BlueOak

I know, third post about health issues recently; life's hit a few bumps to be sure. I think this one is designed so I don't sit down as much in life, but it's creeping into other areas, such as my ability to rest after work now. Just did 10 hours today and I can't sit down at the end of it without a low level pain, which builds to moderate if I sit too long. When standing, I am fine. I've been doing very light Yoga again to try and reverse it. It's most accentuated when doing downward dog, but not in the bend as you might expect, its when going into an arch of the back upwards. So i've been doing that and related exercises to try and improve it. It often hurts a fair bit when circling the back in the morning while sitting. A common yoga move, especially when at a leaning point left and right when circling. I know on the meta why this is here but damn I can't stand up all day. I was planning to maybe switch to driving for a living eventually, so this sucks, one of the staff just left for a driving job which seems to be me mocking myself :D. Anyway any advice is welcome. I am not planning to take another issue to the doctor right now, so I am looking to do a bit of work myself, and seeking answers in that vain. If it gets to a 5/10 pain regular then I'll escalate beyond trying exercises, posture corrections, heat ideas, massage etc.

Pretty much infinite love in a nutshell.

This is a series of problems you can go through if you have a problem with limitations. It starts with I am limited and I don't like it. I want to blame someone or fight the limitations. It ends with you having a few irritations left that you just have to accept or gradually work to shift, but still bother you enough to get under your skin. In the middle it can have avoidance, spiritual moments, shifts in awareness, lots of BS etc. It's great to see, the uncertainty, the walls falling down so the words don't make sense. It's a stream of consciousness cracking at old structures, so if someone is in this state, one thing to accept is they are going through that process. It's better if someone gets through it quickly though, so they don't live in so many self-created fantasies. *We have plenty enough as it is. More broadly: Earth is a prison; it has prisons here. Earth is a vacation; it has vacations here. Earth is work; it has work here. Earth is fun... You get the idea. Even without institutions on a personal level you can make the earth a prison. Among other things, Earth is a prism for light so you can view the universe through its lens. I like this one because it sounds fancy :), detaches people from identity, can be drawn or illustrated, and gets people to think.

If he was biased with Ukranian dogma, the response would be 50 times stronger against your points. Russia has bombed, blackmailed, tortured, and killed the civilian population of Ukraine for over two years. BRICS are their allies. Again I have to tell a pro Russia, pro BRICS spearker that fear and violence push people away from you. Rather than listen to them scratching their heads as to why NATO and western values are preferred. How can it be possible that people prefer money to fear ????? At its core, that's what you are asking. There is no need to reply to tell me of all people that America has created plenty of fear throughout the Middle East for example, yes is the answer. A Ukrainian bias who had lost family, and friends, and seen his towns wrecked repeatedly by missiles, would have hatred in his words towards your point of view. Something you can't see or don't want to understand in all our discussions, because it means acknowledging Ukraine instead of 'the west', and the realities on the ground. You have to actually focus on the region, which was almost impossible in every post I made to you (and there were dozens) because of your anti-American bias. We had a lot of discussions I enjoyed, and you brought a lot of points I had to consider, but this was a fundamental point I kept bringing back. The problem becomes you then have to frame everything from an anti-American standpoint, and anything that doesn't fit into it you can't answer or discuss. Its pretty much the same with everyone who is pro-Russian, I have met maybe 5 people in all these years with a BRICS bias who can focus on the region itself. There was a great speaker, which 'the west' and Russia both silenced who said many Russians saw this as a civil war for example, and nobody can even consider that salient point because they are too busy talking about America. Anyway, that's just one flaw of many in not being able to focus on the region, the main one is we never get peace because we are never dealing with the people involved.

If she runs hard on abortion rights in the swing states she can tip it. She has the personality of a plank of wood, but that might be enough. Remember she's running against an older criminal, and always remind the Republicans of it. I would build age into the strategy as well, as they used Biden's age all the time, now Trump's the older guy and it uses their momentum against them somewhat.

Leo this is in part your bias towards centrism and the limitation of speech counter to the center or current status quo. So this will be my bias towards hearing all sides of a thing to understand them reflected to you, and a my usual mild kickback to authority. Maybe I am also resisting the natural evolution of the leftwing of politics to be more authoritative and organized, which is required. If we had more than a simple one-dimensional left/right definition of politics, then I'd see it more clearly. First off I understand limiting simple posts that are repeated by a user with no attempt to connect them to anything but the person's experiential or worse second hand observations. That might be a bias of mine toward detail, though, so that might be an incorrect approach too. This central space you and the moderators hold allowing for discourse, is also required to have regulations or a code, so all this highlights that it's a very difficult job for moderators. All I can advise is that if you feel something (an emotion comes up), check with another moderator first. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, you run a place I genuinely value here, but removing something doesn't often help the discussion. It can do if that thing is deliberately overly belligerent, inflammatory, or meant to be disrespectful to the people posting, but limiting ideologically held beliefs on the already correct forum for them is only going to give you a more limited representation of something. I have long been fed up with the Gaza topic. I understand everyone's position. I understand the limitations we all have to change anything because they are the fears of those involved manifested, and the wider world playing out there. I also understand how horrific it all is, even more so now with no substantial representation counter to the violence due to monied interests, and so I stepped way back from it. The materialistic nature of the world really has skewed everything as bad or worse than the 80's did. We are always going through a shift. Not a dig at you, I also understand the more conscious of a thing you become how it can be irritating to address the same opinions over and over. Though if that thing is not represented how can it be addressed, even if the poster doesn't go away at all differently I DO, YOU DO, we and those reading benefit. Thank you for this space. All the best.

The left is often focused on the wider country, as much as they are on their own direct experience. You may say this is at odds with the thread title, and some of that is justified to say, but it becomes part of the identity. I could go through a lot of what the conservatives here did to make my life worse, for example, but there is also a wider social conscience that I and those I speak to have.

Meta about the thread. Some say it's about expansion. Others, the removal of the ego. Then we have survival states like this which both narrow or reinforce the ego, while showing us the limits of it. I am in a tight squeeze at the minute, like the walls are as narrow as I've ever felt them. Anyway, not to get off topic, just an observation of it all related to my current experience.

No I understand. Trouble is ego, or the I, cannot stay dead in these stress-filled survival states. It might be worth another go though, I have a couple of patterns in the way of it but I know what they are. Appreciate the reminder.

Do you really want to know the answer to that? You love the part of yourself you are rejecting or pushing away. It can be the hardest part of spirituality because its directly going against a behavior or pattern you've developed, but it's the key to everything. It can also be the easiest part of spirituality, as a strong emotion is easy to see, while a chronic state you are unaware of can be much harder. There can be a lot of things in the way of this, for example loving someone who hurts you is very damn hard, so people usually start with something easier. Pick a poster on this forum that gets you angry, then go inside yourself for answers as to where the anger comes from, and learn to love those part(s) of yourself. Sometimes parts because associations and connections are reaching other behaviors and patterns that you can become aware of, and so the internalization of love goes through you with self-reflection, inquiry, and healing if you bring it there. *Note love is unconditional. Whatever is in the way of it is a condition. Whatever you think you need to love you don't. A long time ago I used to think it meant being a doormat or acceptance for example, but it doesn't mean X or Y it only means love. See teal swans completion process for example. All the best. Now can someone answer the unanswerable for me: How can I integrate infinity if it's everchanging? Only to become everchanging I suppose. I'll ask this again elsewhere in a separate thread if nobody has any takes, as it's been bugging me for awhile.

Yes. Most people stay roughly in their original income bracket. People will be triggered to tell me about the exceptions. But the above sentence will still be true for a whole host of reasons: Education, starting capital or financial support, patterns, behaviors, success/losses, social peer group, expectations, general mindset, environment, how conscious someone is in regards to things like health or work ethic, etc. If you've pushed up a bit you've done well financially for all those reasons. The trouble is, you'll see the 0.000001% on social media or TV and think damn I'm not doing as well as them, and not realise everything you've gone through. This is the long way of saying you're doing well, keep at it.

Life's a balance of emotions and logic. You have your emotional fears, but you also have your emotional ties too to consider. Logically, you must ask yourself: do my life's plans work better in America or another country? Have you visited these countries? If not, that's a good first step: spend time away from tourists and get to know the locals. Every country has its pros and cons, research them, ask about them, etc. America is full of drama on its media to the point its comical if you step back from it. So definitely having some time away from the TV or screen would be a good idea before you make a major decision. Don't forget these emotions or bury them but at the same time put them in the context of your life.

Biden has lost this significantly at this point. If anything, you'll see the establishment, as in those in power, trying to even things out a bit so it isn't a complete landslide for Republicans. They need to do this for your dual party system to function which they maintain at all costs. Biden should have gone years ago. Every time I post the following elsewhere: Boomers don't like giving up control. The post gets deleted. It's true, its a generational thing I've been dealing with all my life. Its not true of everyone, but each generation has common characteristics across it, and one of the boomers' worst ones is not training leaders and successors. The healthy dynamic should have been for Biden to pass the torch but to remain the mentor. That would be a sensible, natural evolution. We have a generation that cannot do that en masse. So Gen X gave up trying in many areas, not all areas or all people obviously, they are quiet workhorses, but Gen X dealt with this stubbornness all their lives. Now people blame Gen X for giving up on certain areas. When hardly anything they did made a dent on this stubbornness. Nobody can tell me that running an 80-year-old man in one of the most difficult jobs on the planet is a sensible idea. It's ridiculous. What happened to looking after the generation after you, mentoring, being a protector, and a guide? It's just that boomers have lost the ability to mentor the subsequent generations, and thus can't accept getting old. This mentorship is how you accept the natural progression of things while remaining part of it. Father to Son. Mother to daughter in the family, and then a relatable mentorship in life generally. I've seen it across my entire family, politics, business, everything. It's sad, and what's worse is they'll just blame the shooting, they won't even get to learn the lesson at the 11th hour either now. In the wider population, people cannot accept getting old, they resist it, and that resistance plays out in different ways, such as bizarre cosmetics, geriatric pregnancies, putting off life too long (not living in the moment), and not training leaders to replace us. Some of it also comes with the disconnect in families, with people working too many hours and thus not developing the aspect of themselves that would do this naturally, plus staying in the provider roles unnaturally without passing the torch for far too long, but hey corporations and 60 hour work weeks 'yay'. *Worse not having any connection with children at all, like me, and thus never developing the aspect of myself that would seek to teach a younger generation how to be a leader, provider, and self-sufficient man. It's all related. **I also realize with the age gap increasing, trying to address this is like moving an even bigger bolder, as there are more old people stuck in the same patterns, and also more older people that need representation they can relate to, usually from other old people.

@integral For what it's worth, I am sorry you've had difficult and painful experiences in the past related to the topic. By talking about them, you can educate and help others find balance. I hope your sister is healed and well.

Maybe its my flaw that I don't accept that at face value, and that I want to integrate or understand all perspectives, it's something to consider.

Well, let's break it down. You don't want an evidence-based conversation. You don't want a non-evidence experiential conversation. (if it doesn't align with you) You want to just make your point and have people agree with you when they don't. How can I address the point when the two methods of doing so you don't want to see? I know I am being hard on you and a part of me feels sorry about it, but if someone doesn't bluntly say this to you, you'll never see it.

My way of making sense of the world is to take the information I've been given and then fact-check it. If it holds up, I reconsider my position. I look for the best I can find and then cross reference. Then I try to bring in as many factors as possible to form a well rounded conclusion. I do use personal experiential experience as well but only as a starting point to learn more. If you are unwilling to indulge that or our ways of dealing with information are incompatible I understand.

Really blunt and narrow then: Thread about the identity of vegans -> Don't want to talk about veganism. Result: ?????? More broadly; You don't want to talk about X, Y related to it, just the definition you've given, in the way you've made it. Result: Life never works that way. *BTW you already have leveled up as you called it, you don't want to talk about identity anymore, because arguing identity is like kicking yourself over and over in the shins. It's painful, you don't get very far and you often fall over. Trying to lighten the mood, you can always call me out on my need/love to debate :D.

Come on this has to show you that you have an issue to work on internally? How do I reply: No you? Anyway, it's been a pleasure going back and forth, take care of yourself, and don't take identity too seriously or how it's structured, it'll be easier in life.

Everything I just typed came from working with nutritionists, therapists, and other professionals for 10 years, and then living as a vegan for 13. In that time, I was required to learn a certain amount of information I passed on to patients, both to recommend products and to give suggestions to put them in contact with the correct specialist for them. You'll get more from nutritionists, professionals, or therapists in these fields who taught me, and less from a member of the public. The information I gave is systemic to the body and its behaviors and has holistic qualities in an attempt to align them. It certainly has an emotional and behavioral component (green), but I've touched on the psychological, the biological, and the collective interpretations, we brought the bible and dictionary in for example. I've drawn associations between these things heavily linking identity and diet. I hinted at cultural, social, and financial components. I haven't explored every aspect in depth, 1) because your responses are quite short, and 2) because the thrust of your thread was directed at identity. If you want a better thread, take your own advice and bring more than a surface-level analysis yourself in your responses. Put the time in and give me more to work with, it's not a one-sided thing. I generally reflect who I am speaking to because those are the parts of me that are engaged. Let's say for arguments sake I was completely orange in my approach, or blue. If you cannot talk to these aspects of yourself, that's a failing inside you. Do you understand that? For example in your analysis, the poster who brought up the bible, someone could kneejerk and say that is a blue response, but you can take the bible all the way to turquoise if that part of you is developed enough. What you are saying is: I see something I consider green in myself and I cannot talk to, elevate it or I reject it. This aspect of me is something I am resistant to. If you were truly more conscious than this aspect I am showing you (whatever that means to your valueset), you would be able to not only be able to contain the reply I am giving you but elevate it. It would not provoke any negativity in you because you'd realise you were creating resistance to something.

I've been a vegan for 13 years now. Yes when you stop eating something, there is a detox period. If you see people go vegan or vegetarian, it's quite common. For many reasons: You have cravings, and you can develop physical symptoms associated with them, but usually, they are mental in nature. When we eat anything, we change our body chemistry and our mood. This applies to any food, and you have a lack of body awareness if you are unable to experience this. I'll give you an easy one coffee. Too easy, okay, some middle ground, sugar. Maybe too obvious still, bread. Bread is very filling and often used as a quick snack or comfort food, removing it from your diet is often noticeable both in how you have to approach meals (more time) and also in the comfortable feeling of being full which people use to mask emotions, without the bread they have to experience the emotion. When you remove anything from your diet there is also a distinctly physical component. Detoxes can happen when you drop any major food group and certainly heavy foods from your diet. In the bread example, you may notice your tongue is less white, and you may notice how your throat feels (also that suddenly you are losing weight!). Meat is an extremely heavy and dense food, going without it for a time allows your organs to cleanse and recover. A complete week-long detox every six months from all food is a good idea, and if you are not doing it (which from your words I can assume) you are not allowing your body to recuperate and are always in a state of digestion or actively using the organs in your body, which builds up toxins and things you need to eliminate over time. It also tires them out. This is why fasting, even historically, was so helpful, but it was less needed in times gone by because people didn't have all their trash in their food, and they didn't have as much food to process either. Being hungry and going without something was a more normal state of affairs. These days, people are overfed, their organs are in use when they should be resting, eating late at night, eating poorly, and never having a break. I'm going to reflect your judgment equally and say you know so little about this topic that advising people on it is a very bad idea. *If anyone follows the week detox advice every six months, do something that feels reasonable. if it's a vegetable detox, a salad maybe, water, or just a few days even that is beneficial, slow, and steady. This is one very direct way to experience physical, mental, and sometimes social, financial, or cultural associations and reactions to food.

Nowhere in that post you quoted will you find I said anyone, let alone all people, should go vegan. You invented that as a projection of your general anti-veganism bias. People are incapable of having a vegan diet on mass, they don't take care of themselves enough. If you surmised me telling people what to eat from other posts I've made here, they were done directly to show you how telling people what diet to have or what identity to have generates resistance, and not to be surprised when you see it. Talking generally here, not about veganism: Changing your diet is not dangerous; people do it all the time. Putting fear into people for trying to make healthy choices is unwarranted. Healthy choices require you to pay attention to your body and focus on it, if you are not doing that they are not healthy choices. Then you talk about veganism being unhealthy again. It's vitamins, minerals, and proteins. If you are getting them you are getting them, if you are not you are not. It's honestly not rocket science. *I'll add personally I had a detox period coming off of meat also, and have heard its not uncommon. I was a heavy steak eater, and I enjoyed a lot of meat, but I got through it and my stomach adjusted over time; just as I did picking new foods that I appreciated, I dropped soya very quickly as an example, and consider that junk food. I've had similar detoxs in the past by doing cleanses; it wasn't much different.

Most people don't have the ability to cook or buy a varied diet because they live off junk food or trash, and then end up 60 years old with Musculoskeletal pains or diseases they wouldn't have otherwise had. This is in part because they have to work 60 hours a week to spoon-feed millionaires their lifestyles, and so snack on trash; also these days because of being broke, and more difficulty sourcing food globally due to in supply chains problems from the global tensions, and scarcity from global warming. This is a very common outcome: people are getting less healthy not more, and the percentage of people who are vegan in the population is very low. I would like to see your data that shows vegans vs the general population in terms of health issues, that would be interesting. Because 1) it won't exist. 2) The problems with diet are down to junk food speed eating and a detachment to food, exemplified by factory farming; which alongside demonstrating people's disconnect with the most important part of their physical existence, also creates meat of an inferior quality. I know there are always people who need certain things and certain diets, but nutrients are found in vegetables and fruit in plentiful quantities. Specifically minerals/protein and vitamins respectively.

Let's start with the dictionary on identity, which is a collective structure: The condition of being a certain person or thing. The set of characteristics by which a person or thing is definitively recognizable or known. The awareness that an individual or group has of being a distinct, persisting entity If I were to expand this with my former understanding, it would be: What I consider as part of myself. For me these days: It's a convenience in a void; that tends to be how I view identity, people use it so they can function day to day with a reference point. For example, if I were to try to push in that direction again of becoming everything, or egoless, I would answer: Yes a human can be everything talked about in this thread. It would be simple and true. In your analogy here, you'd have to accept veganism, carnivores, fruitarians, people who don't eat, regular diets, vegetarians, and pescatarians. Or killers and non-killers as equally part of existence and life.

@integral Reality is entirely defined and responded to in your head. If I say yes what does it matter? If I say no what does it matter? We can find common ground and do, but that has to account for this fundamental truth: You live in a different reality to me and everyone else here. In your own mind. Everything you’ve told me, down to the language itself is going to hold different nuanced meanings, connections, importance, experiences etc between each of us. *I’ll have a watch of the video later thank you, I am going to a hospital visit soon. Reality is incorporated into each of us. The entire reality is in our heads. There is no more or less reality. You might mean something like collective approval or recognition for the identity, this is where you confusing the two.