Nemra

I understand that delusional side. I'm talking about the Ukrainian side.

@Hojo, not everything and not always it's about the US.

Russia knocked down? Come on. War is dirty. Russia was way dirty. You don't get to choose for Ukrainians.

@Hojo, Ukraine does not consider itself a part of Russia, which is the most important thing here.

@Schizophonia, Stalin is watching you. Be careful!

@Xonas Pitfall, well, be they male or female, at their core they must have masculine energy. It's even better when they have integrated femininity with their masculinity.

I'm attracted to both. Haha. I find them attractive when their energy doesn't entirely "match" their physique. I love when the things that I find are opposites coexist together in certain ways. Yes, they could exhibit things that I label as masculine, regardless of what they actually think of themselves.

I love when what I find feminine and masculine physical features are mixed, but not every mix. At their core, they must have a masculine energy, like assertiveness, confidence, etc.

@Schizophonia, rejection affects both sides. But still, if an attraction is different, it doesn't mean it's only based on what others reject.

@Schizophonia, no, in the sense that I'm not focusing only on the rejection part. Although the rejection could make it more valuable. If people have a different attraction from what you think most people are attracted to, that doesn't mean it's entirely based on something that is dependent on how most people look at it.

@Schizophonia, could you clarify what you said?

I don't know if it's a fetish, but I like it. The more androgynous people are, the more attractive they are for me.

Я долго ждал вас, мой учитель. 🫡

Товарищ Сталин, это вы?

Then I must be delusional to hear religious people whine about why they couldn't preach. Lol.

@Leo Gura, but isn't it good to hold responsible, powerful countries like you do for yours?

The grass is always greener on the other side, regardless of which grass is actually better.

Mearsheimer is focused on his determinism. Sachs is focused on how to brake out of that determinism. @Leo Gura, if you think American hegemony is a problem, then others' countries future probable hegemony will also be a problem. Although by that thinking you could justify why you should remain a hegemony. But you can't trust other countries that they wouldn't want to be a hegemony. Although I would be at peace from people talking every kind of BS about America when American hegemony ends. 😌

That's such an easy thing to say. You can't escape from surviving unless you kill yourself physically. Why not say you care about the truth, but you also care about survival?

Maybe Trump should not be tough on crime after all.

@Keryo Koffa and @Davino, please give me that DMT! 🙏

Most of the things are like that, imo. I think what's needed is to make the distinction that by reading, we're mostly going to be aware of what ways people have thought. You are also offering your philosophy to open our minds to new kinds of thinking. Literally, reading or listening to someone's philosophy could give you "tools" to discover new things. But you're still the one out there who isn't dogmatic, doesn't artificially limit himself, and engages in deep stuff.

@Sandhu, I didn't say to BS yourself. For example, I mostly don't want to be with someone from my culture because of different reasons. But I don't blame them for not being the way I want. However, you can think steps ahead.

Americans could learn to be better racists from other countries. Lol.