something_else

I mean, the same happened with people photographed with Epstein and in that case it's a pretty valid concern. You can judge people by who they associate with. Obviously Tate isn't on the same level as Epstein but he still definitely has enough toxic views that you could question the views of people who are spending a lot of time around him.

You shouldn't feel guilty. Guys mostly need to learn to accept this and not care rather than getting upset by it

This isn't even a read-receipts issue. This is separate. Read-receipts could not exist and the person in this context could just have stopped replying out of nowhere and it would have created the same result. Being left on read hurts like hell until you get desensitized to it. But yes that is all in the context of the initial phase of a relationship where there is little commitment or trust and you are just starting to message each other. Obviously doing that to someone you have already established a relationship with is toxic and wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees on that. But it's a much rarer and separate issue. For a guy you're going to get ghosted and left on read by like 85%+ of the girls you start texting so you have to become desensitized to it.

I've left people on read and not responded. Most of the time it's because there was clearly no chemistry and I wasn't interested in the person and they probably felt the same way. I don't see why you'd bother reading a message and then not just replying pretty quick. The excuse of "sometimes I'm busy" which I've heard as a criticism of read receipts is irrelevant because you just wait until you're not busy to open the message to begin with. IMO that actually encourages you to be slightly more organic in your conversations rather than spending ages constructing messages. Texting is supposed to be organic and off the cuff most of the time If a person freaks out about you leaving them on read for whatever reason then that's their issue. With girls it might even help you although that's a tad manipulative. I just don't see how it's that big of an issue

Emulating his traits is like selling your soul to the devil. Yea maybe you're gonna attract more girls, but at what cost? It's like redpill. Yea it works, but now you're also a far more toxic human as a whole which hurts your satisfaction in the long run even if it gets you more sex. You can get better with girls by doing really basic shit, you don't need to follow loud dudes online preaching the world to you. You see pretty normal dudes doing really well with girls and almost none of them are following Tate or redpill. They just have basic social skills and aren't weird. That's pretty much all you need to have successful relationships with girls. Leo gives a good and balanced perspective on it, which is why I quite like his advice. You'll get further by learning to be a chill, fun, interesting, confident and authentic dude than you will by learning to present a falsely hyper-masculine asshole persona to the world.

Trust me, they are not thinking asexually. Even if they act asexually. Again, it's possible. You just have to pick guys who are capable of it and they're going to need to be guys who are secure and satisfied in their sexuality.

I don't think having them or not having them would actually alter anyone's texting that much. It's frustrating because getting left on read is frustrating. It's much nicer to just get blanked with absolutely no response than it is to get left on read. After it happens to you a lot you stop caring. Or if you have enough abundance you stop caring. On WhatsApp you can use your phone's notifications to read messages without actually marking them as read, and you can also hold down on the convo (on iPhone) to temporarily view it without marking it as read. On Snapchat you can swipe and hold into the convo to read it without marking it as read. Which I know a lot of people do. So there are ways around read receipts if you really need that. Ultimately when it comes to a girl though, whether there are read receipts or not isn't going to change whether she's attracted to you or not. It simply determines how frustrating it is to your lizard brain when she rejects you by leaving you on read.

It’s not universal. I’m just saying that on average guys who are starved of sex are gonna struggle more to maintain non-sexual friendships with girls.

This is basically admitting you don't know that many women in real life, and that most of your ideas about women in the modern world are from the internet The problem is that often the very guys who this would apply to are so desperate for sex and female love that they struggle to see women as friends in a non-sexual way. Being able to hold a friendship with a woman as a guy often first requires that your own sexual needs are met. It ends up being a bit of a catch 22.

Climate change movements don't need attention, everyone knows about climate change. What we need is more people on board with it. Stuff like this just makes people not want to associate with movements like that because humans are hard-wired to avoid crazy/unpredictable humans who act out. Yea, but pulling shit like this is going to make those people even less likely to change their mind because now they can point and say "look how crazy the people in your movement are! we are right for not supporting it!" People want to support movements that are strong, marketed well, and make them feel like they are a part of something important. They are hard-wired to avoid crazy. What they did gives off very "I didn't get my way so now I'm acting out" vibes which the exact people they are trying to inspire change in (mostly older conservatives) absolutely hate. Obviously this isn't ideal, but it's how it is and most likely always will be. So any movement for change has to be more skilful in producing change than just childish outbursts like this. It's about marketing. Stuff like this influences humans in very subtle ways. It isn't really conscious. Just like how coke don't want their ads showing on controversial YouTube content. Consciously that seems dumb but sub-consciously your mind makes associations that hurt the organisation.

The thing is for many guys he does provide counterbalance. Most people need to go through a stage of selfishness and taking as much as they can get before they can transcend past that and move into the realm of responsibility and maturity. The one argument in favour of him I support is that if you are a weak, shy, quiet, meek guy, most of what he teaches you will drag you in the other direction, which is healthy character development. In SD terms he helps guys with seriously under-developed Red (which is common nowadays) develop it. But beyond that most of the stuff he is teaching is really pretty immature and grifty. And he clearly has some Betty very toxic viewpoints as well

I’m happy for you Again it’s just the wording that irked me. “Depression isn’t real because it went away” Like I’m not even sure what you mean. Obviously depression is real. If you had it for ages it’s real in some sense. Just because something helped it doesn’t mean it suddenly isn’t real and doesn’t exist. That’s very bizarre logic

It was more the strong vs weak man comparison I was talking about rather than masculinity. Telling women that they don’t need to be scared of strong men and they do need to be scared of weak men is just a bit vague and useless because you’re not really clear about what you mean by strong and weak. But you worded it like it was just plainly obvious information. “I don’t know how many times this needs to be said” and that was what irked me a bit

That’s a lot like saying the sun isn’t real because it vanished at night

Yea because strong masculine men never do anything threatening towards women. /s

Which of course, you are

It actually does the opposite. It makes people hate your group and world view more, even if you are supporting valid causes.

It’s also a crime. Several crimes, actually. And very irresponsible.

The method I used was to cut the cactus up like a cucumber into slices, then blend all the slices into a paste. Then you boil it for like 6hrs to make a tea. It tastes awful but it does the trick You should Google for how to make San Pedro tea for the full process. you’ll need a cactus about the size of your forearm for a decent trip

Honestly you might be better off owning it and just shaving your head Its not like baldness is unattractive if you pull it off Balding and not owning it is probably worse Anyway, ask Leo, he’s probably more of an authority on it hahaha

Oh dear

I imagine that one of the bigger risks is that you often don't know what else you are taking alongside the intended drug. If you do a lot of comprehensive testing (for wanted compound, and to make sure none of the more common harmful similar compounds are present) that would help a lot. I can't really see how pure LSD or Psilocybin for example would hurt the body, but no one really knows and the body is a complex thing so you can't really take anyone's word for it. I mean, we thought smoking was safe and even healthy for hundreds of years.

I think that green flags aren’t really a universal thing. At least not like red flags. Green flags will be quite unique to you so it’s hard for others to point them out It’s most important to focus on absence of red flags rather than presence of green flags, IMO. A well rounded person might not have any specific ‘green flags’ but they’re already beyond a lot of others just by having so few negative red-flag traits

Cos it’s the time of year when everyone is going to uni And I responded to your (OPs) other thread before I saw this. But the jist is that cold approach during the day at uni is silly. Start going out and going to uni parties. Build up a social life at uni.

Are you just doing this on the street around uni? Mate you’re going about uni life all wrong. Start going out at night and going to parties. That’s how you meet girls while you’re at uni Or maybe strike up chat with girls you happen to be around for your classes Doing spammy cold approach around uni is a bad idea because you’ll build up a reputation