SeaMonster

Sure, you might have trauma and hate your parents or something. If there aren't close emotional connections with family you could compensate via universal philosophies.

I don't know that he's particularly worse than Stalin (even with the issue of Jewish extermination, Stalin was going to carry it out via forced resettlement to the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, which was basically a swamp. Stalin simply gets more points for dying before carrying it out.) The gulags alone put Stalin at least tied for 1st place.

Something that doesn't work takes forever, so there's that. It's not a choice between "something that takes a long time" and "something that takes a short time." It's a choice between "something that may take some indeterminate but reasonable amount of time" vs. "something that takes forever."

What the fuck does that even mean? If you make money, you're part of a system (you pay taxes, e.g. unless you're a criminal.) If you don't make money, you depend on someone else making money, so you're part of the system even if indirectly. I always roll my eyes at this forum rhetoric. "Functional member of society" -- what a horror!

I mean, that's a half-truth at best. Women make the first move ALL THE FUCKING TIME; that is ALL THEY DO. It's just that the first move they make is so subtle, most guys are too untrained or in-their-head to notice it, or too chickenshit to act on it. And as far as best options, this leads to a discussion of "what percentage of women that make this aforementioned first move will you be attracted to?" I would say in my experience it's at least 10 to 20% of the time. The problem with cold approach is the same as with cold calling in sales in the old days: it's highly inefficient.

Does it matter? Beliefs/teachings can't be true or false, they can only be useful or useless, helpful or harmful (and then depending on the context as well.)

Just notice the obvious logical contradiction: perfectionism is imperfect because it keeps you from accomplishing many of your goals. *head explodes*

I don't know what country/culture/locality you live in, so it's hard to assess what is real risk and what is imagined risk. I would have to know the specifics. Can you afford a stationary bike, e.g.? It could be a good intermediate step (and they're great for bad weather days.)

I mean, you don't have to tell people you're going to start a business until you've actually started the business (as in, set up an online presence and whatnot.) There may be good reason you have trouble telling people this: some part of you may be trying to protect you from sounding like someone who just talks but doesn't actualize his goals.

If you're stuck in a cycle -- TRY SOMETHING NEW. And not just a variation on the same old theme, but fundamentally new, like an activity you wouldn't normally consider (and if it makes you uncomfortable, good.) To get unstuck you need neuroplasticity.

Talk is cheap. Love is about action.

You're right -- I am missing the point, because what you wrote here is contradictory. Is it "results" or is it "be social and have fun"?

If you are a naturally feminine woman, there is no reason to be super-ambitious because of the indoctrination of rah-rah feminism. That's great for naturally masculine women with high testosterone but it's not for everyone. You see these women crying about it on social media because they are clearly trying to fit into some mold they are ill-suited for. It's perfectly fine to be a wife/homemaker/whatever if that's what suits you best. You have to know where you fit between the extremes and what the appropriate balance is for you; no-one can tell you what's right for you in this regard (they would only be projecting their beliefs onto you.) If you want to work just enough to make a living while you're single, that's fine.

I don't believe they had nothing going for them, at least in the more subjective areas like game/social skills, so I suspect you are not evaluating them appropriately.

Speaking to yourself loudly is different than auditory hallucinations (particularly of a disturbing nature.)

It's a solution to a problem but it's not an OPTIMAL solution. There are better solutions with less cost (in terms of risk, side effects, money, etc.) Like, every solution to a problem must be evaluated in those terms: am I paying too much (now and potentially later) to get what I want? If there's a better solution then you're best adopting it.

You have to go to a retreat where there's a doctor that will screen you, do an EKG etc. People with certain conditions shouldn't take it, but otherwise it's safe. It's just much more powerful than mushrooms, there is no comparison. I think it's heart, liver and lung abnormalities that are a problem, but don't hold me to that, check with the retreat staff.

I second this idea, you can't really beat iboga for oxycodone. It's just a matter of saving enough money to go to a retreat.

I think you are operating with a false dilemma in mind. You're not stating it, but it's there implicitly. Here's how to look at it: 1) If I act like "myself" right now, it doesn't work 2) If I act fake, it doesn't work. (that's basically what calibration means to you.) The problem is that those are not the only 2 options. There is a third option: change yourself outside of the context of pickup so that you no longer operate from a dilemma standpoint. In other words, transform your life in other areas first, then see how it automatically transforms how you deal with women.

I don't get this, because it sounds pretty stupid to me, so maybe I'm missing something and you can explain it to me. You're a student at a large university (which I assume is a party school.) ...and you're thinking about cold approach game...at bars? Huh... Why are you doing the hardest thing you can possibly do? What about social circle game? Girls from your classes? Frat parties (even dorks have frats)? College is the time to network and socialize and meet girls the easy way. Like, wtf? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on this thread...

I think what Leo does is basically hypnosis. When he says stuff like "you are imagining blah blah blah" that is what is called a suggestion. You go into your head and start making pictures of whatever; then he says "I am greater than Jesus, Buddha and sliced bread combined!" The content of this doesn't matter; you're already in a suggestible state, so you will go (eyes glazed over) "Leo is better than sliced bread!" You're not critically evaluating anything he's saying; there is no critical thinking involved. You just become a vessel for what he asserts. I have to say it's pretty fucking hilarious (although clearly, doing hypnosis on unsuspecting people is morally suspect.)

See, you're quite capable of fine logic! So perhaps you misunderstood because the topic is too emotionally-charged for you.

Like I keep saying, it's all about inner game. Those who have this experience, like you have, understand that women are uncanny at picking up vibes of confidence in men. They don't even do this consciously, it is like a radar. It is how it works. If you're "having problems dating" then clearly "something great" isn't "happening inside you" consistently. I think you either don't understand what he said or are deliberately misinterpreting it. "Not so great" men can be men that have this PLUS negative qualities. You're making all kinds of assumptions that don't fit what is being said, like "something great" means "great men with no negative qualities" or whatever. There is just too much confusion in your thinking.

You said you "hit the snooze button." Is it possible you're just not getting enough sleep otherwise? It can be difficult to be full of energy and motivated if you're not getting enough sleep, e.g. I would simplify things much more. Focus on your very basic needs (like enough sleep, eating right, etc.) before you look at ambitious goals. Maybe that means going to bed earlier or whatever else. If you can fix that, maybe it'll be easier to do the higher-order stuff.

If you are interested in enlightenment, you are almost certainly in the upper 500s. Most people even in the 400s aren't interested in enlightenment, it's not on their radar. Both of my parents are typical 400s people. (I see a lot that I find funny. People take the Hawkins Scale and look at a person and go, "ah, he's exhibiting negative emotions, he must be in the 100s/200s." That's not how it works at all; The Hawkins Scale is kind of the center of gravity for an individual, not any particular outpouring of emotion.) He's not "enlightened"; he is stage 1 awakened. 600s is where there is no longer a "center point" personal self, it's like a localized spaciousness or witness experience. This witnessing is taken as the substitute subject. This is just sort of getting the ball rolling where at the end of the process there are no substitute subjects, no doer, etc. Let me let you in on a little secret: even a guy at 1000 would have a ton of work to do, so don't place him on a pedestal. Shadow work seriously only begins at 1000. You have to completely dissolve the "subject" which identifies with the ego personality roles in order not to be threatened by your shadow parts and begin to really work out how to integrate them. It is not easy. Personality habits are a tough nut to crack. Enlightenment isn't your personal rapture, it just ends one problem and allows you to alter personality habits so you can act out of choice as opposed to compulsion. The process is a lot of work, however.