Emerald

I agree with that assessment. It's likely what's given her the hyper-focused awareness on this issue and the motivation to understand it top to bottom. And then the motivation to fight against it without worrying of the social consequences or scorn that the average neuro-typical 16 year old may be fixated upon. I've had students that had varying forms of autism. And usually those who are high functioning autistic are surprisingly dedicated and immersed in one particular thing that's like their thing. And climate activism is probably her thing, and it's really making a difference.

I see the face of someone who understands the gravity of the situation. Anyone who truly grasps the gravity of the situation will be angry, afraid, sad, disappointed, and the list goes on. Honestly, with the trajectory going the way it is, I'm having to imagine my children as young adults potentially starving to death due to food shortage and dealing with the instability that comes from climate change. If that doesn't make you mad/sad/afraid, I don't know what will. Sometimes the presence of fear and anger simply means that you're more aware and not less. Here's an example... There was an older couple leaving their home to go out. And they had a security camera recording their front porch, likely to watch for burglars and the like. So, on the security camera footage, you see them leaving their home as calm as can be as they lock up the door. But in the video, you also see that there's a bear on the porch, like 6 feet away from them just watching them leave. They don't see the bear. They are not aware of the bear despite the fact that they are just feet away from potential mortal danger. So, of course, they weren't scared or freaking out. They weren't aware of the danger. But this lack of fear and emotional response isn't a sign of emotional maturity. Rather, it's a sign that they didn't know the gravity of the situation they've found themselves in. The fact of the matter is that they were in danger. And if they saw the bear, they'd be terrified and would have taken steps to avoid the potentially dangerous situation. This is how climate change is for most people. It doesn't feel real yet. Most of us don't see the bear... bet Greta Thunberg does. So, of course she's sad and scared and angry. That's the more conscious response.

That's true of most politicians for sure. But I think it unwise to shrug my shoulders and give them a pass on it and act as though it's not a big deal or that it has no effect. It truly is a big deal and does have a big effect. An effect, that white people like you and I, can only grasp from the outside... making us highly likely to underestimate the impact. Trudeau's behavior is the exact type of behavior that needs to be taken seriously, as it does impact people's lives in a profound way that he likely doesn't grasp in any meaningful way. And whether his transgression stems from harmful intent or pure ignorance, my answer is the same... Throw 'em to the dogs is what I say. Make an example of him and let the pitchforked internet mob string him up, put him in the stocks, and let them throw rotten fruit at him. Let the brutal wisdom of the hive mind have its effect. And give the hive mind a thumbs up as it happens. Don't attempt to douse the collective rage of the masses with buckets of water that say, "meh... it's normal." It may be NORMATIVE but it's not normal if we define normal in relation to societal health and well-being. Get angry as though his actions are directly impacting you in a negative way... as they truly are. Participating in holding his feet to the fire, will encourage him and other powerful people (and average people) to care a little bit more about marginalized groups. Given that we all have the opportunity to weigh in, I see it unwise to just shrug your shoulders like it's no biggie, when you can call someone out on their bullshit and actually hold them accountable and participate in the establishment and solidification better and more evolved social taboos. Get a few million people doing the same and he'll be shaking in his boots. Make both willful and unconscious racists more uncomfortable with expressing their racism and not less. After that kind of response from the masses, he'll be focused on marginalized group like his life depends upon it... because he will recognize that (effectively) it does. He's also nominally on the left, so he should be held even more accountable for his racism that we on the left hold right wingers. Gotta keep the garden weeded for it to grow right. That way better options can brandish themselves in the next Canadian election.

I don't know. He did it like 3 times. And one time in particular, he really looked like he was getting ready to perform in a minstrel show. So, it makes me think it wasn't just a case of stupid white people syndrome, like an "Oops! Derp! I tried to go to Halloween as Little Wayne. I didn't know the historical context and did a racism." With the repeated use of black/brown face, it does betray a kind of mocking nature to the portrayals. And his policy does reflect a kind of callousness to people of color. For example, there is a problem with Mercury poisoning in the water at Grassy Narrows, Ontario which has a large Indigenous population and has been for a long time. And Trudeau promised to take action to fix it. But when a Native Canadian brought it up and talked about how his family and community was dealing with the mercury poisoning at a high dollar fundraiser that Trudeau was holding, Trudeau responded by dismissing him and derisively/sarcastically thanking him for the donation while everyone in the room laughed at the joke. So, I personally do think that he has some issues with being dismissive of issues that marginalized groups face. Now, I'm sure he's not "Join the KKK" racist. But being unwittingly racist and failing to recognize the human struggles uniquely experienced by different groups still has profound effects given his position of power.

Well, honestly there are conspiracies going on left and right. And it's free public knowledge even. It's just that the real conspiracies are of little to no interest to most conspiracy theorists. They prefer to focus on "Flat Earth" and "Elvis is secretly still alive" rather than focus on the fact that "The government is bought and paid for by billionaires to do their bidding at the expense of the average person." The real stuff just isn't sexy enough for them.

Damn good. I'm glad that there seems to be a tide turning, both in me and outside of me, since around the time the news of the Amazon being on fire broke. My impression is that the gravity of the situation is starting to hit larger swaths of the population. Let's hope that that gravity hits enough people soon enough.

I'd say that men are underestimating the importance of these gestures. They're very important to women... and for the VERY SAME core reason why wealth and status tend to attract women. Most women aren't consciously sussing out men based on wealth and status. (Some are, but those are gold diggers - which is a different story). But the attraction to wealth and status is a background process. But the purpose of that background process is much more vital and important than the wealth and status that it can home in on. The background process's purpose is basically to determine, 'Is this man stable and responsible enough to be a good father and provider?' It's based upon very old subconscious evolutionary structures in us, where a woman and her children's well-being is squarely in the hands of her mate who had to do nearly 100% of the hunting/gathering duties while she's giving birth and taking care of a newborn baby. And if he couldn't provide or just up and left, she and her baby are literally dead. So, she is evolutionarily in a very vulnerable position in that way, and relies on a man a lot. So, all of her wiring is looking for signs of male investment in her particularly and signs that he can provide for her and her children's survival. And her wiring is looking for this, even if her conscious mind is not. And those evolutionary structures are still in place, despite the fact that we've long evolved out of the nomadic ways that gave rise those structures. So, when a man does small things like paying attention to a woman's interests and buying small things, it registers emotionally in a very similar way to a man being wealthy to women's evolutionary wiring regardless of whether the guy is wealthy and high status or not. That is, unless the woman's in her head and consciously seeking out some rich guy (aka shallow women and gold diggers). But if she's just letting her instincts run in the background and not getting up in her head, as most women do, she will be just as enamored (or more) by a guy of modest means buying her some paintbrushes than some money-bags kind of guy buying a piece of expensive jewelry. It's that he's showing her investment in her specifically that's important. But the giving of gifts (especially gifts that show investment in who she is as a person), really hits the right evolutionary buttons because it communicates investment in her as a specific woman on the part of the man. Like, he's taken some of the money he's worked for and used it to procure something to give to show his affection and investment toward the woman in question... and not some other woman. Now, modern people might have lost this meaning consciously. But evolutionarily speaking, novelty and gift items based around hobbies are a luxury and register as such. Paintbrushes now, might be something you could pick up for $3 at a bargain bin. But in nomadic times, an item as mundane as paintbrushes would be the epitome of luxury. And so, subconsciously, when a man buys a woman a gift item, even if it's modest, it will register physiologically and emotionally as a signifier that a man has the capacity to provide for all the basic needs and then some. As he has bought her an item that's for fun and enjoyment and not for survival. It's like a little birdie that collects trinkets to attract his mate. But it's not about the trinket or how much it costs, it's about the meaning it lights upon. And most importantly, it shows that he's gone out and done the work with his lady in mind.

In the Incel community a guy who isn't getting laid as a result of only wanting the most attractive women is dubbed by many as a fake Incel and is called a StandardCel instead. But Incels are basically guys who think they can never get laid. And they are usually very misogynistic and diminishing of women because they see women as taking everything from them. They call women Femoids (a mashup between Female and Android) because they see women's purpose as to determine which men have value and which ones don't. And Incels have decided that they don't. But if you look at most Incels, they're really just a bunch of normal guys with low self-esteem and body dysmorphia. There is not actual basis to their label of themselves as Incels.

Can be. But more-so, what I mean is that you'll find people who are dealing with similar but reciprocal issues and life-patterns. But there can be incompatibilities in other ways too. And this can be leveraged for better or worse. For example, someone dealing with having trouble expressing anger might find themselves in a relationship with someone who is chronically displaying anger. This, when taken unconsciously, is a recipe for disaster. But when taken consciously with the intent to help eachother grow can be an opportunity for both to understand themselves better and heal.

You must understand, that the abundance of men trying to get a chance leads to a certain kind of security in finding "a" man. I can just walk into a gas station and there will be like 5 men there ready for some form of romance or another. Lots of supply equals little demand. Male interest is as cheap as a gumball. But there are very very few of those men who are right for me. And finding one of them is like finding a diamond in the rough. Little supply equals lots of demand. So, the task for women is to sort through a sea of diamond-shaped gumballs to find the actual diamond. And you know that eventually one will just surface. So, you let it be. And there it is. So, for women, they have to really lean into their intuition to find the right man for them. And this is because the man a woman is with will determine so much about her life. Also, having a baby is a much larger investment for the woman. Plus men are stronger, leaving her in the vulnerable position in a relationship. So, women have to vet men in order to keep their lives in order and to keep themselves and their potential children stable and safe. And not just any Tom, Dick, or Harry who's dtf will do. And to find a man who can match your level of care and investment... which can be incredibly difficult. There are a great many men who simply aren't mature enough to fall to the depths that we, as women, tend to find quite natural. But in my pickiness, I've found that the right one makes it through the funnel. I don't care to look for men, but my feelings will present me with the answer. Now, the man who makes it through the funnel, won't necessarily be the hottest or the most successful or the most confident, etc. He may not be the most (fill in the blank). But he will the right one. And at that point, being around him will be like a drug independent of any trait he does/doesn't possess. And there is usually an uncanny level of mirroring happening, in way of both positives and negatives. You will be the right one for someone. You just have to interact with women. Also, you have to take a leap of faith and try. Those that try will eventually get success. For men, cold approach will be best to get some success. But women prefer warm approach. So, if you want success go for the former. If you want a more fulfilled partner, go for the latter. It's also important to understand that you're projecting male attraction dynamics onto female attraction dynamics, which makes it feel impossible. You're combining the strategic, objective quality aspect of male attraction to the specificity of female attraction. Male attraction is easy and objective. Female attraction is hard and subjective. So, you're thinking female attraction is both hard and objective, which makes it feel cold when it's anything but. And this conflation of dynamics is why it feels so hard. But you don't have to be Superman to be the apple of someone's eye. You just have to have the right stuff for her. Women are always looking for their mirror. You will be that for someone. You just have to have realistic expectations, have some social awareness, and swing the bat. You will be successful if you do those three things.

For sure. But it also gives contrast for the genuine connections, which are worlds apart emotionally and connection-wise.

That depends on you. Some people are less oriented to wanting lots of sexual experiences than others are. You just have to be really honest about what you want. So, ask yourself, "If I settled down with this person for the rest of my life, would I be willing to sacrifice any future sexual relationships with other people?" For you the answer may be yes or no. Either way, be very honest with yourself even if it's uncomfortable.

I've found that it's very difficult to fantasize in the abstract about an ideal man. Like I can't imagine a random attractive, knight in shining armor kind of guy and really have it hit the arousal button. I'm bi-sexual and can fantasize about random attractive women, and that works... though it's very surface level. But it doesn't work toward men the same way. I have to fantasize about a real man that actually exists in life, that I already have an attraction to, to get aroused by a fantasy about him. And the fantasy must be laden in the context that we already exist within. Otherwise, it's very dead and platonic feeling. And porn doesn't work. And erotica doesn't work. It's all too abstract and it doesn't stimulate my heart center in the way I need to actually feel the rising up of the erotic emotions that give way to attraction. The only way to get those feelings through a fantasy is to paint an entire scenario where some kind of intimacy and emotional tension happens. Of course, that's very hard to get through a fantasy. So, it's not an active process and there is never a decision made with the conscious mind as to whether I am attracted to a guy or not. It just blooms at random. So, if I'm walking around a mall, I will register an attractive man my age and a little old woman with the same degree of platonic feeling. It's all so very neutral. I feel like men kind of scan and strategically figure out if a woman is above or below a certain line for them in a very mind-based laundry list kind of way. And I feel like this logical scanning process is going on constantly. But it seems that the more mature a guy gets, the less neurotic this tendency gets and it becomes more subtle. And when a man matures, he integrates his feminine side, which means he can lean into more his intuitions to make relationship decisions like women generally do. That's my impression anyway. You can definitely tell the difference between a head guy and a heart guy, and with the head guy, your intuition will lead you away from him if you've developed your intuition woman. They have an essence about them that's very unappealing, and you can see it in how they talk and how they move. For me (and I wager for most women), there is no rhyme or reason to when an attraction will come about. It's very much like you're in the middle of a still lake, and then suddenly (once every couple years or so for me) something interesting suddenly surfaces to be explored. Now, when I was like 12-15, I would consciously scan and focus toward guys based on looks and style. But once I hit like 16, I was much more picky and not so focused on being in a relationship. By 16 you pretty much discover that there's no scarcity of men in the world... the problem is really to keep them away as most of them are wrong for you and the majority are just lonely or looking for sex. They don't want you in particular. They just want a woman. So, attention from them feels no more special than an acknowledgement of gender. So, at that point when the novelty of male attention wore off and I became more disillusioned with it and wise to the tricks, I started leaning much more into my intuition to decide for me who I'm interested in and being very open-handed about. And I've never had the problem of being luke-warm or finding guys who were luke-warm about me. Yet again, everyone will attract what mirrors them. So, even though I don't have issues attracting luke-warm guys, I have other things that I do attract. So, the intuition isn't always perfect as it also reflects past traumas and problems as well.

Centrists are the ammo that regressive extremists load their guns with. Extremists (by definition) are fairly small in number, and would never get their agendas put in place without the help of uninformed feckless Centrists that they can easily confuse and trick into validating their worldview. And thus, Centrists are always easy to radicalize once they believe that's normal. They are the easiest people in society to weaponize by those with regressive intentions because they have no personal code of ethics beyond appeasing both sides. It's really nothing other than herd mentality dressed up in a respectable diplomats clothing. And this is because Centrists have nothing they fundamentally stand for, other than being in the center of whatever the most socially acceptable viewpoints of the day happen to be. So, all you have to do to trick large swaths of Centrists into greenlighting and supporting harmful agendas is to convince them that one side of the political spectrum believes in it and that it's normal. And you can look at a history book to see how easy it is to convince humanity that barbaric, war-mongering, exploitative, genocidal social patterns are normal. So, he who has control of the Overton Window, has control over the Centrists... which are like 70% of the population. And most of them pat themselves on the back for being so even and fair to everyone. Centrists think themselves in the enlightened position by being 'neutral', and this compounds their lack of real values and their lack of education on political topics. They stand for nothing, and thus fall for anything... because their fundamental agenda deep down is to avoid conflict and be accepted by everyone. But this rather shows a lack of courage and vision. And really just outright laziness. And all regressive radicals have to do is pat them on the head and make them feel accepted and enlightened for them to cozy up to them and see regressive radical viewpoints as more normal. This is why you find so many people on the far right end of the spectrum now-a-days being very strategic in their branding and trying to appear as normal as possible to seem legitimate to the Centrist eye. So, in many regards Centrists are far more dangerous than any other political group, as they hold all the power by shear number. And there is the saying to "Never underestimate the power of large groups of stupid people." They are so easily weaponized. Important Note!!! Just like the term Centrist, the term Extremist is also a relativistic term... just like big and small. You can't say anything is inherently big or small because it's a comparative metric and not an absolute metric. The same way, you can't say any viewpoint is inherently Centrist or inherently Extremist. It all depends on the context and societal structure they exist within. So, Centrism is defined by whatever happens to be the average of the most common viewpoints in a particular society. So, Centrism has no ideology that's solid and universal. Centrism is always shifting with the tides of the society that the Centrism is laden within. So, in a Nazi society, Nazi-ism is Centrism. In a Communist society, Communism is Centrism. In our society, Capitalism and Neo-Liberalism is Centrism. etc. Extremism is also a relativistic term in that it's defined as whatever is on the fringes ideologically. So, it's on the outer edge of what society considers normal. So, in a Nazi society, anti-Nazi-ism is Extremism. In a Communist society, Capitalism is Extremism. In our society, any and all changes to the status quo is Extremism. So, with Centrism and Extremism, neither can (in and of themselves) be a measure of having a good or bad viewpoint. There can be Extremists with ideas that will benefit humanity, and there can be Centrists that have ideas that will harm humanity. So, all views have to be examined on their merits and not how moderate or extreme they're considered in the eyes of society. So, all a commitment to Centrism does is take society's current viewpoints as gospel and poo poos any changes. To be Centrist is to be attached to the status quo and to avoid any critique of unhealthy social structures.

The thing to understand here is that the initial stages of attraction and the deeper aspect of the relationship are very different. But since you're very young you've likely only experienced the former and not the latter. And that's normal. So, when Leo spoke about looks being the most important thing and the personality being the cherry on top, he's talking about relative to the initial attraction phase. Men are attracted primarily by physical signifiers primarily, and are attracted to lots of women. Women are attracted primarily by their feelings of chemistry with the man, which is heavily contingent upon his personality. But if the relationship is to become real and fulfilling, it must evolve past that initial phase. And the concern for looks must (and will naturally) fade gradually into the background the more real it becomes. As far as the deepening of a relationship goes, intimacy is the number one thing. It's about growing the relationship deeper and deeper and holding space for one another. So, if you have a relationship based primarily on looks, all women will eventually lose their good looks. You're 20 now, and you're probably feeling that forever youngness vibe of dating in your early 20s. And you may not be aware of this because you're around a lot of women your age. But for women, looks will always depreciate. For men, they will depreciate too... but a little bit slower. So, if you base a relationship on looks as the primary thing, be prepared for a life of swapping out your girlfriend every five or ten years or so for the younger model just to recapture a relationship with that aesthetic drug of female beauty. And be prepared for the relationships to be shallow and unfulfilling, as a woman's looks will never sustain a relationship. The Coolidge effect will set it and the limerence phase will end. And even if she's the hottest chick on the planet, you will grow used to her and other women will look hotter. Now, you're very young. So, it may be the case that you're not ready yet to move on to the deepening phase of a relationship. You may be more interested in getting new and exciting experiences with many women, which is perfectly valid. Most young men are not ready to really open their hearts until their mid twenties. It's all about the penis before that, and it's just a developmental stage to grow through. And it's important to get it out of your system, as you will likely have a harder time giving up what you've never had when it's time to settle down with someone. So, it's important to really know what it is that you want. If you're focused toward a deeper relationship, you'll go with a woman that you're drawn to in both regards (attraction and compatibility)... and you wouldn't be focusing elsewhere. If you're focused toward excitement and experience with many women, you'll always be looking elsewhere in any case. Now, potentially what happened is that you got into a relationship with someone you weren't attracted to and didn't have chemistry with in the first place. This can be a problem as primal sexual attraction has the function of bonding two lovers together in the initial phase, which is the seed of the relationship that everything grows from. The heat of the initial phase of a relationship certainly has a bonding function, even though it cools down rather quickly by its nature. You have to be able to read your sexual and platonic chemistry with a woman before dating if you want a deep relationship for this reason. You must integrate your feminine side to open your heart and access your intuition which will tell you clearly who you fit with. And be in touch with your animal instincts to know who you have sexual chemistry with. But this is a maturity process. So, don't expect yourself to be older than you are. You're 20, and it's probably healthiest for you to experience a lot of what sexuality has to offer. Do it all now, so that you can see the emptiness in it and lack of fulfillment. And you can easily let it go when you're ready to settle down with a woman in 5 to 10 years. That's my 2 cents.

All cats, big and small, are obligate carnivores. So, that probably really isn't good for the lion to go Vegan. But human beings can. I am Vegan myself. But it's important to give the kitties what they need.

Actually, when I first found Leo's videos... I was like, "Holy Crap! There's another one!" I was shocked to find someone so similar to me. And it was ultimately the fact that Leo was making videos, that made me consider starting my own channel. I had always wanted to share my perspective, and had even fantasized about being a philosopher-type as a teenager, but thought "Nah... I have to be practical." But as time has gone on, I've met a lot of people who are similar to me through my channel. So, I feel less uncanny about my similarities to Leo. But no worries. I definitely am just a person, who is working class going about my working class existence. Kind of socially awkward and kind of nerdy. Leo and I have never met, and I just film stuff out of my bedroom with no affiliation with anyone else but myself. Now, of course, that's exactly what someone in a secret organization would say. But it is true what I'm saying. I'm a one man band.

Even the darkest traits come from innocent roots. So, perhaps you have some aspect of yourself that have been repressed away into the shadow and away from you conscious mind and that aspect uses narcissism to cope with being repressed or various traumas or unmet needs. And perhaps, this is why you're so attracted to women who have these traits. Sex with women that resemble that repressed aspect of yourself if very symbolic of communion and wholeness, so it would make sense for you to be attracted to women like that. But keep in mind that the narcissism is just a coping mechanism that that rejected aspect uses, and not a quality that is inherent to that aspect. So, it's not about integrating narcissism. It's about integrating the aspect of you that has been coping with some trauma or unmet need by being narcissistic. The narcissism is a tool and not an inherent trait. And if you are able to integrate that aspect of yourself and meet its needs, then the narcissism will become an obsolete coping mechanism. And it will naturally fall away. And you will no longer be so into narcissistic women as a result, as there is not need to project your own unmet needs onto them. Another example of this would be if someone has repressed something like greed. And if that person decides to shadow work, they might be perplexed and say "Am I really supposed to integrate greed?" But that's not the point. There is no need to express greed to integrate that shadow. What must be understood is that there's actually an inner aspect of themselves that's using greed as a coping mechanism. Perhaps, as a child, they experienced trauma around not having enough. So, that inner child aspect is still coping with that perceived lack through the vehicle of greed. But the inner child is not inherently greedy. It's a coping mechanism.

You can't get any girl you want. But you can increase your chances of being successful with women in general. But the most amount you'll become successful is 10% of women willing to sleep with you, and 1% that are head over heals for you... though you'll only hurt them if you act like a Playboy toward those in that 1%. I recommend focusing toward the 9% that are attracted to you and willing to sleep with you but not the 1% that are crazy about you... unless you're looking for an actual relationship. Now, this may seem like a bummer that you can never be universally attractive to all women, but that's actually a lot of women. But this reality check is necessary if you want to have a clear idea of the reality of the situation, and not get swept into a fantasy that just exists in movies really.

I just released my first video, if you're interested... A bit blurry because my camera had some issues with it and I had to film on my computer instead. I hope you like it

I'm not sure if this is the right subforum to post this, but I wanted to start a discussion here about Tarot. I think The Tarot is a very helpful tool for looking at things from different angles than we're used to. And this is because it engages the part of our mind that's more visual and narrative as opposed to logical and linear. So, it's kind of like an archetypal language that can be mixed and matched to create new stories that pertain to the experience of being human. I'd be interested in what other people's experiences are relative to interests in or using the Tarot.

Awesome! My email is thediamondnetchannel@gmail.com if you have any questions.

That would be a very unethical way to use Tarot cards... or any spiritual tool/teaching. There are a lot of vulnerable people out there. And there does exist many spiritual teacher (and probably Tarot readers as well) that want power/money/etc. from keeping these people dependent on them. Always be cautious of spiritual teachers/and others who try to tell you that they're your only source of insight. Always remember that wisdom is always internal, even if others can help you retrieve it.

From what I've seen, there are many different philosophies around Tarot reading. For some, it's a tool for divination, and it can be used in the way that you mentioned. But that's not true for me because I don't possess psychic abilities. Instead, I use it as a tool for the querent and I to use while we explore the topics that get lit upon in relation to the cards. So, it's more collaborative like life-coaching. But there are many different ways to look at it. For some, it's a parlor trick. For others, it's fortune telling. For others, it's usuing divination to get clarity. And for others, like myself, it's an archetypal framing device for life's patterns. And I'm sure there are many more perspectives than that.

You're welcome.