Basman

I agree that women are on average are more attracted to lean athletic bodies over "the rock" tier muscles. It's more about definition, especially in the upper body (broad shoulders) and fat percentage. That is a much more realistically obtainable physique for the average guy compared to something like the Athlean X "super hero" physique. Also, in self defence grappling can be effective if going up against a single opponent but has the issue of leaving you open to attack from others. It's generally always better to escape, so techniques that give you an opening to escape are the best IMO. When I practiced Wing Tsun many years ago, there where certain techniques that allowed you to escape a grab and push your opponent away in one motion.

There's always a party in Amsterdam especially during the weekend. Besides the open sex trade, a significant amount of the people in the centrum area are themselves tourists and just looking for some fun. However, accomodation close to centrum can be very expensive. Most tourists find accomadation in the southern area of Amsterdam and take the metro into town.

I agree that Leo's style of speaking can come off as arrogant and confrontational and that he's generally a bit informal. It has its ups and downs. On the one hand, it dramatizes his topics to a certain degree which makes them more interesting and allows him to better convey their seriousness. On the other, it can be a bit too much at times and engender judgementalism. He speaks in length about how he can come off to others, his arrogance among others, in this video: It's pretty eye opening as someone who's been watching his content for years and no doubt been affected by him on a personal level. Definitely made me consider more how I treat the information I consume on a critical level.

@Leo Gura I don't mind it. I kinda like that it is that way actually. It makes me feel more free somehow. It's morbin time.

Occassionally I get this sense of detachement from myself, usually when in bed, that reality is inherently strange. I get this creeping sense that there is some "lie" to life that goes beyound society or human existence. I get this sense that fundamentally, nothing about this reality is a given. For example that we need air to breath or that gravity works the way that it does. That we as humans are a particular way and not another. That I am me specifically and not Abu Hajar from Pakistan. Its like reality is fundamentally arbitrary. I hope that makes sense. The "rules" that fundamentally underly material reality and shape it is what I'm trying to point at. Like how gravity is an extension of certain principles that govern reality, which have a knock-on effect that influences geography and climate and the subsequent animals that adapt to the environment (I.E. our life). Why are those principles not another way? Why are those "principles" the way that they are? Who died and made them the boss? To a certain degree, you can explain reality as a consequence of a prior event. For example, humans have five fingers because we used to be lizards that had 5 fingers. Those lizard fingers used to be fish fins, an adaption to a water climate. There's water on the Earth because of planetesimals, and you could go on like that till the supposed formation of the universe. Like that, you could theoretically map out explanations for everything in order of importance of leading events that cause subsequent phenomena. But you can only work your explanations "backwards" up to a certain point. The Big Bang Theory is practically merely faith if taken as gospel and doesn't "tie" the loose end (also, mid show). That being why reality is one way and not another? Or alternatively, what is reality? All of those explanations are inherently backpedaling the fundamental question of where it all started and how exactly "that" works and why it works the way it does? You could make a distinction between "mundane" material reality and extraordinary reality. "Mundane" reality being material, comparatively easily explainable ordered phenomena but which is inherently arbitrary on a fundamental level. Extraordinary reality being the part of reality that is inherently indivisible and unexplainable (Why is reality one way and not the other?). Now, I forsee the obvious "god"/"dream" comments coming. However, I find those explanations too easy and disingenious if you don't somehow break down what that actually means and how you came to that conclusion. Those are very loaded term that can simply come of as commands to believe rather than earnest explanations. I'd like to see earnest replies if you intent to engage. My main issues: Why is reality one way and not another? Why can't it be another way? Where in reality can you locate the "fundament" of reality and how does it connect with reality on a wider scale? Why am I experiencing life from the perspective of this particular human and not the perspective of another human or animal? Why am I me fundamentally? Why am I a human and not say an attack helicopter? Thank you if you read this far.

@Osaid I agree that there is an overarching degree of interpretation when it comes to trying to understanding reality. That is inevitable. Though I find your logic a bit too broad and hard to follow. @Leo Gura By that, do you mean it is not possible to understand what reality is normally for humans? If so, doesn't that make reality inherently unknowable to a degree? From the last couple of days sitting with this stuff, I feel a sense that reality simply can't be fully understood and that it is inherently mysterious to a certain degree. Atleast from my point of view currently. It's not like not understanding a certain type of science. Fundamental reality is much more pertinent to my direct experience. Becoming clear that I don't know what reality is is in of itself kind off clarifying to me.

@Rishabh R First rule: we don't talk about Actualized. Second rule...

@Ayham If I was you I'd start with what exactly you are getting from these practices concretely in your own experience. The more specific you can be in what it does for you, the better a case you will have for yourself. If these practices turn out to in fact not be doing anything of meaning, then what's the point? Relative to criticism, honestly why do you care? You don't need to deeply analyze a critic in order gauge whether or not it's constructive. Don't overcomplicate things. Have some faith in your own ability to know what is right for you.

Women have a lot more to gain from being more sexually selective than men. Hitting on guys as an attractive women is pick-up on easy mode.

Used to have a cringy obsession with listening to Manson music when I was a teen, so I have some thought about the guy. Relative to personal development, Marilyn Manson very much carries the personality of an artist. I think he is likely quiet self-aware listening to his interviews and podcasts. It is hard to say what he really is like without getting creepy because Marilyn Manson is such a stage persona, divorced from his day-to-day self. I don't feel like he is meant to be taken completely seriously, but more as a commentary and an artistic self-expression in of itself. But he does somewhat betray his age when you look at his works today. especially his older stuff. Manson is very much a product of his time. His misceant and macabre style clearly reflects his dueling with the originally protestant culture that he comes from and that was more prevalent in the 70s and 80s. Playing with the macabre especially juxtaposes what is normally expected and creates a space where a sort of genuineness can be explored. Or just flips things on their head. My favorite album is Pale Emperor.

If I was you, I'd start by making clear and concisely what exactly your hang-ups are and format your text. Reading of what you've written, it sounds like you struggle with: Perfectionism around habits. A sense of meaninglessness. Simplistic, black and white thinking tendencies. It's hard for me to read clearly what exactly you are trying to communicate when you aren't very clear and concise about what exactly you need. But trying anyway (and based on the title), I wonder if you simply lack experience. In my own experience, the sense of going in circles comes from when I try too hard to create results without clearly defining goal as well as actionable steps. Just blindly following a sense of "self-improvement". It's easy to get lost in the sauce. For me, developing my critical thinking skills has been an important part in making me feel less ridicolous as a person. That involves weighing the efficacy of things, truth, biases and the relativity that comes with the complexity of life. It requires an openness to learning and an awareness of ones own tendencies to want to jump to a conclusion. It allows me to better process how I think and more accuratelly assess the information I'm inundated with. I hold a habit of questioning the information and ideas I'm presented with instead of simply believing or not believing. For example with Leo, I take most of his content with a grain of salt and I don't (or atleast try) to not complicity just accept all that he says. This approach makes me an active participant of my world view. This in turn allows me to act in a way that is more integritous to me. I help myself by thinking for myself.

There's no way to avoid feeling bad when things don't go your way, on some level. That's human nature. Feeling rejected is perfectly normal. Best you can do is learn to deal with it. Not take it so personally. You can learn from a rejection, so it's not a purely negative experience necessarily. A lost opportunity can lead to a different path that ends up being right for you. Like a girl you crushed on rejected you but you grew your relationship with the boys as a consequence. Failure can grow you as a person. Even if we could, we shouldn't strive to eliminate everything that feels bad in life. It's an important part of what makes us human.

You definitely should avoid overdoing it. Writing, that is. But it is quiet helpful to process conscious thinking, in my experience.

I don't know how involved you are as a guardian, but perhaps you could speak with the school if you have some legit concerns (parent-teacher meetings, etc). I don't know about teachers neglecting traditional gender roles over neoliberal "build-a-bear" gender constructs. I feel like that is easy to take out of context and blow out of proportion without any evidence. Maybe talk with your sis if you are concerned about how she feels. What her perspective is. Kids doing edgy stuff isn't anything new though. They don't really understand what they are doing, just that it goes a bit against the grain. They understand when they are being edgy by the reactions of their peers and adults. I believe edgyness is stimulating to still developing people because it lets them explore the complexities of life (not just the safe and approved facets). I remember when I was a kid, back in 7th grade (Ca. early 2010s) we had a talent competition at school where the kids would go in groups and arrange a piece to show off to their parents and classmates. I kid you not, the last piece was a bunch of girls just straight up twerking at a 100+ people, most of them parents. That shit's messed up. Kids are weird.

Psychedelics are classed as drugs from a legal standpoint, and as such are illegal. It is hard to pinpoint exactly why psychedelics are classed the way that they are, but it might be worth considering them as a political tools. Psychedelics where widely used by counter-culture movements during the 60s and 70s and associated with various political and social movements, This had lead to certain concerns around the use of psychedelics, including the risk of physchosis and adverse psychological effects as well as them being used for political/social control. It's fair to say that psychedelics can have a radical affect on the way people think, which can be inherently very strange and weird people out. However modern research is showing promise for certain drugs to be used for treating mental health issues. As we see the popularity of legalizing weed grow, the odds of psychedelics being reclassified and made legally accessible is growing with time.

@effortlesslumen I mean, it's not that deep. It's just getting used to using a certain muscular region over the other when you breath.

@Romanov Points raised by a minority don't get dismissed as a "loud minority" always because the merits of a conversation isn't solely dependent on whether or not the interests of a group is a minority or not. If the majority value fairness for example then hearing out minorities could be valuable in of its own right. It depends. The "loud minority" phrase isn't exactly an accurate descriptor. It is just there to help get a sense of the scale of things. Online discourse can be melodramatic and make things seem like the end of the world. So a little perspective helps you see the forest for the trees. It helps you consider the degree to which extreme rethoric is leading a discussion and avoid strawmaning people. It is important to be intellectually honest and consider the biases of both sides.

I suspect the type of people you are talking about is a bit of a loud minority. How many actually do this? Especially online, a few extremists can make the whole bunch seem rotten. The majority generally tends to stay silent with most matters. As to why people get offended for the sake of others, there can be numerous different reasons. Genuineness will vary. An authentic sense of empathy and a of justice. They feel that you are being offensive. Depending on their background and culture, they might have certain expectations for what is normal. It can be difficult to seperate emotion from context sometimes. Context matters. Assuming intent. They think they know how you think and that what you mean is antagonizing (usually unconsciously). Not getting offended might be percieved as making them look bad, I.E. social pressure. Virtue signaling as a way to demonstrate social conscious, gain benefits and control others. Some of these more narcissistic types are fueled when they know that they are highly visible. It's been documented for example that "karens" become even more indignant and imputent when they know they are being filmed. Karens blow up like they do in part because they have a camera in their face. The sensationalism inherent to online discourse likewise drives a degree of short-sighted interactions. Hence why things tend to blow out of proportion online. That is not to say you can't try to protect people without it being some sort of ploy. Getting offended for the sake of others isn't a new thing fundamentally speaking. People have always been defensive about the things they care about. Moral of the story is just not being antagonizing and bridge burning IMO. I personally value understanding, so I don't like to completely disregard other peoples perspective even when you disagree with them.

I'm not experienced with like judging whether or not a country is a good place to live in compared to the rest of the world, but I do have some thoughts. I think it really depends on you and what you value and priotize to a certain extent. How do you want to live your life and is the country you live in right now reasonably conducive to that? Are you OK to a reasonable extent with the cons of the country you live in or the country you want to move to? Perhaps you could use Maslows hierarchy of needs to measure how a country reasonably caters to each level. If it fails an aspect that is important to you, for example self-actualization since a failing economy would make you too busy with scrounging resources to live according to your highest values. In terms of "red-flags", again, I think it depends on you. Every country is going to have some cons regardless, but you're not in immediate danger most likely where you live right now. Its not likely that a war suddenly breaks out like in Ukraine. In that case, you're already gone before you get the chance to even think in terms of "red flags".

@effortlesslumen I believe when I was first practicing it, I would just remember. Bit like meditation where you notice when you are drifitng in thought and return to your breath. Making yourself breath with your diaphraghm when you notice yourself shallow breathing. Daily meditation definitely helped me developing it as a habit since you are working with your breath consciously. It wasn't hard for me to learn the habit as I tend to be just good at remembering certain stuff. I don't know if that's helpful. There might also be a musculature aspect to it. Your body might need a period to adapt and develop muscle control. Nasal breathing is pretty much the ideal for calm deep breathing in my experience. With your tongue resting on the back of your two little buck teeth, jaw somewhat relaxed.

Why don't you ask ChatGPT that exact question?

I believe that in the book "Feel the Fear and Do It Anway" (by Sussan Jeffers), fear is defined as uncertainty about your ability to handle something. It's been a long time since I read that book.

It be silly to give up on your passions just because a machine can do something similar. It's not just about the end product. The process of creation and learning a skill is inherently rewarding for their own sake. The bridges we build when we make meaningful stuff are intrinsic to our happiness. People still paint landscapes even though we have photography. Creation itself is an intimate and important act (hence why you are maybe feeling depressed about all this). If I made a beautiful acrylic painting of your pet, getting you to frame it and everything. That would have more sentimental value and respect than if I just put a bunch of prompts into Midjourney. Or another example, if I made a pair of chopsticks from scratch, painted them and gave them away as a gift. It wouldn't be the same if I just bought them at a store. The process of creation itself adds value to art. The humanity we derive from something created by people. That is something that AI might never reach. Only in the fact that it is an AI, does it speak to us, itself an ingenious human creation. It is when we settle for "good enough" that we tragically lose out on the "heart of art". It's like we no longer really care about art for its own sake. Only for what it can do for us.

@sda Good luck with that. If I could give one advice, that would be to look out for if the first world country you intent to move into accept the credentials of the country you are studying in. First world countries don't always accept degrees from a third world country. I think it might be worth looking into the exact details and how they apply to you.

@sda Wow, good on you. What are you studying? What type of career are you aiming for? In what country do you whish to live in after your education?