thortho

From what I remember of the rules of what's unclean and what's not, it seems to mostly have to do with what's "different". So, as mentioned in the passage - rabbits are unclean because they chew their cud (well, sort of, anyway) without having cloven hoofs, and pigs have cloven hoofs but don't re-chew. So they're different from the ones that do chew cud and have cloven hoofs. Similar went for things in the water. If it has scales, like most fishes do, then it's okay; if it doesn't have scales, like shellfish and whales, then it's unclean.

Oh yes, garlic. I use it a lot, probably most of my cooking uses a clove or four (or a whole one, if it's one of those cloveless types). I guess that goes some way towards explaining why I'm single.

I prefer hardcopy books, paperback or the other kind, but as I'm living in a fairly small place at the moment (and will be for about another year, at least), I just don't have space for them. So I'm sticking to e-books for now. They also come with the bonus of usually being somewhat cheaper than the other kind

It's fairly long, and not really suited for a snappy one-liner (19th century folks could sometimes be the opposite of frugal with their words, couldn't they?), but I still like it, partly because it's written about 150 years ago and is still true today, partly because it is a little inspiring and thought-birthing, but also because it's from one of my favorite books, John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, chapter three (I did have to search for a while to find it in English - I've only read it in translation): "In our times, from the highest class of society down to the lowest, every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship. Not only in what concerns others, but in what concerns only themselves, the individual or the family do not ask themselves—what do I prefer? or, what would suit my character and disposition? or, what would allow the best and highest in me to have fair play, and enable it to grow and thrive? They ask themselves, what is suitable to my position? what is usually done by persons of my station and pecuniary circumstances? or (worse still) what is usually done by persons of a station and circumstances superior to mine? I do not mean that they choose what is customary, in preference to what suits their own inclination. It does not occur to them to have any inclination, except for what is customary."

Possibly a fun thing to think about, but it has so very little impact on my daily life that it hardly matters to me at all. Now, if I had a job involving e.g. getting satellites up there, I'd probably need to develop a stronger opinion on this, but since it's very unlikely that I'll ever seek employment in that area, it's a fairly non-relevant question. So I just stick to the accepted idea (since Aristotle at least): The Earth is round(ish).

Get out. That about sums up any advice I can give. Get out, block his phone number, block him on every social media you're using and set the privacy settings as restrictive as you can, don't stop to talk if you "run into" him in the streets or at the store or wherever, and get help from support groups and/or professionals.

I'm a nursing assistant in a retirement home; previously I've worked as an assistant in a psychiatric ward, as well as general worker in construction and roadwork. While making things (roads, sidewalks, buildings, etc.) is quite enjoyable, I find I prefer the caring/nurturing professions a lot more (if not the actual work involved, then at least the co-workers are much more pleasant company, generally), and it's most likely what I'll keep on doing for quite a while, yet. Possibly, at some point, I might take up studying to become a nurse but I'm not sure if I will - there's plenty of time to figure that out.

I'm not sure how to overcome the guilt, and I'm not even sure that's the important thing, here. What's important is to keep going - "make it right", in a way. I mean, if you've wronged someone else and feel guilty about it, what do you do then? Apologise, repair the damage (when possible) and move on. Possibly see if you can use the guilt as a fuel for not doing that kind of thing again. So you've not met some of your deadlines? That could mean that you were overly optimistic in setting those deadlines in the first place, so set yourself the same tasks with a more generous deadline. Or maybe you had too many goals you wanted to accomplish at the same time, so cross out all but one of those goals and save them for later, once you've achieved the first. Having too much on your to-do list can be paralysing - "Hmm, should I do this thing or that thing or maybe one of the others?" and then spend far too much of your day focusing on exactly which task to start with, or you get started on one thing but feel guilty that you're neglecting the others, so that i) it gets harder to focus and ii) you switch between tasks too frequently. Or you've not met your goal of meditating every day? Maybe you've set the duration for your daily meditation too long - if you've never meditated before, then it can be a little daunting to suddenly start sitting for 10 minutes at a time (for instance). So, start with a shorter one - just a minute or two - there's simply no way you don't have time for that. Once that becomes a habit (give it a week or three), slowly increase the duration - one extra minute every two-four weeks or so. Even here, if you've seventeen other to-do things, that might become distracting from your 1-minute meditation ("What am I doing, just sitting here and doing nothing when there's so much stuff to get done?"); so again, trim your list. Find which is most important to you (or just choose one at random, I suppose) and stick with just that for, say, a month. Small, managable steps are pretty much always the way to go. You won't run a marathon in four giant leaps, you finish by "just" putting one foot in front of the other, again and again. That's not always easy, but it gets even more difficult if, at the same time, you're writing a novel on your smartphone and having a conversation with your running buddy.

Makes sense. At least if we take "rules" to mean an external set of rules, probably written down somewhere. Someone of integrity doesn't need to have a rulebook somewhere out there, the "rules" are within them. And they don't need to think too much about whether a particular action is in line with any rules, they're acting more out of instinct or habit than anything else. Much like virtues, generally - a virtuous man doesn't need to wonder if an action is virtuous or not.

There's no such thing as a "perfect" woman (or man, or pretty much anything at all). And nobody else can make you happy - not long-term happiness, anyway, and not all by themselves.

Listen more to what they're saying, and try to find some questions to ask related to that. The way it's coming off from your description is that you talk about yourself for a bit and then run out of steam - it's not entirely clear how much they're saying, or if they're even getting a word in at all, but if you're basically just giving them a monologue, then the conversation's going to die fairly quickly. It could work better to give a short introduction, ask a question about her, and then, based on her reply, either comment on her answer or ask a follow-up question. Now, it shouldn't come off as a job interview (and absolutely not as an interrogation) where all you do is ask and ask and ask - you do need to put a little of yourself out there as well, at least when it's something you relate to (so, she says e.g. that she loves dogs - and you do, too - then you can get into talking about dogs a little; if you have or had dogs, there are stories there, or you can talk about various breeds, what kind of dog you'd like to get, that sort of thing). Or, you could work up on having a few "safe" topics up your sleeve. The usual stuff: Line of work (does she like her job - why/why not), cats or dogs, interesting movies seen recently (or books read, or TV shows or whatever), some hobbies. And so on and so forth, just build up a reserve of conversational topics. And remember to listen to what she says, and show that you're listening with further questions and comments. Also, short lulls in conversations aren't bad, but if after 30-90 seconds of sitting in silence and neither of you manage to find anything to talk about, or if neither of you are interested enough in the other person to ask even the most basic questions? Yeah, that's pretty bad.

She's said "no" three times in the space of what, one year or even less? I'd say it's time to move on. How do you know she didn't have any other plans that time? She might've been off from work, but had something else to do.

Our teeth don't really prove anything; there are animals that have pretty vicious-looking teeth that mainly (or exclusively) eat plants. Gorillas spring to mind: Sure, they eat a few insects and caterpillars, but they're mostly plant-eaters (I imagine that what insects they eat are just the ones unfortunate enough to be on the plant when it goes into the mouth). And just look at their teeth! Our digestive tract, from what I've read, points towards a more plant-based diet, and proper carnivores are capable of consuming a lot more meat in a sitting (relative to body size) than humans; I remember reading that if a human ate meat like a wolf does, then we'd be eating ten to twenty-pound steaks in one go (that's about four to nine kg; a restaurant I know of gives you the meal for free if you manage eating one kg steak within an hour). However, we human clearly are capable of eating meat; we have people living in very cold climates (e.g. Inuits in Greenland and North America) who were historically nearly completely carnivorous (fish, whale, seal, walrus, various small land mammals, birds and eggs) since the vegetation is fairly sparse. From what I've read, more modern diets (with more carbohydrates) haven't been very pleasant for them (increase in obesity and diabetes, mainly). These are, of course, fairly extreme examples, and the vast majority of humans haven't lived and aren't living in such climates. From an environmental standpoint, eating meat (and fish and so on) could be considered "better" when people are living in areas where plants don't thrive so well - better eating a locally caught fish than a nice, balanced vegetarian meal where most of the ingredients have to be imported from a long way off, that kind of thinking. So I don't think the main problem with meat eating is that humans are "made for" a vegan diet; it's rather the whole mess surrounding the meat industry that's the problem.

I don't know how the rules are where you live (because I don't know where you live), but in both Iceland and Norway, the very first time they just take a few small samples, both to check for stuff like iron levels as well as screen for various diseases. I'd imagine it's similar elsewhere; if your blood iron is too low, they won't (or shouldn't) let you donate. If the iron (and blood pressure etc.) is okay, then I suppose it's a possibility that they'd let you give. They don't take very much (at least not where I've been), just half a litre (500 ml or about 1 pint). Speaking personally, I've always felt a little refreshed afterwards - a bit like oil change in a car, I imagine.

On one hand, seeing as how just about everyone here is influenced by him in some way (and wouldn't be here having these discussions if he hadn't started up the forum), citing him is a fairly natural thing to do. However, if trying to make a point about something, I think it's pretty weak to point to someone else for proof. Depending on the subject, of course, but this sort of "appeal to authority"-style of discussing can easily suggest that the writer isn't really thinking about the subject themselves and are just parroting another's views and opinions. I should stress that this isn't even close to always being the case - sometimes, someone else has simply articulated the point so well that it's simply better or more efficient to quote them, rather than trying to say it again with one's own words. But I think that pointing to one of his videos as a way to "win" a discussion or to provide a final answer to the problem being discussed - that's not how it should be done; and it'd be problematic if other participants in the conversation would think to themselves "Oh well, Leo says that it's like this, so that's the end of this discussion". And I'm fairly sure that Leo would agree with this, that his videos are not the final answer or ultimate truth or anything, and can (should, even) be criticised just as much as anything anyone else says. And on that point, I'd like to end with a little quote: "Indeed, I counsel you to go away from me and guard yourselves against Zarathustra! And even better: be ashamed of him! Perhaps he deceived you. [...] One repays a teacher badly if one always remains a pupil only." Thus Spake Zarathustra: "On the Bestowing Virtue".

Myeah. I can't speak for all men - nobody can - so really, the response to any of these questions comes down to "It depends". From my perspective: 1. Not really, I've had first dates where we didn't hook up, and that's fine; once we did end up in bed after first meeting (we had been chatting online for a couple of months before, though) and kept a relationship going for about a year before reaching the conclusion we were after very different things and breaking it off; I like to think that if our goals had been more compatible, it would have lasted a lot longer. 2. Nah. I'm not into the completely hairless look, myself, and hair in armpits and/or on legs isn't an issue for me. I used to work with a guy who claimed he preferred women didn't touch razors (and hair removal products in general) at all, so there's that. 3. I'm not sure what "shows her sluttiness" means, exactly, but I'm going to go with "is uninhibited in bed". And that's just not something I've come across - it's been more a case of inhibitions fading out as greater trust and intimacy gets built. I don't think I'd mind, though, as long as it's the kind of kinkiness I can go along with in the first place.

Do you normally brush your hair? If you do, by all means have your hair brushed in the pictures. Do you normally wear suits, your hat backwards? Then have pictures of you wearing those things. Do you often go around topless at the beach? ... You can guess what I'll say here, I'm sure. If your pictures present yourself very different from how you actually are, then you'll probably not have much luck finding a stable long-term relationship. It could work if all you're after are one-night stands, though. I mean, of course you'll want to have good pictures, but they shouldn't be "unnatural" pictures - no pictures of you doing things you normally don't do, and yes, the content is more important than the aesthetics. Pictures of you having fun, showing that you're a fun person to hang out with - that's important. But if you're very concerned about the aesthetical/technical side of things, I suppose this article is as good as any for those concerns: http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2014/06/leveling-up-how-to-look-good-in-photos/

Well, you could try going to a blood bank. They'll check your iron level, blood pressure and so on (well, I suppose that depends on where exactly you live, but if it's a responsible one, they will do that). Eat well, that's pretty much the most important thing. Get some multi-vitamins, if you can afford them; try to catch some sunlight and time outside as often as the weather and your surrounding allows Regular exercise is also fairly important - while walking for 1-2 hours a week isn't bad, I'd suggest slowly building up to do more - if you can get up to doing half an hour (at least) every day, then great! I'm not sure caffeine is any kind of a solution. I know for myself, when I'm having an off-day for whatever reason, no amount of coffee-guzzling will get me up to normal, and although I usually have some coffee in the morning, I don't feel any worse off on days where I don't have any coffee (or any other caffeine source) at all. One thing that keeps me energised enough to work all day is the very simple fact that I spent about half a year being unemployed a few years ago- and that was so very sucky, the fear of going back to that keeps me very thoroughly motivated. While economically, it wasn't that bad (unemployment support here is fairly generous), mentally/spiritually it was terribly draining (the feeling of "I'm unemployable and useless" set in fairly quickly after a series of job application rejections) - not the greatest motivator, of course, but at least it's something. It does help that I found a job that I love, of course.

Do you you have any particular species in mind? Seeing as I consider human to be one species of animals, your question comes across like "What's the difference between animals and dogs?" - a bit too vague to properly answer, and in any case a biologist would be better qualified to give a sensible answer.

I prefer to keep my eyes closed. I tried having my eyes open for a while, but found myself getting too distracted by whatever in front of me. Even a blank white wall might be distracting, all the small details becoming more interesting after a while - not to mention what happens when a spider or a fly walks into my field of vision.

Oh, and another thing that might be worth considering on this whole "being a man"-subject: What is "being a man" contrasted with? Sometimes, when trying to find a definition of something, it can be helpful to contrast it with something else, a "this is not that" approach, especially if buying into a binary style of thinking. Of course, another useful way is to find examples of what's to be defined and just point at that. Point at a yellow thing and say "This is a example of a yellow thing", and you're on your way. Still, you might need a similar object of a different colour, so you could point at that and say "This is not yellow". So, it's possible to define manliness by contrasting men with women. It might give some good ideas, point to some qualities that seperate the two. But you could also go for a definition by contrasting "being a man" vs. "being a boy" - and that might give a very different idea of what being a man is.

Well, even if the "If you only have sex with like 1 or 2 woman your whole life, I can guarantee you that guy will be a pussy" bit were true, that still wouldn't mean that having sex with 100+ women will make someone not a pussy. An analogy: "If you only have three drops of gas in your car, I can guarantee that you won't be able to go for a long drive" doesn't mean that having a full tank will make the car driveable. And if there are other issues with the car (faulty engine, lack of wheels, broken transmission, etc.) then filling the tank up will do no good at all. If you're so horribly desperate to get laid that it becomes the single most important thing in your life - then yeah, that might happen. Get so desperate that you're willing to bend over backwards and twist yourself into a corkscrew for just a chance at taking a woman's panties off, and people will take advantage of that. I almost want to recommend that you try and forget about women alltogether, and just focus on almost anything else you find interesting; although from this standpoint, more focus on interesting social things, something that'll i) bring you into contact with other like-minded folks, and ii) is something that can be used for showing off a bit. I'm fairly sure women are more interested in guys that do interesting things than they are in guys who do not. And on this subject specifically (becoming manly man) - well, you could always go for something that's generally considered a manly thing. Take up a sport, almost any physically demanding sport will do (so, possibly not throwing darts at your local pub), and I suppose a combat-oriented sport would be better. Not necessarily training in order to compete in tournaments or any of that - just for the training of it; pretty much anything with sparring or rough physical contact could, if not actually make you manlier, at least make you feel manlier, as well as doing very good things for confidence. And, of course, grow (or maintain) a little backbone so that you won't let women walk all over you, just because they're dangling the promise of sex in front of you like a carrot on a stick. Well, actually, grow (or maintain) a little backbone so that you won't let people generally walk all over you, just because they're dangling something you desire in front of you like bait.

Well, you don't have to take it that far. Thinking you have to take things to this extreme - and therefore refusing to do it - it's similar to refusing to exercise because you don't want to look like one of those huge bodybuilding guys that seem to spend more time in front of a mirror than actually working out. Just getting a couple of good pictures should be enough, so get them (that does require taking more than two pictures, but you can go over them later, before deciding which ones to use) and then stop doing it. Unless all your pictures have gotten a year old and your appearance has changed (lost/gained weight, new haircut, grown/shaved off beard, and so on).

Well, without Facebook I'd probably lose a lot of contact with some of my friends (they live in one country, I moved away to another one). So, I like it when they're posting pictures of their kids, small updates on their own lives, that sort of thing (and I suppose they feel similarily about the stuff I post) - that way, we can spend a lot less time catching up and recounting the last year or however long it's been, whenever I'm back in the old country, and more time just being together. It's been handy here in the new country, too - for e.g. a group of co-workers organising an outing (since we all work shifts, it can be a bit of a jigsaw finding a time when everyone in "the gang" is available at the same time), as well as getting heads-up on interesting concerts that aren't otherwise advertised heavily, that kind of thing.

On the days I have a morning shift (starts at 7 am), I get up at 5 and do this: 1. Do some simple exercises, mostly bodyweight but a little kettlebell work. Nothing too heavy, just enough to get the blood flowing and any stiffness softened up. Takes about ten minutes or so. 2. Prepare the coffee. I'm using one of those press things, so it's just measure in the coffee, boil the water and pour it over. 3. While the coffee's stewing, a short meditation (10-15 minutes or so). 4. Drink the coffee while writing for about twenty minutes/a few hundred words. Kind of a journal-thing, but not very focused; can be whatever that's on my mind at the time, or just plans for the day/week, or even just something fictional. 5. A quick breakfast - something like yoghurt, oats and maybe raisins. 6. Pretty much just "kill time" (anything from reading a bit to doing the dishes) until it's time to go to work - it's about ten minutes' walk from where I live, so I normally have a little spare time. It's pretty similar on days off/late shifts, except that I take more time for preparing breakfast and rather than going to work, I go do something else - read, go for a walk, do chores, or whatever. And I sometimes sleep a little longer, too; even without an alarm, I usually wake at around 6, and then decide if I'm going to get up or sleep in for a bit.