caelanb

I think that's an overgeneralization, but why do you think that (people have married from them)? I'm just using it to widen my net some more and when I don't go out to a bar (weekdays normally) I can still try chatting with girls. Cold approach is f*cking brutal when it's direct, and she rejects you. Plus, it can get awkward since the reason you went up to her has been rejected. Is approaching a girl indirectly (friendly conversation) still cold approach? Hinge probably but by the slimmest margin. Don't some people here have experience with game? What do you mean? I definitely am not game.

I want to get better at talking to women I am attracted to since I am interested in dating relationships and potentially making more friends (as a bonus). I plan to go out this Friday to a bar in my city (1.3 million in the greater area about) alone unless I can get one person to come. And wanna go out Saturday night with some friends too. As a background, I have only had two good friends since I was a child, so I have not had many opportunities to go out to parties and bars with people I know. Although, I could have since one of my friends has done a decent amount of partying and stuff. But, I have never gone to them because I always felt that it was a waste of time and low self-esteem (and still have some), along with some social anxiety and people judging me, as is common with high school students. I am brand new to the game (I've only gone out 3 times on my own in the past month or so). I want to use it to get a date and make an intimate connection with a girl (I have never been in a relationship). But, as I have recently learned (and suspected), I am terrible at it. When I talk to attractive girls in university, on the streets or at a bar. I go blank. I don't act playful, funny, or a confident person. I have a little bit of that stuff when I talk to a girl I don't really find attractive (or moderately attractive) or just a guy. But everything kinda shuts down when I talk to a girl I find attractive. I think it's because I really care about how it goes with an attractive girl. But I do when she is not attractive. All fundamentals of the game; playfulness, vibe, leading the interaction, teasing, and complementing are essentially out the door. And the more intimidating the situation, like a group of attractive women at the bar having fun and dancing perhaps with a guy or two, the worse it is. My social skills are inversely correlated with how attractive the girl is and how intimidating it would be to walk up and talk to the girl since I prefer not to humiliate, embarrass or show that I am desperate to some degree. With that said, I can be outgoing when comfortable since I am expressive and sometimes funny and can socialize pretty well. At least that's my impression and what I've been told from those I've asked. It's easier to initiate a conversation with an attractive woman when there is a lubricant like you know someone who knows someone. Or you're doing something in common. It feels like imposter syndrome when I go to social environments to talk to girls and act like I know what I am doing until everything goes blank. To extend my reach, I have 4 different dating apps (Hinge, Tinder, Bumble, and Badoo) and have had terrible results on them (my total matches for all apps put together is less than 10). However, both texting and game skills are bad. So, I probably won't get any dates out of dating apps (I have been using them for about 3 months). There is a guy I met coincidently at the bar recently who I know mutually (along with his buddies), and I'm tryna have him go out Friday. Since, apparently, he's been doing this for some time. He (has been on just two apps for 4 months) and his buddies have had success (over 100 matches), and he told me that my profile is good. So, either I'm not attractive to women (since I get no likes and most girls I like don't seem interested in me), the algorithm downrated me a while back (cause of the bad profile I had), or I'm part of the 90 percent of guys who get almost nothing on matches. Or all three, which is probably the case. Unfortunately, my lack of success doesn't help with self image, and confidence and makes me a bit sad since most attractive women I like reject me. I watched all 3 parts of Leo's videos on getting laid. I forget what he says exactly in all of them. But I think I have the general idea that you have to have an inner game of (actually believing you can do it) and have the outer game of social skills to attract women. I am curious if anyone knows any tips for using game and apps to date girls and get intimate, especially when you are out alone (the hardest cause you got nowone to fall back on). Other than moving cities since I'm still in Uni. I tried to summarise my situation. So, hopefully, it makes sense. It's worth noting that between the time I started writing this post and when I finished it (both today). I asked this one girl I saw to go to an improv club at Uni and if she wanted to go out to a comedy club, and she seemed open to both. Got her number. I have used this opener a few times, and it seems to work. I don't feel comfortable going up to the girl and talking with her just because she is attractive (it feels too awkward and nerve-racking so I kind of go blank/act like a robot). Rather I go up to them to have a friendly conversation and then try to make my way towards her number and then interest. Thank you.

Hey, I just found out that there is a page on mediabiasfactcheck.com about actualized.org. According to the website, Actualized.org is the most pseudoscientific on the spectrum of pseudoscientificness. Perhaps Leo should have a conversation with the founder about such a conclusion since I would assume there is disagreement here.

Hey @Leo Gura, I have a few questions for you on Life purpose I've been wondering. I base these questions on what I've spoken about with other people who understand the general idea of a Life purpose but may or may not have a detailed understanding of what you describe as a Life purpose. Given that people's values, goals (ideally directed by values) and interests can change over time, is it also possible for a person's life purpose to change or have many Life purposes? If this is the case, I assume your or another person's Life purpose could change to something completely or slightly different from what it is now and/or you would create another one. Or is it just that people don't know themselves well enough throughout some part(s) of their life, so they change, modify and/or create a couple or more Life purpose(s) to eventually create a/a couple of Life purpose(s) that align(s) with their most developed self or at least a self with a decent level of development? I feel like because life is so dynamic, it's hard to pinpoint one life purpose that you will stick with for your entire life, and thus, it/they may change or be modified. Thank you.

Hello, So a couple of months ago, I watched a video on microaggressions. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, it is a comment or action that subtly and often unconsciously or unintentionally expresses a prejudiced attitude toward a member of a marginalized group (such as a racial minority). The mosquito video is a good illustration of how microaggressions affect people. The mosquito video is a shorter version of the video I watched a few months ago. I watched Leo's videos on excesses of stage green. I recall him pointing out that green can sometimes be too easily offended by jokes (such as about LGBT2Q+ or Asian people). I'm struggling to understand whether or not people's reactions to the so-called microaggressions are, as I recall Leo saying in his video, green being a 'snowflake' and offended too easily or a valid response. For example, if someone jokes about a marginalized person or is genuinely interested in a person's family background. So they ask where someone is from (whether or not they are part of a marginalized group). I suspect it is not an excess because these seem to be genuine negative reactions that a marginalized person can experience from another person's words, whether it is intentional or not. This forces (mostly non-marginalized) people to be especially careful with what they say to avoid offending anyone (marginalized or non-marginalized), which prevents people from, as I recall Leo saying, developing 'tough skin.' However, as the mosquito video points out, considering the 'tough skin' argument, some people (especially marginalized people) experience them more than others, making it unfair for those people because they would have to develop much tougher skin as a baseline. Based on my understanding, a good example of this unfairness is white privilege. Anyways, just curious about people's thoughts. Where would it be okay to draw the line between green being reasonably sensitive and green being unreasonably sensitive? Violence is obviously excessive. For example, many (if not all) people in my family (we are not part of a marginalized group) would consider microaggressions something you should avoid. However, Leo's video makes me rethink whether or not this is just an excess of stage green or an acceptable reaction from someone who has been and is being systemically oppressed. Thank you for reading, and it would be great to hear from you!

@Hatfort Oh, new TLDR video that I haven't seen! Love TLDR:D

Hello everyone I would like to share a resource I found that debunks Covid-19 misinformation. I came upon this Youtube channel while researching the statement said by Pfizer's CEO recently. He said something like 'the Covid-19 vaccine was not originally developed to prevent the virus from spreading.' Which is true, but, as you will see in this video, it was designed to prevent serious illness and turned out to be good at preventing the virus from spreading also (at least initially, but it could have changed due to the different variants, not sure). This fact has probably been brought up already on the forum, but I think this is a good resource. Here's the video (I don't think I need to post the link to the channel, you probably know how to get there): I likely would not have found this video/Youtube channel if my friend had not told me last week about this statement, which would not have led me to do a little more research on what it was all about and then find the article and video. In a way, I was not really surprised by the debunking because I had been aware that the vaccine was effective at preventing the spreading and severe illness. I was just not sure which of these two or one functions was the main goal at the beginning. Anyway, I hope this helps anyone who decides to check it out and/or is confused. I hope I posted to the correct sub-forum, if not, please move it, thanks.

Hello, when it comes to approaching multiple women a night, if the place has maybe 200-400 occupants (half to 2/3 guys lets say) how many women can you approach before other women get pre-conceived notions about you (such as having seen you approach other women that night)? Thanks

I have used salicylic acid cream to help clear out my (moderate) acne. I did not clear out everything, but it was good enough. I tried using a routine with a skin cleanser, exfoliate, acne cream and moisturizer. Unfortunately, my skin didn't like it very much. It could have been due to the wrong creams, but I don't know. I've heard people say you should at least moisturize your skin. I've tried doing this, but my skin has never responded well to any store-bought moisturizer I used. But, if all else fails, in my experience, something that worked like magic was the Tiege Hanley acne treatment system. It cleared up my skin very well. I still have some because I did not go through the whole container, even though they are small containers. That said, it's not cheap because you have to pay a monthly subscription. But now, back to the main point, I don't use any skin care products apart from the salicylic acid I mentioned above, which I only use once in a while (this could obviously change). However, it seems to have reached a point where it does not do much. It's not much of an issue because my skin is fairly clear, but unfortunately, it is not perfect.

Hopefully Canada and Mexico well be able to stand for democracy and against the dictatorship of the U.S. if it goes to the far right, but it would be a challenge. There is also the possibility of emigration to Canada or Mexico for those that don't want to live in a dictatorship (which I would understand). This seems pretty likely because Republicans would probably try rig to the election in their favour. If the Republicans take back the three back I would like to believe that it would be excruciatingly difficult for Trump/republican party to change the constitution like Putin did to bend the rules for their own self-interest. But once/if that happens, f*ck, who knows what will happen. It would be very weird dystopia time for both Canada and Mexico. A big problem now (from what I have heard) is that if Trump doesn't get in troubled because of January 6th, than it'll happen again, and it'll probably be worse. But as my dad says, hopefully there are enough people with the right mind to keep the U.S. democratically stable. And that's why voting is so important! There is a TLDR News US video that discusses a similar thing. In summary, it's pretty unlikely, but still possible. One other thing I will say is that watching American politics, predominantly the right, makes for some entertainment because of the sh*t that happens. Probably not great because of the fact that's it's not SNL even though it seems like it.

Here's an article by a Canadian political scientist that discusses the possibility that the U.S. could turn into a righwing dictatorship by the year 2030. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/03/us-rightwing-dictatorship-2030-trump-canada Scary stuff for the U.S. and Canada as well as the rest of the western world.

I add any music that I like or at least don't mind to this playlist, so it's a mix of genres. However, according to spotilyze, the main genres are pop, modern rock, tropical house, pop rock, and electro house. https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2oKOoK9JiTZgXREk7f6Kef?si=5580bd2ad9144f30

@Leo Gura Will you have a conversation with a scientist or rationally minded person anytime in the future? Or are you no longer interested in doing that? I'm not talking about having a debate, but instead, having a good-faith conversation about reality, truth, and science. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would be very much interested in doing so. You can talk to people like Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michio Kaku, Michael Shermer, or perhaps a typical university professor. Neil deGrasse Tyson is probably busy, so it might be a challenge to speak with him. However, he was recently on Modern Wisdom, so he definitely has some time. Also, even if you think they are not interested in having a conversation or think it's a waste of time, it doesn't hurt to test the waters. It could be positive for both sides but also negative too, you never know. Thanks.