Vrubel

Help, I am clueless. I have LSD blotters, how do I microdose? Do I just cut them up with a razor blade?

@RobertZ @Ora @Kamo Thank you so much!

@Striving for more Please don't be disrespectful on my thread. I appreciate your honest expression but you sound very immature. Yes, It's normal to manifest desperation and you probably will f*ck up a lot of approaches/texts/dates because of that, that's just part of the learning process. The important thing is to remain steadfast and results will be guaranteed. Also, nobody is desperate for sex all the time, you probably feel just fine most of the time. Do some meditation or explore psychedelics to gain some centeredness, strength and wisdom. Holding a grudge against women because of being rejected a lot is a very predictable egoic trap, if you had some consciousness you would have shaken of these toxic thoughts and attitudes pretty easily.

Since this spring I started approaching women in the streets. A huge motivating factor was that I thought of myself as a very attractive guy. Like before I knew about even the existence of the possibility that you can approach a woman on the street, I would get a lot of attention from girls when I was simply walking and running errands in the city. Girl's heads would turn, they'll look straight into my eyes, often being all feminine and bewildered, sometimes smiling and even glowing. Hot girl would feel my presence even before I turn the corner and they actually saw me. These "magical" moments of attraction were very common for me. The very reason girls were so intrigued by me was because I had a very secure, strong and even spiritual energetic presence. (I am short and not that good-looking). But now that I started approaching women in the streets there is none of that magic. Women don't look at me when I am doing "sets" and the only result that I got so far was a few dates with just barely-average-looking girls. Nothing more. I feel it's because doing day-game and scouting out girls to approach is an inherently needy activity. The paradox is of course that when you cannot care less about girls you will get a lot of attention from them but when you are doing an activity that involves actively scouting and approaching girls you will stop existing for them. There is inherent neediness and the power balance advantage is with the girl. Is there a way to be energetically secure/strong and still actively seek out women and approach?

@Esilda Women intuitively understand dating and the dynamics involved, most men are not so socially wired and need to learn this. You can be a "self-fulfilled" attractive guy but if you are a reclusive and autistic ape when it comes to interacting with women you will remain forever alone. Guys learning the proper dynamics of dating is also for the benefit of girls. Maybe you will never meet your dream prince because he has a limiting belief that approaching women is needy and that he is not yet "self-fulfilled" enough. Again: watch the virtue signaling and projections, Both sexes have their own struggles when it comes to dating, but you don't seem very understanding of the struggles of men

Connect? Ouch, I even get rejected when I just try to share my perspective and understanding.

All guys want connection but connection alone is not going to satisfy his core need. A woman can be lustful and promiscuous but at the end of the day, her core need is intimacy/connection. What? No. If a guy dates a girl and they have sex after a few dates, that means that a sufficiently deep connection was successfully built. Or if the men and women are clubbing, are horny and go for a one-night-stand this also means a connection was built. Maybe in a short time but maybe that connection was really intense. Of course, there is always the risk of bad sex.

I stated the core biological needs of both sexes. Yes, it's a generality but a pretty solid one. Your examples don't disprove this. This is what all girls say, it's your core need. Normal women are not prostitutes, they all have standards and need a connection in order to have sex. A guy facilitates this connection by being attractive to you.

This is definitely true, that's evolutionary biology for you. It's harsh. For women and men but in different ways. I have by the way no interest in having a "man vs women" discussion. I understand this is your feminine perspective as what I wrote was my masculine perspective. The one is not better than the other. Your need is first and foremost for romance, intimacy, "decency" and emotional connection. You think of this as a pure angelic wish, this is your rainbows and sunshine. Your most heavenly fantasy. A guy wants that too but his biggest priority with women is sex. men equate sex with rainbows and sunshine. His most heavenly fantasy is a harem.

The need for sex is something a guy feels on a daily basis in varying intensities. It is a deep biological need that really has the potential to f*ck you up if you don't deal with it properly. So it is crucial that men learn to handle and satisfy this need but at the same time, It is very much so looked down upon if you are honest about actively pursuing women to satisfy this need. Guys want emotional connection too but it is not their priority. It is virtue-signaling if you start your spiel about how much you value love and emotional connection and guys that "just" want sex are creeps. The comment was a tacit example of this feminine and societal attidute. That's totally understandable, there is no judgment here. After all, as a society we cannot admit we are horny animals and as men, we cannot explicitly admit that we first and foremost want sex from women.

@Esilda I love that you brought this up because this is typical of how most women think about game. Notice the tacit virtue-signaling and disgust you have for game. I am not judging you because this is how 90% of women think about the concept of "game". What you don't understand is this: If you get approached on the streets by a strong, confident, charming good-looking guy you will go home and tell your girlfriends enthusiastically that this very cute boy approached you and you will probably note that he was tall, dark whatever. (even though it was a more unconscious primal or spiritual-energetic aspect that ultimately won you over). Now if you get approached by a dark soul loner with poor social calibration your face will shrivel up in disgust and you'll go home and tell your friends that a maniac approached you. You will then reiterate the importance of #metoo and feminism. Strong guy = massive survival value for you therefore everything he does "I accept and think is cute". You will yield massively to him. Dark soul nerdy guy = "Ewwwwwwww. Please get him away from me." Of course, these are two extreme examples. But ultimately your biggest problem with game is that it is a seemingly love devoid statistical endeavor and that a "creep" can grow into a stud that you are attracted to. As a guy, I think the best thing that "game" teaches me is how to act whenever I meet a girl that is just my type or we are in love. When there is a match like this girls assume everything will be smooth and effortless. But you have no idea how easily an inexperienced guy can ruin a match made in heaven. I personally was so inexperienced and insecure that when an absolute tenner fell in love with me there was nothing I could do. I actually broke her heart with my inexperience and insecurity.

This tells me you know nothing about women

It is not an excuse, I am planning on continuing (I even hired coaching for the coming weekend). It’s just when I day game I come into this state of consciousness that is “seeking/scouting” almost plotting. As in contrast to being energetically centered, secure and deeply strong as whenever I am just running errands. I was asking for advise to overcome this issue and ideally combine my attractive non-needy state with the scouting (more needy) aspect of actively day gaming. I am extremely introverted so day game is pretty much my only hope.

This is going to be a somewhat openhearted and vulnerable share on my part but I feel I need to do this. My apologies in advance if this post seems randomly structured or somewhat torn in contradictions, see it as a reflection of my struggles here. I am 24 years old and extremely introverted. In my teens, I got disillusioned with my friends and became a kind of a misfit loner. since then I have struggled with feelings of insecurity and shame for it. Though I did went through a lot of (and I can even say massive) personal growth in my young adult life, this made me think that I overcame most of my petty insecurities and angst. But in the last few years, I started doing psychedelics, and more recently since the spring I also started approaching women in the streets. This has resurfaced a more serious and existential sense of outcastness for me. Like at times I literally feel like a crazy person and it makes me feel ashamed. I actually have an uncle who is very spiritual-minded but mentally ill and he is a real f*cking outcast, like in the ugliest and most hardcore sense of the word. My parents are tacitly afraid I will end up like him. At times I cannot help but to understand their fear. On the very first psychedelic trip that I had (three years ago), I cried for having lived my life so alone and I got a new massive appreciation for my loving family, which up until that point I underappreciated. They are the only people in life I truly trust and deeply care about. Forgive my superstitious language but I feel like it's my fate is to be alone. My whole teenage and young-adult life I struggled against this fate only to suffer in the process. The more I have let go the more inner peace I gained. I thought that my surrender was complete and last year, the pandemic year was actually the most peaceful year I ever had. Though this year is different. This year I have set the goal for myself to be more social and to date more girls because I am not done with those experiences and I do not want to waste my youth in that regard. But ultimately I know that I do not want a family of my own and I have no desire for friends. Lately, I was having a pleasant dream of laughing with some old colleagues, which were one of the few people in life I enjoyed spending time with. Also in that dream, I was validated by pretty girls. Nothing sexual but they gave me a sense that I belonged, was respectable and most of all: normal. The dream was noticeably in contrast to how I feel in waking life. Typing this made me cry, I feel overwhelmed by life and sorry for myself. If you had comparable experiences and life paths I would love to hear from you.

Haha, please tell.

I still need to be social in order to have a dating life. Also for my professional life, I need to start going to events and build up connections. But ultimately I have a vision of ending up alone.

Better not, you might puke it up

10 mg is a good starter dose, it's very little so the risk is small too. That alcohol you did 16 hours ago won't play a role here if you feel fine and sober. Sounds to me like you are good to go but make sure you are not distracted by returning flatmates.

My new 5-meo batch is much lighter in color and more finely powdered than my previous batches. (Top one is the new batch, I never saw 5-meo so white and fine before). What does this mean? should I be more careful or is this nothing to worry about?

@Thought Art Freebase

First of all, this debate is pointless because Israel already exists as a state and it will evolve whichever way. Second. You must understand that just because you hold these relativistic notions about nationalities most people do not which has "real-world" consequences. In the "real world" there is a difference between a roast beefish people and a Jewish people as there is a difference between a car and your mother. For one thing you can get targeted for extermination for the other not. And thirdly it is normal for a people group to seek independence and freedom (from oppressors). That's what history is about and is still happening with people like the Palestinians, the Kurds, Catalonians, Tibetans etc. And in many ways, I understand and support them. The Jews just succeeded. I won't apologize for that.

The UN is notoriously laced with simplistic symbolism and hypocrisy. Sure, those too are very valid.

I feel you but there is nothing really wrong with Zionism, the term has been hijacked real bad. It has nothing to do with right-wing nationalism let alone racism. At its core, you are a zionist if you believe that the Jews have a right to their own state. In that regard, I am an unapologetic Zionist. Zionism has saved millions of Jews from prosecution, oppression and potential genocides namely in middle eastern lands. Also, Israeli contributions in water management and the agriculture sector help feed the entire world. Sure, the tragic victims of Israel's existence are the Palestinians and I strongly believe this needs to be corrected by way of compromise. This kind of hyperbolism just shows a lack of nuance and understanding for Israel's security concerns and traumas.

This is a nice dystopian picture. And I certainly agree that if the nazis won the war it would have been a lot darker. Certainly no democracy, freedoms and multiculturalism. Without a decisive German defeat that included the confrontation with the atrocities, all the ingredients would be there for another world war as a continuation (perhaps with nukes). But then again you have to understand that the nazi phenomenon is so exceptionally over the top destructive, cruel and contra-Europen/German educated/civilized values that it also fizzles out pretty quickly, it is simply not sustainable as a system for anything let alone government. The mass repressions in the Soviet Union ceased virtually overnight with Stalin's death. In large part, because the people (including the perpetrators) simply couldn't stomach them anymore. I think the same would happen if Hitler would have died naturally. And even after Stalin's death, Communism lasted only 38 years in Russia. I would argue that a watered-down version of nazism would not even last half of that. I see 20th-century Fashism and Nazism as short bursts of extreme relapses, Ultimately European democratic values have prevailed because the build-up base for them was already strong before the relapses occurred. You cannot have a society that used to be educated, ordered and peaceful relapse for very long.

The "history is written by the winners" statement is way too oversimplified and misleading. History is written by whoever writes it, would be a more accurate statement. The thing about history is that it is the number one tool used to enforce a societal/national narrative. This narrative is not a simple story but rather a sacred almost mythological-connected-to-the-heavens foundation, ensuring unquestionable legitimacy to a certain civilization, people-group or state. For example, think about the American war of independence and its founding fathers. People and fighters in every American war since then would look back at that time period and use it to draw inspiration and motivation from. They will feel so deeply connected to the original idea and ideals of America that they will have no problem dying for it. It's kinda funny that during the civil war both the North and South would look at the ideals of the war of independence as their legitimizing source. The North would emphasize the union and freedom part whilst the South would focus on the "independent spirit" and also the freedom part (but in a different way). Southerners actually sometimes referred to the civil war as "The second war of independence." But of course, the narrative of America goes deeper than the inception story. Ultimately it is deeply anchored in the idea of " western civilization" which points to ancient Greece and Rome as its more temporal legitimizing narrative, and to the story of the Israelites and Jesus Christ as their spiritual legitimizing narrative. Another great example of this phenomenon is the medieval Holy Roman Empire. The name alone is an overcompensation for their insecurity as a legitimate entity. They were basically a very multicultural but germanic dominated realm roughly encompassing modern-day Germany and the north of Italy. Well... How are you going to legitimize a land which is so random and diverse? The answer: you say it's holy because you got the pope living in the deep south, you say it is Roman because... why not? And you say it's an empire because that word sounds cool and powerful. Even though a Holy Roman emperor had nowhere near the power of an original Roman emperor. Also, notice how a Germanic-dominated realm would source its legitimacy from ancient Rome despite having fought them and in the end actually destroying Rome. Napoleon would also legitimize his emperor status by referring to ancient Rome despite French tribes having fought the Romans. Because history is not written by the winners but by those who have the most perceived glory and intellectual contributions. In some cases, history is written by the losers. How do you explain the Babylonians getting such bad press in the Bible despite conquering the Hebrews? What about the lost cause myth of the confederates, which was the leading historical narrative for southerners for way over a hundred years? The south doesn't need to win to wite its history. Notice how Robert E Lee has an almost god-like status akin to Washington. In the case of Nazis, it is a little bit harder for me to imagine because at the end of the day nazism was way too aggressive and extreme of an ideology to be mainstream for a long period of time. Nazism eats its self and rather quickly: who has the common sense to take on the Soviet Union, Brittain and America at the same time, whilst prioritizing sending people to extermination camps over sending supplies to troops? Even if Germany would have won they would either have collapsed shortly after or would had to water down their ideology considerably to unrecognizable levels.