Emerald

I just got mine today about 6 hours ago. I got the J and J shot, so I don't have to go back for a second one. So far, no side effects.

Yin and Yang always go together in everything. They are never separate. Shiva and Shakti dance together within the macrocosm of the universe and in the microcosm of atom. They exist as complements within every living and non-living system. But if we draw some broad strokes, detachment from outcome is Yin, while aiming toward a particular outcome is Yang. Yang goes from point a to point b as it has a set destination and goal. Yin starts at point a and ends up where the wind blows it. That said, detachment from outcome, which is Yin must happen before certain Yang traits can be tapped into... such as rationality. This is why you can't really integrate one side without integrating the other. Everything has both energies and they're always intricately intertwined on every layer of everything. You can paint some broad strokes and say that "This thing is masculine" or "This thing is feminine" which are true in an approximate way... but in the nuances there is always both. Another example of this would be in connecting to personal sovereignty. Personal sovereignty is Yang/masculine in the sense that it enables you to set boundaries and be strong. But it is Yin/feminine in the sense that personal sovereignty CANNOT be achieved without being intimately aware of and sensitive to the emotions and the instincts which are Yin. And this is because emotions/feelings/instincts is your inner compass that lets you know that you're setting boundaries in accordance with your personal sovereignty. If you try to set boundaries and gather strength from the mind, which is Yang, then you will not be able to. Your boundaries will either be too hard or too soft, as you won't be connected with the body (which is Yin). Basically, polarity is more nuanced than most people fathom it to be. And because Yin and Yang are never separate, trying to integrate one without the other won't happen.

It doesn't change as a woman becomes more conscious. (Except in the case of when she works through her traumas... because traumas create incredibly magnetic attraction points. Most attraction comes from mirrored traumas actually. But setting that exception to the side...) What changes is that a woman realizes what she wanted the whole time and can then go for what she wants more directly. Women don't have a lot of resources for self-discovery because society is geared toward the masculine perspective. So, it is difficult for women to learn about their feminine side. Women want intimacy, surrender, and deep connection. And women are looking for a man with the qualities of a good father. I wish I could bring you into the feminine perspective to show you what that looks like. Not to be offensive in saying this, but men don't ever seem to understand what integrated masculinity looks like. It's very subtle. But most women, until they dive deeply in themselves are unconscious to this drive. So, they search for it an a shadowy and manipulative (and often ineffective) way. And they seek it from male partners who can never give that to them who mirror them in their own disintegration. And that becomes part of the allure because it mirrors their internal situation. So, you have to understand that there are layers of dysfunction in the average person. And these layers of dysfunction are the reason why men and women tend to play the game quite brutally and in a zero-sum fashion. And I would encourage you to look at dating and relationship from more conscious integrative perspectives as opposed to boiling it all down into a zero-sum game. Otherwise, it will be a self-fulfilling prophesy for you. You will attract only what you're willing to see. And then, you'll only see what you attract. And you will only attract women who (like you) are only out for their own agenda.... because you both assume that dating is a competition of agendas that someone must lose. Now, I get why this is more difficult for men. Your game is a numbers game. And the masses have many shades of dysfunction. For a woman, there is no sense of scarcity. And so, we can find one that matches our personality and sensibilities. And we will attract whoever most matches our strengths, our weaknesses, and our traumas. But if you want a conscious relationship with a partner, you'll have to find a woman who is more self-aware... which means, she won't be playing unconscious games where it all boils down to a battle of agendas.

Just keep following your intuition, and it will lead you where you're meant to go. If that ends the relationship, it wasn't the right relationship. If it strengthens the relationship, good. But the main thing is to do what you feel good doing without regard to the outcome. You may notice if any fear-based behaviors arise in you, and deal with those. But if you're enjoying the process here, just keep going. And if he likes it, he can stick around. The last thing I recommend is playing a game where you pretend to be less interested than you are. That's masculine energy stuff because you're striving for some outcome and sapping yourself of joy in the process. Be more Yin and outcome independent and just enjoy your time with him. And if it repels him, it was meant to.

My advice is not to listen to Leo on this one. When I was 20, I was lacking a support system and dealing with a lot of emotional upheaval. And men would invite me to their place, and I'd know what they wanted. But because I was very alone in the world at the time, I felt lacking in the capacity to turn down the company. And I would tell myself, "Just turn him down if he tries to get sex." But I was also dealing with boundary issues because of all the problems going on in my life at the time. And there were a couple guys, where I said no quite a few times before they eventually wore me down and I gave in to their advances. And it was really clear that those guys who pressured me into it thought that they really had won me over just because they eventually wore me down. They probably had some notion that I was really into it deep down and that they just needed to keep finessing me. It's just that, once it gets to a certain point, you feel like "Do I want to consent and make the best of it?" or "Do I want to resist and have this escalate into a full blown rape?" And the former is easier because you can convince yourself that no boundary breech has occurred. But I felt pretty violated the first time... and monumentally violated the second time. The second one was straight up date rape. But he had no idea. He invited me out on a date the next day as though he hadn't consistently ignored my 'no's the night before. Basically, don't be dumb. If a woman says no, it's not because she's playing hard to get. And if you eventually wear her down, it's not an indicator that you've won her consent. She just decided that it would be less dangerous/stressful to give in.

Most women who come forward about rape get accused of the crime of false accusation. The community usually prefers the narrative, "The woman that I know lied about it and the man I know is innocent" to the narrative "The woman I know was raped and the man I know is a rapist." The first narrative goes down a lot easier. So, what you have to understand is that ALL women who come forward about rape, will be falsely accused of the crime of false accusation as most people side with the rapist. Most people will always think that about her not matter what that she's lying and trying to rake a guy over the coals. I'll leave my analogy here too, so that you can understand the way that imbalance in liability shakes out... So, it's just a matter of men needing to take on more risk factor for the sake of taking some of the burden off of women's shoulders. Let's say that women's risk of rape/being accused of false accusation AND men's risk of being falsely accused of rape is symbolized by rocks. Now, men are carrying around 20 lbs of rocks everywhere they go as this represents the likelihood of them being falsely accused of rape. And women are carrying around 1000 lbs of rocks which represents the likelihood of them being raped and then accused of false accusation. Because the risk women are carrying is FAR greater than the risk men are carrying, when men get concerned about false accusation and criticize the MeToo Movement, it just looks like men trying to shovel their 20 lbs of rocks off onto women who are already carrying 1000 lbs of rocks. Men want women to carry all the risk factor and get rid of their risk factor altogether. Now, for a man who is falsely accused, of course it's terrible. But to expect that women take on all the liability of rape is just selfish. And there's already a huge issue that, when women come forward about rape, their communities don't believe them and ostracize them and side with the man. So, you're trying to feel more secure and safe and to guarantee you'll never be falsely accused (which is very unlikely to happen)... but women don't have any such exemption.

I'll just leave this here that I posted earlier. Right now, you're really upset by the 20 lbs you have to carry without any care for the 1000 lbs women have to carry. Also, most rapists never serve time in jail. So, even rightfully accused people tend to get off scott-free in the case of a rape. "So, it's just a matter of men needing to take on more risk factor for the sake of taking some of the burden off of women's shoulders. Let's say that women's risk of rape/being accused of false accusation AND men's risk of being falsely accused of rape is symbolized by rocks. Now, men are carrying around 20 lbs of rocks everywhere they go as this represents the likelihood of them being falsely accused of rape. And women are carrying around 1000 lbs of rocks which represents the likelihood of them being raped and then accused of false accusation. Because the risk women are carrying is FAR greater than the risk men are carrying, when men get concerned about false accusation and criticize the MeToo Movement, it just looks like men trying to shovel their 20 lbs of rocks off onto women who are already carrying 1000 lbs of rocks. Men want women to carry all the risk factor and get rid of their risk factor altogether. Now, for a man who is falsely accused, of course it's terrible. But to expect that women take on all the liability of rape is just selfish. And there's already a huge issue that, when women come forward about rape, their communities don't believe them and ostracize them and side with the man. So, you're trying to feel more secure and safe and to guarantee you'll never be falsely accused (which is very unlikely to happen)... but women don't have any such exemption."

Yes, exactly. It's about creating a culture where it's less punishing to come forward about rape.

The statistics for false rape accusations are the same for false accusations of any crime... which is about 2%. Rape accusations are not more likely to false compared to any other crime.

So, it's just a matter of men needing to take on more risk factor for the sake of taking some of the burden off of women's shoulders. Let's say that women's risk of rape/being accused of false accusation AND men's risk of being falsely accused of rape is symbolized by rocks. Now, men are carrying around 20 lbs of rocks everywhere they go as this represents the likelihood of them being falsely accused of rape. And women are carrying around 1000 lbs of rocks which represents the likelihood of them being raped and then accused of false accusation. Because the risk women are carrying is FAR greater than the risk men are carrying, when men get concerned about false accusation and criticize the MeToo Movement, it just looks like men trying to shovel their 20 lbs of rocks off onto women who are already carrying 1000 lbs of rocks. Men want women to carry all the risk factor and get rid of their risk factor altogether. Now, for a man who is falsely accused, of course it's terrible. But to expect that women take on all the liability of rape is just selfish. And there's already a huge issue that, when women come forward about rape, their communities don't believe them and ostracize them and side with the man. So, you're trying to feel more secure and safe and to guarantee you'll never be falsely accused (which is very unlikely to happen)... but women don't have any such exemption.

That’s not true. In fact, the opposite is true. Inauthenticity is boring across the board. Authenticity is interesting to the people who are cut from the same cloth as you.

I've heard some really gnarly things about John Lennon. Far more gnarly than what I've heard about Kurt Cobain. One example, John Lennon had said that he wished he had had sex with his mother before she died. Like he was lamenting the missed opportunity. And otherwise, lots of accounts of him being a pretty abusive father to his son... and also abusive to his partners.

I wouldn't say that fewer women are attracted to friendly men... in fact quite the opposite. But if you come off as rude/strict/unapproachable AND you attract women on that basis. And then they find out you're friendly, they may cease to find you attractive because they were attracted to you when you were rude/strict/unapproachable. It's not true that rude/strict/unapproachable behavior is more inherently attractive than friendliness. It's just that you will attract a certain type... and then when you reveal yourself as friendly and that type will no longer feel attracted because they are attracted to rude/strict/unapproachable guys (probably because they're attracted to avoidant tendencies).

What might be happening is that you approach women acting one way and try to "game" the situation to where you're likely to get an affirmative response. You may be doing this consciously or unconsciously. And then, as you start to get comfortable, you start to show your actual personality. And because the person was attracted to you for the facade/game, once they see the real you they will begin feeling differently. If this is the case, my advice is to watch for inauthentic behaviors that you're employing consciously or unconsciously to avoid rejection... and to do your very best to lead fully with your unique authentic personality. That will be your best beacon towards women who are your type (which is what women are really looking for)... as opposed to playing to whatever you think the given woman will want and then not being able to maintain the facade.

A silly ad targeted at a silly populace is actually a smart strategy... unfortunately.

As someone who is not a phone person, maybe it's the same for him. Just wait for him to text back. If he hasn't in a few days, maybe send a follow-up message.

This is not an intellectual thing. Just follow your instincts and your emotions and the feelings will eventually arise that lead you to where you want to go... if that is indeed where you want to go.

UGH!!! I hate it when that happens.

Communicate what feels natural... like what you're enjoying in the moment. Like if you're enjoying her appearance you can tell her she's looks beautiful, hot, cute, etc. Or if you're enjoying the pleasure, you can tell her in more explicit or subtle ways how good she's making you feel. Basically, speak your pleasures and enjoyments out to her as they arise. But you don't want to have these things in your mind beforehand. You just want to be very attuned to your own body and emotions and willing/able to communicate what comes to mind in the moment... here and there.

You have to experience women who are real and physically there with you. Most men who ONLY find 10/10 women attractive haven't had real sexual/intimate experiences with women. It's more theoretical and abstract and picture based. But if you have real sexual/romantic experiences, you will shatter your attachment to the imagined ideal woman and really be able to appreciate and get turned on by real women who are not picture perfect. If you haven't had that experience yet, you may not think so. But I'm nowhere near a 10, and I never had any complaints nor have I had any trouble attracting a partner who's invested in me. There's a lot more to the sexual instinct beyond visuals... and that's true for both men and women. Men do have a visual bias. But a man who hasn't developed himself in any way beyond that bias is a low quality lover from the female perspective. The best thing to do is to get experience with women.... both sexually and romantically.

Hijabs and Niqabs are pretty clothing garments. I always thought so, even as a kid. It's not surprising to me that someone would prefer to wear one. I always found it weird that, when Muslim women choose to wear them, everyone is quick to jump to oppression over her being able to make her own decision about what she wears... even if she says so. Yet again, I've worn dresses, corsets, heals, and make-up before and had people swear up and down that I'm choosing that because women are oppressed and that I've been programmed to think I have to. But this viewpoint is so disempowering. So, if a Muslim woman tells me that she's wearing a Hijab or Niqab because she likes to, I remember how I don't like people to insinuate that I'm making my clothing choices because of oppression, and I take her word for it. It's not the most outlandish thing to consider that someone might want to wear one.

Jewish Nationalism in Israel leads to the oppression of Palestinians. This is because Jewish people have more power in Israel compared to Palestinians who are treated as an underclass. White Nationalism in America and Europe leads to the oppression of nonwhite people. This is because white people have more power in these places compared to nonwhite people who are treated as an underclass. So, for both of these forms of nationalism, it is the same. All right wing nationalism is about oppression of the underclass in the region. Left wing nationalism can be beneficial as it helps an underclass nation get out from under the thumb of an imperialist power through consolidating as a nation. It's about unifying against the powers that be. But right wing nationalism always gears itself towards maintaining the power of the state through oppression of an underclass.

I can only speak for myself, but I assume that it's a common pattern. I was raised in a house with two parents who were against racism... but in a denial kind of way. My entire paradigm around race was that there used to be lots of racism. But then, Martin Luther King came in like a super hero and got rid of all the racism. And that I should love all people and 'not see color'. And it all sounds very nice on the surface, but it's a very bubble-kid way of teaching the topic. And I was sheltered from outside perspective until I was 13, when my parents split up and I lived with my dad in a trailer park where there was lots of racism around me. But 12 and before, I thought we did live in a post-racial society because that was the picture that was painted for me. And that racists were the evil, horrible extreme minority that was maybe like 1 in every million people. And that these people must also be like serial killers. I was also raised in a very small town with a 92% white population. So, I was incredibly sheltered in relation to race/racism. But when I was 11 or 12, I was watching the show Lizzie McGuire. And she and her best friend Miranda always wore these cool hairstyles with pigtails and crimps and braids and stuff like that. So, I went to my mom to let her know that I wanted to get braids, which I was relating to Lizzie McGuire who was played by a white actress named Hillary Duff. So, my mom looked up a salon in the phone book so that I could get braids. And I go into the salon and for the first time in my life, (other than my mom) I am the only white person in the room. And I feel really shy, awkward, and uncomfortable about it. And suddenly, I am the one in a million, evil, racist person. I had been taught my entire life about how racism wasn't around anymore and that only evil people are racist and that I shouldn't even notice color. But here I was in a room with several really nice black women, feeling racially uncomfortable. And I felt like such a terrible person. And when I got home from the salon that day, I just laid on my bed feeling so empty because I felt ashamed of myself. Then, I found a way to convince myself why it was okay. But this was the end of my color blindness. I got really pre-occupied with race for several years after that. I was just really afraid of being outed as a bad person. So, every time I would be around people of color, there was this feeling like "Oh my gosh! What if I say the wrong thing, and I get outed as a bad and shameful person." So, I genuinely can't relate to the mindset of seeing people of other races as inferior. Perhaps there are deeper shadows to examine, but that hasn't been a thing for me. I suspect that that mindset goes along with the nationalist mindset, which I've never had. I've never been "Yay! My team is awesome and all other teams suck!" about anything. But I suspect that that's where that mindset comes from. The thing for me has been a deep fear of being a bad person and seeing myself as bad because I've internalized the shame of all the racism that's happened in the past and present. But it's been a lot more relaxed since I've learned more about my own privileges and what the defensive behavior is like from the other side. And it's also been a lot less of a 'contents under pressure' situation since I've suspended my attachment to the story of my own sense of goodness. But I suspect that a lot of white people are very against racism but have been taught about it in such a way that it makes it much more difficult for them to face their own Shadow in relation to race-related issues. And a big part of that is the internalization of the sense of "I am bad." and the shame of it.

No. Racial identity is important to many people. And you're erasing part of their identity and experiences in pretending that things are or should be post-racial. Notice how it's white people who are the main ones focused on erasing race. And the reason why is because white people are the main ones that feel uncomfortable with race as a reality... because it reminds them of the shame they've internalized because of the unhealed trauma wounds around race. When I said "enlightened", I meant that people who try to pretend like they're post-racial have this idea that they're doing something wise and kind by pretending like race doesn't and shouldn't exist. But I'm sure that if you were a person of color and dealing with the realities that people of color face, and then attempting to speak about those realities around white people only to have them shut you down and finger-wag you for making racial distinctions, that you would NOT like it. What it does is invalidate the perspectives of nonwhite people who have experiences with racism on a regular basis. And so, when a person of color talks about their experience as a person of color, and a white person jumps in to derail the conversation or invalidate them by saying "Kum-bay-ah! Let's just let go of this race nonsense and just be one people." this (as you could imagine) would be very tiring and frustrating and would probably aggravate all kinds of individual and collective wounds. So, no. You're not trying to be how you'd like others to be... even if you think that's what you're doing.