eos_nyxia

the openness to raw reality + the willingness to be wrong and to adapt your perspective >>> models. If you get this backward, I think you can't avoid reaping what you sow, you are chained to your models forever like a slave. You cannot dispense with it that easily even when it truly does not serve you anymore: say that you've truly outgrown whatever the original use is. And so the thing which originally gave you meaning and value quite freely, it now binds you. Eventually, you get less and less fresh value in return, but you do keep getting a meaning that you're addicted to. It functions like an addiction. And if you can't (at least theoretically) dispense with your models, it actually also limits how well you can work with them. I think a lot of flexibility and adaptability are required to best make use of any sort of mental construct or mechanism. Detachment and "having some space" from any of your models of use frees you up to make use of them in a more creative, ingenious way. Also: people's attachment to hierarchies and what it means, and has to mean.... this is also straight-up a sort of mental/ emotional slavery. You may not feel it at first, but it does bind you. Keeping things a bit looser/ open-ended at least clears up your path of movement a bit, including in the RIGHT NOW. From this perspective of needing models: There are rules about ascending through hierarchies. And they MUST be obeyed. I tend to think of it as a sort of game with a bunch of rules, the rules may be anywhere from very explicitly said, to being so implicit that the people playing it barely see it at all. Hierarchies... are ultimately also a mental invention or construction (that may or may not be relatively well-built for its purpose). But is it ever the fastest, most efficient way to do anything? Very rarely is this the case. The nature of its construction makes this so. This isn't about "skipping steps in development"/ attempts at spiritual bypassing (which is a valid issue in the sense that people do end up less developed in certain ways), but about the whole structure of mental hierarchization being super-rigged by nature. We call this "reality" and this keeps us in our place. Along with that, there is also this urge to impose meaning onto others by telling people what it means, and thereby restricting other people's pathways as well... isn't there? Great, now we're all enslaved by our models.

Realistically, if you have biases that you insist on protecting in a way that you get super attached to, and you get defensive about it... Congrats! You got emotions. Defensiveness is rooted in emotionality. Just because it is latent does not mean that it doesn't exist, haha. You make decisions based on such all the same.

I will say though that the states for "losing" in choosing poorly are higher, specifically in terms of men being a direct risk to your body and physical health. But I really don't quite get what's going on here. There is something not right about this whole thread.... that does not serve the highest good. And saying WOMEN ARE THIS, WOMEN ARE THAT, this is simply supposed to be about pointing out "unpleasant truths", right? I think one of my issues is with gender-essentializing all emotion. First of all: ANGER is still an emotion. Men (I assumed cishet in the past)... in my experience, are highly emotional, and not even with anger. But how MANLY OUTBURSTS and MANLY TEARS don't get written as a man having an adult temper tantrum has seriously been beyond me. How you get to be considered a logical person as a result of being man/ "having testosterone" (??) makes zero sense. How can this be accepted tolerated as professional behaviour (or behaviour appropriate for public) if "emotional outbursts" are just not acceptable? I just don't get it. When I was younger especially, I often presented as on the dry/ logical side. Especially in conflicts (with partners). I.... don't think it was considered particularly attractive overall. But I was raised that way. IMO there is something super dysfunctional if the only thing you can get from that is that I'm a super masculine woman by nature. I know that I'm a bit different in this way though: like for my husband, feeling like/ identifying as a man is intrinsic, to the point that he takes it for granted. It's like breathing, eating, or sleeping. For me, "femininity" has always been like a sort of hyper-conscious, performance art. Often, it has felt very real, but also paper thin. Like a beautiful illusion. .....this means though I tend to take the stuff I like, and reject things that I don't like and see value in. In general: I don't think it's right to too heavily genderize "logic" or "emotion", even if trends emerge. This is to say, with your rhetoric (your way of talking about things, your perspective), you should NOT be making it harder for people to become more balanced by spreading your "TRUTHS" about the world around and around. In other words, you dudes: don't go around claiming all of the good attributes for yourself! And unless you are a Vulcan (like a Spock!), perhaps you are not in the position to be judging so freely because you also, at times, have this human-thing called emotions leaking out of you too, in your particular way? (Not that it will make any difference to me personally, because it never has.)

As a woman this thread is pretty unrelatable to me based on overall life choices, lol. A lot of the girls/ women that I have known and been closest to were either: had a "young and dumb phase", but in their case, it was pretty short (as in, through highschool) actively not interested in men, or avoiding them (school, preparing for career, just not that attracted to them overall, very introverted/ isolated (the last two groups which is just not being accounted for when people are like WOMEN THIS, WOMEN THAT.) Generally, I actively avoid people who are in a state of frequent crisis as a result of their decisions though.... that's my bias/ preference. I have just had enough other things to work on (whether on myself or some other aspect of my life) so I generally don't pick people who destabilize that. Sometimes I've felt overly selfish about it, but in my experience, the consequence of ""giving people a chance"" when I knew they would be trouble or we would not be good fits has pretty much never been worth it. Anyway, I think selecting for """DUMB WOMEN""" is apparently other people's bias. Yea... I would agree that this is not a gender-specific issue, really. I've watched a good number of men/ boys make dumb-as-shit choices since puberty. Some people keep repeating them. But to be hearing stuff like "ALL WOMEN ARE >>>insert negative traits<<<<" as a result of their own choices.... in my head, I have been quietly shaking my head from a distance. Like for example: lots of dudes seem to be wired toward the "SPARKLIEST" woman wherever they are. (Which I generally consider to be fair play; you want what you want.) But predictable things then happen. Then they wonder why all women are shit. But then you hear this train of thought: "Oh, all women are like this, even the super shy ones/ good girls?" Dude. Ok. I've gone through this one before, and you probably should too. Are you sure that you're not just a "shit magnet", as in, you have a knack for attracting and not choosing people who are not good for you? That you have some unconscious bias for selecting terribly? If you're explicitly attracted to emotion and following your appetite for sparkly displays.... generally, you get drama? There are literally whole groups of women who are just INVISIBLE. And that has not changed since puberty.

Yea... you can't actually "refute" much of what I'm saying at all, can you? Let alone actually have a coherent conversation about it? (Which wasn't exactly the intent of writing what I did anyway.) Sorry, you found it not interesting/ not fun/ etc. But the point of making such a detailed response is.... addressing various points and issues related to the topic you brought up. I took this topic seriously... because it is a serious enough topic, and you just don't care. Nice. So basically, this is all about your emotions and how you want to feel about things, and how you want to see the world, above anything else. Damn absolutely everything else. Damn whatever effects your worldview has on the world by extension. Figures. Dogmatic people mostly all think and react in a very similar, predictable sort of way, TBH. At least you're honest about not giving a shit, I guess.

@Hero in progress I wrote a rather long, serious post on the previous page... and none of my points were addressed, as that's how it goes sometimes. But anyway: why are you tagging yourself in your responses? I..... thanks for that visual, lol. I didn't need to know quite that much. ...honestly, what she needs, from your description, is probably a very long shower. 1) What makes you think that the "ugliness" that you saw that came outside, wouldn't have been something that was kept inside and/ or latent otherwise? Do you really think keeping it all in and to yourself makes it better? 2) Also, you don't seem to have a great relationship with your sister based on how you talk about her? You make your sister sound like a piece of meat... Ok, so.... what are the actual, apparent consequences of being promiscuous? I mean logistically, what do you think actually happens to women?? While I'm familiar with various semen retention theories, I'm not sure what you're taking as an indisputable truth here. Even if there is in fact a point to retaining one's energies.... y'all super fucking weird about it ("weird" in this case = neurotic and giving off culty vibes). But that's what often happens when you fetishize self-restraint, or anything, really. The risk of disease is a valid enough concern (for which people do take precautions, often very seriously). Shame tends to have its roots almost purely in socialization/ culture/ upbringing, and regret is very personal. Guess what: regret is a risk... because LIFE is risks. But that can go either way, with FOMO or with having baggage from too much negative, unwanted experiences. Are you people actually ever serious about this whole "loose pussy" thing, or is it just a figure of speech? Because I've heard WAY too many people talk about vag in a literal way, and it's pretty dumb. As if the vag could magically discriminate against the owner of one penis or another, if lots of sex was somehow going to make someone looser.... So are you also saying... don't have too much sex with your husband/ wife because that will also make you loose? Might as well be logically consistent here, you know?

@Hero in progress In what world is "women are used up/ undesirable the more they have sex, and the older that they get" expected to go over well with women? Whether you are personally interested in someone at all, it's beside the point IMO. It's dehumanizing rhetoric. (And arguably, in the process, you unavoidably get dehumanized as well. Which I suppose is fine if truly you want to reduce your relationships to nothing more than a series of transactions.) I mean... to be fair, it's not like the opposite type of suggestion is being taken that well either? (That men aren't intrinsically desirable just because they get older, more experienced, >>>insert male person's metric of high value<<<)

I stopped being bothered by these type of things pretty much completely (like the man who is being responded to in the video) because it's just like he's slapping a giant, screaming sign on his forehead that says: "I HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER EMOTIONALLY." Thanks for letting us all know?

This idea that women are sitting around crying because they aged out of being targeted by older men who see them as a >>>>insert random young, interchangeable piece of ass<<<< needs to just go die already. Y'all can have each other, whoever you all see as mutually "high value". Don't care TBH...

It's straight-up cope in many cases, lol. Not just about the physical appearance. But the supposed value of things they have to offer offset such. IMO, "achievements" don't really make up at all for someone who is likely a less vital version of themselves, and who is more cynical/ judgemental, and especially more rigid. But anyway, reality sorts itself out.

Yea... but does your semen value you back?! Oh, a more serious answer. As someone who might fit your description as a woman (I've probably been with fewer people in terms of traditional sex acts compared to many women who identify as conservative in my culture), but who is not conservatively wired sexually... (as in, I had to make choices which led me up to this point.): 1) there are NO PRIZES at the end for not truly doing what you want to do, and experiencing what you want to experience, regardless of the supposed consequences. Regardless of whether you "fuck it up" and other people and yourself treat you like "broken/ used goods" at the end of it all. FOMO is real. No one's gonna come give you a medal/ trophy for being "perfect", so let's hope that you're truly happy with your choice. (Or else you might do something like go around shoving it in people's faces, trying to either convince or force people to do the same as you do.... which is, "coincidentally", not something that people who are truly happy with their choices tend to do.) 2) according to these types of purity models, I was always used/ damaged goods for reasons out of my control. (history of childhood sexual abuse). I had to come to terms with this quite early, that either way, this choice about "when" and "how" I started expressing my sexuality was not mine to make, along with "who", obviously. TBH, I have had no reason to play along with this game for the reasons that people often play along. Guess what? This is sometimes behind people's motivation toward promiscuous behaviour, though it is absolutely never safe to assume. Fortunately for myself, I also came to the conclusion very early in life that purity or "innocence" is NOT about your history, but about keeping the slate clean, or perhaps polishing it. About consolidation of body, mind, and spirit. And the way you express yourself, the way you feel, the way you think thoughts. It is about being so truly you(/You), that that is all that there really is. It's about how open you are, regardless of whatever you have experienced (or not experienced). Strangely... it's actually about having more personal power in and of itself, just because, and not about giving it away or taking more power relative to other people (or in the context of societal structures). Anyway... who actually, realistically wins according to this model? For anyone who does... like, their experience and interests and sexual inclinations and wiring lines up with this system? They always did "get lucky". They meet the right person, at the right age, in the right context, and then they put the work in. 3) TBH, I think my sexual restraint and self-discipline ended up making me more intense with my sexual fantasies (if I choose to go this way) in a way that ended up making me more "depraved" (as in, extravagant/ unhinged). That's what it tends to do, lol. And it can so very easily backfire. Isn't this obvious enough from looking around? >>>cue some public conservative figure/politician with a very respectable wife/life/kids who gets outted for being into non-kosher porn/ paid sex<<< Off the top of my head, the only person that I have seen give this advice in a decent and practical way toward women is a woman herself (The Crappy Childhood Fairy) who made this suggestion: if you have trauma and/or attachment issues, getting intimate with people fast and easy often doesn't work well in your favour. You tend to keep getting into inflammatory situations where the cycle repeats in some variation or another. However, this isn't a moral/ puritanical judgment. It's a practical one from someone who has dealt with actual issues.

What's the appeal of this particular game// hierarchy of consciousness? As in, what are the ACTUAL prizes for "winning"? What... because it's "the truth"? Please... that's literally what everyone says. He said, you said, we said, etc. What.... so that you inevitably get to place yourself at the very top (or near it)? That's pretty boring (and also, very predictable). At the end of the day, you're stuck in your head just like everyone else who is playing their little games with themselves, by themselves. So what I'm asking is... is it a good game? Why would I either want or be compelled to buy into it as an ideology? As for any issues you have with people stem solely from you being "too advanced"? lol. (Even if it might be a legitimate concern in some cases, it's a real easy cop-out in many others. For example: a lot of the problems that people say are a result of being "AM SO SMART NO ONE UNDERSTANDS ME" is squarely a result of being """emotionally underdeveloped""" and not being at other people's bandwidth (emotionally speaking) for whatever the reason, and often not wanting to be either. Often it's the result of people who wanna be so special. Everyone, no matter their ideology/ cognitive models at hand: it's way too easy to fall back on your models whenever you hit snags with dealing with reality/ people and to get defensive like your life and identity depends on it. Rather than to think... hey. It might be something else entirely off-the-map. Or: maybe my attitude and approach is not that productive with people (But also: that really, you just don't care anyway.) Without a certain kind of detachment from your models (as a scholar at least theoretically should have), without the ability and willingness to toss it out and start over if need be, without the willingness to at least sometimes see "raw reality" the way it is first, openly and in all ways, in all its complexity and messiness and unfathomability (at times), without pre-emptively shoving it into boxes (inevitably to serve one personal agenda or another)... what's it all worth ultimately? We got all sorts of people shoving all sorts of theories together for varying agendas. Some of them more well made, and some less. Some legitimately accounting for more factors, and some far less (regardless of actual claims made). In some cases, consider this: there might actually be a good reason why no one wants to buy it.

I was exploring "detroit techno" last week still, and Plastikman came up. This reminds me of hearing this song by them a couple years back. Though I didn't realize that they were part of the Detroit scene then. Note to self: replacing a "c" with a "k" in a word does not automatically make some music group/ person German. Very sexy in a being pulled down into a very dark basement in a late 90s-era cyberpunk club kind of way. It's a coin toss... will you makeout with someone, or will you get smothered? No one knows.

Thanks for reminding me to relisten to #1 Record!

...don't forget to add shitting wherever, masturbating in public, and living in a barrel to that list! Life goals.........

@integral Great, now why doesn't he (since I have seen and responded to at least one of his other threads) and other people take this same attitude of "meeting people where they're at", and apply this to everyone else on the forum? What's the difference between "not capable", "doesn't care", and possibly thinking that what he does is in everyone's best interest? Like, if he was a woman in this space discussing things from a "feminine" point of view (even if what's validly feminine seems to be constantly up for debate) and getting antagonistic, this discussion would get gendered pretty quickly and people would be treating him like he's a screeching, overly-emotional harpy. Anger/ aggression is an emotion too, ya know.

Agenda = objective, goal, purpose, motivation, desire. Pick one or any. Everyone has an objective (or objectives) for doing one thing or another, even if they're not always cognisant of them. What's yours? What's your aim? What are you trying to accomplish? Beyond "infinite love"? Why are you so hella wound up, to start with? It's like watching someone screeching into the air. ...or maybe a televangelist. It gives off 'frothing at the mouth' vibes which I find a bit entertaining. ...I've had my moments too though, fyi. Not sure why you're looking at everything and seeing antagonism/ criticism. You too can 'choose' how you're going to respond if that's the game you're at. Yes, we're all mirroring aspects of ourselves and reach other (however you want to divide the pie that is identity/ self/ Self/ etc.) ....so what else about it?

@thisintegrated Originally I joined this site a couple of years ago to journal and hash out some of my identity issues/ thoughts in a public space. It was therapeutic and helped with dealing with breaking some of my self-expression inhibitions as well. If I didn't still journal on here (and get used to doing such), I probably wouldn't have an account and post on here at all anymore, though I might be reading people's posts, IDK. I still like reading people's journals, it's like getting a recurring subscription to looking into the personal, deeper slice of how people process and approach themselves, their lives, etc. So I am watching people doing their thing, and myself doing my thing, and sometimes the both of us doing our things in ways that sometimes intersect via interaction, observing each other, etc. And I find the writing medium a bit more intimate as well. Overall, even on this forum: I prefer to observe what people are doing, where they're at, what it means to them, etc. more than I really like to participate most of the time. As for visiting the "SD Orange" parts of the forum, I guess: 1) I'm chronically drawn to observing the lowest common denominator. 2) A lot of the "higher content" I find a bit dry/ insipid because of the contents of it.... as, in I stopped finding what was being discussed novel years and years ago. Probably around 16-17. TBH a lot of the stuff I see people writing about it's like... a far less coherent rehash of what I grew up around via my own reading and also my dad's influence, who was also highly educated and well-written/ well-read. >>>>insert various high-Fallutian, Neo-Buddhist/Hindu spiritual influences with a cognitive bias<<<< It's like watching people doing some kind of slow, confused noodling. From the outside, it's like... what's the appeal? Is this fun? Is this meaningful? Is this what everyone showed up to the party for? ... It has the same appeal of showing up to an appointment you're obliged to go to, or being stuck in the public schooling system. Still, I do read the stuff sometimes. I just find it boring. It's like: I check in quickly, breeze through it, see if there's anything noteworthy or interesting, get out. And if I feel like if I'm gonna come in here and post with a bad attitude, I just... shouldn't. It serves no worthwhile greater purpose.

We're probably not going to hear any sort of resolution on that any time soon. But generally, I would tend to assume that it is, at its very best, unnecessary. Unless there is some sort of "benefit" that I have never heard of... I've tried quite a few Stevia-based sweeteners over the past 15-20 years, and this one is one of the very best, IMO: ' A lot of them have this aggressively herbal, bitter aftertaste, and this is one of the few that doesn't.

There are too many people here who want to talk and want to be the best (and also be right), and that's very boring to both watch and participate in. Which is why I rarely post on the main forum. I guess some people interact with others on this basis for fun and possibly to learn something, but personally, I find it gets old very quickly. TBH I tend to assume that it has a lot to do with the demographics of the forum (some of which you mentioned): young, male, ...inexperienced with the opposite sex (or at least, """has trouble relating to the feminine"""/has some major chip on their shoulder about it), has certain cognitive biases and favours particular styles of communication, and tends to exclude others on this basis. Pick one or all of the above. Also, as @Gesundheit2 said, there is an element of this: mostly, this forum is probably made up of first-worlders with a lot of time/ privilege on their hands. If they weren't, they would be going about conversations on the same subjects in a different way; I am sure of it.

Why are you so passionate about all of this, anyway? And what's your agenda?

What does a "high-level" forum actually look like to people? (Serious question to be answered.. not just a rhetorical one.) Are you looking for a space where people have earned their accolades/ "rank", based on >>insert whatever your values are, and your system of measurement for growth/ attainment is<<. Is this just a group of people getting together, coming to discuss "Very Important Things" together? Is it meant or preferred to be more open or closed, and why? IMO it's first more about the sorts of conversations that people have, how we have it, and what sort of values we share. What actual work is being done (or not), both individually and in people coming together. Measurement and judgement about people's progress (or lack thereof) ought to come second, in the sense that, it's not very productive when taken in isolation, and done as something for its own sake. Case in point: take a look around at people doing the same thing, not just here, but in any group. IMO it's all the same pile, but sometimes with slightly nicer and more sophisticated window dressing. If people say that it somehow makes a difference because they are >insert "Godly"/ spiritual identity, insert specific activities<...it's mostly all distraction. By design, it generally gets people as a group nowhere (although it maybe works as a competitive stimulus for some people), and people make something of it in spite of it. Technically, enlightenment was always sold as a "way out" of the cycle of the grind. ....and that's how a religion starts. But you know, life goes on after that (whatever your metrics for "enlightenment" is).

Issac Newton's virginity sure helped with his reproduction value, haha. ....seriously though, how does being a turbo-nerd fit into all of this evo-psych stuff? The handful of explanations I've heard are just... so clumsy.

1 am mood: I fell a little bit deeper through the "what's Detroit techno??" hole. It's got that old-school, icy-cold Kraftwerk type of feel to it.

Honestly, out of all the things that I have ever done, learning observational drawing and painting has helped the most by far. I notice a ton of details now about people, my environment, and visual aspects of physical reality that I never noticed before, because it does train you to look at reality in literally a different way. (And AI art generators are not gonna replace that.) Is it very time efficient? Probably not.