LastThursday

One of the biggest hurdles I overcame is having a victim mindset. For a long time I felt like I wanted to lash out and put everyone in their place, and tell them how stupid they had been for treating me badly and neglecting me. This applied to my parents, siblings, family, friends, and in fact everyone. Although, I never did confront anyone directly, I instead just withdrew myself from everyone. If I couldn't be treated well, they didn't deserve me in their lives. I think watching one of Leo's videos on the subject was the tipping point. That was a few years ago. I then knew I was being an ungrateful selfish bastard. I'm still one, but I'm an "aware ungrateful selfish bastard" lol. The awareness I've gained is that once everything is stripped back, I feel a sense of lack of love. The word "lack" is interesting because it presupposes that I'm actually entitled to love from people, which I'm actually not. That realisation has felt like a dagger to the heart, but it was also both sobering and liberating. Most of the love we/I want is conditional. We want to be loved in a way we understand. It's not enough that we simply get love in whatever form it comes, it has to be meaningful to us directly. Before I even stumbled upon Actualized I had a form of hypnotherapy. I was in a low place at the time. One of the things that emphatically stuck in my mind about the sessions was that I was actually lovable. At the time it struck me as bloody obvious, but it also had a deep effect on me - it was something that I'd forgotten - I felt I'd spent a long time not being loved. That forgetfulness had infected my very being, I really didn't love myself very much either I'd forgotten how to and maybe I never really learned how to in the first place. I opened my eyes gradually to the snippets of love around me. Despite being withdrawn myself, friends and family would still contact me, that was love. I would just turn up to see me my mum, and she would feed me and let me sleep over and would be happy to see me - that was love. The guy in the coffee shop who knows what coffee I order, that's love. The friend who buys me a CD or gives me a book for my birthday, that's love. The sister who prompts me now and then, despite me snubbing her for five years, that's love. The strangers who gave me their condolences when my mum passed away, that's love. The friend who emphatically said he would be there with me at my mum's funeral, that's love. Love is everywhere. What triggered me to write this is that there have been a few events recently that jarred me: marriages, pregnancies, people getting on with their lives. These people were/are significant to me in one way or another. I feel both envy, out on a limb, and as if I'm simply observing the world doing its thing without it ever involving me. I want and need to stop feeling detached and blowing in the breeze and unloved, instead I need to be in the flow of the river. But for that I need to change my mindset, but I'm not there yet. I find this amusing and insightful to my condition:

Go listen to a language you don't understand at all. Only then do you realise how arbitrary it is, we are all producing gibberish with our mouths. In that sense it is empty. Even language having rules (grammar) doesn't stop it from being gibberish. The only thing that gives language any meaning is because it is anchored to reality. Language needs reality in order to make any sense. The thing is, reality is also gibberish (arbitrary). It also looks like it has rules (a grammar of reality, a.k.a. physics). When we're born we have hardly any understanding of reality whatsoever. So what is reality anchored to that gives it meaning? How do we come to understand reality? There is only one answer: there is an intelligence to/inside/part of reality that gives it meaning. That is how a new born is able to bootstrap reality into something meaningful.

After many years of soaking in this spirituality stuff and what Leo and others teach in general, something is bubbling away beneath the surface. I'll spell it out, it's my unease at nihilism and talk of the void and nothingness and getting rid of the ego. I'll call it zeroism the sake of lumping it altogether. I understand at a tacit level what all this zeroism is about. Quickly: being attached to a something creates suffering, and a something is pure illusion or more accurately it is not at the root of reality. Firstly, suffering is the human condition, there is suffering and all the things associated with it at all levels, great and small, simple and complex. Pushing past suffering is one of the greatest means for actualising yourself. Secondly, there appears to be more to reality than meets the eye, the immediate sensation of a material world with objects and people is not to be trusted - it is a house of cards which can be toppled over and it should be toppled over - so that you can truly be spiritually actualised - enlightened or awakened. Non-dual speak frankly bores me. For every person that says something is occuring, there is someone that says nothing is occuring. I've even argued myself for nothing going on, using logical thought. It's like eating strawberry ice cream and then someone saying "you're wrong there is no strawberry ice cream, there's nothing there". This is just rubbish. I can't vouch for the experiences of others, because I'm not them (yes I am a separate sentient human being), but strawberry ice cream exists. If I go to my local shop and buy it, I can experience it any time I want. And that's my point. Consciousness or whatever this is exists in all its glory, it is here, right here, right now. To deny that existence or argue against it or to say it's anything different to what it is, is utter delusion. There is meaning to reality, there is something, there is movement and colour, there is ice cream - because reality is all of it, it's allowable, it's not illusion, it's not maya, it's not nothingness or whatever. I exist, because I experience myself existing. Stuff is happening because I experience it (I can feel you all cringing now). I can accept that reality is just experiencing itself and that an "I" is unnecessary, but the fact remains that there is an "I" right here at this moment. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of delusion and ignorance but this is to all to do with the content of reality. However, reality itself is not delusion, illusion, nothingness, or anything else. Reality is exactly as it presents itself right now. If reality presents itself differently in ten minutes' time then that is reality. It's really very very simple. Why all the unnecessary misdirection of zeroism? Trying to overcome suffering is really about utility and actualisation. Actualisation is 99% about the content of reality and deconstructing everything, so it is all utility. You're actualising because it serves you. You are the one that wants to get enlightened, telling yourself otherwise is silly. After a while it should become blatantly obvious that everything is constructed in some way: it's made of parts, it has rules, it fits within a greater whole. Most of human drama stems from the inability to extricate itself from its constructions. But the fact remains that constructions are reality, they're not illusions, they are simply things that can be shown to be arbitrary - that being the greatest single realisation to have. Yes the content of reality is completely arbitrary, but it still exists, I'm here to witness it. You get me?

There's a number of tropes I suffer from in my dreams: trains, sex, exploration and levitation. Deconstructing each one would be interesting in itself, but I'll talk about levitation. There seems to be two basic types of levitation, levitation of myself and levitation of objects. In my dreams the self-levitation is the most prevalent. Again, this splits into two types: forward motion and vertical motion. The forward motion usually starts off by walking normally, but then at some point there is a realisation that I'm floating along, legs tucked up a little and a few feet off the ground. This sort of levitation feels effortless and very natural. If I wake up soon after having this type of dream, I feel a sense of disappointment that it's not possible in real waking life. That part of me that believes in magick knows it's possible in real waking life too. The other type of self-levitation is the vertical type. This is different. It seems to take a concerted effort to maintain. There's a sense of wanting to take in the whole scene, so I focus on shooting myself vertically upwards. Sometimes it works and I go high high up, sometimes I only go up a few yards. But it's unstable, I have to think hard to maintain my height, but nearly always I sink back down again. Very rarely I can go high up enough to go over buildings, although most times there's very little lateral motion. There's never any acrobatics, I'm always upright, I never fly like Superman would. What about object levitation? This is extremely rare and like the vertical type takes concerted effort. I can only think of one clear dreaming instance, but there may have been others. In this particular instance I was trying to "float" playing cards by lightly flicking them away from me. When I managed it, they would float an inch or two above the table, and drift slowly across until they fell. In both the levitating objects and vertical levitation there is a sense of concentrated intention on my part, and I have to get myself into a certain mental state in order to achieve it. The levitation in these cases comes from me. In the forward levitation case, it comes from outside of me, just like walking doesn't require mental effort either. I could laugh it all off as dream stuff, but there are definite "laws" to dream levitation and there's a strong sense that it would be perfectly possible to do awake, given the right mental state and lots of practice. The only thing is wasting my time on something that is probably impossible: why invent aircraft and maglev trains? I'm not sure what's more deluded, trying to levitate or giving up and not trying to levitate?

Note to self: experiments in dream levitation.

Yeah we British are a funny lot. We like the idea of monarchy as a whole, but we don't like the idea of the monarch having any actual power. It's interesting that there's still a split in attitude towards the monarchy, ever since the English civil war. You've got a minority who want rid, a large majority of those who couldn't care less either way, and a fairly large majority who want them to stay. My guess is if the Queen dies, things will carry on as normal, no drama. There's no crisis of succession, someone will be constitutional King. It's hard to say how much a new monarch will affect politics, my guess is not very much. There is some argument for becoming a republic in order to reduce spending on the royal family. But we'd probably just replace the Queen with a president, who will be cheaper, but play exactly the same role in terms of parliament. What we really should get rid of is the House of Lords, that is definitely an anachronism in the 21st century, but that's a different conversation.

NLP has it covered: https://www.hgi.org.uk/resources/delve-our-extensive-library/anxiety-ptsd-and-trauma/fast-cure-phobia-and-trauma-evidence And for the visual types:

@Late Boomer it's the journey not the destination. It seems like you are already on the path, even if you just stumbled onto it like most of us have. It doesn't matter if you're late to it or early to it, most of this stuff is not about the age of the body anyway, it's spirituality and actualisation after all. It's not bad to introspect and see how things could have been different, it gives you perspective. But it's strikes me that to get your mojo back this sort of negative introspection will only sap that energy away. Health, depression, life circumstances, state of mind are all interlinked and feedback on each other - you are a unified being. Start researching deeply and improving on each of those areas where you can. Make that your purpose in the short term, so you have a strong base to actualise yourself.

When was the first time you did a thing? We don't think about a lot of the things we do every day or even occasionally. Each thing had to start somewhere and somewhen, but most of it is lost to memory. Some things are memorable enough to stick in the memory for whatever reasons. I have a feeling that these memories need to be fed and watered at times, they've stuck around for their own inherent reasons. Here's a few of my firsts: I remember vaguely being helped by one of my parents cutting out shapes from magazines and making a collage. I was probably about three or so. Ok, it wasn't all me, but it was my first bit of art. Even the greats have helpers! I've liked art ever since, and was good at school, but it never really gripped my imagination as much as other things. I do have an artistic side to me though, and it started then. I first started coding when I nagged my parents to death to buy me one of those new fangled home computers. They caved in for my tenth birthday, and since it's close to Christmas, I only got the one big present that year. I was ecstatic. The last time I coded was yesterday, as it's my job. I can honestly say that one present changed my life. I still love coding 38 years later! I first learned to read when I was around four I think. I distinctly remember being fascinated by letters and symbols of all sorts at a young age. I remember asking my dad what all these little letters meant, and he patiently described that each letter had a different sound and went through them all. Luckily for me Spanish is pretty much phonetic, and I found it easy to remember. My dad recalls that I learned to read overnight and I've been reading every since. A few years later I learned to read English. And, I still enjoy reading and playing with words very much - that's why I'm journaling I think. Around the time I learned to read, I used to play with my dad's calculator. Electronic calculators were a novelty in the 70's. I had an intense fascination with the thing. It engaged the senses for me. It was tactile with chunky buttons that made a satisfying click, and the display was glowing red filaments, which seemed alive to me. Again, my dad had to cater to my curiosity and explain numbers and arithmetic and trig. The trig I never really understood, it was too much for my young brain. But the numbers and arithmetic I could understand well enough. I would click away for hours. To this day I love the abstraction of maths, and I did Engineering at university for that reason. It's also the reason I was so taken with computers. Around nine or ten years old. My parents decided to buy me and my sister an electronic organ. I remember distinctly going to the nearest shopping centre and looking around in the music shop there. I'm not sure why they decided to buy one, it certainly didn't come from us kids. Saying that, my dad was/is musical having played the guitar on and off forever. And I would have tried playing his guitar at an earlier age, and he taught me how to shape chords and stuff, but the memory is too vague. The first time I played a keyboard was then however. I have had a keyboard of some description my entire life since. The only hiatus was at university, but then I regularly used to jam in the music rooms there. I would say I'm a reasonable player, and given the right training I would have been amazing - and I sort of regret this. The last time I played was a few days ago. A bit later at age 12 or 13 I wrote my first poem. This would have been in English class and my poem was entered into a competition, I think I came close by getting into the shortlist, but I didn't win. From memory the subject was nuclear war, which was definitely a theme in the 80's. What a happy subject, not I've written occasional poetry ever since. Even though I get a kick out of it, I've never really pursued it to any degree. Like playing an instrument, it just makes me happy, I don't care if other people like it or not. I thank my first girlfriend's dad (when I was 15) for indirectly getting me into classical music. It was the done thing in the 80's that if you wanted to seem educated, you had to have collections of things, mostly Encyclopedia Brittanica. Lucky for me he also had a collections of classical music tapes. I mean it was just the usual greats: Handel's Water Music, Bach's Brandenburg Concertos, Vivaldi's Four Seasons. But I spent many an hour sat on the floor with headphones on listening to those tapes (which I made copies of for myself). It was a revelation, before that point I knew of composers and had heard snippets of the music in adverts and so on, but to put everything together was great. I've had a great admiration for classical music ever since. At university I even introduced a friend to classical music, and he became even more fanatic about it than me. I'm sure he had five different versions of the Four Seasons at some point. And so it goes on. I especially, like classical piano, for obvious reasons. And how could I forget sex? Well I had to wait until I was 19 for that and my then girlfriend's bed in student accommodation on campus. Although, I had a near miss at around 16 or 17 with my previous girlfriend, although if it had happened and her dad had found out, I would have been murdered. Although, I suspect he knew exactly what was going on. Lastly, the first time I got drunk and I mean properly drunk was in fact the behest of that first girlfriend's dad. It was my 18th birthday, and it was his local. Before that I had drank watered down wine with dinner (being Spanish and all), but this was a proper sesh. Being like a bean pole and a short guy at that age it didn't take a lot before I was steaming drunk. I did throw my guts up afterwards, all over his newly laid wooden flooring. I was banished to the school were I spent the night on hard lino flooring. The dad was the school caretaker and the mum a cleaner there. They lived in a building adjacent to the Victorian school building where I went to school. Although this would have been in the Christmas break, so the school was empty. My first ever hangover was not pleasant and I've never learned the lesson since.

The waves come in up the beach, I breathe out then in, I open myself up to majesty of the world. The waves go back out, I breathe in then out, I go within and see the majesty of myself. The gull soars on the water, I breathe out then in, I spread my wings free in flight. The tree stands in the sands, I breathe in then out, I stretch my roots feel my might. I am the water, I am the birds, I am the trees, I am the sands. The waves come in up the beach, I breathe out then in, I open myself up to majesty of the world. The waves go back out, I breathe in then out, I go within and know the majesty of myself.

I could tell you how creative, kind, sensitive, fearsome, open, unique and special you are. All the qualities of a beautiful person. But it wouldn't do any good, you have to know it yourself first.

It's the difference between eating pizza every day, or savouring every mouthful of Roast Pavé of Wild Salmon once a year. Ritual, setting, ambiance, pace, dressing up, trying something new.

Transports me to a different, yet familiar, time and place.

Ever encountered a difficult person? Someone who constantly fights the the world, or doesn't play by the rules, or is completely intransigent, or is just plain chaotic and insane? How is it possible to love such a person? Should you love such a person? Notice the negativity which arises when you are with these difficult people. There will be a whole bunch of judgement going on, about how this person shouldn't do this, or should be more loving, or think like you, and how they can't see the obvious? The irony is that your judgement makes you a difficult person. Maybe you can justify your judgement to yourself, by saying that you can't help it, that difficult person brings out the worst in me: their negativity is infectious. If you look past the judgement there is love to be had. A person is difficult because they challenge your worldview in some way. If you have an ignorant unempathetic boss, they are challenging your view that everyone should not be ignorant and unempathetic. It is actually you who are imposing upon the world and that it should function in a certain way. It is that dissonance that is causing your misery. It's both a rigidity and lack of acceptance on your part. Often difficult people are self assured, righteous, immobile, intelligent, manipulative, lacking empathy, or have wonky thinking (outside of the norm). They are not wrong for having these qualities, it is the normal spectrum of human behaviour, they are normal from a human perspective. They can be got through to though, if it's your wish to educate or change them or help in their suffering. But you have to go through a different path than normal, judgement will normally be met with resistance. One powerful way is through suggestion. You mention tangentially that things could be different if they tried something else. You say to your horrible boss, that they could get more productivity if they eased off the micromanaging. You pit a strong positive against their strong negative. Give it time to seep in and let the difficult person take ownership, as if the thought were theirs. Be strategic in how to inject positivity into a difficult person's view of the world. Another way is to match the difficult person and meet them on their level. For example you have to deal with an impolite person, who never thanks you for putting in extra effort. You then become as "difficult" as they are. Become impolite and short, don't do small talk, don't smile. You reward every bad bit of behaviour with equally bad behaviour on your part, you reward good behaviour with good behaviour. You are matching their difficulty head on. The change in your behaviour will become very obvious to them, and this will cause confusion on their part which will make it hard for them to continue with their difficult behaviours. They will start to actively seek an easy life, by doing the things that make you behave well. Stand firm! You can of course just be stoic. You're pleasant, polite and forgiving no matter what the difficult person throws at you. You lead by example and show that there is no malice or judgement from your part. They will carry on manipulating and being aggressive and yet your passive nature shines through. It is hard to be unpleasant to someone who is constantly pleasant to you, something clicks eventually and you change. The difficult person "wakes up" to their challenging behaviour and it cannot be ignored after that point, something must change. Often the thinking processes of a difficult person traps them in their behaviours. If you are insightful enough, you can help point out inconsistencies in their thinking, and sometimes this hits home. The difficult person realises that they are conflicted and this is the source of their suffering. This can initially result in confusion or a kind of silence and introspection as they try and resolve the conflict. Even if they choose to ignore the conflict, the realisation cannot be undone. Difficult people often suffer from conflicted thinking which they aren't aware of. But it all has to start with you. Ask yourself "Am I a difficult person sometimes?", and if so are you willing to change?

Yes. Where does thought end? Say you saw a familiar person in the street. You walk up to them and no, they're someone else. Was that familiar person just a thought or was it your reality at that point? What's the difference between thought and reality?

I thought I'd broach the subject of having a love life. When it comes down to it I feel very conflicted. It's something I think about consistently almost like a reflex. But even now I'm struggling to gather my thoughts coherently. Ok, time for Mr Left Brain, a list of points: I get horny I want regular sex with women I don't want to have to compromise what I can and can't do by being in a relationship I'm an all or nothing type of guy, I can't have a part-time relationship, it would drive me crazy I do want intimacy, sharing and joy and some adventure from a relationship I have an acute sense of beauty and especially for faces (see below), it's important to me I want to flirt and attract attention, even if not to get off I don't have opportunity/make opportunity to put myself in situations where I talk to women All my social circle are around my age or older (i.e. married with kids, i.e. no source of new people to meet and no partying) I'm prepared to go out by myself, but I'm always very conscious of my age I do like the idea of having a family and all that, so that limits the age range I can go for I'm 50/50 about taking on someone my age with kids, there will be hurdles to overcome A 50 year-old woman can be attractive no doubt, but it gets much rarer I'm not into PUA tactics, it just sucks, although I will approach if the situation allows it: nightclub, possibly pub but unlikely Online dating is low odds, I mean I do scan on occasion, but the response rate is nearly non-existent There have been one or two work colleagues I have found attractive and got on with, but that's just luck of the draw I could do courses or activities that would allow me to meet women, but from experience you get stuck with a particular cohort, and if no-one fits that's it, no luck. And I would need to do something I'm interested in I'm at my most relaxed, confident and self-assured I have been in my life, and I feel frustrated that I'm not in a position to explore that more with women I don't want to go out with bimbo even if she was a supermodel, intelligence is important to me I know for a certain fact that if I'm looking for some sort of good fit in a partner, it's a numbers game, I need to meet a fair amount of women to meet one that fits my standards To a degree my standards are high, because I have a lot to offer, I'm high value in a lot of ways Energy is important to me, I don't want a woman that just wants to stay in all day on her laptop or painting her nails, there's a strong inverse correlation between age and energy I would happily go out with women in a wide age range, but I'm acutely aware of being judged if the woman was noticeably younger than me, whilst personally IDGAF, I'm also not into making my life harder for no reason at all: she has to be worth the aggravation! I'm sure there's a lot more going on, but that's the stuff that immediately surfaces. In terms of the face thing, I've taken various tests and I'm a super-recogniser or at least I'm high up there. I have both an extremely good memory for faces, and attention for facial characteristics: https://theconversation.com/facial-recognition-research-reveals-new-abilities-of-super-recognisers-128414 I like a good body (especially good skin) in a woman, but the face is most important to me. I would probably have a bias against stick thin, but it's not out. I'm not bothered by height, but I know for a certain fact that women are. But I'm a shorter guy at 5'7", so probably it tops out at 6' in a woman (without heels) for me. I'd probably feel odd going out with someone under 5', but I have done 4'11"! I feel it's a bit childish to say I have a type, there's so many different characteristics that might attract me in a woman physically let alone personality. I would genuinely say I'm race/ethnicity agnostic. But that's not to say I don't have biases in what attracts me, I do, blue eyes for example, or jet-black hair or blonde. But it's the entire package so to speak, not just individual characteristics I go for. I don't think I have any sort of race fetish, but I've never really given it much thought. The way I see it, is even in spite of everything else, I will have to look at this person day in and day out, she has to be interesting to me visually, I'm a very visually-led guy. My ex always had a particular pair of jeans she looked good in, and that attraction never wore off. And vice-versa, if something were to bother me about appearance, there'd be no shaking it off. It's a visual shallowness I guess, but not something I have control over. Ok. So if hypothetically I had a stream of "encounters" with women that fit my vague criteria at least visually say, but no real relationship, would that satisfy me? I think it would do a lot to satiate that horniness I regularly feel, and give me some sort of ego boost too. I would probably keep things mostly private from friends etc. I'm not sure how maintainable that is longer term, and knowing me I'd probably fall in love with most of them. So being put through the emotional ringer regularly is not something I relish. I'm not sure I've got the right mindset for a numbers approach to it. But not getting into relationships would leave me free to be myself and not compromise. I'm definitely not into long distance relationships. I mean, yes it can start that way, but one or the other would have to move. Either I'm in a relationship or I'm not, I don't want some vague something in-between or meeting via Zoom now and then, that would suck big time. I suppose the only other thing, was that if a relationship were to become serious and longer term, that she is amenable to having a family (my ex wasn't and that caused problems). And for god's sakes no dogs or horses. I get the companionship thing, but it's just not me. I actually got a message from a dating app from a 25 year old recently. She was definitely attractive facially, and was a Buddhist, so maybe? I found myself being reluctant to message back, it's a big age gap, but I did, however she didn't follow through. I think 25 is pretty young for me, but it's a hard lower limit. I'd probably be more comfortable with 30 and upwards to 38. After all, it's only a number. But I would feel kind of odd being introduced to parents younger than me!! That's it, no real resolution, or much coherence about what direction to head in. Fuck it. I'll just carry on as I am for the moment. Singledom bliss.

Some more (not) doing: Euphoria take me into slumber, Make me insensible to petty concerns, Remind me of whoat* I was meant to be, Of becoming etherial and lightly bound, Vaguely and indifferently embodied, Just resting and slowy divesting, Euphoria take me deeper, Let me forget it all, And renew, Me. * not a typo, smoosh of who and what, one for the dictionary

@Swarnim this is great. It's the realisation that gender was within us all that time. Normally we project a gender on to another person, unconsciously. Gender isn't a simple construct it's very nuanced and deep. But as you've realised you can project a different gender onto yourself. What's happening is that you're emphasising or bringing out what's already inside you, like turning up the volume. The other realisation is just how flimsy and fluid your own identity is. You undid decades of indoctrination of being male with a short amount of meditation. There should be loud bells ringing: 1. You can turn up the volume on any desirable characteristics you would like to "embody". 2. You and your identity are a construct, and you are free to remove it if you want, or to be anyone you want to be. 3. You already have a method for achieving 1 and 2.

@Zigzag Idiot I like the message. The clip is like a painting, or something you'd see on a Christmas card, with a certain doing nothing vibe to it. The other thing that springs to mind is: is a rhetorical question and a rhetorical answer just a duality? And is that itself a rhetorical question, or is it an answer? Welcome to my mind.

Not much to report today. Just haphazard rhetorical type questions. Is it ok to have nothing going on? Have you ever been with people and felt the suffocating vacuum of having nothing to say, even if it's only momentary? What if you've been with your partner for years and in fact the norm is to say nothing to each for long periods? Should every moment be filled with activity? What about boredom, how does that figure in having nothing going on? Isn't boredom a fate worse than being a loser? Winners always have something going on. Being bored is just admitting to being a loser (?). How is it possible to life live and be bored? Aren't they complementary opposites? What if you give up doing anything? Just recontextualise activity as nothing. Isn't that bliss? Isn't that just admitting death in through the front door? Isn't death a fate worse than knowing you're a loser? Can you attract any/thing/body by doing nothing at all? Can anything get done by doing nothing at all? Doesn't the world revolve anyway? Can't you just recontextualise doing nothing as constant activity anyway? Isn't doing/doing nothing just a duality to be squashed like a bug? Only to be left with an uneasy sense of WTF?

Some things you can't know beforehand, you just have to try them. Relationships are like this. They're dynamic entities so there's a certain amount of leeway to readjust as you go along. You can account for yourself and do all the things that lead to a healthy relationship, even if you have further work to do on yourself. You will naturally develop and change anyway and so does the relationship in response. You can't account for your partner though, and it's possible they are unable to have a healthy relationship with you because of their level of development. It's a risk that has to be taken.

My condolences. I understand how difficult it is when a parent passes away. I wouldn't consider subvocalising when reading to be thought per se, it's just a mechanical action. It may trigger thoughts though, such as images, feelings and so on. It may even trigger further subvocalising which has nothing to do with what you're reading, so that would be a form of thought. Thought is a complex interplay of many different experiences, subvocalising is just one aspect. If you think about it, you could also think visually in words, it needn't be auditory. For example people who spell visually (in their mind's eye), are often better spellers than those that do it auditorily. They are thinking visually in words.

All language requires context. You can use just words to create context, like in a novel, but most every day spoken language is done with reference to reality (i.e. non-language context). I don't think Leo is careless with his words, he's actually very precise. It's just that you need a large amount of context to understand those words - which Leo actually provides in his videos and elsewhere. The problem arises because it's very easy to be lazy or mischievous and just take a phrase like "I am God" without any of Leo's context. It's unfortunate that a word like "God" is already so loaded with it's own traditional baggage, so it's incredibly easy to misinterpret what Leo is saying. Personally I have a lot of trouble with a phrase such as "everything is love", but that doesn't mean this phrase shouldn't be used. There is some onus on me to understand it, communication is a two-way process.

@Kamo don't get me wrong. I subvocalise with the best of them. Just not computer code or thought. I wish I could read without doing it too, it would be cool in a nerdy way. Reading isn't thought though. I'm very intrigued to know what happened to you at 24? Hopefully I won't regret the question?

Indeed my perception differs which is why I go on about it. When I do computer programming for example, I don't actually talk to myself in Javascript, that would insanity. No. It is thought, but it's not my internal voice. It's a mixture of images, memories, "knowing", finger memory, intuition and so on, there's hardly internal voice going on at all (except to curse at bugs). It seems completely alien to people that they could actually think without talking to themselves, I find it amusing and weird.