastery," as a self-consistent thing? It might be useful to distinguish an uppercase M - Mastery (the "highest" existential mastery, as you note) apart from a lowercase m - mastery (the mundane human kind) but even then we have to notice at what point the uppercase blends into the lowercase and vice versa. And now slap on the additional twist of subjective perception regarding the relative... is it wholly up to me to declare things "mastery" or not according to personal whim? Or is "mastery" something beyond personal preference and bias? But if it is "greater" than myself, then why am I unable to untangle myself from the object of inquiry? Sometimes it feels futile to talk about mastery dualistically as you notice how your own categories begin to break down. But at the end of the day we know when we feel mastery nonetheless... so we know that it is, at the very least, as a private experience. It's all so interconnected and yet so lonely