DrugsBunny

Of course this dude watches Nick Fuentes. I knew you were a reactionary, but I didn't take you for a literal neo-nazi. If only the admins here were familiar with Nick Fuentes, then I could report the thread, but since they don't know he's a literal card-carrying, board-certified, unapologetic neo-nazi I guess we'll all have to suffer the deranged brain-rot of this thread until they figure it out.

I'm sympathetic, that sucks for artists. However, this thread prompted me to generate a trippy new avatar through AI. Honestly, I think Leo is too optimistic, this sucks for artists. I made this in like 1 minute with no art skills.

How is it that people who do consciousness work can still be duped by the pathetic likes of Andrew Tate?

I tripped on LSD yesterday and it felt like I had the opportunity to surrender fully to ego death if I wanted to. The only issue is, it felt quite uncomfortable. I'll be having a perfectly pleasant trip, feel myself beginning to get carried away by a trance, then anxiety kicks in. My best attempt to describe it would be like, it seems that my ego is comprised of a ton of tiny "nodes", or very miniscule elements of consciousness, almost like a pixel but not visible, and some nodes are inextricably connected with my "fear response" protocol in my brain. Even though there is no reason to feel fear, the nodes that evoke fear get triggered as I start to "surrender" then I back off and say "nah fuck this, I'll just meditate and quell this feeling before trying ego death". Is ego death supposed to evoke such a stark aversion? Just wanna make sure I'm doing this properly.

You really needed the benefit of additional editing and afterthought to complete this juvenile quip attempt? The transphobe community isn't sending their brightest. It's interesting you have chosen to contrive an unfounded narrative of my presupposed violent intent when there is nothing in my post history that would indicate that. It's as if Actualized hired a court jester for much needed comedic relief but got a bit more than it bargained for. Keep rolling out these absolute bangers haha, your posts are gold. My personal favorite is the one where you equated homosexuality with rape and murder.

@Yidaki Your questions have been sufficiently answered, but I suppose the egoic devastation of acknowledging the flaws of your perspective would be unflattering to accept.

@Yidaki Your first question is based in the misconception that they are solely responsible for making the decision. Were you under the impression that a doctor will just perform sex reassignment surgery after simply being requested by a confused teenager? No, absolutely not—this is not how it works—there is an extremely extensive process of psychotherapy and scientifically derived medical assessments intended to properly diagnose whether this will be in the person's best interest... It is also untrue that this is irreversible. If you can change your sex, what makes you think that you couldn't change it back? A simple google search of "reversal sex surgery" will easily demonstrate that you are coming into this matter with false perceptions. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27156012/ Your second question makes it very clear that you have fallen prey to a transphobic ideology. Did you actually fall for the false narrative that you can be prosecuted for accidentally misgendering someone? This has never happened. You can only be subject to legal trouble if, for instance, you work above a trans employee, and they can prove that you are excessively and intentionally harassing them by knowingly refusing to properly address them. This never happens, but if it did it would be indicative of a bigoted person engaging in persecution towards a marginalized class of people, in which case, yes, as an employer, you could find yourself in legal trouble, and rightfully so. Your questions have very obvious answers to them, and I reject the idea that asking questions is diametrically oppositional to having a bigoted perspective. Ever heard of the Jewish Question? *rolls eyes* Even though your questions have been sufficiently answered, I'm don't imagine you'll allow these answers to influence your perspective in the slightest, but hey, you're welcome to prove me wrong.

@Loba You'd likely be devastated by the epiphany of how sheepishly hypocritical you are if it ever somehow occurred to you.

Followed by: *Face-palm* First of all, most do take these steps, but what if altering ones physical appearance falls slightly out of an individual's range of comfortable activity? Your moral prescription here would have us deny their identity simply because YOU are uncomfortable accepting that gender is internal and not necessarily external. If they are truly the gender they describe themselves as, it will surely show up in their speech patterns, and other behavioral traits. My boyfriend (I'm a guy) is a trans guy who still has gorgeous boobies and a cute feminine face. I am physically attracted to females, but sentimentally fascinated by male energy, which is what my boyfriend provides for me flawlessly. I can tell they are a guy inside, yet their physical appearance could leave one guessing. If this makes you uncomfortable, that's not because of their flaws, it's due to your own closed-mindedness. I don't want to be abrasive but there's no other words to properly address your position here. Get used to it.

Can you think about what you just asked for even a second? Gender dysphoria means your body doesn't match your internal identity. There is no more dysphoria if your new body matches your identity sufficiently. We wouldn't gatekeep the right for them to identify as their internal identity behind the paywall of affording an expensive surgery... What exactly do you want us to do with the information provided in this "What is a woman" documentary? Do you actually have any prescriptive actions we should commit to on the basis of your position? Would you prefer that all trans people be forced to identify as the gender they were assigned at birth, and have more of them commit suicide because you won't afford them the courtesy of addressing them as their preferred gender? Matt Walsh is undeniably a bigot, and I assumed those credits transfer to those who bolster his messaging. If this was a faulty assumption I apologize, but frankly I don't think it is. The questions you're asking would be obvious if you actually had any sincere concern for these people.

Your question has already been answered. It would seem that you're not willing to accept the obvious answer to the inquiry you've made. Your mistake is assuming the word "apolitical" can't be used in a less rigid context. In this context, apolitical doesn't mean that the user is not interested in politics, as you're insisting it must mean. It means, within the domain of this forum, the user is literally apolitical in the sense that they are not permitted to engage in politics. What else would you call that? This isn't even a profound observation, nor a necessary scrutiny by any means; you're just demanding that your semantical usage of the word "apolitical" be the exclusive definition that everyone else uses.

@cetus Sensitive.

Apolitical, in this context, obviously means "this user is NOT permitted to discuss politics" rendering them apolitical in the literal sense that within the domain of this forum they will not be engaged in politics. It's a semantics game to insist this is an unreasonable label. To be perfectly clear, I'm not even referring to @Yarco, because Leo didn't make this decision until another user @Fadl decided to indirectly call me a drug addict while asserting the conspiracy of partisan treason regarding the FBI raid. You're probably about to say, "all he said was that the left doesn't want to deal with Trump next election", to which I'll respond: Do you really think that's all he meant by that specific language. Please don't be this intentionally naive.

The lack of self awareness here might actually deserve some kind of trophy. Why not afford me the same courtesy you're describing here regarding my perspective? The reason you won't is because you're politically opposed to my perspective, and your grievance here is not one concerned with open-mindedness as you would have us believe, but with defending your worldview, as I have done, and as @Oeaohoo has. You heard it here first, folks; gays are actually a conspiratorial manifestation from the (((globalist elites))), and the pride flag is the covert symbolism for desanctifying humanity. I'm not being dramatic, but your language is indistinguishable from that of Q-Anon, and "globalist", in the context you're using it, is nothing other than an anti-semitic dog whistle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalism#Right-wing_usage Looks like I'm supposed to report this, and I'll take pleasure in doing so. Gays are now "deviants" apparently. Big yikes. Bro, @Yog are you really going to keep defending this guy? I could already tell he was bigoted nationalist, which is why I went so hard on him, but now that he's made it abundantly clear I'd hope you can admit you were mistaken to take issue with my approach. It's not a coincidence that all the people here opposed to Leo's decision have expressed disgusting views here themselves. I'm trying to imagine the world one must live in to equate homosexuality to murder and rape. https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/80666-insight-into-suffering/ Ban 'em all Leo. Let them pursue consciousness work with the many tools this forum provides, but don't allow them to further delude themselves into lunacy while subjecting the rest of us to their bigotry.

@Oeaohoo It would be wise and somewhat courteous to make some effort to conceal the fact that you frequently binge watch Jordan Peterson, but I'd imagine your habit for wearing antique monocles and sipping oolong tea with your pinky fully extended would naturally preclude you from affording others this modest courtesy. I would ordinarily excuse the pedantic posturing here, but considering how little substance you've actually managed to convey in spite of this heaping onslaught of drivel I'm going to be blunt about how asinine this comes across. Having just looked up "Faust" so as to familiarize myself with this specific flavor of pretentious posturing, I can only laugh at the idea that one could, with a straight face, equate the pursuit for LGBT acceptance with selling ones soul to the devil. It must make you so angry that people no longer have to live in shame for expressing themselves openly as who they are. No one is forcing you to do anything, we just ask you not be openly bigoted. I'm actually cracking up, my dude's straight up Jordan Peterson on steroids. Let's actually deconstruct what you've just said. Cosmopolitan: • (of a person) One who is free from local or national bias/attachment • (of a culture) Containing people from many different countries Post-modern: • An intellectual stance of skepticism towards epistemic certainty or the stability of meaning • That which follows modernity Nomad: • A person who does not stay long in the same place • A wanderer The implications of what you said are actually pretty revealing. You're essentially ascribing an implied faultiness towards the broad rejection of nationalism, from which I can only surmise that you are a proud nationalist yourself. Post-modernism has nothing to do with this, but you couldn't help but throw in the fancy buzz-word. I hope I'm not being too abrasive here; after all, I can only imagine how difficult it must be to conjure a cogent worldview with the taste of Jordan Peterson's ejaculate ingrained into memory as thoroughly as it must be for someone who would post this.

It's ultimately a good idea to ban certain users from posting political drivel and to take the extra step of making their "apolitical" status visible for all to see. This is supposedly a community for conscientiousness, introspection and self-improvement, so you're committing a blatant affront towards the pursuit of this objective by pompously broadcasting your own selfishness/ignorance and to be blunt, stupidity, by insisting that the FBI commited partisan treason by legally investigating humanity's greatest embarassment, Donald Trump, the bigoted manchild who: Tried to steal the election while insisting it was being stolen Directed an unprecedented insurrection attack on the capitol when he lost Denied the seriousness of covid-19, framed as a liberal hoax Demanded states "slow the testing down" when it became obvious covid was real, sacrificing human lives to preserve the false perception of his preventative efficacy This "FBI raid" was the issue of focus when Leo decided to adopt this much welcomed change, so let's not pretend it is unwarranted or that Leo is being unfair here. You'd have to be haplessly devoid of even the slightest modicum of introspection to believe Trump didn't have this coming, and I'm personally glad there will be accountability for the juvenile dullards subjecting the sane adults of this community to their deranged brain-rot.

I suppose out of infinity anything is possible, but I'm starting to think it must be the case that, at least for some people, the way they talk about their "soul", experiencing heaven, and past lives, and stuff that should only be accessible after death, that it must be the case that multiple lives can take place under the same "dream" of metaphysical consciousness. For instance if you physically die and feel yourself shooting up towards a light tunnel that brings you to some metaphysical conception of heaven, wouldn't that be part of the dream, and you haven't gone infinitely meta yet? Thoughts?

@undeather Sounds awesome, thanks.

That's so good to hear. Question, do you get unlimited water there? Are there showers? I have a weird affliction where I have to brush my teeth excessively to relieve irritation. Would I be able to accommodate this condition on a retreat?

Can we stop pretending that there's even a modicum of intellectual merit in denying trans people their identities just because it makes you uncomfortable? Asking "What is a man/woman?" is like asking "What is a name?"; a name is that which one goes by, same with gender. If your name is @Yidaki, what's to stop someone from saying "Hey, you're name is self-referential! That means it's invalid because definitions can't be self-reflexive." Hopefully you can see why this is just asinine. Nobody would claim that names are contradictory because they rely on self-reflexivity. The reason why this is the ONLY way to consider gender is because it provides the most utility, and very obviously so. For instance, if someone is born with a woman's brain, but has a male body, such a person has to live up to incompatible gender expectations, which leads to isolation and suicidality. Therefore instead of having strict rules limiting gender to one's biological sex, we can accommodate those with gender dysphoria by defining gender as that which one goes by, so we are instead saying gender is that which you are internally, and disregarding external physicality. Unwillingness to take one's word for what gender they are is simply bigotry, and people like yourself need to take a serious introspective look into why conceding this obvious courtesy makes you so uncomfortable. I'm curious, since this transphobia is popping up more often on this forum I'm curious if you actually believe it's even possible for people to have a female's brain structure in a male body. I'd be willing to bet you don't actually believe gender dysphoria is real, which would discredit this whole "ideologically neutral" facade of intellectualism you're going for.

You think if God literally came down from the heavens and bestowed the unflattering truth about Trump upon humanity, conservatives would just call God a libtard and stick their heads further in the sand in the face of divinity? I'd bet on it.

Just some petty food for thought here, but what do you imagine the supposed legal betting odds would be on trump getting arrested at this point now that the feds have raided his private property? There's gotta be a place where you could bet on this right? I might actually wanna put down a few hundred on him getting arrested at this point. Another wager I'm not quite as confident in would be him actually spending significant time behind bars if arrested.

When spirituality meets transphobia. Seriously people, stop responding to this as if this self-appointed internet scholar is actually presenting a critical subject matter and isn't just a simpering transphobe. My dude actually named himself @Scholar and cited a Jordan Peterson video. It's hard to conjure a more pretentious commitment to the phony aesthetic of intellectualism. Just cringe and ignore the poor troll. He is insecure and projecting his own self-hatred onto people suffering from the very real affliction of gender dysphoria.

I've determined that radical self acceptance (otherwise known as self-love, minus the imagery of chronic masturbating) needs to be one of my main goals in consciousness work. I would like more perspectives on how I can actually achieve this. Is it better to actually improve my life by achieving more materialistic pursuits which would naturally lead to self acceptance, or can psychedelics and meditation open new facets of my awareness that will better facilitate this goal without the need to pursue a higher materialistic status?

I'm referring to the subliminal healing auditory videos such as ones found on this channel. I fell asleep to something like this the other day, and had a sort of sleeping hallucination (felt noticeably distinct from an ordinary dream) with obvious spiritual undertones and implications (flying, feeling of freedom). I've only had about 5 of these, which have all come in the last year. I'm starting to think some of the stuff I've previously dismissed as bullshit is actually grounded in something real, but I'd like more perspectives on this.