Emerald

@StarStruck It really just depends on if you're a good fit for what the coach can offer and what kind of results a particular coach can help you get.... and if those results are worth the money to you. I'm a coach, and many of my clients have told me that I've totally changed their lives. Lots of times this is intangible stuff... like getting rid of anxiety or letting go of certain hang-ups or shifting paradigms. But I've had more tangible results too... including one client who transformed his business into a multi-million dollar business after I helped him face the core reasons why he was self-sabotaging his success. And I've (as a coaching client) taken business coaching courses that have made me back SIGNIFICANTLY more than what I've paid. For example, I paid $3k for one business coaching course... which I've turned around to make around $70k (and counting) from. And I recently completed a coaching course that I paid a little over a grand for, and upon completing it, I was able to make about twice that much immediately upon implementing it. So, it's already paid for itself. I've also attended Somatic Healing group coaching events (which weren't too expensive) that have created a lot of inner transformation for me in terms of feeling and understanding my feelings... and having insights come to the surface that I was previously unaware of. And that was priceless.

My question is... Is it a hard boundary for you that you are against celebrating special dates where you wouldn't feel comfortable because it goes against your values? Or is it just not something you're used to doing? If it's the first one... this is an incompatibility. And either you or she will have to compromise something to make the relationship work... or you'll have to change the nature of the relationship to something else. If it's the second one, my advice is to put in the effort to come to appreciate why she values special dates and what the means to her. And if it's all the same to you, to learn to value and appreciate it... and at least to humor her and not expect her to sacrifice something that means a lot to her for something that's indifferent to you. For example, celebrating holidays a particular way is important to me. And one of those holiday traditions is to get my kids quite a few gifts for Christmas to put under the Christmas tree. My husband grew up without a lot of money, so there was never a lot of gifts and he had expressed confusion as to why it's important to get a bunch of gifts. But he wasn't there when I was a kid experiencing the magical expectation of Santa coming to deliver all those gifts... and how important those memories are to me. And how important it is and has been for me to give my kids the same magic that I enjoyed... and how I never wanted them to miss out. Luckily, he was fine with it. But I know he doesn't perfectly understand. He just humors me and it has now become a tradition that he also values for other reasons. So, he was indifferent to it and he compromised to accommodate what was a strong preference for me. And I recommend, in relationships, to compromise if it's not that big of a deal to you. But if it is a big deal for both of you in your respective positions that neither of you can compromise without feeling like you're betraying yourself and your values, it could just be an incompatibility that will lead to a lot of unresolvable ongoing conflict.

@StarStruck I didn't watch the video, but I read through the thread. Here's my perspective... When it comes to pornography, there is often some element of exploitation there because many people choose that path out of a sense of financial duress. So, it can be argued that it isn't truly consent for many of the people who are involved. And of course, you can find very predatory dynamics in the industry in situations that are particularly shady. This of course is not true across the board for everyone. Some people just really like sex and enjoy the exhibitionism of performing on camera. For these concerns, finding amateur porn from independent creators can be a means of finding more ethically sourced porn. Now... more importantly for self-actualization and conscious development practices is to take a middle path perspective on things like sex and porn that is neither based in grasping nor aversion. And often, when someone is VERY against porn.... there can be a polarization into aversion because too much meaning is being applied to sex and there is too much attachment to it. So, I would venture to guess that your aversion to porn might extend beyond simply not wanting to engage with it because you don't enjoy its results and see it as unhealthy. The reason why I say this is because there are other less healthy common behaviors that you likely wouldn't have as strong of a reaction to. And what that indicates to me is that you may have some hangups and shame about sex and sexual desire in general. And these would be very important to work through. There is nothing wrong with sex and sexual desire. And as long as porn is used in moderation, it's okay (for those who are capable of moderation). Like I don't put any prohibitions on myself when it comes to things like drugs, alcohol, or porn. But I'm sober probably 363+ days out of the year and I maybe watch porn like once every couple of months. I understand that I'm a woman, so it might be easier for me to use porn in moderation. But I can say, as someone who is capable of moderation with it, I am much more indifferent and detached from porn compared to someone who has a strong aversion to it. The existence of porn neither excites me nor disgusts me. I'm just not that big of a fan of it and I don't prefer it because my imagination is better. And I sense that that's a much more effective strategy for orienting to the existence of porn in a conscious way. Too much aversion leads to just as much attachment as being obsessed with it.

I wanted to share an insight that I got about why there is a gender between (mostly heterosexual) men and women.... thought it impacts everyone in actuality in some form or another. This is a generalization that only describes the broad stroked understandings of this dynamic. The insight is that (generally) men's core collective wound in shame... and women's core collective wound is powerlessness. It first begins with society expecting men to be Masculine... and to get rid of their Femininity and anything perceived as weak or limited. This is impossible since (on an archetypal and energetic level) everything of the Earth that is made of matter is Feminine by its nature. We are all a part of Mother Nature. And this fundamental expectation to be Masculine as an Earthy limited material being, creates a feeling of shame towards their Feminine side (which then gets pushed into the Shadow... which creates Anima issues in Jungian terms). So, the man feels shame for having a Feminine side and not being Masculine enough (the Masculine is infinite and Godlike energetically and archetypally). And this desire to embody only the Masculine and push away the Feminine produces feelings of obsession towards women... which represent the parts of himself that he's pushed away that he desperately wants to reintegrate with. This is why so many men tend to be obsessed with women and sex beyond what's "normal". But his Feminine side is then projected out onto women (as a whole group and as an idea) as the powerful rejecter as it mirrors his own rejection and mistrust of his Feminine side. And he begins to feel powerless in the eyes of women... and he feels more and more powerless to women the more that he pushes away his Feminine side. So, it creates something you can see a lot in the Red Pill, MGTOW, and Incel guys where there is simultaneously an obsession with women coupled with an intense dislike and mistrust of women and all things Feminine that totally rules their lives. And even though these are extreme cases, most men (and women too) have some level of resistance to the Feminine. And the common thread that's woven through these Manosphere groups is shame and feelings of invalidity for not being "man enough"... which then puts women in the role of judge of who is or is not "man enough"... which translates to "worthy enough" These groups exist as a means of men getting together with other men who are dealing with the same shame/vulnerability. But instead of addressing the wound like a true support group would, it becomes a place where men can aggravate their shame wounds together. And in these groups, women become a scapegoat figure that the men in the groups collectively demonize and project hatred at... in hopes of defeating the source of their shame once and for all. But women are not the source of their shame, so it becomes like any other hate group that names a scapegoat and tongues and aggravates their wounds by shadow boxing with the image of "the hated ones." And they collectively run through the archetypal shame story with other men... while imagining a scenario where they "snatch back the power" from women. And I'm using scare quotes because men's perceived feeling of shame and unworthiness in the eyes of women creates the illusion that women are much more powerful than they actually are. So, many men end up feeling totally at the mercy of women... like women are shame-free Goddesses up on a pedestal judging whether a given man is worthy or unworthy of love and existence. This then creates the feeling of being the vulnerable man fighting against the powerful callous domineering women. And they seek to then pull women down from their perceived position of power. And in most of human history, women have been on the receiving end of this pull down from the pedestal. And for millennia there have been a variety of laws and folkways and social patterns to ensure that women don't connect to their own power... and to ensure that no one (men or women) connects to the Feminine power. And this has produced a collective trauma of powerlessness in women in relation to men... where the only perceived (and often actual) route to power is to fit into the narrow ideal image of the beautiful woman on the pedestal that men are most apt to project onto. But with one difference... a declawed version of the pedestaled woman who will not aggravate the male shame wound. This then creates wounds and fears in women around being made powerless by men... which in turn makes them envious of men's greater levels of social and physical power and in turn unaware of male vulnerability and callous to the wound of male shame... which then produces confirmation bias of this archetypal male shame story in the eyes of men as women then can come across as callous (partially as a means of protection). Then, that leads out into more male shame... which leads to more men trying to drag women down from the perceived position of power over men (that women don't actually have). Which then leads to more callousness in women towards male vulnerability and the male shame wound as she views him as powerful and not vulnerable because of the power he objectively wields over her. Then this callousness to male vulnerability leads to more male shame... which leads to more attempts to rob women of their power... which leads to more callousness to male vulnerability and leads to more male shame... which leads to more oppression towards women... which leads to more callousness to male vulnerability and more male shame... which leads to more oppression towards women... etc. It's important to recognize these wounds in ourselves and to not proliferate them and to exercise compassion towards these vulnerabilities in ourselves and others. Otherwise... men will keep envying women because they perceive women to be more worthy and lovable than they are... and women will keep envying men because they recognize that men are more powerful (in a variety of ways) than they are and will not be cognizant of the shame many men are dealing with, which starts the whole cycle over again. But the origin point of this whole dynamic is men feeling pressured to be Masculine and rid themselves of that which is Feminine... archetypally, energetically, and culturally.

It's very unfortunate

I'm trying to wake you up a bit, but I'll stop.

@mr_engineer You were talking about this stuff on the forum the last time I was on here like a year ago. Are you ever going to work through these hang ups and actually go and talk to real women?

Good to hear from you too. I look forward to hearing back from you.

@Emotionalmosquito As it pertains to women, the core wound that impacts men most is shame. As it pertains to men, the core wound that impacts women the most is powerlessness. So, when men are sensitive to being called a creep... it's mostly because it triggers that shame and they aren't able to empathize with how it's a common experience that creepy men often make women feel powerless and unsafe. Thus, men who cannot empathize with women's fears of men and feelings of powerlessness (an only see themselves as vulnerable and women as callous and invulnerable), will only see women's fear of creepy men as a means of shaming and ridiculing them. This unfortunately, makes these men feel unsafe and creepy in women's eyes because they cannot empathize with women and do not understand their own power. There is a phrase that denotes danger that fits here... "He doesn't know his own strength." That is the essence of the creep.

Thank you!

@Canadian There are a couple things that I think could be helpful. I second what @Leo Gura said about quitting the weed as substance addictions can really mess up your pleasure and reward circuits... which mess with your motivation. But there's a bit more... One is to figure out what you're trying to avoid by smoking the weed and face directly with it. Many addictions exist because we're trying to avoid uncomfortable emotions. People can also engage in addictions because they have a difficult time with emotional regulation... so they rely on external substances to regulate their nervous systems. So, consider whether the weed use is serving that purpose for you. And if so, find a healthier way to regulate your nervous system. Then, you'll also want to get clarity on what you truly want in your heart of hearts. This will give you a North Star to move in the direction of... which will give you something bigger to be motivated towards beyond seeking mediocre pleasures and pain relief.

Think of it like the Dao... which is a representation of wholeness and duality all in one. Duality is also an element of Non-Duality. The Finite is also an element of the Infinite. The Illusion is also an element of the Truth. You are both whole and part of God. And you are nothing and you are everything. And you are both one with and separate from God. It just depends of the perspective you're coming from. So, to reject Duality is to fail to be Non-Dual. That means that you can experience "yourself" as God from the perspective of the absolute and infinite... but see yourself as a human in relation to God from the perspective of the relative and finite. When you pray, it is a finite and embodied perspective that is anchored in the illusion. But the illusion is also an element of the truth.

Note: This will be describing what I've learned in my medicine journeys... so it will be a bit surreal. In my medicine journeys, it was shown to me that the purpose of my life is mercy (which is the polar opposite to suffering). And the reason why I was created is because there was part of infinite consciousness that couldn't tolerate infinite suffering. So, it re-imagined a being called Emerald who is finite and imperfect and ordinary... who only has to deal with finite levels of suffering. And in this soul's purpose of my life as Emerald being God's vacation from infinity (and especially infinite suffering)... I also have the option to realize a life's purpose where I seek mercy for myself and help other find mercy too if I should so choose and if it pleases me (though it isn't a requirement). In my journeys from many angles, God has shown me how mercy and suffering are deeply interlinked with one another. And it has shown me that to realize my life's purpose of mercy, I must drop resistance to suffering. That's because there is no mercy to be had without suffering. Mercy can only be realized in the negative space where suffering once was. So, mercy has no value except in relation to suffering. I have had constant upper back and neck pain since I was a small child that have been there every single day of my life. And in one of the medicine experiences that I had, it was shown to me that I was holding all the mercy and suffering in existence in my throat and that's why I had all these physical issues. And from behind my eyes, God (as a deeper element of my consciousness that was the foundation for my human consciousness) was showing me its relationship to mercy and suffering. My neck was swiveling around and around by itself (as it typically does in my journeys). And in that swiveling around... I was feeling the interplay between infinite suffering and infinite mercy. It was like an amusement park of suffering and mercy that existed right inside of my throat. And after a while, I could not tell where suffering ended and mercy began as they were becoming one and the same. Then, God's consciousness (which sat behind my eyes with my human consciousness as a bystander) was playing tricks on itself in my scope of consciousness... where it would create suffering for itself and then reveal the mercy that had always been there the whole time. It was like a parent playing peak-a-boo with a baby... and super mischievous. And it kept doing this, and through my facial muscles would shoot itself a mischievous grin at how much fun the trick was. It had been mercy the whole time... but it would trick itself into believing there's suffering for fun. And I had gone into this ceremony with concerns of experiencing infinite suffering... since I have experienced in prior ceremonies that the consciousness that sits behind my eyes and God's consciousness are one and the same. And then knowing that I will (on some level) experience all the suffering in existence. So, there was a concern that God was experiencing infinite suffering... which is why my consciousness got split off from the infinite in the first place. I saw the God mind and God heart experiencing all sufferings at the deepest levels... and I couldn't tolerate it. I wanted it all to go away. But the infinite must remain infinite... so suffering could not be abolished. So, out of mercy to itself, God allowed that part of itself that could not accept infinite suffering to be finite Emerald. And of course, after this experience, human Emerald was very concerned about God's suffering because I recognized it as one I would be experiencing once the Emerald illusion wore off. But in this other journey, God was showing me that it was okay... and that it was so good at handling suffering, that the infinite interplay between mercy and suffering was just a game to it. And it could have fun with it. To its perspective, mercy and suffering were indistinguishable from one another And it showed me that I didn't need to worry about being concerned about its suffering because it was the perfect parent. And that, unlike the way I was always worried about my own parents suffering as a small child, I didn't need to worry about its suffering. And in fact, it would care-take my suffering because I was the finite one... and as a finite one, I didn't have to deal with the burden of infinite suffering. And it wouldn't expect me as the finite one to take on the infinite sufferings as Jesus had already done that and no one else needed to do it again. Then, it showed me that the way that it manages infinite suffering is by giving finite beings a finite amount of suffering (which would always pass). And it could split off any part of itself as a finite being to give itself mercy (like it did with me). And it could alleviate all suffering in any finite space by pushing it out further into the infinite. And it alleviated all the suffering on the planet and showed me how easy it was. It then gave me the power to alleviate suffering. Just then, a man in the ceremonial space began to cry out in pain. I found out the next day that he had surfaced a repressed memory of a family member raping him as a child. But God let me wave my hand at him and alleviate his suffering... and the cries of pain slowly died down in sighs of mercy. And it granted me the option to wipe the Earth clean of suffering. It hit a discordant note to me to consider that, as there was some element of meaning that was lost (though I don't fully understand this now). I just imagined an image of humanity in one big circle holding hands and there was something empty about it. So, I opted instead for the world to (very gradually) move out of suffering and into mercy (which had been the plan anyway). This would give mercy the proper contrast to be able to truly appreciate and give meaning to mercy (and many other things, I believe). Now, a year later after that medicine journey, I can see that both suffering and mercy are twin elements of the grand design. Though I do want more mercy to happen... and I still get pissed off about needless suffering.... as finite imperfect beings like myself do. Note: It had also told me to be careful about how I teach these truths so as not to be callous to suffering. It showed me that all suffering is an illusion... but it doesn't feel like an illusion. So, if I share that mercy and suffering are God's theme park, it might paint a very different picture than the one that was shown in the eyes of those who are suffering. It's just two different vantage points of the same phenomenon.

Ethnostates cannot safely exist in a world where nuclear power exists... especially not ethnostates that are established by modern top-down authorities as opposed to ones that organically coalesced in the past. We exist in a cosmopolitan world where the most developed countries are diverse with many races, religions, and ethnicities functioning as one people. And we have air travel and the internet. People are not living only as one people like in eras past. Israel touts its claim as "the only democracy in the Middle East"... suggesting that it is more developed than the countries surrounding it. But the most developed and civilized democracies are not ethnostates... nor could they be. So Jews have every right to exist and they should be able to exist and live in Israel... and anywhere. But Jews cannot have an ethnostate (nor can Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc.) without creating huge problems for non-Jews living in the ethnostate and creating huge problems geopolitically. Ethnostates are an anachronism and belong in the past. We shouldn't be establishing or supporting ethnostates that in the contemporary era.

I wouldn't buy much of anything from that Pill vs Pill ideology. It takes a few kernels of truth and then weave's a very distorted worldview around those kernels. And it will ultimately get in the way of your ability have a good relationship with an actual woman because you'll only be seeing her through the distorted projection screen of Red Pill ideology. But the reason why (in a particular instance) a woman might reject a man isn't because she inherently prefers an asshole over a nice guy. That's too simplistic of an explanation, and there are many potential reasons why this dynamic could arise that are more psychological in nature. One reason is that the woman just isn't interested in the nice guy and doesn't feel that way about him. But she happens to have those feelings for the asshole. It's 100% about feelings. As a woman, I can have two identical men with identical qualities standing in front of me... and one of those men I'll feel neutral about and the other I'll feel very deeply for. So, the quality of the man doesn't matter that much... it's really about how the woman feels about him. But the asshole isn't more likely than the nice guy to have women feel that way about him. But women generally need to feel strongly for a man to be interested in him. It isn't like with men where you notice some positive quality (like looks, kindness, etc.) and make the decision based on that. It's very much about chemistry. And if the feelings aren't there, they just aren't there. It doesn't matter how nice the guy is. But if a woman does have a tendency to frequently be attracted to assholes, then there's probably some internal familial pattern happening. For example, if a woman was raised by a mother or father who was aloof who she didn't get validation or attention from... she may go seeking for a partner who's equally aloof. This enables her to repeat the dynamic from her parents where her partner is aloof. And the hope deep down is that if she can get the aloof guy to give her love, then it is the same thing as her aloof parents giving her love. And because of this dynamic, she feels discontent when she's in a relationship with a guy who will give her the love freely... thus leading her to reject what she really needs in favor of playing out familiar patterns. And that's just one example among many. But the issue with Red Pill is that it weaves a lot of lies and illusions around a few truths. And it creates a distorted vision of what human relationships are and why people choose the people they choose. And they often default to more sciencey sounding biological interpretations of preferences. But the reality is that people are far more influenced by their psychology than they are by their biology when it comes to who they're attracted to and who they end up in a relationship with.

A deep connection doesn’t necessarily mean a compatible romantic relationship that serves both partners. A deep connection will arise simply from living life together like any other familial bond. As far as the separation goes, things are much better between him and I as friends and co-parents. I was really unhappy in the relationship. And I’ve opted for the past several years to still live together despite our separation so that we can see our kids every day and not miss out on the family dynamic. Now in terms of relationships in general… Once you get past the initial attraction stage… things get less exciting but they grow a lot deeper. “Still waters run deep” is a good quote for describing it. So, anything that requires a significant amount of “game” past the initial attraction stage will just get in the way of that deepening because game is about creating excitement and intrigue… but real relationship is markedly uneventful.

Have you ever had a relationship with someone before? I feel like you’re going towards this notion that all human interactions are shallow because you’ve never had a real relationship before. And perhaps your friendships haven’t even been that deep. Relationships can actually go extremely deep. For example, my relationship to my husband is really quite deep because we’ve seen each other almost every day for the past 13 years. And we’ve been separated for 4 of them. But the relationship still deepens as we live and raise our kids together. And in my other romantic relationships, things have gotten deep fairly quickly as we shared more experiences, conversations, and personality facets with one another. My advice would be to seek out relationships and friendships that can give you deeper wisdom into what it means to relate.

Lots of men like to romanticize the notion of what it means to be a man in order to get away from feeling disempowered. And one of the ways they do this is by cherry picking certain biological insights and weaving them together into a male empowerment fantasy narrative. And these narratives are usually about men holding power over women in the realm of sexuality, dating, and relationships. This is because men often feel disempowered in relation to women and their feelings about women. And they want to tell themselves a comforting story that puts the woman in the disempowered position relative to men. And so, they may cherry-pick some scientific truisms around men having biological urges to spread the seed wide… and they use these truisms to weave themselves a narrative like… “Women just need to embrace the “natural” female role because it’s in alignment with nature for men to cheat. And if she complains, then she’s going against nature and being too Masculine… because natural Feminine women are accepting when their men cheat. And women are only desirable when they’re Feminine, so they need to allow men to cheat or the man won’t be interested in them anymore because they’re not Feminine enough. I bet they’re not Feminine enough because of daddy issues and having too many trains run on them. So, women should definitely stick with one guy because lifelong monogamy is the only kind of sexual experience that doesn’t damage the woman. Also, think of lions! The alpha male gets to mate with all the females and the female lions are okay with it.So…” Etc. Etc. Etc. This is just one example of a male empowerment fantasy narrative. And they’re everywhere. And because of the internet… you have scads and scads of men wrapped up in the same male empowerment delusions. And it’s really annoying because they really believe it’s true. But the main function of men talking about this and creating this narrative is to make himself feel empowered simply for being part of the male identity group.

I’m not entirely sure what you’re saying here. But am I correct in my understanding that you mean that you wouldn’t ask a woman how she’s doing because you already know she’s doing great. And you know she’s doing great because you’re at the center of the conversational experience… and so because she is speaking with you, you know that she’s having a good time. And you’re saying that all conversations between human beings are surface level. And then claiming that I’ve never met a guy that I have felt moved by. And that men connect to the deeper “make up” of the woman. But women are only connecting to the facade that men are putting on to attract the woman. Did I interpret this in the way that you meant it?

If a guy doesn’t care how the woman is doing, she will probably pick up on that and not want much to do with the guy. Women are mostly looking for a human connection with a man.

This is silly. Of course a guy should ask how the woman is doing. It’s a normal human conversation piece.

?

What about it?

Only one of my relationships began that way. Relationship #1 was when I was 16-20. We worked together at KFC for about a year. And he was a very social stoner guy. He threw a party at his house for New Years Eve and invited me. And I spent the next three months hanging out with him as friends, practically living at his house with him and his family. One night we were horsing around and we finally kissed after heavy flirting for months. It was mutual initiation. Relationship #2 was from 20-29. This is my relationship with my husband. I was out busking outside of a bar that he was drinking at. And he sparked up a conversation with me. We talked until dawn. The next night he tracked me down again in my usual busking spot and asked me to go to dinner with him. So, he initiated and it was similar to the scenario you gave. Relationship #3 was from 29-30. I met him through my channel. After several months of chatting about spiritual stuff and inner work, he got up the courage to confess his feelings for me just for the sake of honesty as a part of his inner work. And I was quite surprised because I felt the same. So, he kind of initiated. But I let him know my feelings later that day, and the relationship sprung up from there. Relationship #4 was from 31-32 and lasted exactly a year to the day. We had been chatting for a few months as friends because of mutual interests in spirituality and psychology. He had/has a lot of deep understandings about esoteric things, so we were always emailing each other back and forth, nerding out about psycho-spiritual stuff. And I developed feelings for him. So, I texted him and let him know how I felt. So, I initiated. He and I are still really good friends. Relationship #5 is my current relationship. I’ve known him for 4.5 years. We got together last year when we met up to do an Ayahuasca ceremony together which I suggested since I knew he was interested in doing one. And the initiation was mutual though I probably took a stronger role in the initiation because I knew he would worry that he’s stepping over boundaries. Four out of five of these relationships grew organically from a platonic relationship first that developed over the course of months or years.

Why do you get to decide how many therapists a trans kid has to see before they can access treatment? Are you an expert that’s well-versed on the topic? Or are you a trans person who knows what gender dysphoria is like? Have you done any genuine research into this topic at all? If not, you’re coming up with these random perspectives from a place of ignorance… and purely from an emotional gut-reaction to something you don’t understand. And it’s wise to take stock of what it is that you don’t know… as opposed to assuming that you do know. Also, being “locked in a therapists office” isn’t going to help the kid at all.