Emerald

If it bothers you, don't read it.

I tend to share in whichever way I feel is going to give the most clarity to the person I'm talking to. So, I'll occasionally do a really short response, if I feel that it's more helpful. But for the most part, I think that being as colloquial, thorough, and nuanced as possible is going to help more people. Do my long posts bother you?

Reality is empty of value, worth, meaning, significance, purpose, or anything of that ilk. So, reality neither has value nor lacks value. It is not worthwhile nor worthless. It is neither meaningful or meaningless. etc. These are just ideas and tools in the human mind for functioning in a society. But they have no existential reality to them. But because 99.9% of human endeavors require us to use these practical tools of value, worth, meaning significance, purpose, "the point", etc... it becomes very difficult for us to swallow the idea that reality and existence has none of these things. So, it is because our human measuring sticks can't properly measure reality that there's a lot of anxiety, and is largely the impetus for existential crises. But it is only because we don't realize these ideas are just intellectual tools for practical functioning... as opposed to real existential qualifiers. As for Leo, I'm 100% sure that he understands this intellectually. But I also get the impression that he has a tendency (emotionally speaking) to hold onto stories of worth and value and significance and the idea that you can add significance to yourself through cultivating particular virtues and strengths. But I'm sure that long ago he realized intellectually that this is not grounded in Truth. But I also think he's softened down quite a bit over the course of the past few years on this point. Maybe he's even rooted it out altogether, and keeps it in his videos because it gets through to certain types of people and to stay on brand to continue to help the demographic that his videos can help the most. That's my personal impression. But I do think it can be a trap that I see a lot of people fall into who consume his content, where there's almost a competitive element to their idea of the path.

Pet's do serve a function in human society. Because human beings want pets and love their pets, they are not expendable for this reason. They are fulfilling a need/desire. So, in essence, being a pet is their job. If human beings didn't keep pets, then they would be expendable in the human mind. And if we decided that dogs were food the way that we decide that cows are food, they would be expendable because it's in their "job" description as "food" to be expendable. But all other non-pet and non-food animals are just seen as irrelevant to society unless they are nuisances to the human way of life. So, bears are okay to exist... way over there. And if a bear comes into the human space, just call a number and within 20 minutes there will be 3 bear hit-men there to deal with that problem. But because human beings are central to the society and directly reap the benefits of society, there will be powerful people who see non-working human beings as expendable. 'The poor are only there to suck off the teet of society... so let's cleanse society of them.' So, if we're in a society like that where all the poor/working class jobs are automated and the poor/working class folks don't work, it leaves that group a very vulnerable demographic because they don't have any asset to offer that they can hold over the heads of powerful institutions. Currently, the big corporations are built on the backs of the poor, working class, and middle class. So, if all those people decided not to go to work... or didn't exist and couldn't go to work... this would be catastrophic for big businesses that rely mostly on lower income laborers. So, the poor and working class and middle class are what is keeping corporations afloat. But in a society where everything is automated, the people have no such power. So, they become vulnerable and expendable. And all it takes is one dictator at some point down the line to really mess things up for them.

I'm not talking about Law of Attraction. I'm talking about the fact that you're basing a society off of what you want to avoid instead of what you want to create. There is nothing wrong with getting rid of things you dislike. But if you focus on what you don't want to have, then you won't be able to actually create the structures that will make that possible, as your society will be based around avoidance of the negative instead of a structural embrace of the positive. Plus, your ideas seem to be mostly a reaction against working. But this may not actually be good for human beings. So, if you create all these structures around avoiding work, you may be taking away something quite positive and making too many people dependent and complacent. It sounds nice to someone who is avoidant toward working... but 'What's actually most optimal for a human being?' should be the proper question to ask. So, not "How can we make it to where no one has to work?" but "How can we structure society to where every human being is living a fulfilling life and feels a sense of contribution to their society?" The former is an avoidant vision, the latter is a vision in the positive.

Your vision for the future feels like a vision based upon avoidance of the things you dislike. So, you're creating your vision invertedly. So, what is your non-inverted vision? Framing it this way, how does society look now?

I'm sorry to hear that. My thought is to reach out to people for support emotionally and practically, and to find an outlet to really allow yourself to grieve. Right now, you are probably trying to stay strong for your daughter, which is something that she really needs. But if you have to be strong all the time, that is too much for a person to bare. So, it's important to find someone or multiple people that you can really let go in front of. Do you have any friends or family that you can grieve with, without having to do the emotional labor of supporting them emotionally as well?

Reconciliation of the practical and the spiritual.

It was almost always that way. I would really really like someone, and it was always like, "He probably doesn't like me back." And then being afraid he would see my interest in him and think of me as weird, and just trying not to act like a spaz. And 95% of the time, my crushes went nowhere. So, hardly any of that male attention really counted for anything. The only cold approach that ever actually went anywhere was with my husband. But only because he was really good at knowing what women like in general and really sweeping me off my feet. So, I had met him a couple nights prior to our first date and wasn't too interested, but by the end of our first date I definitely was obsessed with him. But this was the ONLY time it ever happened. As a general rule, I always found men who start out romantic/sexual with me uninteresting because it's so common and it takes away all the mystery and tension. It's really a dime a dozen, and I know that they probably just run the same script for every woman that will take them. And since the aphrodisiac for me is to feel special and desired in particular, it's just boring to be approached by a pick-up guy. So, I often found myself attracted to men who were reserved and didn't have their sexuality right out in the open. And I enjoyed the longing of not knowing and wondering where things would go. So, it was almost always like "Water. Water everywhere. But not a drop to drink." with male attention.

It used to happen all the time for me, prior to having a family. Now, I mostly go out with my family and I'm close to thirty so it doesn't happen very often anymore. But when I was college age and going places by myself with a lot of people around, I could be approached easily 3+ times in an outing. And I'm not some gorgeous siren of a woman either. I'm pretty average. When I was 20 and I was single, I was approached so much that it was disturbing as I was often in this pedestrian area of town. So, it would happen tons of times. And having that amount of attention eventually makes you feel like a piece of meat, even if most of the guys didn't do anything particularly weird. It's the volume that gets really disturbing. Then, that compounded by the male attention that I would get from friends and acquaintances, would make it to where I had a very complicated relationship with male attention. On one hand, I liked being attractive to men in general. I was always a very sexual interested person. But on the other hand, when it's coming at you full force, it's super uncomfortable and creates this push/pull kind of dynamic. This is especially true if there are creepy experiences weaved into the normal ones, where a guy is too pushy or unaware of boundaries or clingy etc. Perhaps, I was approached more often than most because I was not so sheltered and was out and about a lot by myself. I'm also very nice and approachable. I am also ever-so-slightly above average in level of attractiveness, but not so attractive that I feel like I'm too far out of anyone's league. So, perhaps this was just the witches brew. But I have a lot of friends who have had similar experiences. So, it's definitely more common than not. But I have also had friends who were equivalent in level of attractiveness, but a bit more sheltered and a bit more guarded who would rarely get approached. And I think it has to do with men's ability to intuit who's approachable and who's not, as well as who's sexually open and who's not. But if I had to give you a number of how many times I've been approached or hit on... I wouldn't be surprised if it weren't in the thousands.

There is a reason, and that has a lot to do with negative self-talk and what you get out of it... probably to quell deep insecurities. But if you think you're some sort of social pariah that can never get a girlfriend, then it's simply distortional thinking.

I watched today's video, and found it to be very helpful. There are no clear road-signs on the path, so it is helpful to know how it has been for other people to get a general rule of thumb. I pegged myself, for the most part, as a stage 3 who has glimpsed the Ox but has not yet caught it as with stage 4 with some qualities of stage 5 coming though here and there. And I've been at this stage of letting go of attachments and conditional esteems for about half a decade or more. So, I've been there for quite a while. And I really felt like I was making progress for a long time (as I truly was). But over the course of the past couple years, I have shied away from listening to spiritual content. This is why I'm surprised that I was so compelled to watch the entire video today. Normally, I get disenchanted very easily as it feels like I'm treading over the same ground. And I feel as though I've lost the trail and run out of mind-based teachings that will help me along the path. So, I only want to share as of late. And I think that glimpsing the ox in the way I did previously has put me on high alert for self-deception and obsessed with honesty and perception. So, I don't mind looking at myself and world in unflattering lights. And because of this willingness to look at things in this way, I receive insights quite easily, and it's a skill that I enjoy having and being able to help others with it. But this doesn't really lead through to the letting go that needs to happen for me to progress, as this insight seeking is just another way to get lost in thought relative to enlightenment. It's a useful skill at best and a parlor trick at worst. And I am aware of this, and have been. But the awareness of this pattern, leads back into the pattern as long as I am engaged in thought. Even now, it is what I'm doing... and now... and now... and now. And I'm aware that it's escapable just through detachment from though processes, but I seem unable to resist the pull toward though in daily life. Anyone else, who pegs themselves at a three have this issue? If so, what have you done to make a habit of becoming mindful and detaching from thought in daily activities? Just looking for something to help with building the fires of motivation really...

You probably dislike the idea of a woman having a job and a house of her own since you want to lead. And because you don't have a lot of basic things lined up, it's not possible for you to do so in the majority of situations with the majority of women. So, if a woman has her s*** together, you feel intimidated and it mirrors an insecurity about your own life and your own feelings of inadequacy. A man who had his s*** together, wouldn't feel intimidated by a woman in this way. He already has his own thing going on. So, he doesn't derive his sense of self-worth from her. He's got lot's of other things. So, this is the issue, and why a lot of women are probably not interested in you. You don't have a job or anything really going on for yourself right now. So, you want a woman to fulfill you and take the place of all that you lack, and you are needy. And so you're at risk for making a woman the center of your life, which is something women hate. It feels icky to be around a guy like this. So, women will sense this and if they're smart, they will steer clear. So, the solution is to develop yourself as a person. And become so highly developed that you don't need a woman to fulfill you. Then women will take notice of you because you have improved your character and built grit. But you have to get out of victim's mentality first and take action to improve yourself and your life. And belly-aching about how bad women are for wanting these things, is just keeping you stuck in it. Think about it this way, when you start to think women's way of attraction is unfair... Maybe I think men shouldn't be attracted to appearance. But it doesn't matter... because men are attracted to appearance. So, I can be wise with this information, and if I'm looking to attract a guy to maximize my looks. Maybe you think women shouldn't be attracted to a stable lifestyle and personal character. But it doesn't matter... because women generally are attracted to these things. So, if you are wise, you can max yourself out in these areas. And be smart enough to see that you were dealt a great hand in this way, since there is no limit to how much you can build yourself and your life. And that women will like you based upon something malleable like lifestyle and character instead of something relatively fixed like appearance.

On the absolute level, everything is always perfect forever. So, all human beings are perfect. On the relative level, there is no such thing as perfection. So, there are no perfect human beings.

I agree with choosing your battles as you can't take responsibility for everything. But with climate change, it's really the issue to end all issues. So, it would be unwise to avoid addressing this one and just slip into denial or defeatism. Choosing unconsciousness is the worst choice to make here. There are very real things that people can do to help combat climate change individually, and we have very real social power to influence the leaders and policy makers that make the decisions that exacerbate the problem of climate change. We can also create a demand for new technology that helps us remove carbon from the atmosphere. I'm sure it's possible... it's just not lucrative. But if enough people demand it, I'm sure projects like this will be funded. And then all the workers who lose jobs due to changes in technology and automation, could work in the field of global clean-up in our oceans and otherwise. Again, this is possible... but it's just not lucrative. So, it's a matter of shifting the general public mindset to collectivity-oriented Green thinking instead of self-oriented Orange thinking. For those who are only interested in their own goals, they will be unwilling to find a passion for large-scale global problems. And this interest comes in Spiral Dynamics-wise at Green and above. So, the goal is to shift the public mindset more in that direction, so that we can actually make the jump necessary for humanity and the planet to survive the human Orange phase.

It's a sneaky mindset.

What is your life purpose? And what are the things that you typically fail at or have failed at?

It makes no sense on the surface. But like I said, you get something out of the wallowing that you feel like you need. That's why most of your posts are you wallowing in self-pity.

@Mikael89 If you're complaining then you haven't let it go. But here's the thing. You could make a connection with someone. Like I said, it's possible for everyone who puts themselves out there and has realistic standards. Your problem is that you get more pleasure out of wallowing in self-pity than you would derive from actually having a woman be attracted to you. This is why it will never happen. Because if it happens, what will you be able to wallow about?

So, just let it go. Don't try anymore. It obviously only causes you suffering. And if you don't try, don't complain. If you believe that you can't do it, Just accept that it will never happen for you and stop talking about it already. Move on.

I've seen all kinds of guys get female attention. And these guys are at varying levels of attractiveness and unattractiveness. There are a ton of nerdy guys that I know who get girlfriends and get sex. So, I recognize that, when you're a man, it's a bit more challenging. But it's not so challenging that it will take more than a month (two months tops) if you really put yourself out there, and let go of the negative self-talk. It will be difficult if you come off as needy and clingy... as you probably do because of your mindset. That will intimidate women. But this is fixable. So, it may be the case that because you're in the mindset that you're in, that you repel women, which puts you more in the mindset that you're in, then you repel women, and it becomes a vicious cycle. I could see this happen and that being the 100% cause of your lack of success. There is no other reason than that. Plus, if you actually were to drop this mindset, you wouldn't be able to self-flagellate about it, which would be a bummer for you. You really get your jollies from wallowing in self-pity. But there is nothing inherently about you or anyone else that makes them un-datable. And all this victim's mentality, is just keeping you down. But you get too much out of it to ever let it go. So, you just gripe about things.

Well, if you see the world from this view... how do you know that YOU exist if you're not looking at yourself? Are you just like your mother in this situation? Is the image you see in the mirror you? Is the bridge of your nose that you see when looking you? What is this sense of there being someone you call I? Right now, you've had an insight that shows you that Naive Realism isn't necessarily true. But it could easily lead into a Naive Solipsism. Question even that, and stay in the middle ground of total innocence. I have a video on this topic...

For women it's super easy as it comes looking for you. But for men, it's more difficult... but it's really not that difficult if you're willing to put yourself out there. At the end of the day, people like sex. This includes women. So, you just have to have realistic standards and you can find a woman to have a one-night-stand with no problem. It's a little more difficult to get a girlfriend... but not that much. You just have to actually swing the bat and get rid of these self-defeating narratives. Your self talk is delusion. Your idea of how difficult it is to get a girl to have sex with you is also delusion. Unplug from the rhetoric and just get out there.

Orange was all about bringing women out of the traditional role that women were previously prisoner too. And this Orange anti-traditional femininity and anti-motherhood idea that takes a while to get over. It comes from a subtle misogyny that disguises itself as empowerment by telling women that they can be powerful like men if they divest themselves of the feminine in all but appearance. And this includes anything from wearing pink, wearing bras, being a stay-at-hom mom, etc. Second wave Feminism had a lot of this type of rhetoric that was well-intentioned by still very steeped in the anti-feminine ideals that it reacted against. So, for many women who are Green, there is likely still some of this mindset that hangs out. Plus, Green has different reasons for mistrusting traditional gender roles that comes along with their acceptance for people in the LGBT community. And for Green, instead of being cold toward children, it's generally an awkwardness and not knowing how to act. Or just still being disconnected from the feminine, as Green is like the training wheels of the full integration of the feminine that has been repressed, likely since late early-Purple. Basically, in an Orange society, it's going to prefer the masculine as the society is ruled by the masculine principle. And women are socialized to be more masculine to be seen as worthwhile. This is what enables them to climb higher than Blue on the spiral. Otherwise, if they accept the traditionally feminine role, they won't be in the mind space for that kind of growth. So, it takes quite a while to outgrow. I used to be very awkward around children myself. But being a parent and substitute teacher, I feel like I know how to interact with kids of all different ages. And it doesn't feel foreign to me. I used to think babies were ugly, until I had one of my own. And now I think babies are super cute. I even see babies as being cuter than the cutest of baby animals... which I never thought would be the case. But I suppose it's just the tension between the idea of a baby/child and interacting with a real baby/child who has a complex personality and way of being just like an adult does.

You have a choice in how you express yourself. Personality is not fixed.