Basman

@Consept I've been sexually harassed once while taking a shower by another man and the people of my group, who where mostly girls, just laughed it off. You know if the genders where reversed they would've lost their shit, so there's definitely a double standard that people aren't even cognizant of. To be honest, I don't think sexual harassment against men is equally severe as that against women due to the size difference (prove me wrong if you can) but it is more just the lack of respect. I don't know what you should do exactly in your situation but it sounds like the harassment needs to come down, because that is what it is. Are the other guys in the group aware?

See if there's a philosophy salon in your area.

They broke the one rule, never leak the group chat. It would all been okay if it was contained. There's a point here too that weird and unethical behavior isn't recognized if it is normalized.

Western countries govern themselves on, and in the case of the US founded itself on, democratic values. You could perhaps say that the same way an authoritarian scoffs at democratic principles someone who values those principles would scoff at authoritarianism. This is not to make the case of cultural plurality but my earnest impression of China currently is that it is governed by power for the sake of power. I think it is dangerous to give authoritarians credit where there is none due nor do I think it is appropriate to shield less developed countries from criticism for the sake of some kind of naturalism.

Teal Swan has a bunch of videos on sexuality and how it relates to one's inner world, trauma, etc. The crux of her argument is that the underlying emotion of a particular sexual desire is something which you wish to manifest in real life as sexuality is a "creator energy". For example, she explains pedophilia as the desire to manifest one's innocence, hence the attraction to kids who are innocent. If you have a sexual desire to be dominated then perhaps what you wish to manifest is the experience of being freed from having to take responsibility for your current life. It is an interesting idea which I intuit has some merit and can at least offer explanations to certain sexual desires, whether or not they are true.

Most users here are cut from the same cloth as Rick & Morty watching stoners.

I've noticed a recent influx of pro-Chinese content recently which I find peculiar because China is undemocratic despite it's apparent successes. I think It's an expression of people's distrust of our institutions.

It is actually a misnomer that prohibition was an abject failure and that it only served to fuel gang violence. Prohibition was actually successful at reducing overall alcohol consumption and related illnesses and violence before and after (https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/6/5/18518005/prohibition-alcohol-public-health-crime-benefits). The article further argues that we may be overcompensating due to the perception of prohibition being an abject failure and I tend to agree as we largely atomize the burden of responsibility for drug use in our discourse. Greater access to drugs will probably lead to an increase in consumption which will cost society in a variety of ways. The idea that it is "never the drugs fault" is silly and frivillous because it implies that we as a society aren't responsible for what drugs are circulating in the community and their effects or that drug users are fully rational and in control of their decisions. It glazes over serious addiction as if drugs are purely an outlet for mental ilnesses and not chemically addicting and destructive of families and personal lives. I would suggest that no drug should not be regulated. If criminalization isn't an option then atleast restrictions and high taxes. Imagine the chaos if we didn't have any restrictions on alcohol. Likewise, there would need to be rules about weed and heavily taxed as to become an occasional luxury for the average person.

Facebook epistemology could explain the pit mommy BS as well (which also happens to coincide with anti-vaxx, go figure). They can't distinguish between liking their own pitbull and what is good for public safety.

"Facebook epistemology" is the perfect word to describe prerational thinking online.

You don't want to give rumors too much credence because then you are giving power to the spreading of false information that is typically biased and derisive. It's bottom of the barrel quality information.

The idea of ancient humans not experiencing the voice in their heads as their own is fascinating. Like to them, it's the voice of some kind of spirit or something. It seems like a very physical life and a sort of in-between of what we have now and animals.

The biggest thing that separates humans from animals in my opinion is our ability to create large collective myths and the quality of the ideologies that we are socialized into as children. Liberal ideology for example is a highly advanced ideological "technology" that iterates on hundreds of years of human history, bloodshed, empires, etc. Just look at car traffic. It requires an astounding amount of cooperation for that not to result in disaster every time for an animal but we make it happen. Imagine if Chimps where taught to drive cars. No amount of training will stop them from plowing through people like they are coins in Mario Kart It is not that humans are pretending to be civilized but civilization is acting on top of a primal base.

I haven't had any experience doing pick-up in Amsterdam but most people on the streets in the centrum area ("the onion") are tourists, so a little casual pick-up should be more socially accepted. The red-light district would suck for pick-up since the prostitutes would constantly neg you.

Sure you don't mean customer experience? Integrity would relate more to health procedures and not trying rip off customers.

Do pharmacists need to take the medicine they sell in order to sufficiently inform their clients?

I haven't looked into zizek at all but the concept of a "negative ontology" seems like an oxymoron to me unless it is meant metaphorically. Ontology is the experience of something which implies that something IS happening categorically rather than the opposite, the absence of being/experience. Ontology has to be positive for it to be ontological unless I misunderstood something.

Loving your family is the default. It is only when the family is too dysfunctional and unloving that you stop loving them. I don't find that people who don't love their families simply fall out of love but are in my experience scarred with resentment, a sense of betrayal and a feelings of inadequacy. It takes courage and strength to love. I had my own hang-ups with certain family members following terrible behavior but I eventually got over it because I value the connections more than my resentment. I'm much stronger now. Though I have never experienced the things described in the other posts.

If you deconstructed reality, why would it follow that you become a serial killer? What would you gain from that unless you already had the inner workings of a serial killer hypothetically? It is a pretty big leap in logic. If you look at serial killers historically, serial killers typically suffer from mental illnesses and derive a sense of power, money or a desired experience from murder. Mystecism has nothing to do with it.

I think Trump is just misunderstood... He's not okay 😔.

This sounds like it has more to do with your resentment over feeling singled out as a kid. You should find a more respectful way to deal with your grievances. They might change their behavior around you now but only because they think your nuts. Don't assume other people even know what you are seeing. They might not see that swearing in front kids is that serious. I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think that you should try to ask leading questions instead of trying to dominate people into doing what you want. For example, ask "do you think it is appropriate to swear like sailors in front of the kids?" They might not care but you asserted disapproval while exemplifying respectful conduct. Then they have the opportunity to change their behavior from a place of genuine understanding.

Your top values should be more aspirational and noble relative to the world. It's all about the impact you want to have on the world and family isn't "the world". That doesn't mean you can't value family in the general sense. Who doesn't. That said, I do love my parents. I wish I could buy them their retirement.

Contemplation and studying. I haven't read a single book yet 😁.

You clearly have an anti-western bias. I don't know if your Muslim or something. You bring up some interesting points like western bias in spiral dynamics but it comes of as in bad faith rather than genuine interest in learning. Nor do you do meaningfully contribute to the conversation as you rebuke obvious and basic stuff. It should be obvious that spiral dynamics isn't a moral judgement. I'm not going to waste my time on your trolling anymore.