whoareyou

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    337

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by whoareyou

  1. Posted

    2 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

    Is everyone noticing the paradox here.  There is no wrong or right answer.  From the human egoic perspective if sex turns into an addiction where it is consuming your life then the ego has turned it into devilry.  On the other hand It can be a healthy spiritual thing of Oneness as well.  

    That's right, it all depends weather you are doing it consciously or unconsciously. Just like with anything else in life. TAADA!

  2. Posted

    2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Even experiences of human connection are still shallow compared to metaphysical realizations.

    When you are infinite you are connected to the whole universe.

    There are good reasons why serious yogis and monks go celebate.

    You clearly have not experienced deep and intimate (spiritual) relationships. 

    Majority of yogis and monks don't go celebate for this reason.

    If you yourself are a loner and don't have any human connections, it doesn't mean that it's optimal.

    In fact it's the opposite - so imo this is very dangerous advice that you should not be giving here and this is  part of your life that you still didn't get handled.

    "Consciousness work" and connections with humans (including sex) are not mutually exclusive, in fact they go hand in hand.

    Just doing "consciousness work" and ignoring all other aspects of life is not healthy, and will lead to a lot of problems. And vice versa. You should be doing both.

  3. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    @Serotoninluv

    ~40% is still a lot of people. If you want to say less than half, that is fine, but you are making it sound like it's a tiny fraction.

    In my opinion, passionate but smaller base is far more valuable than large support base. Those people are willing to stick with him no matter what, vs a large support base that can switch sides at any point. The same principle applies in business - retaining existing customers who would be willing to continue to come back many times are far more valuable than 1 timers.

  4. Posted

    12 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

    I'm not questioning the validity of the win. I am questioning the underlying assumption of popularity. Quite often people speak in terms of popularity as if Trump was the most popular candidate in the 2016 election. Trump was not the most popular candidate, he was the second most popular candidate.

    The electoral system is clearly biased. It is not a left vs. right thing or my narrative or your narrative. A voter in California is weighed less than a voter in Wyoming. That is a bias. We could have a discussion of whether the bias is justified, yet it is still a bias. There are times when biases have practical value. . . The electoral college has been biased since it's inception. People started getting upset with the inherent bias of the electoral college with Bush vs. Gore, when Gore won the popular vote and Bush won the electoral contest. Of course people weren't upset before then. If the electoral result is aligned with the popular vote, there is no issue. It is when the two are uncoupled that there is an issue. 

    It is not the reason why he won though, as many people like to think. He actually worked his ass of in the states in which the other candidate didn't bother to put as much effort in.

    If you want to change the system, that is fine, but once the rules are there  - there is no reason to blame the rules of the game to which you agreed to play by.

    I agree that the electoral system is not the most optimal. But if people are that upset by it or think it's "unfair", they should work on changing it or not partake in the election at all.

    Hillary, instead of admitting her mistakes and shortcomings - blamed everything else but herself in her book "What Happened". 

    The attitude of the left is a huge turn off for me in general - instead of making excuses, they should actually work on their mistakes and create a more attractive offer to people. So far they haven't done any of that.

  5. Posted

    9 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

    Trump lost the popular vote by a large margin: 3 million votes. To suggest he was more popular in the 2016 is inaccurate and misleading. He was an unpopular with the people and was able to win with a minority of votes through a biased electoral system. 

    Why does it matter if he lost the popular vote? The US presidential election is not decided by the popular vote.

    He won in states that mattered - and it wasn't by luck, he actually worked his ass off for it.

    I don't think before 2016 you and others called it "biased electoral system". But now, of course you call it biased, when it doesn't fit your narrative.

  6. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    18 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

    It is one of many factors, yet the only factor Moodey's seems to care about. 

    The perception of a good economy is necessary for Trump's reelection, yet it is not sufficient. 

    Go back to 2016 election and see what Trump's biggest talking point was - economy. He managed very well in this area - in a sense he can say to the voters that he kept that promise.

    Majority of people care more about their financial situation than any other issues that were discussed here. It's all about survival.

    Put Trump to the debates against any of the candidates - and he will crush them, as you witnessed in the last election.

    It's not about what you say, but how you say it. And Trump is pretty damn good at it. Non-verbal communication plays a huge role - around 50% or even more. 

    Like I said, don't let your personal dislike, or bias get in the way of seeing things for what they are.

  7. Posted

    36 minutes ago, remember said:

    well but spirituality you can`t avoid - if you think you can avoid that and simultaneously being god you are nothing but an ego.

    That is not what I said! I said that once you have a deep enough of awakening, you transcend "spirituality" all together. It doesn't mean going back to the same place where you were not into spirituality. 

  9. Posted

    4 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

    Moodey’s is a corporate financial institution and their model is based on one variable. The one that matters to them: money.

    “Moody’s based its projections on how consumers feel about their own financial situation”

     

    Yes and that's a big factor, is it not? 

    Moodey's model has been accurate in every year but 2016.

    The track record speaks for itself.

     

  10. Posted

    You couldn't get it up due to anxiety of having it for first time. Don't worry, a lot of guys get that.

    If being a "virgin" bothers you, try finding a higher quality escort and be up-front about yourself. Tell her the truth, not only this will decrease your anxiety(or may eliminate it all together), but it will help her give you a better experience as well.

    Sex makes up at least 50% of the relationship - so yes being good in bed does matter. Your advantage is that you are young and that you have quite a bit of time to learn that.

     

  12. Posted

    It's not that you are attracted to the "money", but you are attracted to the traits/qualities that those men have. Could you find the same traits in the men that are financially not well off? You can, but it's very unlikely, and if you do find - sooner or later they will be financially well off anyways.

    Also, the men that are financially well off on average have higher level of intelligence as well.

    There is nothing wrong with your desire - spiritual growth and wealth are not mutually exclusive.

    Don't listen to those that are calling it "shallow" or "superficial" - they simply don't know enough about female psychology, and how attraction works.

     

  13. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    13 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Balance IS the key. But balance is not taking the mid-point of any given two positions.

    Balance can be radical at times.

    For example, if you're considering slavery vs no slavery, the balanced position is not half-slavery, it is no slavery. The balanced position required a Civil War.

    Balance at times can be radical, but radical does not always mean that it is balanced.

    I agree with you about slavery, but that again is just one individual example. My point was far deeper than that, of course I did not mean to take a mid-point of any given two positions.

    Balance is your entire approach on a long term scale, not just individual situations.

    If you are balanced, in some cases you may take a very "radical" solution, and at other times favor a more "conservative" seeming one. Yet your approach is free of political identity.

     

  14. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    10 hours ago, Emerald said:

    The middle ground is for those seeking to preserve the status quo, including all the unfairness and corruption of the status quo.

    And those seeking to preserve the status quo are conservative by definition.

    Where do you think the "conserve" in conservative comes from?

    Don't fall for the middle ground fallacy. Centrism is no virtue. All it means is that you are in alignment with the views of most of the people in your particular society. And you happen to fall in the middle of the two most common extremes. And usually, it means that you are under-educated and people-pleasing with your views trying to capitulate to the norms of your society and the opinion of the majority.

    Either way, the middle ground is always defined relativistically, just as Conservatism and Progressivism are. So, it depends on what society you live in at what era in time, that determines where the middle ground actually is. And most people are like fish in water, and just take their experiences as the norm without question... and that's true no matter how obvious the corruption is to an outsider.

    In Nazi Germany, the middle ground was Nazi-ism. Was that the sweet spot? Furthermore, you were an extreme radical if you were anti-Nazi.

    In the old USSR, the middle ground was Communism and gulags. Was that the sweet spot? And yes, you'd be a radical if you were against the Communists.

    The only reason why you think that the middle ground is a sweet spot is because you define normal in relation to your society. And that's because you're indoctrinated to believe your society is normal and that your worldview is correct. And you miss the corruptions that need to be called out. And when progressives come and try to make positive change, you go "What about the middle ground? Everyone's getting too radical." 

     

     

    That is NOT what I mean by "middle ground".  I meant that you need a non-biased, balanced approach. An approach that is not identity based (liberal/progressive/conservative/left/right,centrist/etc).

    Your worldview is a bit delusional, because you believe that radical always means more conscious. Radical =/ more conscious.

    You need a balanced approach. Balanced approach requires you to see all the angles and to take many factors into account. 

    Balance is the key to pretty much everything in life, not just in politics.

    You are bringing Nazi Germany as an example here because it fits your narrative. You can find other examples where the opposite is the key.

    The more conscious I became, the more I realized that both sides have things that I genuinely agree with. If more people came to this understanding - there would be less fighting/demonization of each other, and instead more unity, and in turn a better society for all.

  17. Posted

    If Biden is not corrupt and has nothing to hide, then wouldn't he just come out and clear himself?

    The focus shouldn't be on Trump asking for a political investigation, but on the fact that a potential candidate who is running for president, should NOT be running, since he is a criminal!

    A criminal is a criminal, doesn't matter weather he is your political opponent or not, Of course the Democrats want to shift the focus away from Biden's corruption to Trump's apparent breaking of the law?

    The double standards are beyond hilarious,.

  18. Posted

    10 hours ago, Emerald said:

    Exactly. And that's one of the many reasons why Bernie will knock him out of the water. Bernie is actually way more likable and charismatic than Trump is. And that's because Bernie has a big personality... but he's not annoying or duplicitous-seeming.

    Honestly, Trump couldn't even win the popular vote against Hilary, whose personality and demeanor is like Dolores Umbridge meets nails on chalkboards.

    Bernie is a strong figure. He's not budging and he's not playing. He will fight the good fight and do so with integrity. Everything about his demeanor and non-verbal communication screams this.

     

    In that case, we certainly have different definitions of "charisma".

    Not only that, but just like in the last elections the DNC did not allow Bernie to be the nominated candidate, the same will happen in this election. 

    Nothing has changed, DNC is as corrupt as they come.

    Because the focus is on Trump's corruption, it takes the focus away from the corruption of DNC.

  19. Posted

    8 minutes ago, Emerald said:

    Sanders would totally burn Trump to the ground in a debate... TKO-style in terms of both charisma and policy substance.

    I'd love to see it. Trump's usual tactics only work because of the spinelessness and corruption of the other person. And the fact that they try to beat him at his own game. And only Trump can be best at his own game.

    And Bernie is neither spineless nor corrupt. And Bernie doesn't play games.

    The choice will be clear once Bernie starts grilling Trump on his fake populism and broken promises,  and hitting him with some real populism. That's what the people care about anyway. Only the fan-boys care about Trump being a character (which doesn't mean he's charismatic).

    Also, Trump's new campaign slogan "Keep America Great" is a sure fail. The only reason he got the support he did was because he promised to make it better. He fundamentally hasn't, and the people that voted for him in hopes he would help realize that.

    And if he's saying, "Keep America Great" the people from the still-poor Rust-belt will go after him with the pitchforks and tools from the abandoned factories Trump lied and said he'd save, while continuing to outsource jobs and give huge tax-cuts to the mega-wealthy.

     

     

    You have missed what I was trying to say. A lot of the time, it's not what you say that matters, but how you say it. Non-verbal communication signals play a big role as well.

    When it comes to non-verbal communication, Trump is a master at it. I suggest to study this subject in-depth, and start paying more attention to this aspect, than the logical arguments politicians try to make.

  20. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    For those thinking that Sanders would beat Trump are very delusional imo. Trump is full of charisma, while Sanders doesn't have any comparing to him. I tried to watch Sanders interview and almost fell asleep. You may dislike Trump, but one thing you can't say is that he is boring . Go back and watch the old debates from 2016 - it's not even close.

    With the current attention of span of your average viewer, I don't think Sanders has a chance, just for that reason alone.

    If the Dems had the answer to Trump or how to beat him - you would not see the Russia gate stuff, along with the leftist media attacking him 24/7 right from the get-go.

    To also say that Trump is a bigger devil than other candidates is a stretch as well.

    FYI: I am not a Trump fan, and would vote for Bernie if i had to choose between these candidates. 

    Speaking of corruption, the DNC is as corrupt as they come and I would not vote for any other candidate (other than Bernie)

  21. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    38 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Oh, it's gonna get a lot worse. This is only the tip of the iceberg of Trump's criminality.

    If the public only knew how much criminal stuff Trump has done, they would come for him with pitchforks.

    Trump has been skating on thin ice for years now and he's about to fall through.

    Have you considered that besides Trump, there are a lot of other people who have committed crimes in the government? Including some of the candidates running for the next presidential election? What about the crimes that the past presidents have committed? 

    If Biden is indeed corrupt, he should be investigated, regardless if Trump has committed crimes or not

  22. Posted

    14 hours ago, electroBeam said:

    There are some inconvenient truths about spiritual groups like this forum and face to face ones.  

    Speaking purely objectively, a portion of people who get attracted to groups like this were not accepted in society for a multitude of reasons. For example they were weird, have outlandish beliefs or had outlandish values compared to common society. A large portion has been psychologically damaged from this experience: usually personality related disorders.

    For them to save face, they need a way to cover up these traumas, because just the thought of uncovering them brings them immeasurable pain. They need to find a way to feel what they lack: to feel like they belong, are not weird, don't have problems. One sneaky, clever lie is to tell themselves that they aren't accepted in society because they are 'special', above the rest. This one is especially rampant on this forum, observe and you will see. 

    Forums like this, new age groups at large, are a way for them to cover up their traumas, and get what they lack or were rejected with in the past. They forget about society and fully immerse themselves into these little bubbles, putting these bubbles on a pedastool; telling themselves these bubbles are morally superior to their society, more intelligent. They must do this otherwise their egos would have to face the harsh facts that they are covering up psychological traumas. 

     

    Having said that, there are genuine spiritual communities out there, and genuine people in spiritual communities, but you really need to distinguish the healthy from the unhealthy if you want to have a sober, good life. Using spiritual communities as a way of bypassing egoic problems is extremely rampant. Its generally moreso located in green stage, western new age communities, rather than traditional communities like Eastern ones(although they have different sets of problems to avoid). 

     

    Just notice that structure of spiritual communities are generally designed to cover up egoic traumas that a group of people faced in the past, using new aged concepts, moralisation, superiority and other ideas to trick themselves into not building a healthy ego.

     

    EDIT: after reading Akash's comments I just remembered another sneaky ego trick. Having spiritual experiences, then projecting the idea that this spiritual experience is special, above the rest. Getting over excited about this spiritual experience, and then this leads to thinking that you are more special than the rest of society because you had this spiritual insight. Or maybe not thinking you are special, but thinking this community is more special than the rest of society, because you are having these spiritual experiences and all of your friends and family are not.

     

    Like if you want to be healthy, immerse yourself with ordinary society and enjoy it. Don't use this forum and its ideas to escape it. Connect with your parents, family, friends. Don't necessarily adopt their habits, but be the role model to them for how to live an extra-ordinary life. Be compassionate and love them. Be humble, don't show off your spiritual insights to anyone, understand their needs and problems and try to help them in any way you can. Much more boring this way? Can't think your some special spiritually gifted person this way? Good, then you know you're on track.

    You totally nailed it I have noticed all of this in my direct experience.

  23. Posted

    @Nahm @remember

    Read again my opening post, and the post which addresses an occultist here. In the examples that I have given - channeling, talking to entities, etc is an illusion - a narrative created by the ego. It is also a huge distraction from doing non-dual energetic work with psychedelics - it will be a huge obstacle from liberating yourself.

    Learning to work with energy authentically, without being carried away in the stories created by your false sense of self is a big part of this work.

    Drop the need to understand everything intellectually, drop the chasing, and drop the need to gain insights during your trips.

    Less is more.

    Believe it or not, but some of us here have even outgrown Leo's teachings. We didn't do it by intellectually trying to understand everything, sitting on a forum all day, mentally conceptualizing things, etc. Direct experience is the key - and psychedelics if used right (especially smoking 5-MEO DMT) can be a very efficient way to do it.

    But ONLY, if you are using them the right way, and if you understand how to use them. A lot of people continue to be stuck for years, continuing to trip, thinking they are getting somewhere, when in fact the opposite is the case. Learning to understand how your own ego mechanism works, differentiate truth vs egoic projections, etc is very crucial.

    What do you desire the most? Liberation or to partake in ego games?

    The choice is yours.

  24. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Almost all spiritual schools offer some step by step process. It doesn't stop devilry. A step by step process is by definition mechanical and unconscious. The more simple, linear, and mechanical you make spirituality, the more potential for devilry.

    You guys are underestimating how relentless and sneaky devilry is.

    The devil precisely co-opts the highest spiritual teaching. The devil eats gurus and his followers for breakfast. This is the devil's specialty. This is what he's best at: corrupting the highest spiritual teachings.

    You've been warned.

    But of course my warning will largely go unheeded. Such is the work of the devil.

    It's ironic how much you preach about devilry, and open-mindness, yet you are not aware of your own devilry and blind spots. 

    You call other people's attitude arrogant - yet the same could be said about yours.

    I warned you about the devilry when it comes to tripping on psychedelics but you just ignored it, like the devil would.

    The problem is that you don't embody your own teachings Leo.

  25. Posted · Edited by whoareyou

    You guys are not getting it - I am talking about a very nuanced thing here. No matter how much I try to explain, it's something that you need to be conscious of to understand.

    You can laugh all you want, and don't have to take my word for it - I just wanted to inform the public here, because a lot of people don't know how to properly use psychedelics.

    One of the other things that I see here - is too many people are stuck in intellectual understanding and not enough embodiment. Drop the seeking, chasing insights and trying to understand everything intellectually - it is actually counter intuitive. 

    Good luck to all.