Emerald

We've been staying off the radar, for the most part. But of course, because my husband is an immigrant, we have some fears about him being a target. We're also a bit concerned about hurricanes this year because of all the resources that have been gutted. We don't trust DeSantis to handle these situations well, given the fact that he's going to want to serve Trump's agenda as much as possible.

You're mincing paradigms to avoid admitting to yourself the reality of how bad Trump really is. Sure, from the perspective of ourselves as the "video game designer" of this reality (which we can experience in more expanded state of consciousness)... we have all programmed Trump into the game. And the video game designer is operating on such a complex "infinite-D chess" level of understanding of things, that it knows exactly what positive and negative components need to be programmed into reality to serve the highest expressions of mercy and goodness. And if we were operating from that depth of understanding (which we presently aren't), we would understand precisely why Trump has been programmed into this game. It's just like the game designer of the Mario games programmed Bowser into the game, as Bowser is part of the wholeness of the game... as are all positive and negative elements of the game. But as I said, that's not the perspective you're actually operating on right now... as you are the avatar of the game in this realm of awareness. You are not currently operating from the perspective of the game designer... but merely pretending to in order to protect your ideas of Trump from being overturned. And as the avatar of the game, one must honestly engage in the dualistic perspective and be able to discern what is beneficial from that which is detrimental. The video game designer must program in both the negative and positive in the game. But Mario's responsibility is to defeat Bowser. And right now, you (as Mario) are tricking yourself into believing that you are operating from the perspective of the game designer, such that you don't have to admit to yourself how bad Bowser truly is.... and that you can continue admiring Bowser.

It's because, at a fundamental level, he believes that he's special and that it's justified if he has skeletons in the closet because he's superior to everyone else and he has to right to do whatever he pleases, regardless of who it harms. So, he doesn't care if people see the skeletons, as long as he can continue skirting legal responsibility for them... as he sees himself as far superior to anyone who would judge him for those skeletons. And he can always choose to tune out from the judgements and invalidate them... and only tune into people who kiss his ass and validate only those ass-kissing perspectives. You can even hear him do that in his speeches. Consider how most people don't care about what ants think about them. And if they had committed a bunch of crimes against ants and had a bunch of "ant skeletons in their closet", they probably wouldn't care what the ants think of them... as long as there are no tangible consequences. So, while you would feel ashamed to have your skeletons aired to the public... and most people would also... Trump has all sorts of mechanisms for minimizing the validity of the voices of those who criticize him. It like he has an auto-marginalizing mechanism in his mind, where he only lets in perspectives that validate him and convey to him that he's the best and most special person on the planet.

Do you actually crave total isolation? You socialize on this forum every day or nearly every day, quite a bit. And that's not total isolation. It may be that the forum acts as a means of keeping your socialization tank full enough, such that you don't crave it from other sources. Funny enough, I used to identify with being a loner and enjoyer of solitude as a teenager... when I had the most social interaction built right into my environment. (And I still enjoy my alone time as I see moments of solitude as a space for what I refer to as "self-romance"... like I am taking myself on a date) But when I was 20, I truly was alone to the point where if I was killed, no one would notice I was gone for a long time. And I realized then that it was only because I was getting my social support needs met that I could identify myself with solitude and find enjoyment in the solitude. It was because I never truly had lack that I had the luxury to identify as a person who enjoys solitude. It was a very humbling experience that broke down that identity that I had been holding onto as a point of pride.... and as a means of differentiating myself as head and shoulders above there other people who are too shallow to see the value of solitude... and who "operate like sheep." It was quite humbling to realize that I too am a sheep in need of a flock. And it's only in getting totally lost from the flock that the sheep realizes its nature.

That fits with my experiences of who I see as more attractive if I'm only looking at appearance. But even personality-wise, I prefer a man who's not too Feminine and not too Masculine. And I am pretty certain that most women feel the same way.

I thought that maybe she added that context later or something. I missed the joke.

@Talinn I'm sorry. I misunderstood. I thought that it was people passing out Nazi propaganda pamphlets.

When you are a household name, you don't need play.

You'd take Nazi Germany pamphlets that spread propaganda that brainwashed people in such a way that it led to the deaths of millions of people over a 27-year-old irreverent cartoon comedy show that makes fun of everyone and everything taking a jab at Trump? Methinks you don't understand what true vulgarity is. This is a foolish perspective.

I did mean very attractive 25-year-old women who could be super-models. Jeff Bezos could absolutely have a relationship with a super-model-looking woman of 25 who will love him back. And if that was his priority, he could definitely make that happen because of his extensive network. But it seems that he's chosen this partner to marry because she is his preference... not someone he is settling for because he can't get a hotter woman to love him back.

And my point is that Jeff Bezos isn't dealing with scarcity of attractive women that will love him back. As long as he has been a household name, he has had an abundance of attractive options... both fake and genuine. While there are a bunch of gold-diggers, anyone who is well-known will always have an extreme abundance of attractive options that will love them back mixed in with a bunch of gold-diggers. Jeff Bezos has like 1000 times more access to attractive partners that will love him back compared to the average non-famous guy because he is a household name and millions and millions of people know that he exists. I guarantee that it isn't scarcity that's made him want to propose to his current wife. It's because he preferred this particular partner.... not because he lacked options with other women of equal or greater attractiveness who would also love him back. If he wanted to, he could marry a 25-year old hottie that loves him back. He could find that, if that was his priority to look for it. The sky is the limit with his level of social reach. This notion that men marry because of scarcity of options is just what you believe because you can't relate the idea that many men actually want to marry their specific partner... and aren't just settling out of a sense of scarcity of other attractive women who will love them back. And that is probably reflective of you trying to understand why other men have the desire to marry when you don't have that desire yourself. So, you're trying to understand these men who marry by projecting your own perspective and desires onto them.

Of course, infidelity isn't a good thing. But people rarely have affairs on their partner of 20 years just because they found someone hotter who was willing to sleep with them and be in a relationship with them (if that were the case Bezos would have been having romantic affairs with very attractive women from the beginning, as he has no scarcity of attractive genuine romantic options because of his fame). There's usually deeper seated emotional reasons why someone seeks out an extra-marital relationship to go beyond just the desire for a more attractive partner. So, unless he is some serial cheater, I suspect that he didn't leave his previous wife just because his new wife is male-gaze optimized He and his previous wife probably grew apart... and then he fell in love with his current wife because he felt intimacy with her.

What I find is that most men go through a phase where they're interested in having lots of sex with lots of different women. This is usually up until age 25 or 30. But eventually, most of them want the experience of a wife and children and all the benefits that monogamy has for men specifically. In fact, (as a side note about the benefits of marriage for men) married men are statistically happier and healthier than single men... and even live longer and make more money in their career because of the social status that comes with having a wife. (not that that's why these men choose to marry, these are just side benefits) But most men are interested in having children and a deep loving relationship. They just might not want that until they get the hook-ups and partying out of their system when they're young. The same can be said of women who might want to have a partying and hook-up phase before settling down... but usually to a lesser degree. Like, because of my channel, I meet a fairly broad cross-section of people from all walks of life. And the men who value their romantic relationships a lot, do so because they love their specific partner. And it's not like, "I settled for her because I couldn't get hotter/younger/etc." Most men who propose marriage (specifically the ones who aren't pressured to because of being from a traditional family), are proposing marriage because they really want to be with that specific person.

@RendHeaven His new wife is several months older than his previous wife.

It's the new wife that I was referring to as well. But the point is that both his new wife and his previous wife are close to his age range. I forget who it was now, but someone earlier in the thread was saying that Bezos wouldn't be able to land a 25 year old because of lack of genuine non-gold-digger options. But I said that there's a small but sizable percentage of 25 year old women who would be genuinely interested in having a relationship with Bezos (or a man of his age) if that was really what Bezos was looking for. Instead, he likely chose his wife because it's who he genuinely wants to be with... not because of a lack of younger options or a lack of options in general. Any well-known person has no lack of options based purely on the fact that more people know that they exist.

I didn't mean Bezos specifically with that percentage. I meant that 3-5% of women would be willing to date a man 35 years older than her for non-gold-digger reasons... and just because she is attracted to him and wants a relationship with him. Of course, it would be a smaller number than that that would go for Jeff Bezos specifically. Probably 1/5 of that 3-5% who are willing to date a guy who's 35 years older than her would be interested in Bezos specifically. And I'm not even talking about his wealth X factor specifically. It's the fact that he's well-known where a lot of people know he exists that gives him so many options. If suddenly, tens or hundreds of millions of women on the planet suddenly knew that you existed, your number of options would go up exponentially even if you were broke. It just about having eye-balls on yourself. And wealth both helps and hurts if you're looking for someone to be genuinely interested in you. The fact still stands that Bezos probably didn't choose his wife because of lack of options... as simply being well-known will mean that he has a thousand times more options than the average man.

It's not actually her position. It's a parody of Leo's position... just gender flipped and cherry picking perspectives on men and women that one might use if they were trying to claim the opposite of Leo's claim.

Of course, (as the OP's post lays out plainly) women could also easily weave such a narrative about men by cherry-picking truth-oriented elements of women and delusion-oriented elements of men. Really, its just more reflective of the type of opposite-gender company you keep... and an idealization of the gender associated with one's self when one is identifying strongly with their same-gender group. But if Leo were really geared towards truth (applied in the form of self-honesty), he would be able to see the deeper-seated motivations that cause him to invest so heavily in these "male>female" narratives in the first place (which is his real reason for writing this. Though he will frame it differently to himself and others as "Here's the brutal truth," It's really just him saying, "Yay! Men win again! And I win by proxy because I'm on that gender team!"). He does similar things where he frames community as a woman's need... but not a man's need, despite all humans throughout all of our evolutionary history relying on community for survival. It's his way of saying, women are beholden to basic human needs for social connection and support... but men are not. And deceiving himself in that way seems to soothe him and make him feel empowered... and less constrained and beholden to others. And anytime he has the opportunity, he will engage in this gender competition to emphasize that (in all the ways that matter) his gender team always wins and is the best. He clearly fears the Feminine (mostly the Feminine in himself), such that he is trying to separate himself from it as much as possible. And he uses these narratives towards that end of keeping himself unconscious to and in resistance to his Feminine polarity and the Feminine elements of the reality of being a human being. That said, it is true that the Maya is the part of Feminine polarity as is everything in the world of matter part of the Feminine polarity. So, all creatures that crawl upon this Earth (including male and female humans) are Feminine in the broad strokes, as we are all just characters in the story of the matrix of the 3-D illusion. We are all Mother Nature. And the Feminine spiritual path is one of embodiment and of humbling one's self enough to choose imperfection and limitation... despite having direct experience of awakening to the perfection and infinity of the God nature. And this requires a lot of self-honestly and admitting to deep vulnerabilities and weaknesses... and embracing temporality and the limitations of mortality. And a big part of the Feminine spiritual path is to embrace the illusion of separation such that relationship is possible. And the experience of Truth is not an end in itself... but a necessary means to an end to consciously decide to embody the illusion, just as the creator did in its creation of the illusion and your avatar in it. And that which exists with nothing outside of itself, will need to create an illusion of separation such that you can know yourself from an outside perspective. And God gets to forget and awaken to itself because of the Feminine illusion of Maya... or simply to forget and to experience limitation and relationship. So, Leo forgets that he is also Feminine, as he is made of matter and part of the illusion. There is no actual Leo separate from the Feminine matrix. And even the pursuit of Truth within the illusion is just more illusion... especially if one identifies themselves as the rare seeker of Truth. He seems to just be in resistance to the Feminine matrix of Maya... and seeks to escape it through very self-deceptive forms of Truth-seeking that mire him deeper into the Maya... because of his denial of the Feminine in himself. Hence his combative relationship with the Feminine where he must define it as inferior. He believes himself to be speaking out the brutal truth... but is mostly motivated by whatever makes him feel special/different, empowered, and invulnerable within the context of the Maya. And the Truth-seeking just seems to be an identity and worldview that serves that end goal.

That's what I supposed was the case.

What I recommend is to attract like-minded people to yourself through authentic expression.... and being willing to be polarizing. What seems to be happening from how you describe it, is that you're meeting random people and scanning for tells. But that's not going to be effective because you're seeking out needles in a haystack by taking out one piece of hay at a time to check to see if it's the needle you're looking for. Instead, you want to get a strong magnet... and the polarization will draw out all the needles from the haystack without you having to do an excessive amount of digging. That means, being willing to be polarizing... as polarization attracts. So, let your freak flag fly... and 95% of people will get repelled and 5% of people will get drawn in. And that polarization that comes with being authentic is a SUPER EFFECTIVE way to automatically sort the wheat from the chaff in terms of compatibility. You could also potentially join or start a meet-up group in your area... and likewise being bold in your expression of authenticity within that context. (This means being 100% yourself and openly talking about the topics that interest you.) And likewise, many people will be repelled... but a small number of people will be attracted (friends and potential lovers). The more potentially polarizing you allow yourself to... the more attractive you will be to your people. And this will be the pool of friends and acquaintances that you can find a highly compatible romantic relationship in. Also, always stay in the frame of "Do I like them?" as opposed to "Do they like me?" It's really difficult to be authentic if you're concerned about other people liking you. In fact, if you are authentic, most people probably won't be a fan... and some will totally loathe it.

Most young women aren't interested in much older men, that's true.... as 85% of women want a partner who's close to their own age and would never consider dating a much older man. (and that's wise of them) But there are probably many young women who would have genuine attraction and feelings for him. Like, when I was in my mid-twenties, had I been single, I'd have probably been open to dating a guy as old as 50 if I REALLY REALLY liked him.... though my age preference would have been 30 to 40 at age 25. (between 5 and 15 years older) Jeff Bezos is a bit older than that as he'd be 35 years older than a 25 year old woman. But it's not inconceivable to me that 3-5%ish of young women would be genuinely interested in him, since I've always been attracted to older men... and not for opportunistic or calculated reasons. I was just always attracted to more mature features and attitudes towards the world. Of course, it wouldn't be a good idea to have such an extreme age gap because it puts you in a totally different phase of life from your partner, and the young person ends up having to skip out on their youth (and unfortunate reality of having a preference for older partners as a young person). But I have no doubt that a large number of non-gold-digger young women would potentially be interested in him, given my own attractions. And he's a high profile guy. So, while a non-famous older man might only come across a young woman who's genuinely interested in him as a person once every blue moon... there are no limits to the options that a famous guy would have, as he's just on a lot of people's radar. Let's low-ball it and say that 1% of young women would be open to dating a guy who is 35 years older than her. The number is probably closer to 5%, I'd wager. But a low estimate is 1%. And several 10s of millions of people know who Jeff Bezos is (probably more)... with half of them being women. And then, 1/7 of those are young women. And then 1% of those young women would be genuinely interested in a guy of his age. So, if 10 million women know that Jeff Bezos exists... then 14,285 women in their 20s would be genuinely interested in him... assuming that 1% of women would be open to dating a guy who's 35 years older. And I'm sure that Bezos doesn't have any sense of scarcity when it comes to his choice in partners... as he's probably quite well aware that he has lots of genuine options mixed in with the gold-diggers (which would also be true of more age-appropriate partners, so it's the same sorting game regardless of the age of the prospective female partners.) So, I have only to come to the conclusion that Bezos has married his wife because she is the specific one that he wants to be with. I guarantee that it isn't a choice borne out of a lack of options... as he certainly has options out the wazoo. His high profile alone would guarantee that he would never have to make a marriage decision based off of settling for what he can get, because any well-known man is on TONS of women's radars. (And I don't necessarily mean this as a status-attraction thing... I mean it in a neutral sense where many people are aware of his existence on the planet. That alone will guarantee TONS of options.)

Says the Freudian enthusiast... I only gravitated towards the Jungain perspective because it was the only available perspective that matched up with my lived experience of the inner world and helped me understand my experiences of ego de-centering. Finding Jung's work and the work of other Jungian authors in my early 20s was a godsend because it helped me orient myself to my inner world, which was previously all in shambles from the recent crumblings of previous paradigms and identities. Jung had a deep mystical awareness (and the ability to communicate that mystical awareness in such a way that the science-minded folks of the Victorian era could respect and grok what he was communicating). And his work was based in the spiritual instinct such that it transcended the Victorian era trappings and became timeless. Freud, on the other hand, boiled everything down to the sexual instinct. And all of his stuff was so mired in the repressive Victorian sexual norms that it isn't even a relevant perspective in our modern era. And that's because he only went as deep as the material paradigm (of which human sexuality is the deepest root). But he failed to recognize the spiritual ground from which all of those instincts arise. There are very good reasons why Jung diverged from the mentorship of Freud and the student became the master. Jung > Freud

Jeff Bezos???? He's one of the richest men on the planet. I'm sure there are 10s of thousands of women (including very attractive ones) that would literally throw themselves at him because of his wealth and fame alone. Plus, he's not a bad looking guy. And I don't mean escorts would be interested in him. A man of his standing and wealth will be attractive to many women. If he wanted to get a genuine lover who was some very attractive 25-year old supermodel, he could easily do that. But he probably just prefers his wife for more emotional reasons. Once you're that wealthy, access to sex with hot women is a given. But men don't get married for that reason. External pressures not-with-standing, most men ask a woman to marry them because they love the woman they're with and they want to deepen the commitment.

My list comes from my experiences with Ayahuasca in combination with learning systems of archetypal symbolism to understand dreams and synchronicities. Understanding the archetypal Feminine and Masculine is very helpful in decoding anything based in mythos. It can also help you recognize if you are in resistance to one or both polarities... and to help you drop that resistance. For example, prior to my first Ayahuasca journey at age 20, I was fully of the mindset that Masculinity and Femininity were pure social construct. But once I had the experience of ego de-centering that came with that experience and I no longer had any identity to lose or maintain, the aperature of my consciousness expanded. And I was out in my friend's backyard and night. And I was sitting there. And this one was my most visual journey, where I was feeling so connected with nature and watching the plants grow around me. And I got hit by a sudden insight that the most accurate word in the English language for describing the subtle energy of the night and the plants was "Femininity". And it was so completely different from human gender norms. And the same energy was within myself... but deeply repressed. And it became clear that everything I valued was in opposition to this energy. And furthermore, everything in society was working in opposition to this energy. So, in the years after that I sought a lot of ways of being to reconnect with the Feminine. And I sought it out in both Feminism and traditional Femininity... but could not find it there. And that's what led me to Jungian Psychology. And this is where I learned conceptually about the archetypal Feminine and Masculine... and because I knew what Femininity actually was from my experience, I could sense the "vibe" of the Feminine. And in any dichotomy, I can intuitively pick out which is Feminine and which is Masculine. Once you have experienced these polarities directly (outside of rote gender roles), you can easily intuit it. It has a very distinct vibe. And in my later medicine journeys of recent years, I typically experience myself as my small human self (which is Feminine) and my eternal self (which is Masculine). The experience of awakening in these journeys is quite a bit like being Shakti and waking up to the fact that I'm also Shiva for a brief time. Like, I am a temporary flower growing from an eternal tree... and I am the eternal tree itself. I am both in one. But for this lifetime, I prefer to be embodied as the temporary flower. And that is my way of embracing the Feminine in this life... which is difficult because my temporal Feminine self is very curious about my eternal Masculine Self. So, I am not parroting anything. The list of dichotomies that I made is accurate to my experiences of the vibes of these polarities. And once you experience them directly, you can easily pick it out. But most people don't understand what Masculinity and Femininity actually is on this level. So, they default to a shallow understanding of gender norms and how women and men are... or (worse) how they ought to be.

I'm saying that unstable women are significantly more likely than stable women to be receptive to pick-up. You gotta be at least a little crazy or in an unstable situation in life to be receptive to it.