eos_nyxia

This thread made me more lesbian.

It's I'm on top of the world making him feel on top of the world, and vice versa, or bust.

You might gain more insight from talking to people who have been through the traumas than anyone here telling you not to fixate on it because it's not beneficial for you as a personal entity, especially on an emotional level. Though it might be true, it's really just a similar type of rationale dressed up in "spiritual" or highfalutin language. Don't care if you don't want to get your hands dirty, but why go through so much effort to rationalize your choice? At some point, the world does rely on people who care about something outside of themselves, who see the world as themselves and are willing to take action, to guide any sort of social change, particularly to social systems. The other side of this is that everyone must change for themselves; these are not mutually exclusive processes. Though do you consider it to be a morbid curiosity? Outside of this particular bubble, there are people who would care that you care, because a lot of people outside the bubble don't actually care as well. Or it's a performative sort of caring. Personally: death is death. It's intrinsically neutral to me. I am aware that dying is not actually painful after the point of no return. A quick death is more merciful and painless than a death that drags out for years and years IMO. But then, people are weird about death. In my own experience, it was about 15-20 years to get out of the hole, and that's with actively and perpetually putting in the work to heal. I've seen at least a couple of other people describe it that way, though I have no idea if there's any universality to it. What has felt hopeless to me was being younger, as a teenager, and having people describe themselves as lifelong survivors on a perpetual "healing journey", whether it's of war-based trauma, CSA, or sexual assault. Like if it's going to be your baggage your whole life no matter what you do, what is even the point? Feel free to ask me anything you're curious about; I'm not that sensitive about direct questions. Though personally, I consider CSA (especially by a family member) to be a different enough trauma than rape as a war crime. I don't mean the damage to your body and nervous system, but I mean the emotional qualities of it. For the latter, there are many first-hand accounts you can read. If you're curious, it's worth reading as many as you can in order to form a balanced perspective on it (or as many as you can stomach).

Honest question: what does it even feel like to be the kind of person where this is the worst (or one of the worst) fates you could possibly conceive of? From my perspective: it must be nice to have that luxury. Though I'm sure it doesn't actually... feel nice. I get that loneliness and invalidation isn't a joke but... If this is actually the central point of your being, it's like you're made of paper. You're an animal that can make use of human speech and thought patterns, and not much more. What's even underneath that grief and anger; is there anything at all?

You can communicate, just not directly with human language; it has its limitations. Sometimes that's a purpose of "elevated" art forms, If you can communicate with your whole beingness, anyone/ anything that is truly open will be in communion with you. It is inescapable, really.

Is that actually true? I thought that statistically speaking, Boomers and Gen X were the sluttiest demographic. They started having sex near the beginning of the invention and mass distribution of the pill, and before "(casual) sex positivity" has been slowly but surely its shine for millennials. Maybe people are still doing it, but where is the optimism about it?? The pre-AIDs era seemed absolutely wild, though I'm sure, as usual, only a fraction of people were living to their "fullest potential". I'm not under the impression that gen Z is casual sex positive (if I'm gonna make a massive generalization....) I mean, they have the internet. It's a lot easier to avoid talking and dealing with the opposite sex, especially if it doesn't come to you naturally. If anything, mainstream attitudes toward sexuality for gen Y and Z tend to be more permissive, which isn't the same thing? It's just how you feel about it. Honestly, what worries more than anything is the kids raised with a theoretically infinite supply of hardcore, violent porn during their very early formative years. Especially without any kind of proper sex education, both from schools and parents/ guardians. Not to fear monger, but I seriously worry for any girl under the age of 20 especially. I have heard some really terrible stories of girls losing their virginity, getting abruptly choked, slapped, dicks shoved down their throat, etc. by boys who have no concept or desire of consent or the fact that the physical aspect of bdsm cannot actually be casual nor risk-free. Because... porn teaches you absolutely nothing. I have heard that say: in the 80s or 90s, it was not like this at all. Legimiately, this is deranged. Incestuous friend groups have always been a thing though. Source: people I knew in high school.

Yep, I get it. As a child, I was a people pleaser and only stopped masking when I was alone. You need sensitivity and you need courage. IMO if you can't establish your boundaries with grace or the weight of doing so gets too heavy to bear (which tends to be the case with people pleasers), you might as well just let people down on purpose. Like, make a point of doing so. Sometimes being difficult/ bitchy/ asshole-ish will help you get over your fear or preoccupation with being "the bad guy"; being direct has a lot of transformative power. Or being really abrupt. Yea, it's not ideal (it's best not to go nuclear lol), but it's not like you being drained to death magically serves the highest good of this world, let alone yourself. Then you'd get one functional person at best, but most often you'll eventually end up with two people sinking because they're trying to share the same life preserver. So in this case, the pretense of "morality" ("the higher good" via self-sacrifice) is mainly a facade and not something that can exist as a tangible reality. Sometimes you just have to get yourself out of a difficult situation because literally no one else will do it for you. Or in the case of the OP, be careful of what he is setting himself up for more of in the future. Let's just say that if they float because they take without consideration and you sink, that's a cause for suspicion. It should be a red flag for people who have issues with boundaries and having a backbone. You're dealing with someone who has no interest in bare-bones reciprocity, and likely willfully turns a blind eye when it's in their self-interest to do so. Meanwhile, only they are allowed to be the primary victim, should things go wrong or not to their liking. Abort ship. Don't let people use your fear of being an asshole against you. Also, there are plenty of people who are gravely sick, vulnerable, who have been abused and taken advantage of, yet are also conscientious about taking freely and who would feel bad about the lack of reciprocity, or the fact that the person who is giving DOESN'T ACTUALLY WANT TO DO IT. Generally, people who need someone to feed off of (aka. an enabler) will leave pretty quickly when it's clear you mean business, no matter how desperate they say they are. I mean, they might even actually fully believe it. It's important for people to realize that it's not exactly about the words you pick, but the power behind your intentionality. Your emotions. People who need to fill a void urgently are rarely that patient. They've got an empty slot inside them, and you just happen to be there and good enough. It's not even that much about you personally, really. (Something that people tend to forget when they want to cast themselves as the hero in their life narrative.)

Why does this sound romantic? I guess I'd rather be someone's weirdo as opposed to nobody's weirdo.

Well, they might not be wrong. Maybe they're not right about you, but forums can be an echo chamber and it's not always the healthiest thing. Otherwise, think of this way: Everyone interesting is weird, but not everyone weird is interesting. Literally, by definition.

Unless it's an act of both love and conviction, won't you come to regret your choice? (Assuming it's just about taking care of another adult, not potential children. If it is, then you'd have to grapple with the prospect of being a deadbeat dad.) On another level, you could also ask yourself if there is some part of you that is seeking out the obligation. Like, it's potentially a drag but you also get something out of being wanted and needed which ultimately outweighs the absence of obligation. You still get the sense of meaning, routine, and being the "good person" in the situation. This is a pattern I've noticed in people. Really, it depends on what your ethical code is and how seriously you take it. For any level of responsibility you've accepted, you can theoretically just as easily unaccept it. There is no rule that says you have to continue to do something just because you started it, especially if you did not explicitly agree to do so. Yea, it will piss people off and hurt their feelings because they feel like you've developed a set precedent. Many take this to be implicit consent. On the flip side, you could just as easily say that they're a grown-ass adult and they're being entitled. It's worth considering the risk factor if you don't get involved: for instance, is there the risk of homelessness or a direct risk to their life (whether due to medical issues, suicidality, etc.)? The responsibility you take on as a partner/ caretaker might be far beyond your capacity and pay grade anyway... and for what it's worth, you can sometimes help someone at a greater distance as well. It might end up being the better outcome for both people.

Not sure how much of this is my own neurodivergence, but personally I find this super relatable. I also have happened to think for a lot of my life that tasks and expectations that are dumped on women/ girls are beneath me.... so there is that too.

For whatever it's worth, """Science""" (TM) is moving away from this long-held perspective which has been a sticking point/cornerstone in evo psych. (That it wasn't common for women to hunt big game.) https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/early-women-were-hunters-not-just-gatherers-study-suggests-180982459/ https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i spoiler alert: people of all genders who could things, often did it. Anyway, specialization is more typically a feature of modernizing societies (more people, non-nomadic lifestyle), is it not?

I just looked her up.... and oh my god, are you fucking serious?? She grew up in my hometown.... Of course she dropped out of the UFV (it'd either be there or Trinity Western, lol) and was a candidate in the Langley/ Aldergrove area. No surprise there. I love Langley, but it's very white, conservative, and Christian for the greater Vancouver area. And here I thought she was just some redneck from Alberta. (Mind you, I also dated some redneck from Alberta a lifetime ago.) Small town Alberta is like the bible belt of Canada, and Langley and eastward (the Fraser Valley) is like part of the mini bible belt here in BC.

Though TBH, working out and being as physical as I am right now doesn't actually make me feel better about being in my body, on a purely raw, physical level. It does take up a lot of physical, mental, and emotional energy, and I've always been extremely sensitive to physical sensations and basically anything going on in my body. Arguably I could do much much more with that same energy when it comes to mental or creative pursuits, so when I tend to get very body-focused, it tends to cap me in other areas. It seems to have something to do with how my body and brain are built in this lifetime; I make the best of my starting set of strengths, weaknesses, and limitations. Honestly, I have the most energy speed walking everywhere, doing a little bit of yoga, having the most bare-bones strength routine (in terms of both frequency and overall training volume), getting lots of rest and managing my stress levels very carefully. In terms of how it feels physically, at an emotional level: I really, really don't like being flabby and weak. Especially skinny, small, and weak. My body feels "unstructured" at a raw physical level. I don't like feeling not physically capable in my everyday life and I really do not like attracting predators or men who are specifically attracted to weakness in a woman (I question if they're the same sort of guys that seek out women with eating disorders, neurodivergent women, and/or very young women). Unfortunately, that was my childhood, and there is no more powerful negative motivator to work out than this. In terms of pure vanity on a personal level: I don't like feeling shapeless, and worry about this more than I should. At my lowest weights, it's almost always because I stop eating because of stress or some severe mental health crisis in the past. I don't care if anyone liked the way I looked then; I didn't. It's not my ideal. And in general, people should keep their comments to themselves because you probably don't know what a person is dealing with mentally or physically, and you're probably gonna put your foot in your mouth. On a purely aesthetic level, skinny/ thin can look good and healthy on a variety people, and I don't judge people according to the standards which I judge myself. At all. On a collective social level: associating skinniness with being "higher class" can go straight to hell where it belongs. (Again, mostly a thing directed toward women, but also occasionally towards men to a lesser degree.) I came of age in the early-mid 2000s. The Y2K-era aesthetic for women was either skinny, or skinny with big boobs. It was not yet cool to be female-bodied wanting to get stronger lifting weights; weight lifting for women was super niche. Women were actively afraid of getting "too muscular", and there was none of that social media, “strong is the new skinny” mindset yet. Still, even that ultimately boils down to replacing one aesthetic with another. Despite that, I evaded being brainwashed by culture, and started training anyway. I guess this is a long-winded way of saying to train for yourself, and to find some deeper, more sustainable meaning to it. It can all mean whatever you want it to mean that you are capable of making it mean.

As a woman, toward men: I wouldn’t enjoy being with a man who is far more neurotically preoccupied with his looks than It am. I happened once; I wasn’t a fan. I have no pretense of speaking for other women, but personally, I find it more attractive when people are into some specific discipline, whether a sport, martial arts, or strength athletics, rather than general gym rattery (aesthetics-centered training). There is a sweet spot of being disciplined but also chill about the body. Also, having a certain body awareness developed through large amounts of time, focused and dedicated to exploring and training the body and nervous system often helps people establish physical presence. There is a sort of grounded confidence that comes from the experience of making the body more lived-in. At this level: you walk differently, hold your posture differently, you think of yourself and your body differently; it's part of your embodied identity. Being sufficiently committed to a physical discipline inevitably develops your character as well in certain ways. This is a sort of "yogic" or mind/body centered mindset. Some people are good at and develop these skills very early in life during childhood; they tend to be the natural athletes. That confidence might not even carry over fully in terms of sexual and social self-esteem, but there is still something there. That is attractive, though that alone won’t make me attracted to someone. It’s just one of many attractive traits. Natural but strong and agile body types are more attractive, overall. Strength and the physique as a result of DOING are also more attractive and interesting overall to me, because they live life. Like "farm boy" strength. Doesn't even necessarily have to "look strong" either. Training for aesthetics on the side is no real issue though. But then, people of similar ethos tend to flock together. Personally, I'm not naturally athletic or hardy at all; it's all learned, and I'm STILL susceptible to overuse injuries, so a self-numbing "no pain no gain" mentality is a quick route to chronic pain and injuries. My only real skill growing up was flexibility, lol. Some people's bodies and joints are built like a tank though. Still, I appreciate both people who have these traits naturally and those who work extremely hard to have some sort of athleticism.

Boiling it will at least get rid of live pathogens, so there's that, but doesn't address anything you can't kill. My mom still boils her tap water and drinks it warm or lukewarm; I think it's a Chinese thing. Having done this overseas (including to cook), personally, no one I've known has gotten sick from that, including myself. I'm pretty sensitive myself, but I don't have long-term experience with consuming boiled tap water (mainly in Hong Kong). Quality is not great compared to what I'm used to here in BC/ Canada, but that's generally going to be the case anywhere else.

How does the tap water where you live rank worldwide? I used to be skeeved out about drinking tap water in general, but then... I've travelled to various countries mostly growing up, and had way worse quality water, including mountain spring filtered and treated water or whatever, so....

Rinse, soak, or sprout. Or do all! Consider soaking overnight (8+ hours), or even longer (24+ hours). I find that cooking slowly at a low temperature helps as well. I usually rinse and soak, and then cook in a rice cooker on the brown rice mode. It makes it a lot easier to digest in my experience. Make sure that it's not too hard or crunchy when you're done with it. (Though in my experience, if you soak it for a while, it never is.) Also, it might be helpful to eat small amounts (e.g. add 1/4th a cup or less to your meal) to get your gut used to it, and then slowly increase the amount you add. (source: my partner has colitis and has had trouble with a lot of legumes, foods with fibre, etc.) I know this might be too much prep for many people, but it really does help a lot with digestion IME. Also: for what it's worth, eating lentils Indian style might help as well. Garam masala spices, plus ginger and turmeric, might help sufficiently with digestion and absorption.

I'm not much into crystal healing and whatnot, but Moldavite has a very special vibe! Very high energy. Apparently, a lot of it is fake though. I've come to appreciate the washed-out moss green colour more over the years.

Local chains only, or Canadian A&W.

That pizza crust looks like it's made of corpse ashes.

IMO, don't smoke... (but then, I have always had sensitive lungs.) 1) sublingual oils (cbd absorption is crap though) 2) edibles (cbd absorption is even crappier) 3) vape at the lowest temperature you can get away with, either dry herb or an oil that has no other additives like other oils and flavourings. Get a vape where you can control the temperature precisely, not one of those super cheap ones. Just generally: be mindful of the source and quality of the plant grown. Likely this is more of an issue with unregulated growers, at least where I live, in Canada.

This definitely seems like it would be an inevitable issue if all of your poly relationships are compartmentalized and mostly separated from each other because you and your partners' lives don't overlap, or else one or more partners end up seriously deprioritized. Even if you had the energy, there's that limited time factor. How do these people have any time for a career, hobbies, other non-romantic relationships, other aspirations, personal development... or even just alone time? Source of this? TBH one trope I keep hearing over and over again is that men "need" sex to bond, if not partially because they tend to deprioritize other types of non-romantic, non-sexual touch and interaction. For someone who started off with an avoidant attachment style, "sex only" style nonmonogamy definitely doesn't seem healthy for me. As in, it would be encouraging even more avoidant attachments. I had a handful of good girl friends growing up (let's just say between the ages of 12 to 16) who did the whole serial monogamy thing: a new boyfriend every 2-3 months, like clockwork. It was so obviously about the rush of new attraction, attention, and sexual experimentation, while maintaining some veneer of respectability. Some of them got older and continued that pattern, some did not. I don't think "sex only" relationships, monogamous or not, are great for people with avoidant attachment tendencies either.

Does no one here remember this happening?? A member committed suicide here a handful of years ago.... Taking direct responsibility for people is not something which should be done automatically nor lightly. Having and developing general empathy, within your means as best as humanly possible... that is a separate issue.

Oh, people definitely were toxic to her too. There was no doubt. And I'm sorry, but your opinion about this doesn't matter. You weren't there, you don't know what happened, you're projecting onto me, and your judgement of character based on your emotions and biases is rather questionable. I think I'm being quite generous considering some of the things that happened. I helped her and supported her as best as I could in good faith, with whatever limited means I had at the time. It was all I could do.