RendHeaven

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,000

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RendHeaven

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, Raphael said:

    Being Introverted in an Extroverted World

    I often had the feeling of being hated for being an introvert. Society glorifies so much extroversion that it doesn't feel normal to be introverted. Everywhere on the internet, on TV, on Ads, we see extroverted people doing extroverted things. We see celebrities, people partying, people going to concerts, people in groups, charismatic entrepreneurs, etc. but we don't see that many quiet introverts. I never liked noisy environments. I only went to nightclubs three times in my entire life, it was fun, but extremely draining and I didn't like drunk people and people throwing their alcoholic drinks on the dance floor. The only thing that I like to do and that qualifies more as an extroverted activity is doing speeches/presentations in front of a crowd no matter its size. That's something that I'm very good at and that I love to do when I'm very passionate about the subject and have well prepared it.

    I got insulted in my life for being an introvert. I have been asked so much in the past why I was so quiet, but this question has always been strange for me because my mind never felt quiet. I remember a cousin telling my dad that he should do something for me and my dad responding brutally "He doesn't want to go out". I remember a teacher asking students what they did during their weekend and the students responding with extroverted activities where I would say awkwardly that I stayed at home.

    I had difficulties understanding the hate that I got from a certain number of extroverts in my life. If extroverts like to be loud, go out, and party that's fine as long as they respect my privacy. People are different and have preferences in life, but it seems like many extroverts don't understand that. Many of them just disliked me for not being as outgoing as them, they didn't even try to understand me, they just disrespected me. I remember one day being at a restaurant with some extroverts and being so drained that when someone asked me if I wanted a dessert, I responded: "I'll swallow everything that you want.". They all exploded in laughter in my face and responded that they understand why I have no friends. I was so exhausted that I was starting to have difficulties communicating properly and forming thoughts.

    I want to end up here by making the differentiation between being introverted and being socially anxious because there is a difference. If I'm honest with myself, I do have social anxiety, so this is true that I'm avoiding people and I lack social skills. However, even if someone has social difficulties I don't understand the need to put a person down for that. If you're an extrovert, you can help someone with social difficulties by just asking a few questions, showing some kindness, and in return, this person will love you. Help make things better if you can. Also, this is not an excuse for someone with social difficulties or me to not take action and always wait for people. Personal efforts still need to be made and I recognize that I need to make them. I'm personally not handicapped in life, I can do most of the things that I want to do. However, when it comes to making friends and sharing about myself I feel anxious and weird. I noticed that I tend to rationalize by telling myself "it's normal, I'm into self-actualization", but I think there's still a possibility when someone has great social skills, a very likable personality, and spiral wizardry skills to open up to people and being appreciated. A person like this would be like a magnet able to attract almost anyone and that's very powerful.

     

    Haha wow story of my life. Esp. the bold

  6. Posted

    4 hours ago, kinesin said:

    Part of the reason is because for me, such insights aren't usually shared, they're created solely for the process of my own development.  I have a folder on my computer containing thousands of .txt files where I write my thoughts regarding such things (some of which similar to the content of this thread), and nobody else sees them because I never wrote them to be shared, but rather to gain insight through the process of writing.  I'm a big believer in the power of writing for the development of insight, however I understand that most of the time when people write, it's being posted directly for others to read.  With this perspective in mind, I believe OP's motivation was to further develop his own understanding by putting it in writing.  Writing is only half of the equation, however, and when sharing writing, interpretation should be the main consideration.  My earlier comment prompts OP to look deeper into the 'interpretation' side of this thread.

    I do indeed have the idea that ideas shouldn't be shared until they're 'perfected'.  For me this means if I write about something, I generally won't consider sharing the idea with others until I see that it still remains true at least a few years down the line.  What's the value in sharing realizations only to further realize down the line that they were missing some core component of insight, or rooted too firmly in a misunderstanding?  When I mention 'value' here I'm speaking about true value to others, insofar as 'true value' means insights which will genuinely bring real truth and understanding to others.

    Interesting, thanks for sharing 

  7. Posted

    2 minutes ago, kinesin said:

    Think of it this way - before you had these insights, if you would have read a thread like this, what would you have gained from it? 

    Lots.

    2 minutes ago, kinesin said:

    Would you have taken onboard all of the intended communications? 

    Of course not. No "intended communication" is EVER fully "taken onboard."

    3 minutes ago, kinesin said:

    Would it have influenced your development in any major way?

    Doesn't matter. Genuine sharing doesn't micromanage influence.

    You seem to have this attitude that insights aren't worth sharing unless they've achieved peak profundity, but that seems a lil' neurotic tbh.

    All refined teachings started somewhere.

    The expectation that people should withhold all insights until they've found a way to perfectly formulate it (if at all) comes off as resisting reality...

  8. Posted · Edited by RendHeaven

    40 minutes ago, justfortoday said:

    Doesn't exist. Death has always been a first-person experience you are having of others "dying", but no one has died ever, because no one has lived, ever. Again, it's an illusion.

    The Ultimate Truth.

    It's a shame that you can't share it with anyone on a social level since death is presumed "real" and "bad."

    But then again, there's nobody to even share this insight with anyway... ;)

  12. Posted

    1 minute ago, 4201 said:

    "Being good with women" is a fake skill

    Being "good with women" vs being "bad with women" is the difference between women throwing themselves at you and saying things like "I love you," "lets hang out" vs being completely ignored or pushed away... maybe from certain perspectives, this distinction is "fake," but from other perspectives (mainly, the biased survival perspective of the typical hetero male) this distinction feels like life or death!

    4 minutes ago, 4201 said:

    If all of this charisma stuff essentially comes from a place of neediness that will be felt and none of this charisma will matter. On top of that being charismatic essentially comes naturally if you let go of all that neediness and insecurity.

    Exactly.

    I'm advocating that dudes learn genuine charisma, not compensating charisma.

    6 minutes ago, 4201 said:

    What makes you unattractive is not your lack of "women skills" or "charisma" but insecurity.

    I don't really make a distinction between charisma and lack of insecurity - these go hand in hand.

  14. Posted

    1 minute ago, 4201 said:

    That's just your assumption.

    You're right... at the same time though, I'd like to imagine that I at least have an *informed* assumption.

    Attracting straight women as a straight man is actually not rocket science(!!!), so even though we're all fundamentally assuming things about our dear Hardkill, I think we can still strongly point towards what needs work, without waffling in uncertainty.

    Maybe I'm naive but I sincerely believe that all guys can learn to "get good" with women because charisma is trainable & not static.

  15. Posted · Edited by RendHeaven

    9 minutes ago, 4201 said:

    Nothing sucks more of a personality than being the guy who gets off saying shit like this lol

    Just saying what needs to be said. The personality is clearly the problem, it's frankly a disservice that nobody has brought it up.

    You actually have to suck astronomically to not get women while "having the body of a fitness model"

  16. Posted

    7 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

    I already hit the gym like crazy for over 7-8 years and I close to having the body of a fitness model and did martial arts with solid dedication and commitment for over 13 years. I've also done long distance running training consistently for over 3 years now. 

    35 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

    Honestly, it's because I get easily demoralized after getting constantly rejected by countless women from everywhere. It often makes me question whether I will be able to improve my skills with women to a significant degree or will I will always just have to rely on luck to hopefully get another girl who has chemistry with me.

    lol yikes man your personality must really suck :(:D

  17. Posted · Edited by RendHeaven

    Does gravity exist for a fish? I ask this sincerely on a literal, "physical" level.

    You see, as humans we would say, "Oh yeah gravity always exists for all beings, and any being that denies the existence of gravity is just not intelligent enough."

    But such a narrative is inextricably tied to our experience of being a human - and very conveniently so.

    I dare y'all to contemplate with extreme seriousness the possibility that if you were a fish, gravity would literally, "physically" cease to exist (such that it was never even there to begin with), and this "nonexistence" would have nothing to do with your "limited intelligence."

    (Sidenote: there's nothing actually physical about gravity but I'm just phrasing things this way to appeal to our common notion that gravity is independent of our minds)

    Or in other words, notice that the absolute conviction that we have of the mind-independent existence of a so-called "gravity" is necessarily relative to our frame of reference of "being a human."

    No human - No gravity. Period. Not even as a word game, but in terms of literal existence.

    Obviously, don't just believe me though, work through this yourself. Matters of Existence/Being are wholly on you to investigate - no scientist or external authority can bestow knowledge of Beingness upon you, for you yourself are Being first and foremost; the authority of the hypothetical scientist here in regards to Being is necessarily second-order.

    (Science will, however, measure and explain relationships between the preassumed existence of two or more things, and insofar as you also preassume the existence of these same things, the scientist has more knowledge and authority than you specifically with regards to measuring and explaining these aforementioned things.)

  20. Posted · Edited by RendHeaven

    6 hours ago, vladorion said:

    You have to realize that consciousness is also a self. In true no self, even consciousness is a dream.

    So no matter how infinitely conscious you become, it's all within the dream.

    True god realization puts an end to this chasing of deeper and deeper levels.

    "You have to realize that a dream is also a self. In true no self, even a dream is just consciousness."

    "So no matter how wholly you escape the dream, it's all within consciousness."

    "True God Realization puts an end to this simple binary notion of asleep vs awake."