Nemra

@DefinitelyNotARobot "Alpha male" types confuse not giving in to emotions too much with repressing them, so they start to believe that emotions aren't for them and become miserable. I think these are unhealthy types of masculinity and femininity for men.

@BlessedLion He obsessively wants love from others, not knowing that he lacks self-love.

@Hojo I don't entirely agree with you, but I have been doing it since I was like 14–15 years old, and I've had "bad" days, but I'm still doing it. Some people discover their talents earlier than others. Also, I do it because it's so beautiful and amazing when I'm playing what I've heard. Knowing that I can bring myself pleasure just by (re)creating something wonderful keeps me motivated. In my opinion, talent or hard work are secondary. Firstly, you have to know whether something makes you feel deep satisfaction or pleasure. It's like being in a freefall.

@BlessedLion I hate his friend! 🤬

@LSD-Rumi Because he is not that different from his followers.

@Thought Art I have a yearning to learn drawing. I get high on learning (my own way), exploring, and, recently, coming up with a few notes on the piano, although I don't like adhering to teachers even a little bit. The pleasure of just doing it makes me happy and joyful, even though I have days that are extremely boring. Sometimes, I think I can connect those two and also other things that don't seem to be connected someday. Could this be a call?

I watched nearly all of them 2-3 years ago. The one that I mentioned is utterly foundational and deep, which you'll recognize over time. It'll feel like wearing an advanced pair of glasses when you get what he is saying. It is superior to reading the holy scriptures and listening to others teach and/or brainwash you with spirituality if you consider yourself to be a spiritual person.

@Nivsch Don't worry; there are a lot of people who hate both.

It's not that simple.

But all of this depends on the context.

But is there really a balance of power?

You can justify your behavior by saying that you are providing and protecting.

Masculinity, like femininity, can be toxic. That's why men, who mostly identify themselves as masculine, can be toxic. Women being against men being toxic is not toxic, which can become toxic if they are wrong about the person. That is why I said don't care if women say that you're being toxic, if you are not.

@mr_engineer Also, no one here is defending women blindly. They do it because a lot of men believe they are superior because they have power, whether it is given to them naturally or by humans. So, those men are basically being against women.

@mr_engineer The thing is, you believe men aren't toxic at all, or if they are being called as such, then women are exaggerating. I mean, yes, women can exaggerate it. That's why I said to see it as a defense mechanism, because sometimes they can be wrong about it. Women are against men who are toxic. Of course, there can be women who hate men, but there'll be fewer than men who hate women (I don't think those two groups would entirely hate each other). Men still have power, at least physical power, which they can abuse and certainly do.

@mr_engineer Do you agree to ban the real toxic behavior of men? I know those words can be thrown at you, even if you're not being toxic (maybe you are, I don't know). But see them as a defense mechanism. You're not the only man who exists. Banning them might help you feel good, but it'll be hurtful to women as they will lose power to speak against men, who are really toxic, and there are a lot of them.

Those words aren't used only as slurs, and even if they are, they are not equal to the N-word. I know that those words can be hurtful. But you don't have to care about it, as it's easy to misunderstand others while processing emotions, regardless of whether they are right or wrong about you. The real solution is knowing your place, whether others are being mean, compassionate, right, or wrong.

@James123 What you're saying doesn't negate the fact that you could be wrong about the things you speak about. The thing is, if someone tells you that you're wrong or that there's more to realize, you will reply that what they are saying is an illusion. But, interestingly, you would do the same. What I'm suggesting is that there may be more things going on at a deeper level. Respectfully, I won't continue this conversation because our approaches are different and/or we are simply misunderstanding each other, even though we know/believe that the other is misled.

@James123 So you are satisfying yourself. Why though? You are stating things that are different from knowledge, I see. Why does understanding something have to come from the ego? Why should I trust you with that? You clearly understand that knowledge is an illusion and know that what you're saying is true and not true, which I understand. But there has to be something beyond ego because you are aware that it's an illusion. If we are satisfying our egos, then why should I trust any word of yours if ego is an illusion?

@James123 How did you make sense of what I wrote? It did change a lot. If it won't change anything, then why are we even communicating?

@James123 How do you know? Without knowing it, you can't use it and communicate with me. So you know that they are sentences, and you're asking me how I know them. I'm simply telling you we can't communicate what's unknowable. Yet we can, just by making it knowable. So every time we do it, we sell each other some knowledge, whether it is true or not. I know they aren't sentences, but they are also. Also, If I told you that there is a thing that is different than knowledge, whether it is an illusion or not, what would you say to me? Would you regard it as knowledge, which, as you stated, is an illusion?

@James123 Well, what I said was that without knowledge you wouldn't be able to communicate that with me, and that the I, or knowledge, being the biggest illusion might not be the end. After all, you are a human. (I'm not saying that knowledge isn't an illusion)

Then, like everyone else, you're selling illusions to me, whether you had an experience of the absolute or not. Don't you see that it allows you to go even deeper than what you already realized?

Imo, the ones that are not or are less constructed by humans, if those even exist, and that know the difference between the relative and the absolute, and they don't use each of them, especially the "absolute", to justify their crude biases or their willful ignorance. I think the important thing that guarantees its closeness to the absolute or truth is what is done to go beyond themselves (things that humans will never be able to control) and not to reiterate themselves by reading some scriptures, regardless of whether they are true or false, and viewing their interpretation of reality as an absolute or truth. And I don't know if those qualify as being religions. Maybe super- or meta-religion, or just spirituality with less groupthink or brainwashing.