aurum

I didn't think he had a chance originally, but now it looks like he might have a real shot. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out either way.

Good one.

Well we are just going to disagree on this. It has not been outgrown. If you can't understand why men need and even want that kind of pressure, you can't really understand masculinity.

Why do you think that is?

Or, maybe you've just not owned this part of yourself yet.

@Emerald you're making valid points. We are painting broad strokes here and trying to identify general trends. You could splice things in many different ways.

Right, it's a tradeoff. The shadow is that the same impulse to maintain harmony is what causes truth to get swept under the rug. Women are not just sharing truth with more tact. It's a more social way of sense-making, based on consensus and prioritizing group well-being. In that sense, it's more collectivist. Like a hive-mind. This might work if collective sense-making favored truth. But often it doesn't. Group sense-making almost always prioritizes survival of the group. So truth will get sacrificed in these scenarios. Autonomy of mind generally favors men. Men are often rewarded for breaking from the herd for the purposes of innovation, standing out and taking risks. And someone who is not as sensitive to the lasers and attached to connection is much more suited for cutting through group-think and delusion. But of course this also can come at the cost of rupturing social cohesion and connection. Women’s truth mode: high-resolution sensitivity to emotional systems, but often pressured to suppress disruptive insight for social survival. Men’s truth mode: lower sensitivity to emotional costs, enabling more autonomous sense-making and blunt truth-telling, but may lack the nuance to deliver that truth with sensitivity.

That's that Bonnie Blue awakening.

There is more to awakening than ruining your cosmic cosplay.

The ultimate test from God

Folded quick as hell on that one

Yes, that's true. Folding is inevitable. There's no shame in it.

You can still choose Absolute Truth but then live a human life. It's not strictly an either / or choice.

Why are you against addition of inputs? These inputs can be helpful beyond just "compensation". Especially if you don't have top-tier genetics. You seem to keep thinking you can solve all health problems by living like ancient people.

But that also doesn't mean men and women have the same orientation towards truth. Survival has created various incentives and tradeoffs around truth.

Survival / effectiveness often requires both fantasy and truth. You could look at it from either perspective.

You'd have to actually commit to her in a romantic fashion. Do you want that?

Be careful though, because vibes can be misleading. These people are often delusional and not always as good as they seem.

SD Green music is really good for this:

@Rishabh R change is disruptive. You often don't appreciate how difficult integrating change is until you've done it. If some ways, you can be better off just being conservative and not trying to change your life too much.

That's a good answer. You're doing some serious sense-making.

Do you understand why ethnocentrism / nationalism is important? That's the real test of your integration.

Tolerance: your beliefs are wrong, but I still accept you. Here's a hug Integration: I understand where your beliefs are right and wrong

Right, because Yellow should have integrated both sides already. Yellow would understand what the KKK gets right, why it exists and integrate that into its perspective.. Yellow would be deeper than that. What you're describing is more tolerance / acceptance. That's not the same as integrating their perspective. I'd say that's a safety / personal boundary situation. You don't need to tolerate toxicity in your life. You can disengage from such people if you need to.

We learned nothing apparently: