Parththakkar12

I'd say healthy Red, Blue and Orange. The whole 'go hard' thing is very Orange/Red. He does have this unbelievably strong drive for power and money, like nothing else matters. The whole willingness to insult people, call them bums, etc. comes from a Stage Red space. The way he talks is very Stage Red, where it's like 'Nothing matters. If I think you're a loser, I'm gonna tell you to your face that you are. No morality, no playing nice.' He has some heart and he looks super passionate about chasing money and power. I'm struggling to find bad things to say about him tbh.

You want anyone but him in power. He is probably one of the worst people to have as president. I'd rather have a literal chimp as US president than him!

How about 'Trump is evil'? Give a list of all his crimes in the debate and call him evil! You could actually get away with calling him a Satan incarnate or something. It will make you look dumb, but it will really motivate non-voters to go and vote against him. We may just need to use radicalization tactics to really motivate our side to vote him out. We're manipulating people's hatred towards him to really beat him in this way.

Does looking smart and well put-together and competent matter in politics? Or is it just about who can radicalize their base more? Will we need to fight fire with fire in Trump's case?

Out of curiosity, why? Is it about preserving our values of political correctness and not being the one who enters the pigsty to fight the pig or something? Trump may need some good old Stage Blue demonization to beat. He could be an example of a Stage Red person who takes advantage of Stage Green political correctness.

Would most people feel bad about demonizing him though? Calling Trump a devil would throw his supporters in a loop that's for sure. Him and his supporters will not hesitate to call Biden these things. They are the lowest common denominator who set the rules, so, yeah....

That really would be his 'I told you so' moment now, wouldn't it?! One thing I'm learning from Trump is to accept my ego more and not demonize it.

It finally happened. I have seen everything I wanted to see in this lifetime. Isn't it interesting to see the two biggest problems in the world interact with each other?

@DocWatts A healthy conservative party would be: One that accepts that the only constant is change. They wouldn't have this defeatist attitude towards change, they would be on the side of progressives when it comes to creating change. They would have healthy skepticism and cynicism relative to progressive ideas. They would be the anchor to ground progressives in reality, so that they don't wander off into some idealistic utopia. They would not let their skepticism and cynicism to turn into defeatism. They would admit that a mature progressive has a good idea for creating change when they do. This keeps them within the boundaries of their role and intellectually honest. Although their role would be to preserve the status-quo, they don't get identified with preserving the status-quo. They don't get identified with 'realism' or 'pragmatism'. They see the reality that when it comes to creating a healthy and functional world, the sky is the limit. The status-quo is not the best possible thing. Let's not downplay the importance of preserving the status-quo. If your change does not work, if you try something and it fails, you do need something to fall back on. In such a situation, if you don't have a status-quo to fall back on, you will collapse. So it is important to preserve the status-quo and this is the role conservatives would play. All they need to do is to stop identifying with this role and with the status-quo.

@Consept To me, nagging feels like pressure on my head. A woman will nag when you're not taking responsibility for something she thinks you should take responsibility for. The way for you to resolve this would be to figure out what it is that she's wanting you to take responsibility for or step up to. I guarantee you, it's going to be something deeper than just a hole in a sock. The hole in the sock represents some insecurity she has. You want to ask her about this and you want to figure out what it is that she's wanting you to step up to. Then, you make the decision whether you're willing to step up to it or not. If you want to step up to it, your relationship is working. If not, then you're incompatible. I personally would never put up with nagging. This is how I'd resolve the underlying issue, then I'd tell her to never nag me again.

I think this is a lack of integration of Orange. What would you choose? Less money or more money? Is this really that complicated? I understand it if you're choosing to live a deeper, more fulfilling life and you're prioritizing the fulfillment/satisfaction/freedom it gives you to break out of wage slavery, or the materialistic rat race/hamster wheel, or a soul-draining job/business that pays a lot. Having said that, I think it's a simple and obvious decision if all you have to choose from is less money vs more money. Minimalism can be healthy, especially when you're bootstrapping your life purpose and you're being strategic with money. Having said that, you do not want to be minimalistic all your life! You want to die having experienced all the material pleasures you wanted to. You do not want to absolutely deny yourself materialistic pleasure.

Americans are really uncompromising people compared to our culture. Here in India, we hold compromise as this great value that you're 'self-sacrificing for the community'. Not the case elsewhere!

The norm is not good early-life relationships, the norm is dysfunctional, emotionally neglectful relationships. You do need to be emotionally satisfied in your relationships to be happy. People's relationship life looks happy on the surface and on social media, actually most relationships suck. Also, having had healthy early-life relationships will not make you more independent later in life. You will always have those needs. What will happen is that you will have learned the tools to bring in the people to meet your needs because your parents had figured it out. What happens with other people, or people who ignore this stuff is that they are just really unconscious, they are so stuck in the materialist paradigm chasing money/sex that they will not even consider this as a possibility. They do not really care about having emotionally satisfying and fulfilling relationships, which is why they are happy with the norm. You want emotionally satisfying relationships, which is why the norm is not good enough for you.

@Lyubov There was this funny looking Black homeless guy on the train once. I looked at him and smiled. He thought I was laughing at him in a sorta racist way and he acted rude to me.

Why have a relationship then? Why go through the hassle of going out there, dating, doing pickup, talking to a bunch of women, finally get into a relationship? Sex is not technically a need, despite whatever Maslow said. Human beings have emotional needs that we need other people to meet for us, especially romantic partners. The materialist paradigm will deny this, but it's true. Now I'm not saying you need a romantic relationship to meet them, or that romantic relationship is the only way. But it is the most popular and socially convenient way in today's day and age.

@StarStruck About the issue of neediness - I think you only want to be talking to women who want to meet your emotional needs. Those are the compatible women, others will be incompatible. When you look for a compatible woman, not only will you get laid, you will be emotionally fulfilled in the relationship. A lot of women who have something to offer in this sense, some emotional need they're wanting to meet in a guy feel rejected by guys who only want sex. This is why they feel let down when guys say 'I only want sex.' This is where the stereotype of 'All men are the same' comes from. Yes, you heard me. You would be doing them a service by opening your heart to them and letting them meet your emotional needs! When women say they don't want a guy who is 'needy', what they're really saying is that they don't want a guy to lean on to them, or they want a guy who takes responsibility for the creation of an emotionally compatible relationship. They don't want to be put in a position of mom, they don't want to have the pressure of expectations in the relationship. If you're taking responsibility for creating a compatible relationship, you should be fine!

@ColeMC01 They say they care about looks, but do they really? Or does this talk vanish when they find someone they just like spending time with? We have been brainwashed to care about looks by our culture. This is not to say that we don't actually care about looks and that it's all conditioning, but the brainwashing is real. Here's why: Movies and mainstream culture will sell to us the most attention-grabbing, passionate, glam-and-glitzy sexual content because it sells. This involves beauty standards/standards for big muscles and six-packs. This is the most attention-grabbing form of sexuality, but it isn't necessarily the healthiest or the most natural. This is why we get brainwashed with these 'mainstream standards for looks' or 'mainstream standards for game' or 'mainstream standards for what dating should look like'.

@Preety_India I think the better idea would be to let the body do what it needs to do. I can guarantee you that you will not become depressed because of it, it will release the trauma. Shaking is another way of releasing trauma.

It looks like you know how to market. You literally put every single attention-grabbing tag that you possibly could in the title of the post!

@StarStruck Check out Teal Swan on youtube. She has amazing content on relationships and creating authentic relationships. If you really want to go through the emotional labor (and it is a LOT of emotional labor) to create authentic and meaningful relationships, then that is for you. I started with tuning in more and more into my emotions and learning to name emotions, seeing internal emotional patterns and linking them to my childhood. This really opened Pandora's box for me. I've had a 2 year long emotional healing crisis ever since and things are changing very rapidly for me! The fact that I was a wage-slave was a big part of why I didn't have time to date. There, I got more attuned to how I feel and I started to get more on track with my Life Purpose. When you have that going as a male, good things start to happen for you. I just had to leave wage-slavery in order to have better personal relationships. It's been a mix of finding myself, enlightenment work but most of it on relationships.

Have you looked into the possibility that you're emotionally starving? Human beings have emotional needs that need to be met through personal relationships. You could do a lot of shadow work around childhood traumas around emotional starvation. For me, this turned out to be a major part of social awkwardness around attractive women. I had this fear of losing myself, which is why I wasn't going for it with attractive women (and rightly so). I needed to sort that out before I was able to visualize an emotionally safe relationship for myself. I will start dating once my strategy for creating the relationship is complete.

Excuse me as I puke *pukes* WTF is this?!?! This is a new low. Toxic Stage Orange is real!

@Leo Gura Are you guiding @StarStruck to have one-night stands, multiple partners or the one serious relationship?

I think the dollar will collapse because of his antics. All fun and games aside, this is something super serious that we want to be preparing for.

All of his videos on Life Purpose, business, creativity, leadership are amazing. Especially his course. It is an absolute joy to watch him talk about it. Also the ones on 'The Hero's Journey' are really good.