eos_nyxia

Is this actually really a new trend?? Somehow I doubt it's anywhere as bad as it was in the 00s, though maybe the resurgence of the Y2K aesthetic is creating some sort of cultural subcurrent. Wasn't the Kim Kardashian example about her trying to fit into Marilyn Monroe's dress? (Which supposedly did some sort of damage to the dress itself.) Fashion models have been very thin for a long time? The pushback against this due to social pressure is still quite recent. (Last 10 years or so.)

The STANK from not wearing socks with these shoes is real. If you wear them a lot and sweat in them, even washing them doesn't get that smell out. ...I highly don't recommend it.

@Lincisman Look specifically for boots! If you're not specifically looking for "barefoot" shoes/ boots, "zero drop" is another term which might find you what you're looking for. I own a few like... the Vibram Furoshiki. (Personally, I have mixed feelings about it because the velcro strap which keeps the boot together tends to fly off if you do any serious sort of foot bending. However, they have lining so they are fairly warm for what they are. TBH they feel kind of like you're wearing some kind of weird slipper.) I also owned these Lems boots which I wore to death over the course of a couple of years. They are not warm. However I don't live in a place that typically has very cold winters, so I can get by with some warm socks. (IMO a thin, high wool content sock works well for these types of boots.) Someone above mentioned the brand Vivobarefoot. I own a couple of their shoes, including this boot (chukkas/ Gobi?): (These ones aren't warm at all though.) If you're used to those Vibram toe shoes, "barefoot"/ zero drop boots aren't really quite the same. You're not going to develop/ maintain the same sort of strength and dexterity you'd get in your toes and ankles that you would wearing the classic, but it will stop your ankles/ arches from weakening (in my experience) and becoming inflexible. You do get much more of a tactile ground experience than you would with other sorts of footwear, but it's not quite the same either. Maybe there is something for you here? Some of these brands I haven't heard of before, but then, I've been out of the loop for the past handful of years. They might be newer, IDK. https://nomanbefore.com/best-barefoot-winter-boots-waterproof/ https://anyasreviews.com/warmest-barefoot-winter-boots-zero-drop/ It looks like the warmest of the barefoot boots for "real winters" are mukluk-type boots. E.g. there is this brand, which is aboriginal owned: https://www.manitobah.com/collections/mukluks It looks like they have Vibram soles too. Expect to shell out anywhere from 250-500 dollars though, probably. As they tend to all be individually handmade the traditional way (as the boot was traditionally made by indigenous people of the Arctic). (Otherwise, you're probably not getting as good of a boot... and it will still probably be just as expensive anyway.)

Lately, I've been giving a few groups I've been aware of a more serious listen, like Daughter. (Who I was aware of vaguely before I heard that they were going to score Life is Strange: Before the Storm.) It's definitely some moody introvert music. Paying attention to the lyrics more now, they're definitely way darker than I remembered. I've also felt like music has been supporting me more lately, and has felt less like a sort of pretty decoration to fill up space a time... I think this is somewhat faster than the album version: Acoustic versions of Prefab Spout: This one has been living in my head rent-free the past week: (and a fall-winter mood, if I've ever heard one.) And this one, the original which was my introduction to them: Very underrated group from the 80s...

FYI matcha was used for 1000+ years by Buddhist monks to enhance focus during meditation! I've always been a caffeine-sensitive person; it's the only caffeinated beverage that I can consume in fairly strong concentration without it messing up my stomach and making me less focused than I would be naturally, without giving the jitters, etc. (Us East Asians tend to like our very tea strong compared to the rest of the world, IMO.) To the original question: other than the caffeine sensitivity, I'm also pretty sensitive to the acidity in coffee. Cold brew is somewhat better for that reason only. I like drinking the stuff, but more than that, I think I really just appreciate the ritual that is coffee. Otherwise, mentally and physically speaking, I don't feel like it adds that much to my life, personally. Even just getting in my one cup. As a person with a sensitive nervous system, who has always had a sensitive nervous system... if I am actually tired, let alone burnt out? Nervous system stimulation via coffee (but like, not in a focused way), upsetting my stomach and my nerves, and getting a crash later is literally the last thing that I need. These days I find myself pounding my digestive spices to put into my chai the old-fashioned way with a mortar and pestle: personally I like star anise, cinnamon, green cardamom, black pepper, cloves. Microplaned fresh ginger. (No fennel, ew.) IDK... it just tastes better. Also, all of these spices have a "warming", energizing effect. Even if you make a drink with those spices without the caffeine, it still has that effect.

The thing is that I came to this forum a couple years ago with a more understanding, open perspective. Like I was willing to put myself in the shoes of other people to the best of my ability, whatever was humanly possible for me to do, and to take this to an extreme. This very much includes perspectives which I don't find hospitable to me personally. Because I like to learn about all perspectives in pretty much any way, I don't feel this need to get married to ideology whether it's practical or not. I've read a lot of incel/ red pill/ black pill "philosophy" and various other things that I could get my hand on starting years ago. I'll literally read anything. You say no one understands you or cares? I do. ...for whatever that's worth. Even with me... this never-ending barrage of shitting on women turns me off. And I don't think it's right. And frankly, when you say other women don't care at all... having looked around? I'm not convinced. Women by default here make concessions of extending greater understanding and "keeping the peace" simply by being here, especially in this part of the forum.

I try not to respond to these threads in too reactive of a way (because rarely does it do much good IMO), and generally, I'm past getting particularly provoked anyway. I've pretty much seen it all, when it comes to the justifications of perspectives on the opposite side. It's mostly all the same arguments. You could say something which is basically the equivalent of >>it's just reality women should deal with it!!!<< Ok, but does this resolve people of the responsibility and ramifications of pushing out their worldview dogmatically? Where are the actual limits of just saying whatever it is you want in this space? Here's where I feel concerned: I've sometimes been talking to women who are younger than me from here in private, and it is usually this section that makes them extremely uncomfortable. To some degree, even a little bit, they wonder if they are overreacting for feeling the way that they do, for feeling that the way that women are talked about here is just wrong, particularly when it's at its worst. Like, it's degrading, condescending, hateful, etc... They wonder if dating in "the real world" is going to be this bad (and in that case, they might not want to deal with the opposite sex at all). Though I myself say that I don't think it is at all, and that in my experience, it hasn't been the case. (But that also, there might be some generational differences with technology causing some people, especially males, to not be socialized as well...) But also that there is also a much wider spectrum of male persons out there in the real world, including those who have a MUCH healthier and more positive attitude towards the opposite sex. Many people here would probably just call "normies" too, on a forum obsessed with self-development and spirituality. And say stuff which basically amounts to, well... I'm higher up the SD spiral than all of those plebians, therefore I am just better. But clearly, they have experience being better socialized with the opposite sex... Why is it, that the real, "plebian" world is much better than here with this one issue especially? Why is that ok?? How do you justify this to yourself other than "because reality/ survival + fuck women I gotta get what I want because no one else will get it for me? If you want to call and think of yourself as "better" at least have some higher moral standards for yourself? If you saw women talk about men in a similar spirit with similar language as used here, well... the result would be pretty predictable. But really, who can blame women for coming on here, reading all of this stuff, and getting concerned for their well-being as well as incredibly turned off?

Ah, the very classic strategy of "dismissing all female concerns" as being jealous/ crazy. How incredibly predictable. Personally, reading the thread that the OP mentioned actually made me really grateful for having aged out of this treatment, and basically being targeted for being a young piece of ass. It's like filtering out a bunch of people that I would rather not deal with in my spare time, likely for any reason. It's not that flattering and it never was, particularly. You're basically interchangeable.

I can't imagine at any point in my life ever doing this, lol. That's some low self-esteem... I saw this post either. I would say.... if he wants to advertise loudly and clearly that he's no prize, let him have it. But then you think of the damage that this attitude potentially does to other people, and it's just not right. It is ridiculous to suggest that a woman's only motive for critiquing this behaviour is """being jealous""". Some of us feel a sense of responsibility towards younger women and girls. I use to teach them. Do you think I want or would have ever wanted them to see them go through some of the stuff I went through, or possibly even worse? Personally, I try to take it on a case-by-case basis, keeping in mind that not all younger people have ridiculous, know-it-all attitudes (which I also try to take in stride). I also try to keep in mind what it was like to be dismissed by older people when I was younger (for things that I was right about), and I try to keep that in mind.

This is anecdotally just not true for many of us. Do you think women are crying about "aging out" of being harassed in a menacing way in public, some of us, starting from about 12 years old? (I've heard younger as well, at times.) Are you serious? What sort of reality bubble do you guys live in? Must be nice to have the opportunity to be so utterly clueless about what a large segment of the population goes through. Yea, part of it is this thing called self-protective boundaries which prevents you from getting screwed over in the first place.

In no particular order, if I was sorting through your thoughts as if I was you: What makes you think that he is truly happy, as opposed to putting on a facade? Or that he is not simply experiencing the absence of pain due to suppression and consequent numbness? For example: if you took away all of his toys and put him alone in a room for a while... how long would it take for him to fall into pieces (and to be reduced to a childish stub of a person) due to being forced to be around himself and his own psyche? And what would be left of him after this? IMO, even speaking moderately from personal experience as my upbringing was very harsh and emotionally suppressive in many ways: you can't have that kind of harsh, stitled tone when you talk all the time... and actually be capable of real happiness. And that tone is likely the result of someone who has taken all of his vulnerable, most childish emotions, thoughts, dreams, and impulses, and just CRUSHED it down into near-nothingness so he can "be a man". Happiness expresses itself in the body as being a sort of ease and expansive quality, generally. This can be seen in people's body language, and generally, it's very easy to spot in the way that people can usually tell a fake smile from a genuine smile.... what do you think? There are multiple versions of "fierce" spirituality embodied well but this is not what it looks like, IMO. First and foremost: It FLOWS freely. It is not so stilted and tense. This particular microcosm of the internet tends to really emphasize "absolute responsibility" over your reality more than other places. Perhaps it's the self-help bent? There are a ton of upsides to this stance, even in taking it to an extreme, but it's also a recipe for absolute misery for everything that you have somehow failed to address and account for. You can delay this with temporary copes, but eventually it comes back to you, like pulling a rubber band and it snapping against your wrist. And when it does, it hits hard. Even with the numbness. And guess what? It never ends. By definition, you cause yourself suffering in this way if you don't learn how to loosen your grip a bit. In general, living in a state where one is taking a narrow, aggressive, goal-orientated focus is not actually that conducive for happiness. Because all there ever is... is "right now". But it is conducive for bailing yourself out of situations and creating new ones, with the way that he is using it. In my experience, to be happy while also having goals and objectives is to embrace all the meaning and pleasure you take in your purpose... but RIGHT NOW. Not later. Now. Actually, are you aware that Buddhism also advocates for total personal responsibility? (That this is what ends "karma", which is mainly really just referring to the cycle of entanglements in causes and effects?:) Hinduism (at least theoretically) operates on the same principle.

Yes, but the delivery of a message matters, even as people say that it should not, that people shouldn't be obsessed with things being palatable, or the form container or superficial image of the message. Personally, I've myself gone through a phase semi-recently where I felt like I needed to SCREAM MY TRUTH OUT in a public place. But when I was writing here, I kept it contained within my own journaling. I don't consider it to be a socially responsible vibe to be spreading around, personally. Though I get that some people respond well to this (including to being "berated" which is still checking boxes for fulfilling the guru/ master role, which I also find dysfunctional in the long term). And anyways, "beating people over the head with the truth" works best when you use it strategically and in small doses, assuming that you care about the effect. It's like making a painting only out of all vivid colours, like this: You might think it would be more effective than using a lot of muted colours mixed in with a few brightish colours, because it's all BOLD BRIGHT colours, right? Nope. Bright colours register as "bright" against neutral colours... and the "bright" colours that you use don't even need to be quite so bright too. Equal loudness registers all as "sameness" visually, and so ultimately it has no real lasting impact. It's the same thing with our words when we use too much force indiscriminately. The message gets lost in the medium of expression. It's beyond just frustrating or antagonizing people. You numb them. Take this with a grain of salt though, I guess. Not that I post a lot in the forums, but I know they are probably sometimes perceived as obnoxiously long for the medium and are skipped/ skimmed over. But hey, at least I weed out people who have no intention span with words.

I offered questions because they're often more beneficial than critiques (IMHO). They're potential starting points for finding your own answer for things, and it's a bit more direct than trying to interpret a critique (though that can be helpful too.. assuming that "help" is actually what you're looking for rather than something else. Like maybe masochism? ) The concern with not handing over one's power is a valid one. However, do you not agree that practicing quality control matters? That what we put out into the world (or don't)... that this matters? (Which is why I asked the question about the "loudness war".) Everyone screaming at each other leads to a whole culture of people screaming at each other, and over each other. And this echos on and on. All people can do is scream even louder to be heard, until they lose their voice or they just burn out emotionally and mentally. Or have to pull "better" (as in, more attention-getting) stunts in order to be heard at all. This is partially why our online culture is the way it is IMO. A degree of self-restraint and moderation and thinking carefully before you speak is really nice for everyone else. It's a sort of culture of ME ME ME ME ME, and in the long term it's good for no one individual anyway, IMO.

I have experience with both things, especially when I was younger (in my teens and twenties). If there is a sort of "spiritual"/ developmental upside to this all: it's that you learn how to do so much more, with less. You become more efficient in your thinking, maybe. You are forced to eventually make clear what it is that you truly value, instead of being scattered in your desires and intentions, instead of doing things the way that you are used to doing things, using "force" or this idea of "effort" (which creates a lot of internal resistance and is by nature energy consuming and draining). There is this movement toward doing things in state of FLOW, toward actions, intentions, and experiences that are completely weightless in the psyche. You eliminate the weight that is unresolved, tangled emotion/ thought and trauma. "WEIGHTLESS" is the way that things ideally should be, even if the conditions that lead up to it are not so ideal. At least, this is what I have learned how to do. And many, many things open up to you as a result, that were simply not possible before. A serious question though: how much of "chronic fatigue" is a direct response to environmental sensitivities (and developing greater environmental sensitivities, because an aspect of spirituality is "embodiment" which involves developing your perception and body senses)? Anyway, as more people become more sensitive and more perceptive, society, technology, and living conditions will inevitably be adapted to suit our changing needs. As it always has. And frankly, we must live on this planet in a different way, a more harmonious way. Change is necessary for all of us.

Here's a confession: for many years (especially as a teenager), I would not stand directly in front of a microwave. I specifically mean putting my face/ brain up to close to it. It always gave off an extremely dodgy, chaotic energy which did not feel good in my body. Almost as if one's cells were being scrambled, or could start to break down somehow. It was a very ancient microwave though, and kind of a POS. The door got jammed a lot. I was not fully convinced at the time that I wasn't being overly paranoid and vigilant about it, like: But I was much more hypersensitive in a very porous way, like it felt like my body was not strong enough to handle my environment in many ways. Another example? Having to stay in places with fluorescent lighting was significantly worse than dealing with microwaves. A real vitality sapper. Even now, excessive fluorescent lighting over extended periods of time does make me feel less energetic. IMO the approach I take these days is that it's better to build up vitality (including in one's emotions, attitudes, and thoughts, whenever possible) rather than to obsess too much about every possible thing which could be doing you harm in this world....many things which are unavoidable. And a nearly uncountable number of factors, some which we likely have no awareness of them yet because we lack the perception/ sensitivity overall as a species. Change what you can, but the stress and the fear and the hypervigilance, and feeling like you need to put up walls and barriers (or live in some sort of protective glass ball) to survive also has a profoundly negative, anti-life effect. (I've been there before, so I know what it's like.) But microwaved food? I never noticed anything bad about it, even as a hypersensitive person... Also: most newer microwaves seem fine to me. EDIT: apparently the FDA advises against standing in front of microwave doors, lest radiation leaks from it (I'm guessing it's a door construction/ repair issue?) They're a pretty conservative institution too, as government organizations tend to be. Interesting. https://www.epa.gov/radtown/non-ionizing-radiation-used-microwave-ovens

You writing about yourself is quite interesting! I guess I come from the opposite perspective. I have a number of talents and affinities that might be considered extraordinary (intellectual, spiritual, sometimes creative), and I have been this way since I was very very young, though they were not especially played up at first. You could say that I came into this world in this way. My "gifts" stressed out my parents a lot and as a result, paradoxically, I developed much more of an inferior complex about them rather than a superior complex. That I was a massive inconvenience. I came into adulthood feeling deeply ashamed about things that I loved and that provided me meaning and pleasure originally: it just so happens that what you love and value and dedicate yourself wholly toward, it is also what develops talent/ genius, etc. It is no accident. Anyway, it took a while to fully sort it out, as it does. Probably as a direct result of this, I find myself in the opposite position of many people: I think there is great beauty and value in the ordinary and the mundane. I think there are small things in people, in circumstances, in life, which go unseen and unappreciated all the time. I think a lot of things that people find very ordinary to be extraordinary. There is also no shame needed either in being an ordinary person, specifically if you find real joy and purpose in an ordinary life. At times, especially when growing up, I wished I was more ordinary so I didn't stand out as much. I spent a lot of time and energy up until I was 14 finding ways to minimize myself, trying to make myself more invisible and myself more passably "normal. Honestly though? People devaluing themselves so they can value what I have never brought me much pleasure. People trying to knock me down a peg because they thought I too highly estimated my own talents and skills (?? when really, I was still trying to not take up too much space, I was simply mentioning that I had had problems growing up) seemed very petty and like it was not done in good spirit. I'm sorry that your dad called you stupid growing up. This sort of thing should be a sort of crime for how much damage it does to kids overall. Teachers do a lot of damage to kids this way as well. I used to teach and I would NEVER say anything like that, like literally: over my dead body. As a related note: I've known many people over the years who also rejected this self-image imposed onto them by teachers and relatives, though I have noticed that it seems to have always left some scars. Knowing that people who do and say these things, that deep down they don't know their own value or intrinsic self-worth, or that they often have this void or a lack of meaningful anchoring in their lives? Knowing this has made it a bit easier for me.

The need/ desire for a guru (aka. some form of authority figure) precedes the guru itself. Whether it's a religious/ spiritual figure, a beloved politician, an intellectual, a parent, a doctor (or some other professional health authority) or some other form of mentor. And like any other person in a large, complex society, they fulfill a specialized role. The urge ought not to be either fetishized OR demonized (demonization is so much like fetishization anyway), in a similar way that we shouldn't be screaming at people for wanting parents. (Though eventually, we all do grow up one way or another. Life has a way of making that happen whether we want this or not.) I used to feel very ill-at-ease about authority figures and if they were legibly worth the price tag (monetary, emotional, spiritual, etc.). These days, I try to consider it on a case-by-case basis, and also within cultural context (like Indian gurus, who are filling a social role/ "job position" that is still considered to be of value). And from there, to consider their value in relation to those factors, and various other factors. To simply cut it all out wholesale and without discernment may very well be a net negative for the greater whole. Not to mention, it is likely just impossible. When you suddenly create a void, the thing that immediately fills it is often not so great. Is whatever surrounds that void and people's wants, expectations, and fancies. You have effectively replaced a system (which yes, does technically limit and hold you back) with something much more haphazard. This ought to be well-accounted for, one way or another. This obviously assumes you care about harmony, wellness, and social order alongside human development. I remember Sadhguru said something like, gurus are for people who don't want to jump into the Void by themselves. The rest of us just do it anyways because we are nuts. Realistically, you have to work with whatever it is that you have on hand. We all do. Whatever legibly gets you where you need and want to go, I guess.

I mainly just have a bunch of Qs: What is the proportion of you practising/ learning/ studying/ "embodying"/ listening, for how long you've practised... and how much do you speak and preach in comparison to this? (...and why? What are your motives?) Where do you think your authority to know "Truth" comes from, especially so that you might justifiably negate others without taking into account what they say? What are the tangible results of your practice? And with your way of approaching and speaking of all of this... IDK, are you trying to win the loudness war? (Isn't the internet already this way, and hasn't it becoming more this way? Is this a net positive, especially in the long term? Is this a temporary phase?) Is this how you want to communicate? Is this how you think we all ought to communicate? Also...what is the greater point of this all? Your communication? (Which is why I asked about your objectives/ agenda originally. Finally: do you have any real, deep appreciation for "the game" that is life?

the openness to raw reality + the willingness to be wrong and to adapt your perspective >>> models. If you get this backward, I think you can't avoid reaping what you sow, you are chained to your models forever like a slave. You cannot dispense with it that easily even when it truly does not serve you anymore: say that you've truly outgrown whatever the original use is. And so the thing which originally gave you meaning and value quite freely, it now binds you. Eventually, you get less and less fresh value in return, but you do keep getting a meaning that you're addicted to. It functions like an addiction. And if you can't (at least theoretically) dispense with your models, it actually also limits how well you can work with them. I think a lot of flexibility and adaptability are required to best make use of any sort of mental construct or mechanism. Detachment and "having some space" from any of your models of use frees you up to make use of them in a more creative, ingenious way. Also: people's attachment to hierarchies and what it means, and has to mean.... this is also straight-up a sort of mental/ emotional slavery. You may not feel it at first, but it does bind you. Keeping things a bit looser/ open-ended at least clears up your path of movement a bit, including in the RIGHT NOW. From this perspective of needing models: There are rules about ascending through hierarchies. And they MUST be obeyed. I tend to think of it as a sort of game with a bunch of rules, the rules may be anywhere from very explicitly said, to being so implicit that the people playing it barely see it at all. Hierarchies... are ultimately also a mental invention or construction (that may or may not be relatively well-built for its purpose). But is it ever the fastest, most efficient way to do anything? Very rarely is this the case. The nature of its construction makes this so. This isn't about "skipping steps in development"/ attempts at spiritual bypassing (which is a valid issue in the sense that people do end up less developed in certain ways), but about the whole structure of mental hierarchization being super-rigged by nature. We call this "reality" and this keeps us in our place. Along with that, there is also this urge to impose meaning onto others by telling people what it means, and thereby restricting other people's pathways as well... isn't there? Great, now we're all enslaved by our models.

Realistically, if you have biases that you insist on protecting in a way that you get super attached to, and you get defensive about it... Congrats! You got emotions. Defensiveness is rooted in emotionality. Just because it is latent does not mean that it doesn't exist, haha. You make decisions based on such all the same.

I will say though that the states for "losing" in choosing poorly are higher, specifically in terms of men being a direct risk to your body and physical health. But I really don't quite get what's going on here. There is something not right about this whole thread.... that does not serve the highest good. And saying WOMEN ARE THIS, WOMEN ARE THAT, this is simply supposed to be about pointing out "unpleasant truths", right? I think one of my issues is with gender-essentializing all emotion. First of all: ANGER is still an emotion. Men (I assumed cishet in the past)... in my experience, are highly emotional, and not even with anger. But how MANLY OUTBURSTS and MANLY TEARS don't get written as a man having an adult temper tantrum has seriously been beyond me. How you get to be considered a logical person as a result of being man/ "having testosterone" (??) makes zero sense. How can this be accepted tolerated as professional behaviour (or behaviour appropriate for public) if "emotional outbursts" are just not acceptable? I just don't get it. When I was younger especially, I often presented as on the dry/ logical side. Especially in conflicts (with partners). I.... don't think it was considered particularly attractive overall. But I was raised that way. IMO there is something super dysfunctional if the only thing you can get from that is that I'm a super masculine woman by nature. I know that I'm a bit different in this way though: like for my husband, feeling like/ identifying as a man is intrinsic, to the point that he takes it for granted. It's like breathing, eating, or sleeping. For me, "femininity" has always been like a sort of hyper-conscious, performance art. Often, it has felt very real, but also paper thin. Like a beautiful illusion. .....this means though I tend to take the stuff I like, and reject things that I don't like and see value in. In general: I don't think it's right to too heavily genderize "logic" or "emotion", even if trends emerge. This is to say, with your rhetoric (your way of talking about things, your perspective), you should NOT be making it harder for people to become more balanced by spreading your "TRUTHS" about the world around and around. In other words, you dudes: don't go around claiming all of the good attributes for yourself! And unless you are a Vulcan (like a Spock!), perhaps you are not in the position to be judging so freely because you also, at times, have this human-thing called emotions leaking out of you too, in your particular way? (Not that it will make any difference to me personally, because it never has.)

As a woman this thread is pretty unrelatable to me based on overall life choices, lol. A lot of the girls/ women that I have known and been closest to were either: had a "young and dumb phase", but in their case, it was pretty short (as in, through highschool) actively not interested in men, or avoiding them (school, preparing for career, just not that attracted to them overall, very introverted/ isolated (the last two groups which is just not being accounted for when people are like WOMEN THIS, WOMEN THAT.) Generally, I actively avoid people who are in a state of frequent crisis as a result of their decisions though.... that's my bias/ preference. I have just had enough other things to work on (whether on myself or some other aspect of my life) so I generally don't pick people who destabilize that. Sometimes I've felt overly selfish about it, but in my experience, the consequence of ""giving people a chance"" when I knew they would be trouble or we would not be good fits has pretty much never been worth it. Anyway, I think selecting for """DUMB WOMEN""" is apparently other people's bias. Yea... I would agree that this is not a gender-specific issue, really. I've watched a good number of men/ boys make dumb-as-shit choices since puberty. Some people keep repeating them. But to be hearing stuff like "ALL WOMEN ARE >>>insert negative traits<<<<" as a result of their own choices.... in my head, I have been quietly shaking my head from a distance. Like for example: lots of dudes seem to be wired toward the "SPARKLIEST" woman wherever they are. (Which I generally consider to be fair play; you want what you want.) But predictable things then happen. Then they wonder why all women are shit. But then you hear this train of thought: "Oh, all women are like this, even the super shy ones/ good girls?" Dude. Ok. I've gone through this one before, and you probably should too. Are you sure that you're not just a "shit magnet", as in, you have a knack for attracting and not choosing people who are not good for you? That you have some unconscious bias for selecting terribly? If you're explicitly attracted to emotion and following your appetite for sparkly displays.... generally, you get drama? There are literally whole groups of women who are just INVISIBLE. And that has not changed since puberty.

Yea... you can't actually "refute" much of what I'm saying at all, can you? Let alone actually have a coherent conversation about it? (Which wasn't exactly the intent of writing what I did anyway.) Sorry, you found it not interesting/ not fun/ etc. But the point of making such a detailed response is.... addressing various points and issues related to the topic you brought up. I took this topic seriously... because it is a serious enough topic, and you just don't care. Nice. So basically, this is all about your emotions and how you want to feel about things, and how you want to see the world, above anything else. Damn absolutely everything else. Damn whatever effects your worldview has on the world by extension. Figures. Dogmatic people mostly all think and react in a very similar, predictable sort of way, TBH. At least you're honest about not giving a shit, I guess.

@Hero in progress I wrote a rather long, serious post on the previous page... and none of my points were addressed, as that's how it goes sometimes. But anyway: why are you tagging yourself in your responses? I..... thanks for that visual, lol. I didn't need to know quite that much. ...honestly, what she needs, from your description, is probably a very long shower. 1) What makes you think that the "ugliness" that you saw that came outside, wouldn't have been something that was kept inside and/ or latent otherwise? Do you really think keeping it all in and to yourself makes it better? 2) Also, you don't seem to have a great relationship with your sister based on how you talk about her? You make your sister sound like a piece of meat... Ok, so.... what are the actual, apparent consequences of being promiscuous? I mean logistically, what do you think actually happens to women?? While I'm familiar with various semen retention theories, I'm not sure what you're taking as an indisputable truth here. Even if there is in fact a point to retaining one's energies.... y'all super fucking weird about it ("weird" in this case = neurotic and giving off culty vibes). But that's what often happens when you fetishize self-restraint, or anything, really. The risk of disease is a valid enough concern (for which people do take precautions, often very seriously). Shame tends to have its roots almost purely in socialization/ culture/ upbringing, and regret is very personal. Guess what: regret is a risk... because LIFE is risks. But that can go either way, with FOMO or with having baggage from too much negative, unwanted experiences. Are you people actually ever serious about this whole "loose pussy" thing, or is it just a figure of speech? Because I've heard WAY too many people talk about vag in a literal way, and it's pretty dumb. As if the vag could magically discriminate against the owner of one penis or another, if lots of sex was somehow going to make someone looser.... So are you also saying... don't have too much sex with your husband/ wife because that will also make you loose? Might as well be logically consistent here, you know?

@Hero in progress In what world is "women are used up/ undesirable the more they have sex, and the older that they get" expected to go over well with women? Whether you are personally interested in someone at all, it's beside the point IMO. It's dehumanizing rhetoric. (And arguably, in the process, you unavoidably get dehumanized as well. Which I suppose is fine if truly you want to reduce your relationships to nothing more than a series of transactions.) I mean... to be fair, it's not like the opposite type of suggestion is being taken that well either? (That men aren't intrinsically desirable just because they get older, more experienced, >>>insert male person's metric of high value<<<)