Lila9

Yes, I agree. All the points are surprisingly shared by both: (The "Predator" Mindset, The Suppression of Empathy, The Rejection of Modernity and Equality, The "Secret Knowledge," Scaling Women, Alpha/Beta Hierarchy [The "Führer" Principle]). Especially the predator mindset, sleeping with as many women as possible while providing them no value in return and scaling women. They have no idea how traumatizing and humiliating this is for women, and they don’t care because they don’t view us as human. I am traumatized from men’s objectification for my entire life and from men who coldly approached me in public in my most vulnerable years and states, when I was eating, when I was waiting at a bus station and couldn’t leave, when I worked as a cashier, when I was in a new city and needed guidance (some creep actually followed me).

I smell low-key misogyny from you. In the other thread, you called women trash. This says a lot about you. You are one of those men who act like nice guys but actually harbor tons of resentment toward women. You consume content from women who cater to men’s biases and what they want to believe about dating. I don’t know what her intentions are, maybe the same as Pearl’s. It is totally untrue that women don’t have accountability, I hear that all the time. Statistically, women are very successful in academia and in leadership roles. Single mothers and mothers are accountable enough to hold an entire household together while working and never being properly paid. So saying that women are not accountable is just gaslighting. Yes, both genders suck at dating these days but men are obgectively more awful at it. I would like to share more from the women's perspective because it is not often shared here.

If you are interested in teaching philosophy, isn’t it about teaching people how to think critically, first and foremost? From my view, teaching philosophy is more about teaching people to ask the right questions and letting them arrive at answers through more questions, rather than serving them ready-made answers, right? This is how philosophy was originally practiced. And, of course, not with just anyone, but with people who are genuinely interested in philosophy. Do you have an issue with being challenged? Regarding the truth: Isn't it impossible to access truth if one is selfish? People are selfish, but I would argue that men are, on average, more selfish than women. I believe I confronted Leo about this earlier. The masculine doesn’t care more about truth than the feminine; it is just that they have different paths. If the masculine seeks truth through questioning and logical pursuit, attempting to be as detached from emotions and bias as possible, then the feminine seeks truth through knowing, intuition, the body, and direct “downloads” from the source. Ultimately, the perfect philosopher masters both. Just because most philosophers historically were men (mainly white men) doesn’t mean anything about innate ability. They had the privilege to be alone because they were surrounded by women, if not a wife, then a mother, sister, or other family relative, who met their physical needs. This saved them significant time. Those women may have been brilliant, with great lost potential, but they had to do domestic labor because of strict gender roles and systemic oppression, at the expense of their personal pursuits. I belive that the epidemic of what you call “men-pussies” (men who havn't deconstructed patriarchy, in my jargon) exists because many men refuse to embrace their feminine side, which includes their humaness, their eros (life energy), they are too attached to the masculine energy (logos). Even the stoics were more in touch with their eros. They were socialized to believe that everything related to femininity or women is bad and opposite to what it means to be masculine. So if there is a majority of women in academia, suddenly men dismiss academia as “bad” or “not masculine” simply because women are there. Everything women do, some men do the opposite, believing it will make them masculine, which ironalicaly, makes them more passive, when in reality, they should look up to women in order to become their full selves, they should be open to integrete their natural combination of feminine and masculine energy, which is what women usually do more.

I see. There are inherent biological differences between the sexes. I.e., different genitals (no further explanation needed), different physiques (one has more muscle tissue while the other has more fat tissue), different hormonal cycles (women have a 28-day cycle in which energy changes during the month, some days energy is stable, some days energy is high, some days energy is lower, and some days energy is very low, while men have a daily cycle in which energy is high during the day and lower at night every day), etc., etc. This is widely agreed upon by feminists. no feminists claim that this is not true. One would need to be very detached from reality not to see it. There is no argument about this, correct? The issue is that the system, which is patriarchal, yes, even in “the most egalitarian countries” in Europe, is still tailored more to the male physique, which still discriminates against biological females. Labor performed by males is more rewarded and valued globally than labor performed by females. Male-dominated professions like engineering, tech, and science are considered more valuable, while female-dominated professions like nursing, teaching, and social work are considered less valuable and therefore less paid. While we all want educated children (the next generation) and healthy people in society, we value those professions less when they performed by women. Why? Additionally, women do more unpaid labor by doing more household chores than men and raising children, which affects their careers, and as a result, they remain poorer than men. When women attempt to succeed in male-dominated careers, they are very likely to receive more hostility, sexual harassment, and sex-based discrimination due to biological factors such as motherhood and the menstrual cycle. If we are talking about a truly egalitarian society, it can never be tailored to a male physique alone. It should be tailored to the physiques of both sexes and, in general, any group other than white men - like disabled people, for example. So, the article doesn’t prove anything about the unsuccess of feminism. It only proves that patriarchy persists, and the solution is deeper than just law-level equality. Also, for true equality, we need men to want to be equal to women. It’s not enough for women to strive to be equal to men. Men also need to develop more emotional intelligence to be able to share the burden of emotional labor that women do. Men also need to be able to take care of children and do house chores. If women can work, raise children, and do house chores at the same time, men can too. If men don’t strive to be equal to women, no matter how many laws there are, it wouldn’t work. We need two to tango. "Equal rights" doesn’t mean becoming a man. It means receiving the same human rights as men: the freedom to vote, to choose, to receive an education, to possess property, to earn, etc. It started with the first wave of feminism, which didn’t necessarily want to destroy patriarchy. It just wanted the right to compete with men in the patriarchal system in order to spread privilege more equally, if that makes sense. First-wave feminism did a lot of good for women, but it was mainly white women wanting the same freedom as white men. However, it doesn’t fully work because the problem is deeper. The issue is deeper, and the solution must be more complex than simply granting equal rights by law. It is a nice beginning, but not the end. This is why feminism continued through four waves. Each wave developed feminist ideas further and added more nuance to the previous waves. Feminism evolved over time and adjusted itself to reality with constant backlash. The First Wave The goal: Legal equality, the right to vote, property rights, access to education. The backlash received from patriarchy: Claims that women are too emotional or irrational for politics (funny when it comes from men), mockery in the media, and portraying feminists as anti-family or unnatural. The Second Wave The goal: Workplace rights, reproductive rights, protection from domestic abuse, and opposition to pornography (arguing that it sexualizes inequality, normalizes violence, and trains men to see women as objects). The backlash received from patriarchy: Rigid beauty standards, which were promoted and monitzied by capitalism; the porn industry further develops, which alienates women from their bodies and objectifies them for the male gaze, for mere comsumption, women internalizing this and not feeling connected enough to their bodies, constant stress, eating disorders, and mental health issues among women. The Third Wave The goal: Body positivity and sex positivity (emphasizing women’s agency and sexual autonomy), rejection of narrow beauty standards, rejection of the male gaze, and recognition of how race, class, and sexuality affect women differently (i.e., women of color are more oppressed than white women, LGBTQ women are more oppressed than hetrosexual women). The backlash from patriarchy: Claims that feminism is no longer needed because women already have legal rights. Claims that feminism has gone too far. Sexualization and commodification of feminist messages by capitalism in order to sell products, culture wars, and red pill/manosphere backlash. The Fourth Wave The goal: Bringing awareness to how widespread sexual harassment is in workplaces and powerful industries, shifting the shame to the attacker rather than the victim, accountability for abusers, believing and supporting survivors, body autonomy, reproductive rights, equal healthcare access/treatment, critique of porn expectations and unrealistic beauty ideals, critique of the “motherhood penalty” and “fatherhood bonus”, unpaid care labor, concerns about femicide and gender-based violence, which are seen as systemic issues. Backlash from patriarchy: The manosphere (Andrew tate alike alpha bros), claims of “cancel culture” and “feminism gone too far”, political pushback against women’s reproductive rights, increased online harassment and misogyny targeting women, framing feminism as anti-male, promoting rigid gender roles, dismissing structural inequality. Why is there always backlash to feminism? Note that feminism has valid goals. None of them involve killing, raping, controlling men, or harming men for no reason. The most “horrible” thing is holding men accountable for their bad treatment of women. It is more about freedoms that men receive without question and take for granted, while women do not. When women request the same form of freedom, fair treatment, and respect, they receive massive backlash. Why? This is because the system, which is patriarchal, wants to preserve itself. The men (and some women) in this system work to preserve the system, because of various reasons: socialization, survival, conformism, fear of change, privilege, lack of critical thinking, ignorance, etc. I would argue that the pickup and red pill movements emerged as a backlash to feminism, as an attempt to regress and revive the past, to preserve the gender roles of the past simply because they served men more than women. This is anti-evolutionary. Historically, marriage has always served men more. They made a bargain with the devil. The patriarch is a corrupted and inauthentic individual. He sold his soul for privilege in this hierarchy of power, where his freedom is guaranteed and his lineage continues, regardless of his character or genes. He sold his humanity, his femininity, his compassion, his humanness, his eros, his intuition. Today, after 4 waves of feminism the trurth is very obvious: men who follow patriarchy are not attractive to women, especially women who have deconstructed patriarchy, aka feminists, and see through its BS. These men are not attractive not because they are bad-looking or not rich enough, but because they lack eros, which is life energy connected to feminine energy. They have too much logos (connected to masculine energy) and so little eros. This is boring. And it make them so dumb. If you read male characters written by women, they have lots of eros because they are at peace with both their feminine and masculine sides. No internal conflict. Regular men in the patriarchal system lack it. They are boring conformists and submissive to other powerful men. This is not attractive, I’m sorry. Feminine and masculine energy are not uniquely possessed by men or women, both have them, and in women both energies are intertwined. When you repress your feminine energy and force the other gender to repress their masculine, you end up with toxic and codependent gender roles, which are unnatural and inhuman, even if they are called “traditional.” And if they are set to benefit only you while oppressing the other gender, don’t be surprised when you receive backlash. You deserve it! Therefore, the solution for all young men who struggle with dating is to deconstruct patriarchy, learn how it it hurts them and women, connect to both their feminine and masculine energy and reclaim their full humanity: stop watching porn and objectifying women, talk to real women, learn leadership and organization skills from women, develop emotional intelligence, cultivate real relationships with people, and cultivate some eros.

Come on. You are policing men by calling them gay for not being part of your patriarchal toxic masculinity cult. This is so pathetic and outdated, dude. Grow up.

This is not true. Men are even more toxic toward other men. Yes, they have the bro code, but it is shallow and very hierarchical, and the only purpose of this bro club is to exclude women and other marginalized groups to keep the control and the power in their hands, rather than actually connecting to their humanness and forming genuine connection. Otherwise, men wouldn’t complain about the loneliness epidemic. Women usually develop better relationships with each other, deeper ones, because women are usually more emotionally intelligent. Men are not that emotionally intelligent because of male privilege, which allows them to survive in society and receive all their human rights while being immature idiots. Haha, and dude, women can always learn to do male jobs. Stop sharing the same cherry picked video I have seen you incels share over and over again as if it means something. Men's job is a matter of skill. Yes, it may be more difficult due to a different physique, but women are quick learners and good leaders. Even science says so. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2023/03/31/new-research-women-more-effective-than-men-in-all-leadership-measures/ Most of male dominated professions like science and tech deliberately exclude women (by hostile behavior towards them) due to mysogeny and fear because they know that once women will feel free to enter those fields, these insecure males are doomed. You and your friends actually need to start learning real leadership skills from women rather than looking up to immature idiots you worship, who teach you nothing but exploit you shamelessly, and you accept it like the submissive idiots you are. That’s why many men have unconscious resentment of women. Women have lots of power given by nature, and insecure, weak men like yourself always try (with stupid passion) to destroy women, to take their rights, because this is the only way you can deal with women: by taking their rights. You FEAR equality. Women are so powerful that you need to take their human rights in order to feel good in yourself. You, the “non-emotional” men, are actually very emotional, it turns out. Insecurity, hatred of women, entitlement, anger, grandiosity are emotions, fyi. Society is controlled by lunatic men, and it hurts everyone, including you, and if you don’t understand it, I’m sorry, I don’t know how to help you.

Men are those who do dick measuring, competing with other men because of ego. And women are forced to compete with other women in order to survival In the patriarchy, but competition is not a feminine thing. If we are a matriarchal society, why the most powerful people in society are men? Where are our powerful matriarchs?

Where did the assumption that the feminine cares less about truth than the masculine come from? Who did you hear that from, and why do you view this as truth? Who does this belief serve? How is this weaponized? I suspect that there is an underlying dark motivation behind this assumption (an ego stroke) rather than actually seeking the truth. Is this your sneaky ego trying to feel superior to women? Maybe deep down you also fear your feminine side. If you truly cared about truth, this assumption alone wouldn't satisfy you. You would need to question everything, always. If people don't automatically accept your assumptions as truth, it is actually a good sign and not something to be intimidated by. Did you fantasize that you could just approach people who have different life experiences than yours, who may be in a survival mindset, with a random radical assumption, and that they would accept you as their messiah or something? Just because some guru says that reality is a hallucination says nothing to me, even if what he says is true. I should think for myself. Unless I experience something that convinces me that this is the case, I should remain suspicious but open. If I am provided with math solutions, I am not satisfied. I want to solve them on my own. I want to be immersed in the process. This is more interesting. Someone may provide me with a general guide on how to solve math problems, but I want to arrive at the solution myself. This would be more reliable for me. Anyone can hand me a solution to a difficult math problem, but they could lie about it, solve it incorrectly, or be grandiose, so why should I trust their solution? Let me solve it on my own, and then we will see.

Probably ETs or with their help. There is some evidence that science rejects because it is "irrational".

How feminism can be authority if the world is still controlled by patriarchal values? By competition? By heraechy? By men being mostly in power?

OK Lila, enough Actualized.org for today or for the next year/s. This place is not for me.

Ideally, there aren’t supposed to be people who are rich to this extent, especially when there are people whose basic needs aren’t met or are barely met. That’s sick. It reminds me of a tale… About Lao Tzu, who was the chief of justice of the supreme court in China. This decision was made by the emperor of China, even though Lao Tzu denied it at first because he knew that he was not suitable for the court. His first case was of a poor man who was accused of stealing money from the richest man in China (richer than the emperor of China). Lao Tzu gave the verdict of six months in jail for both the poor man and the rich man. Everyone was shocked, haha, especially the rich man. He was the one who was robbed, so why did he have to go to jail? Lao Tzu explained to him that he sees deeper. The poor man stole from the rich man because the rich man hoarded all the wealth of the land, taking from many and depriving the community. The rich man’s greed forced people into theft. So he, the rich man, is the primary criminal, while the poor man is secondary. The tale ended with the emperor concluding that Lao Tzu was too deep and too wise for the court and releasing him from his duty.

It is difficult. It is better to avoid as much as possible and protect your peace. Most of humanity is not at the level of loving horrible people, and that’s OK. Even normal people who did nothing to them may be disliked for silly and selfish reasons, like hair color, accent, social status, gender, ideology, etc. Most people’s hearts are not that big because most of the time humans operate from a low vibrational state (beta waves), which is good for analyzing things, logic, and survival in the modern world, but is not enough for acceptance, love, and connection. When we are really open to love and accept others, our consciousness operates on alpha waves. We can get there through relaxation and meditation. Then we are more open to others, our hearts are more open, we are more able to accept, we are less likely to judge, we are more prone to listen and truly curious about others, we truly want to understand them, and we love them. However, there are cons to this, because when it is misused, we are more vulnerable to suggestion and manipulation. I have heard that the marketing industry is very aware of this and uses various techniques in its commercials to make our brains enter an alpha state so we are more likely to listen to and observe their ads. We are also very vulnerable when our brain in the theta brain waves state, which is a deep mediative state. This is also the state we enter when we are hypnotized. Anyway, I realized that regardless of the state of my brain, loving is a conscious choice. While it is not human to love everyone always, we can always strive to be more loving and make loving choices. And we can also control our brain waves once we are conscious of it: Sometimes we experience mystical experiences that make us feel like we love everything, but they are temporary. If we ever love everyone, this should come naturally, not by force, and there is no need to feel guilty about it if we are not as loving as we believe the ideal spiritual person should be. I have a ritual of love meditation to wind down. It is very simple but very effective at both entering alpha/theta brain waves and connecting to God. I imagine a big divine LOVE light inside me, growing from my heart chakra, expanding to my body, my home, my town, the country, the continent, the entire planet Earth, the entire galaxy, and the entire universe(s). Every place it expands to, it nurtures with love, unconditional love for everything that exists, for existence itself. The feeling at the end of it is amazing.

❤️

Female genitalia is a womb, a void, a dark space. Dark space is nothingness, it is the soil on which everything can grow and be created. INFINITE potential. This is literally the most powerful thing. Without it, there is no life. If the womb creates life, then the breasts feed it. There is so much power in the feminine, given by nature. You can build the most technologically advanced city, but without mothers giving birth, it is pointless. It is a ghost city. Just because men are taller and more muscular does not mean that they are entitled to control women. The natural purpose of the male physique is to be an aid to the life created, not those who destroy it. Patriarchy is not the basic social organization, it is unnatural. It opposes nature. It fights against it. It creates artificial hierarchy and suffering. It is fueled by insecurity and fragile egos rather than truth, love, and wisdom. Natural social organization does not oppose nature the way patriarchy does. It does not destroy it. It lives in alignment with nature. It does not create poverty, it does not rape women and children, and it does not protect male superiority at the expense of anything valuable. Men who like submissive women are usually insecure and have fragile egos. They hate femininity, because they have indoctrinated under patriarchy to hate it. They can only accept femininity when it's castrated, non intimidating to their ego. NPC type patriarchy constricted femininity. Which is actually masculinity in disguise. Men gladly obey other men, even if those men are morally corrupt and delusional. Men obey patriarchy and never deconstruct it, even if it kills them. This is the highest level of obedience. It is foolishness.

JD Vance is such a creep

Women are socially pressured to obey because this is what patriarchy perceives as being feminine, but this is not femininity per se. Men obey more powerful men because this is how they learned to build trust and relationships with them.

I wish I loved and respected myself enough. I regret not being more selfish. I was parentified by my parents, as the eldest daughter, I was like a tiny mom not only to my parents and siblings but also to the children in the neighborhood I grew up in. My pain was invisible to the adults around me. I always appeared stronger than I felt inside, and I wasn’t aware of that until people told me. I wasted so much time taking care of others while neglecting myself.

Obedience is a masculine energy. Soldiers are obedient. Obedience requires self-repression, sacrifice, and discipline. This is the complete opposite of feminine energy, which is creative, expressive, and free-spirited. You simply want a masculine soldier with female genitalia.

Maybe you should start with a platonic relationship with women, just to hang out and play, unless you see this as too degrading to your ego and something that may exclude you from the patriarchal cult, after which you will be called a simp, of course. What is it in the gender dynamics that created the incels and red-pillers? What are the gender dynamics that actually worked in the past? Do you mind elaborating? Yes, but men like you enable toxic men in power. You actively support them, you admire them, you bootlick and stroke their ego, and they shit on you, send you to wars for stupid reasons, play with your life, make you poor and weaker and you still look up to them and blame all your problems on women or feminists, because this is what they want you to do. Y’all never ask questions. You just accept the pressure. Just a perspective.

I see. How deep do you believe your understanding of Alien Consciousness is? I understand that it may be difficult to explain, but I would love you to expand on it as much as realistically possible in your blog posts.

What this information is based on? Source?

Remote viewing? What if this information is now outdated? Astrologers don’t do remote viewing or astral projection or something paranormal to obtain the knowledge. They just study what they have been taught. This is a second hand knowledge, I suspect.

Ok, I think I know the answer but I won’t share hahaha.

Ok, so the planets are living and conscious, and their energy is affecting us. How do we know how each planet affects us? How do we know that they are predictable? How do we know that one planet affects a specific aspect of our lives and not another planet? Astrology maps are very detailed, where does this information come from?