jimwell

I'm only in my 30s but I have already embodied this worldview. Damn, I'm really an alien.

There is truth in that. But there is probably more. People explicitly or implicitly convince themselves of that, and when the moment comes, they voice the same thoughts.

Thanks for the validation and feedback. But yes, conformity has value. As long as you rely on society for survival, a certain level of conformity is needed. Have fun!

In this context, “break up” and “break down” essentially have the same meaning: to disintegrate into smaller pieces. That is an additional reason why these phrasal verbs are senseless. You don’t see any problem, not because you view them logically, but because you use them unconsciously. Then why does English have "power on" and "power off" and "volume up" and volume down"? These phrasal verbs are sensible; hence I use them. Other sensible phrasal verbs I use are "rise above" and "step into". Hmm... I don't think about it that way. In conventional English, native speakers are more proficient than I am. I struggle to express my ideas from time to time, especially about topics I am not familiar with or not interested in. I also make grammatical errors from time to time, especially with prepositions (on, at, in, etc). But in sensible English, I'm more proficient than native speakers. It's not even near. I say "near", not "close" because "close" sounds similar to "close" as in "close the door". The difference between the "s" and "z" sound is insignificant. Conformity is valuable. Society can't exist without it. But I can't tolerate blind conformity. It's too repulsive. In fact, one of the things I find repulsive about Japan is its blind conformity. It has caused me to lose some respect for the country and its people. Correct. But applying awareness and analysis into it results in something more beautiful and sensible. And that's the value of non-conformity. Because of love and respect for beauty and sense. From my perspective, it's not. The benefit outweighs the burden. But I'm also strategic about it because I must stay alive. I don't like the fact that "found" is the same word used for "find - found - found". "Based" is more preferable than "found". But as I have explained in my OP: My English also features consistent rules. If a noun can function as a verb in English, then “foundation” can become “foundation – foundationed – foundationed”. So it is sensible to say: My destiny or life path is foundationed by my divine mission. A sentence as heavy and important as this deserves something structural, unshakable, and permanent, hence “foundationed by". Because a native speaker doesn't analyze it. A "root" is a part of a plant and flexible while "foundation" is strong and reliable. I value complexity but also simplicity. I call it “simplified complexity”. Most of the so‑called nuances are negligible almost all the time. English has too many words for one thing. No wonder its native speakers tend to say “for lack of a better word”. It is not because English lacks words. It is the opposite: English has too many words to express one idea, so native speakers struggle to choose. It is akin to going to a buffet with dozens of desserts: choosing which is best becomes a difficult task. Thanks for your feedback. I'm curious how a native speaker such as you perceives my Signature English. Now I know. I don’t communicate with native speakers outside this forum (except for occasional business transactions).

@Yimpa I am using these spiritual insights for practical purposes. Most spiritual people separate the ego from God: demonizing the former and angelizing the latter. My spirituality integrates survival. So, I integrate and honor the ego. I have been integrating Stage Red’s bravery and tenacity, Blue’s discipline and conformity, Stage Orange’s self‑empowerment and individuality, Stage Green’s oneness and New Age insights, Stage Yellow’s systems thinking and integration, and Stage Turquoise’s universal compassion. This might sound grandiose and self‑elevating, but it is truthful. Also, the self‑pedestaling proclamation is itself evidence of honoring the eGo(d).

I used to lament that I was born and raised Catholic. I hated my parents and society for it. They poisoned my mind. But for the past few years, I have been grateful for everything Chrisitan that happened to me because I have seen some truth or beauty in Christianity.

I have been honing my Signature English for the past few years. I place less importance on conventional English rules and intentionally use English in ways that I perceive as correct, consistent, and simplified. My English encompasses all aspects of the language, including word choice and word order. To romanticize it a bit: my Signature Style (including English) intentionally bends or breaks established norms in art, language, systems, or behavior to reject conformity, asserting that beauty, meaning, consistency, and sense can be forged outside tradition while still retaining clarity and intentionality. One of the reasons I am able to do this is because I have good proficiency in English. In my 20s, I worked in Customer Support for Telstra and AT&T, which enabled me to speak with Australian and American customers almost every day. I was also an English teacher to Japanese students and even co‑started an English school in Japan. Using English for all forms of communication became so natural to me that I thought I had reached the highest level of mastery. But in my early 30s, I realized that one of the primary reasons I was fluent in English was because I had been using it unconsciously. I simply observed how native speakers talked and imitated them without scrutinizing why they spoke that way. Eventually, I began to notice inconsistencies and senselessness in conventional English, particularly in the use of phrasal verbs such as "break down". If you really think about it, the opposite of "break down" (to lose control or stop working) should logically be "break up" (to gain control or start working). But no; "break up" means to end a relationship or to disintegrate into smaller pieces, which is completely different from the expected meaning. Other senseless phrasal verbs include "give up" and "turn down". My English rejects most phrasal verbs and instead favors straightforward words such as "quit", "surrender", and "reject". My English also features consistent rules. If a noun can function as a verb in English, then “foundation” can become “foundation – foundationed – foundationed”. So it is sensible to say: My destiny or life path is foundationed by my divine mission. A sentence as heavy and important as this deserves something structural, unshakable, and permanent, hence “foundationed by.” “Rooted in” is not enough, because it suggests something botanical and flexible. “Rests on” is not enough, because it implies something light and fragile. "Founded on" is senseless because "founded" is the past tense of "find". “Foundationed by” is best. Also, my English values simplicity. Conventional English has dozens of words that mean “remove”: “delete”, “erase”, “eliminate”, “terminate”, “expel”, “eject”, “exile”, “purge”, “extinguish”, “eradicate”, “exterminate”, “obliterate”, etc. What? How am I supposed to remember each word and its nuance? I could invent another dozen words from scratch to mean “remove” and then make an excuse for nuance. But instead, I prefer just a few: “erase”, “eliminate”, “delete”, “expel”, “purge”, and “destroy” sound good. “Remove” is senseless because its literal meaning is “move again”, but to where? I still have too many things to say about my Signature English, but I’ll end it here because I don’t have much time for this. I just want to demonstrate that being non‑conformist is difficult, laborious, and can wound survival. I plan to fully embody my Signature English and use it all the time, but I hesitate because doing so would make me unemployable. When my English was at a very good level in my 20s, I could easily pass TOEIC, TOEFL, and other established English exams. I could easily impress HR interviewers and obtain jobs that required English proficiency. Paradoxically, now that my English is at an even higher level, it is perceived as weird and broken by conventionalists. Passing an English exam and obtaining an English‑proficiency job would now be very difficult, if not impossible. So for now, I can only embody 50%, because I must survive. When I have gained 1 million USD and safe from any form of salary slavery, I will embody it 100%. It’s best for me to stay on the safe side, at least for now.

That’s a form of conformity. But I love the color orange. Red, orange, yellow, and brown are the defining colors of my favorite season: autumn.

Paradoxically, Halloween parties and costumes are conformity.

This is what a real prayer is; the true essence of Christianity before corruption.

That's an erroneous perception. There is no such suggestion. But the title of the video, which is the same title this thread uses can be perceived as shallow. But as the old cliche says "Don't judge a book by its cover.". Regarding the validity of the youtuber's statements, I have already acknowledged it in my previous post.

@Tenebroso That's a good response. Yes, there's nothing wrong with enjoying luxury. Many of them engage in spiritual bypassing which is an erroneous way to engage in spirituality. Here's a reply that's a bit poetic: Although spirituality may wound and weigh on survival, when embraced in balance, it blossoms into a radiant celebration of life. It feels good to feel good.

She does make valid statements in the video. You don't know that. She probably does. Poor people who become rich tend to collect luxurious things. I have observed this many times. And look at that car. Isn't that a Bentley or a Ferrari? Yes That's valid. Girls must be treated with appreciation and respect. Innate, indeed. Then what?

Yes, the same principle applies to masculinity, even more so because masculinity is broader and deeper than femininity. Masculinity encompasses business, science, engineering, systems, martial arts, vision and ambition, spirituality, etc. The more a man relies on money and other people to do and accomplish things for him, the more of the essence of masculinity he loses. So, no I'm not hating. It's counter-intuitive because being born rich naturally robs you of the privilege of deeply appreciating and being grateful for every dollar, making millions or billions less meaningful and fulfilling. Musk, Bezos, and the billionaires in home country have billions and enormous power. But I just need a few millions to feel much more grateful and powerful than they could ever feel. And my life feels much more purposeful, impactful, and even spiritual than they could ever feel. It's all relative although the last sentence I said might also be objective.

You have succeeded in gaining and accumulating millions, which is a very beautiful accomplishment. Now, you have freedom, power, and security. But you have lost something that is also very beautiful. You can buy and wear the most expensive makeup from Chanel, Dior, or Tom Ford, and carry bags from Hermès, Louis Vuitton, or Chanel. You can travel to South Korea every month and stay in the finest hotels such as Signiel Seoul, The Shilla Seoul, or Park Hyatt Seoul for lip, nose, breast, and other costly surgeries. But none of those things can give you the true essence of femininity, because it is something money alone can never buy. I will leave you with a line of poetry: True femininity is not stitched by surgeons nor purchased in boutiques; it is a sacred essence, untouchable by wealth, and radiant beyond price.