Forestluv

Moderator
  • Content count

    11,010
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Forestluv

  • Rank
    - - -
  • Birthday 12/31/1969

Personal Information

  • Location
    Michigan
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

19,610 profile views
  1. It seems the key distinction to make is that a male predator that wants to enter a women’s restroom for his jollies is distinct from a transgender woman that wants to use the women’s restroom to use the toilet. A transgender woman that has transitioned has the expression of a woman, not of a predatory man. As well, a transgender woman is often subjected to harassment and assault in men’s restrooms.
  2. My impression is that you don’t see me as offering anything of value. That’s ok, some people lack interest in what I communicate.
  3. Imo, this is important and has value, yet falls far short. Yes, white poverty is a problem that should be addressed. In the bigger picture, wealth inequality and corporate plutocracy is a major problem. I think it’s very important to redistribute wealth into poor communities and lift up poor white, black and brown people. Yet a problem occurs because poc are disproportionately poor. Many white people will resist distributing wealth and social services into poor communities if too many poc will benefit. For example, a lot of white people resist M4A because too many “lazy” poor black people will benefit. Giving wealth and social services specifically to poor white people will only make the problem of systemic racism worse. Similarly, I don’t think giving wealth and social services exclusively to poor black communities will work because there will be too much white backlash. Understanding that wealth inequality effects poor people of all races is an important piece of the solution . Communicating the harms of wealth inequality to all people and reducing wealth disparity is very important and can mitigate the intensity of racism, yet it is insufficient to remedy systemic racism imo. It would alleviate some of the racial tensions - yet it falls short of resolving systemic racism. You say the problem is poverty that leads to hatred, resentment and racism - yet black people are disproportionately poor! White people have all the money! And upper class white people are creating and maintaining the systemic racism. There are plenty of middle class and wealthy white people that are racist and want to maintain systems of racism in which they benefit. Denying this and not addressing it will allow systemic racism to continue.
  4. @Parththakkar12 That’s not my question. You stated “The next step though is to wake them up.”. I’m asking specifically about this step. I agree, one’s own self awareness and communication dynamics are important. Yet, I’m asking about the specific actions to wake them up. Imagine we have a systemic racism denier. What specific actions would you take to wake them up to the actuality of systemic racism? And what would the ‘needs’ of a systemic racism denier be?. . . Appeasement to systemic racism deniers perpetuates systemic racism.
  5. @acy_321 This is what I call the “sub ego death zone” and it can be an uncomfortable space. I’ve felt anxiety about entering that space again. I’ve found it helpful to do low dose trips in a peaceful environment. This can help the mind-body surrender, let go and dissolve attachment to the ego. Or I may take a break from tripping and do other practices like meditation, yoga, time in nature. This can help get insight into the nature of the attachment and fear.
  6. You don’t describe the methodology or actions for this step. How would you go about waking up a systemic racism denier? Without the methodology and action toward actual progress, it becomes Jordan Peterson-esque “concern” for progressives, which allows for the continuation of status quo.
  7. This fear is reflective of the misunderstanding some cis-gender people have about gender. They think a man is going to put on a dress and makeup, then say “I’m a woman” and go into women’s restrooms to spy for his jollies. This is a misunderstanding of gender.
  8. Denying the earth is spherical, climate change and microbes exist are also ‘behaviors’, yet I wouldn’t call it an “important and valid perspective”. Its important to move beyond these denials to make progress.
  9. That is not like what I’m saying. That is your construct and you are conflating. To me, you don’t seem open to contemplating what I communicate.
  10. It can be super hard to communicate to certain minds. The notion of “artificial” and “natural” don’t even exist. The notion of “real” vs “imagined” doesn’t exist. Coming back down, I’ve found it amazing to watch the mind kick back in and start creating constructs again.
  11. Yes, they are all imaginary. My point is that strict “male” or “female” gender is also imaginary. That is what many cis-gender people have a hard time understanding. They think that my male-ness is obviously real and their nonbinary-ness must be an imaginary identity. Yet one’s traditional “male” gender identity is just as imaginary as a transgender or nonbinary identity. This can be uncomfortable and scary for some cis-gender people to realize. For me, it was super cool because it opened up some new avenues of exploration and fluidity.
  12. Transcending chimpness, doesn’t necessary mean chimpness is destroyed or dissolved. Transcendence can be expansion and integration, similar to other characteristics in SD. There can be new sexual energetics that arise with things like yoga, tantra, meditation, eye gazing, creating art, dance, mystical sessions - sexual elements that flow independent of, or in conjunction with, traditional chimp-level physical elements. Yet when one is contracted within chimp-ness, these energetics wouldn’t appear. If they did, it wouldn’t be considered “sexual”.
  13. Sometimes I enter that state. It’s a cool dream state. I kinda like it. . . As long as the awareness ME (transcendent to “me”) there is no problem. Discomfort only arises when I contract into little “me” and think I am all alone, the only thing that exists, no one is real etc.
  14. It’s interesting how some minds are locked into a strict binary gender construct and think anything outside the two normal genders is an imaginary identity. Yet they cannot see their own gender to which they subconsciously identify is just as imaginary. Generally they have been raised in a society dominated with two strict gender categories and their own relative experience is within one of these gender categories. This to them is normal and anything outside of these two categories would be an imaginary identity (since it would be an imaginary identity if they were to do it). In terms of SD, high green / yellow would have an understanding of ones own relative experience and relating that to a different relative experience of another. One of Orange’s big resistances to this is to define gender as two distinct categories based on physical attributes, such as genitalia.
  15. In terms of charisma and public energy, it’s AOC hands down. She was by far the biggest progressive endorsement for Bernie and saved his campaign. Bernie was down and out after his heart attack and AOC single handedly revitalized his campaign and even made him the front runner. When AOC stumped for Bernie, she was a legit star. She can draw huge crowds and gave high quality speeches that strongly resonated with the crowd. She has Robert Kennedy and Obama level skills and resonance. She was more of a headline speaker than Bernie. The only other person that even comes close is Cornell West, yet he obviously not a successor. Omar had a many good flashes yet is not on AOC’s level. AOC is also very good at doing her homework and exposing the hypocrisy and corruption of others - via twitter, speeches and congressional hearing. Her smack down speech of Yoho’s misogyny was legendary and she has eviscerated plutocrats. And she destroyed her opponent in a debate (although it was a weak opponent). And she is very good on policy. There are other good progressives on policy like Nina Turner, Jayapal, Khanna etc. Yet no one comes close to AOC’s broad range of skills, charisma and ability to resonate with the public - especially with GenZ and Millennials. She has mentioned she may walk away from congress some day if she thinks she can make greater contributions in other areas and she has never expressed ambitions of becoming a senator or president. Yet I can see her becoming president in 10 years or so. A lot of boomers will have died off and GenZ and Millennials will be the major voting bloc. Plus the country will likely be more Green. Her rise has been so fast that I could see her potentially running in 2024 if the country continues to worsen under corporate plutocracy and corruption. She is by far the biggest ‘change’ candidate, imo.