Parththakkar12

Sounds like you don't like doing what you did, when you were helping this person. It sounds like you self-sacrificed for them and what you were doing for them wasn't even that important to them, you didn't see that and you went through too much trouble to do something that turned out to be unimportant for this person. My suggestion would be to pay more attention to what the person actually needs, then you can help them figure out how to meet that need. Either you can do it yourself, if you want to, or you can direct them to someone else who can. The fact that they're asking you to do something for you that's unimportant to them shows that they themselves don't know or aren't sure about what they're actually needing. If you're not up for helping them figure out what they want, you might just want to ignore their request. They won't particularly mind that cuz it's not that important to them.

Was it the one on 30th Street or the one on Table Mesa? I'd grocery-shop in the one on 30th Street!

Systems fundamentally get created at Blue. That's the thing! If you want to really create systemic change, you have to truly integrate Blue and understand the reasons why Blue systems work the way they do, so that you can then create better systems that don't have the same problems, this time consciously. For example, if you really study systems, one very interesting thing you'll understand is this - Morality is the fundamental building-block of all agenda-driven organized human systems. It's not a bug, it's a feature. In fact, such a feature that it's inseparable from the discussion of systems. I'm going to let you contemplate that one. At Blue, the problem is that the systems are created unconsciously. Systems only get consciously created for the first time at Yellow. This is why it tends to be so important to go back and understand Blue to really uproot the dysfunctional systems, to solve the systemic problems at the root and to create new, better systems that are fundamentally better.

@Preety_India Wait, this isn't a blame-game? You actually have a solution? Does it work?

@Preety_India Kay fine. You win the blame-game. Congrats. Here's a cookie.

@Preety_India I understand the meaning of anti-racism. I don't need you to educate me on that! I'm shining some light though on what I've observed when people talk about anti-racism, especially white fragility. It comes across as an attack on the white race. What we need to understand whenever we take a stand against something that it generally doesn't work. It compunds the very problem that you're taking a stand against. My homework assignment to you is to contemplate why that is the case.

The only biological difference is the difference in melanin pigment in your skin, which really doesn't matter to real life. Fundamentally, race doesn't matter. All the consequences of having a certain skin-color are socially constructed. None of them are natural, really. The social consequences, though, are very real. There are entire collective identities of races. Race is so fundamentally a part of your identity, your racial identity is so strong that if you really identify with your race, you will only feel a sense of belonging with the people of your race. That's ethnocentrism and that's the breeding-ground for racism, with very serious social consequences.

@Preety_India I never said that either. Now that you're asking me whether races exist or not, on an Absolute level, they don't exist. We do have very strong racial identities though, so the 'Do races exist?' question is irrelevant to the topic of racism.

@Preety_India That question assumes that I said that 'discussing racism is ethnocentrism'. I never said that!

@Preety_India My facts are right.

It's not racist per se, it puts the finger on a real issue. However, it can fuel anti-white racism. It can be used to justify one's ethnocentrism by non-whites. It makes an enemy of white ethnocentrism, which is all good and fine if white ethnocentrism leads to racism. However, you don't want to make an enemy of the white race. When you start doing that, (which a lot of POCs are very prone to, simply because their own culture is at say Stage Blue), you are demonizing the other race's ethnocentrism to justify your own ethnocentrism. This is not Stage Green behavior, this is Stage Blue behavior taking advantage of SJW causes to further one's own agenda. You want to talk about 'white fragility' only once you've solidified your own identity in your own race. For example, you don't want to have 'black fragility' or 'asian fragility', you want to work that stuff out before you go telling another race to not be fragile!

What she needs to do is she needs to heal her wounds of rejection, her shame around not being attractive to men she wants. This will drive her more in a direction where she learns how to be more attractive to men in general and she heals herself out of her attraction to the wrong guys (no offense, I'm calling you a 'wrong guy' here simply because you weren't into her). She sounded like someone caught in an avoidant/anxious relationship-dynamic, where you're the avoidant one, she's the anxious one. If you're in the shoes of the anxious one, you'll feel rejected and if you're in the shoes of the avoidant one, you'll feel like the other person is being too desperate/needy/clingy. To me, it looks like this is what happened with the two of you. She's going to have to really look into this before she even gets into dating! As far as her 'being disadvantaged' goes, this can absolutely be changed. What I've noticed very closely is that my attraction to a woman's body has more to do with how she presents herself than the particulars of her body itself. For example, if a woman is fat, but she wears tight-fitted clothing that shows her cleavage or something, or a nice dress, I'm going to be attracted to that! She's drawing me in deliberately by the way she presents herself. But, if a woman who's thin and has a perfect figure wears low-quality loose clothes (maybe to hide her figure because she's insecure about it), I'm going to feel nothing about her otherwise 'perfect body'. The point being, women have a lot more power when it comes to attracting men than we think, or than they even know of in general! Yeah sure, men like to look at a certain kind of body in magazines, in fashion-shows, in beauty-contests, in movies, on Instagram/social media, even in porn. This can make women feel very insecure about their body when it doesn't match those qualities. But, if you notice very closely, because their profession involves being attractive to men, (all men, not just one guy, not just the one guy you want in your life) they put a disproportionate amount of effort in how they present themselves and how they look. This is what actually draws men in! This is the value those industries create for men. Put the same sexy-looking woman in baggy clothes with no make-up and nobody will even look at her. The point being, in real life, a woman with any kind of body can attract any man. (who isn't objectifying her or who isn't conditioned into only wanting a specific kind of body, but, would you want to be with such a guy anyways? Even if you had his kind of body?) Now yeah, individual men will have certain preferences in bodies when it comes to actually dating and having sex, so you're going to have to go for a guy who's into you. But, you can still be attractive to a man who isn't necessarily into your kind of body! He just won't go for it with you because he isn't into your body, but it won't be that he won't even consider it! All men are horny, let's face facts. Especially if you flaunt the body-part that the specific guy is into, say wearing yoga-pants to show your ass, he's going to be attracted to that! No matter whether it's 'too small' or 'too big'. None of that actually matters. That's what women probably tell each other, that's female conditioning.

If you're a deep thinker, you will struggle. The surface-level world will simply not excite you. Always remember that social norms and social rules are not designed by high-consciousness people in order to be able to create connected and meaningful relationships, they are designed for the dumbest, most simple-minded, lowest-consciousness person to fit in and be able to function. If you are a unique and interesting person, you may think that this is a good thing, that you'll be very attractive in general. Most people believe this. This is not true at all. Even if you will be, big deal. You really won't care for most people. If you want to be attractive to most men, you need to have a certain look. The key, though, is that you don't have to be attractive to most men. You just have to be attractive to one, the right one. You're not trying to break into the film-industry or modelling or something, you're trying to date! If you're trying to get into those professional fields, yeah, you do need to fit some social norms of attractiveness. Not when you're dating.

The shaking is a release of trauma. Let that happen. Let it run its course.

First things first - If you are clueless about this relationship, don't go in for some sort of outcome. Don't expect this to magically get better because it won't. If that's why you're in it, if you're hoping for this to go anywhere, the first thing I'd do is I'd let go of any attachment to outcome. If you have trouble with this, get professional help. Once that's done, if you still want to stick around, what you want to do in the relationship is you want to try to understand her. You want to really look at the dynamics and get to know her, understand what's really going on between the two of you. Ideally you want to do that on your own time but now that she is in the picture, doesn't hurt to do this with her help. In relationships, Teal Swan is the best. She is one of the best experts in the world about relationships. In fact, she is the best, period. Let go of attachment to outcomes. This stuff will cease to matter to you. With this specific woman, of course. Don't do anything rash or out of anger. You will regret it. About your issues with women's lies in general, that's a very tricky conversation. Especially when there's too many people waiting to call you a sexist, misogynist male pig. They absolutely can lie, your concern is legit. It can be very frustrating to separate the wheat from the chaff. There's only one real way to know - learn to connect with them. When you do, when you are able to feel the Oneness, you will be able to see the truth about the other person. Then, once you have the truth with which to tally everything she says and does, now the real work begins of separating the wheat from the chaff. You can understand her agenda, her mindsets, her attitudes towards the situation.

Not clear enough! Hanging out doesn't cut it. The date will go nowhere and she knows that. What you need is an agenda, a materialistic agenda for the collective of the two of you. That's what you need as a leader of the collective of the two of you. In this context, sex. You need to make a very clear decision about whether you want to sleep with her or not and if you do, what exactly you want to do with her. That's where your confidence will come from and that'll draw her in. I'd suggest finding yourself in the context of sex before going out into the dating-world. I understand that you may want an attachment-relationship with her. That's all good and fine. However, if you aren't chasing sex, your collective isn't moving towards a common materialistic goal that all the individuals of the collective want and value. In such a situation, the materialistic goals of all the individuals will take them away from each other and the collective will fall apart. Your attachment-relationship won't work, or rather, it's at her mercy, if you don't have the sex part figured out. The point being, all human collectives come together for materialistic reasons, when individuals have materialistic goals, so they create a collective that has a common materialistic goal that integrates all the individual goals of the individuals. You see this with business and with dating. The point of the collective is to take organized action towards the common materialistic goal so that everyone involved gets what they want. It is very important that you, as the leader of your collective that is your romantic relationship, understand this and you set the goals for the collective, the agenda for the collective as to how you're going to achieve that goal, create strategies, plans and execute on those plans. You don't have to do all of this alone, you can have her help and her advice in doing this and you can integrate all of that in your dating-strategy. You have to initiate and lead all of this though. If she isn't on board, understand why, learn your lesson about her and women in general from that situation and move on to the next woman.

@chungii chang Do you want to sleep with her? Do you want to get into her pants? Or do you want to have a platonic attachment-relationship? What do you want with her? If you don't know this, figure this out first. The big problem I see with what you're doing is that you don't have an agenda with her. You don't have that because you haven't made a clear decision relative to what you want with her or you don't even fully know that. This is why decisiveness and leadership matter so much in relationship.

Yeah, I know. The blame always has to come back to the guy. This is getting old now, honestly. If it's not 'man bad, woman good', it's misogyny. Who told you that? Why does everyone believe this?! Are men not allowed to expect something more than sex from a woman? If you have higher-consciousness expectations, does that mean that you're 'being bitter about not getting laid' or something like that? This is a theme I'm sensing. What I'm doing here is I'm talking about what a toxic relationship looks like from male perspective and what to do about that toxicity.

So, would you settle for Tier-1 or would you find a partner who actually cares about you? I prefer to cut out the thorny stem and bring in a stem that's more holdable and useful. Thorns are utterly useless and only painful, they should be cut out. Yeah, it's one thing to care about someone's safety, to be well-intentioned about it, it's another thing to actually know how to do it. You don't know how to care about someone's safety if you don't know what's in the best-interests of that person. Your confidence relative to being able to do that will be highly dependent on their own commitment to their own safety, for example. If that's not the case, then you're faking it to yourself and/or them.

Isn't it interesting how these same women will devolve into criticism when they find out the reality of the situation?! This assumption of perfection is something they like to make. Very interesting how they try to moralize to men how to be men, when even they know that a man who knows how to be a man doesn't need her moralization. The real way of dealing with criticism is to see that it's bullshit, to beat the adversary of your confidence by showing them that it's bullshit and to build your confidence despite them. That's how you do it! Also, interesting how they try to break the very thing they want in a man - confidence. If you want a guy to care about your safety, his confidence in his ability to do that will highly depend on your state as a woman. If it doesn't, that's a narcissistic/sociopathic guy. It should depend on her, it's not unhealthy.

Lol I wasn't calling you out or something, although more power to you if you got something out of it. What I was referring to was my own previous paragraph, that it was about the immaturity of 'trying to prove yourself' vs chasing social status.

@Espaim It's immaturity. That's the long and short of it. A real man doesn't have to prove himself, he is self-confident. It's a lack of self-confidence that's making them chase external validation. This was about proving yourself, that's immature. However, there is a more natural drive in men to pursue social status. That's with the more serious things, like being rich, having a nice car, having a 'trophy wife', etc. This social-status thing has more to do with being attractive to women and procreating, so to speak.

Point taken. As a guy, it can be very demoralizing when all you see in the media is demonization of masculinity. Female criticism completely shatters your confidence and self-esteem. Male self-esteem depends a lot on female approval. Women probably don't know this and most guys won't tell you this because it's not alpha enough and because 'your self-esteem shouldn't depend on external validation, that's weak!!' Precisely. You just told me the reason you aren't being open about this. Men have a fundamental drive to be protective towards women. Now, when this drive gets expressed in a narcissistic manner, what you see is the patriarchy, women being treated like property in ancient times, etc. The point being, the drive behind the patriarchy isn't inherently evil, it's meant to meet the female need for physical protection. What this entails is that men have a protector aspect of self whose self-esteem entirely depends on the health, well-being and happiness of women. If you're in charge of protecting a woman, you don't get to decide whether you're a good protector or not. She does. That's how this works. This is why her opinion about you will be more important to you as a protector than your own! Now, in the patriarchy, up until this point, it was all about physical protection. The attitude was 'I'm going to keep you in the house and I'm going to go out, do the hard physical work of winning the bread for the family, you manage the household, so to speak. Don't leave the house because it's too dangerous. There's wild animals, there's other men waiting to steal you from me, etc.' It was narcissistic, not denying that. That's why it didn't work. It was an unconscious attempt that didn't work. It's important to note this though if we want to create a new system that does work.

@Emerald It sounded more pro-male to me than anti-female or 'internalized misogyny'. Unless being pro-male is misogynistic, in which case, I don't know what to say. If being pro-male is misogynistic, if you want to take away any form of happiness/approval/genuine understanding a man can get from women, that's just sad.

I see more of this happening in the future because men really do value women who understand them. This is like a huge relief to me, to see that such women exist out in the world. Looks like the gender-war is ending now!