Joshe

Regarding the girl, it’s probably gonna happen several more times, because that’s just the way it is. You have to not be so eager to give so much love to a person who can easily toss it away. They should earn it and you only give it when they do. When you show them they have you by the balls, they perceive it as weakness, because it is. That’s just the way it is. Let yourself love them slowly, and don’t reveal your full love often. Only do that occasionally. Women don’t want to win love easily. They want to work for it. Once they know they have you 100%, things start to change. Keep them on their toes and wanting you more than you want them. At least until she is fully committed. Maybe take some solace in that every man has to go through this, usually many times. It hurts but you will survive and it will make you stronger.

Why would you place a symbol of such a hateful man right next to symbols of loving saints? Seems like cult idol worship. Normal people don't plaster their living space with political figure merch, and they sure as hell don't put it on a pedestal with saints.

Sorry, didn't mean to derail things. I'm not sure exactly what enlightenment or awakening is, but it's been a question on the table for many years. And I've wondered if it's much more simple than what many here believe. If I go by your definition, which I'm opened to, then yes, it's not as rare as people make out. But I'm not sure that's all there is to it.

But why stop there? Every time someone hits a new perceptual configuration the first move is to call it the absolute. It feels final when you’re in it so you tell yourself "this is the only enlightenment and everything else is illusion." But what’s really happening is you’re just describing a crystallized configuration of perception. You call it the total or the unlimited but that’s just the flavor of the mode you landed in. Someone else hits a different crystallization, like pure void, unity, or whatever, and they’ll swear that’s the one true absolute instead. Enlightenment occurs either via a portal opening all at once or via crystallization of contemplations and training. What you contemplate and what you train determines what your new mode of perception will be. If you contemplate oneness enough, eventually, those contemplations will crystalize and have an impact on the whole of your being. But so will contemplating and training your golf swing. I'm just toying around with this idea btw.

“Enlightenment” is just one perceptual configuration of many. It’s trained into the psyche via what folks round here like to call “this work”. When they reach some new state, they think “this must be related to that “enlightenment” concept I’ve been looking into a lot.” ”And folks say there are degrees to it, so there is potential to intensify whatever this thing I’ve discovered is” The whole time, thinking there is a linear path or a ladder to be climbed towards a single, absolute mode of perception. When in truth, the mind has the ability to open many different portals to many different modes of perception. Standard enlightenment is groupthink and boxes people into a narrow mode of perception. Being able to summon the portals and enter them is meta-enlightenment. Standard enlightenment is just an amalgamation of various positionalities, ideas, practices, and interpretations that eventually crystallize into a new mode of perception. And when perception changes in a big way, they call it enlightenment. This is my new theory. You can actually engineer and inhabit many modes of perception, and enlightenment is just one of them. First, one must identify and contemplate the portal mechanism, as opposed to blindly doing practices hoping for some vague result.

What if he’s passionate about his bobble head toy collection or Star Wars figurines? Sharing passion just opens a channel for mind and emotions to flow - it doesn’t automatically pull her in. It can, but IME, if she engages with your passion, it’s because she’s already interested in you. The passion itself doesn’t seem to pull her in without preexisting attraction or wonder. But you know what does? Telling them a story - with or without words - that says “you can experience interesting and positive emotions with me, in a care-free way, and you don’t have to worry about my negative emotions raining down on you”. In other words, stoicism and fun. The best hook IMO is one where they convince themselves of the product and become receptive and gravitate towards it. Because at that point, she will allow you to take her on a journey. Make the journey exciting, fun, and/or interesting, and that is success with women. If women like the journeys you take them on, then you’re successful with women. If they don’t like them, you’re not successful with women.

You’re still conflating a fringe minority with the majority - the same point you ignored before. Most people on the left aren’t like what you describe, so at least consider what I’m saying for 1 minute.

Insightful video: Stoicism or “emotional compression” is emotional labor, which women expect.

I see. Thank you!

I don't think they can really do that at this point, given all the speculation about Epstein himself being taken out. Also, I'm sure she has safeguards of her own in place to protect her from things like a suicide narrative. It would be too risky to take her out. Even if she so happened to get killed in a traffic accident or a heart attack, speculation would rise to a risky level. Although, something like a car accident might work, because the average American just needs the slightest bit of plausible deniability to accept something. But I'm guessing you'd have 5-10x the journalists probing into the situation, which is risky.

The left you’re talking about is a minority faction (Twitter left, activist left, progressives), not the bulk of the left. The right you’re talking about is the bulk of the right. It’s a mistake to critique the far-left minority as if it represents the whole, and then contrast that to a critique of the right, because the right is far more ideologically uniform in its conservatism. The mistake is comparing a fringe characteristic in one group to a core characteristic in the other, making it seem like the two traits are equally representative when they’re not. Leo makes this same mistake as well. Also, “bald guy” was meant as slur, not euphemism. He gets to avoid giving Leo the dignity of using his name, at the same time reducing him to a slur. OP has a lot of pent up hatred that he will, one of these days, need to let go.

I agree. In my most heightened states, the presence of the “witness” is most dominant, but the witness isn’t Josh. There has always been perception. Perception has never ceased. Consciousness seems to require a witness, wether that witness be my ego or whatever the witness is when my ego takes a back seat, there is always a witness.

Yeah, I agree. I think it’s mostly frequency of overreacting to petty things and demonstrating that you can’t keep your shit together. These are the most common things: Begging her not to leave after a breakup Excessive jealousy or possessiveness Overreacting to small disagreements Complaining constantly about life or work Seeking constant reassurance about the relationship Publicly venting insecurities or self-pity Dramatic emotional outbursts over setbacks Resentful rants about past relationships Oversharing fears without action to address them Acting helpless instead of taking responsibility

Thanks for explaining.

So your claim is by completely shedding all fear, enlightenment occurs? I’m not being critical here, just curious, because I’m not deep into spirituality.

😂

Badass story. Respect. it sounds like you’re talking about hyper-vigilance, or living in the red, and even to come down to yellow (such as at the coffee shop), you’re still vigilant with your survival to a degree. This is true, but what happens when you remove this ‘closure’? Does something automatically happen or does it just allow the possibility for something to happen?

Lol. It’s good for you, or so I like to think.

Lol, that's funny! Is yours extroverted? One good thing about an older outgoing and extroverted sister is you inevitably wind up in her robust social circle. Without her, I would be a totally different person. Maybe even holding ideas about gender superiority. We endured a rough childhood together, which created an unbreakable bond.

Yes, I found that by knowing myself, I can largely know others, because I know all the little games I've played and gotten to the bottom of them and mapped out their structures, and so they spring into mind as potential hypotheses via subconscious pattern recognition. And once they're there as hypothesis, via analysis and deduction, I can usually discern quickly what is going on with someone. But analysis and deduction are more often than not not even needed. I can read most people like a book, but only because I've read myself like a book, and over time, confirmed we're all very much alike in structure. Even if I don't know the "content", the "structure" seems to often be accurately intuited, or at least not far off. This is my main tool in social calibration. I suppose this skill naturally develops with self-reflection, and if one has spent many hours contemplating human behavior in general, it develops even more.

This seems legit.

Facts

All good. Funny af actually. Lol. You made me laugh with the caveman language.

Yeah, I’m sure I haven’t resolved all the “real stuff”. Again, thanks for the resource, will definitely check it out. That’s a nice insight. I really like that. And it would definitely take some time to integrate and to understand the implications of it.

Lol. Can’t get anything by you. In hindsight, I suspect such posts are not very helpful, and to be honest, I wonder how much of my ego is talking with some of my posts. But I’ve kinda adopted “strength” into my identity, and of course I think my way is best. Stop being fucking weak bro! Lol. Not you, you seem to not be weak where women are involved.