Emerald

Haha! Definitely similarities there... both stylistically and thematically.

Yeah... I was very romantically precocious. I had my first kiss at age 6. And I was doing a lot more than kissing by the time I was 14. But I'm from a very conservative redneck town with the only sex-ed being abstinence based, so naturally everyone else was about the same. Probably a solid 30% of my friends had lost their virginity by the end of the first year in high school. I was always labelled as the innocent one if that gives you the idea. A lot of my friends all have pre-teens now and a couple of them have teenagers. We're 30.

I remember being on the receiving end of a teenage boy's first date back when I was 14. I went out with this boy Scott who was also 14, and I really liked him. We had a lot of fun talking together in typing class. But he was very awkward and couldn't relax and he was an awkward kisser (due to inexperience), and so I lost feelings for him. He also didn't tip the waiter, which bothered me. So, here's my advice... - Relax - Be yourself - Don't be a pleaser - Learn how to kiss (don't wet your lips with copious amounts of saliva before-hand) - Be natural - Tip the waiter This is advice based purely on my teenage dating experience, so may not be relevant to you. But just in case, I figured that I'd share.

Sure. I have it in my signature bar.

I made a video that touches on this. Solipsism itself is a belief that we superimpose onto reality. And therefore, it is not true. But the problem is that people start believing in solipsism once they see how flimsy the notion of naive realism is... and then they fall on the other side of the horse where they start believing that their finite perspective is the only perspective.

I wouldn't worry too much about this... especially since Sadhguru's advice seems to advise more against casual hook-ups every weekend as opposed to the figuring things out and changing partners over time. And there is a practical (not a moral) reason for this. I think it would be quite paralyzing and harmful to set yourself to an impossible standard for fear of what it might do to you spiritually. Like, you seem afraid of being forever marked by your sexual choices. And it feels a bit similar to very puritanical notions about sexuality as leading to a loss in personal value of some kind. But the thing is, life happens and we can't always guarantee that our relationships will work out. And you don't want to constrict your natural drives to such a degree that life can't happen to you. So, you can expect that you may have a few sexual partners over the course of time... perhaps more than a few. But don't think that this permanently stains you in some way. The reason why Sadhguru talks about this more in an energetic way. So, if you're sleeping around, you're mingling very closely with the energy of another. And the energy mixes with your own. And it confuses the system. So, it's not good for spiritual practice to also be in the practice of changing sexual partners every weekend. But this effect doesn't last. Energy is mutable.

The main imbalance here is that there is an overt focused toward masculine highness over feminine lowness with regard to personal development and spirituality. And this is why it attracts who it does, and why the imbalance occurs. So, the masculine is all that has no substance of its own but can create change and transformation by enacting itself on a substance. It is related to the elements of air and fire for this reason. And it has to do with everything of the intellect and of the spiritual. The feminine, on the other hand, had substance and being but does not have the ability for change and transformation. It is related to the elements of Earth and water because of its groundedness in the mundane experience of life and our humanity. It has everything to do with the Earthly and ordinary. And it also relates to the emotions and existence itself. So, the masculine is about doing. The feminine is about being. So, this is a personal development channel. So, obviously a lot of that is about doing which is in the wheelhouse of the masculine principle. And it is also a very intellect-heavy and high-spirituality-heavy channel, which is also under the umbrella of the masculine principle. So, the topics covered and how they're covered will find an audience that values the masculine. But to add to this, it's important to understand that there is a shadow to personal development that everyone engaged in it shares to a certain degree. Often times, the shadow of why a person wants to develop themselves is to mitigate negative feelings about themselves (feminine) and develop more abilities relative to doing and having an identity (masculine). So, personal development's shadow often has a resistance to the feminine built in, and a retreat into the masculine. This is true for men and for women engaged in personal development. The way to actually balance and integrate on this forum would be to focus more toward feminine values like vulnerability, receptivity, atunement to our own emotional state, practicing empathy toward others, listening to the intuition, facing the shadow and the unconscious, and dropping the need to compete or be correct or to point out when someone else is incorrect. One thing I've noticed with the forum that's given me a bit of insight into the masculine is that there tends to be an intellectual focus toward higher up spiritual concepts. And on this forum, it often happens at the expense of being able to accept the mundane and emotional aspects of what's happening. So, there is a lot of denial and a hiding behind concepts to cover over emotional wounds. And perhaps a feeling like being right is the thing that makes someone valid. So, there is a lot of loftiness and idealism at the expense of noticing what's here now. But I also want to mention that I think this is a common pattern in society in general. It just shows itself a particular way on this format.

I think this is very common, but actually comes from lack of personal development on the part of the woman. A woman who is conscious of her emotions, won't test you. And this is why... These tests mostly happen unconsciously, where a woman is vying for a certain need to be met without realizing consciously that she's vying for a certain need to be met. That's what the "test" is. I'ts unconscious manipulation because she doesn't yet know how to become aware of her emotional state/needs and she doesn't know how to communicate them properly and directly. This is why there are all those stereotypes of women saying their "fine" when they're really not. And essentially using passive aggression to manipulate the situation to get what she wants/needs. So, this is a shadow thing, and the tests come from that unconscious manipulation that stems from being unable to be aware of and communicate her emotions directly. Also, even if a woman consciously decides to test a guy, there is still an unconscious undercurrent. So, relative to men and women's emotions and how they work, we work very much the same way. We have the same capacity for feeling a wide range of emotions. But the primary difference with regard to emotions, generally speaking, is the vantage point that we take in relation to them. So, the masculine orientation to emotions is distant, like a bird's eye view. As such, there aren't a lot of details, but it's very simple to recognize and label. So, from the masculine perspective, emotions are easy to become aware of and communicate. But they are very simplified into broad strokes, which makes it harder to have a deep understanding of emotions but it's also easier to make quick strategic decisions and to communicate directly. Reading emotions from the masculine perspective is a bit like reading "Clifford the Big Red Dog", it's simple and obvious and you know what's going on. The feminine perspective relative to emotions is like a street view, where you're right up close to everything. So, if you have a bird's eye view like the masculine perspective on emotions, you can see the broad strokes of what's happening in the setting. But if you're in the feminine perspective, you're seeing all the details and nuances and people and sounds and smells and all the little things that you can't see in the masculine bird's eye view. But the complexity is difficult to become aware of and to communicate from because it's all so close and difficult to wrap the mind around. So, reading emotions from the feminine perspective is a bit like reading "War and Peace", you can learn to read it but it has a big learning curve. And society doesn't teach us how to read and communicate our emotions in this way. So, most people (and women especially) haven't learned the proper tools to make sense of them. So, people who are jammed into the masculine perspective, have a very vague notion of their emotions and things get over-simplified without the ability to take the feminine perspective. People who are jammed into the feminine perspective get lost in all the details and nuances without the ability to back up a bit and take the masculine perspective. So, the masculine is like being 100 feet away from a tv screen and missing all the details. The feminine is like having your face pressed directly against the tv screen and being too close to see what's actually going on. So, a developed person will cultivate the ability to switch between masculine and feminine perspectives. And then, these unconscious manipulation tactics are no longer necessary because you can become aware of your needs and feelings and communicate them directly to the other person. So, the tests are only necessary until the woman has integrated her masculine side, and learned the ability to switch between perspectives. And then, from the masculine her feminine receptivity can grow because she can communicate her needs and boundaries better and feel safe enough to open up. And from there, there is no need to test your partner or be insecure, because you're no longer riding blind.

Do you actually want a family... or do you want to avoid social disapproval? This is really the question to hone in on. Really tune into your emotions here, because it seems to me that you're negatively motivated instead of positively motivated. So, the horse that's positively motivated is moving in the direction of a stick and carrot. The horse wants the carrot, and so the horse walks without resistance toward the carrot. The horse that's negatively motivated is also walking, but he walks because he's trying to avoid the whip. So, are you following the carrot or simply trying to avoid the whip? If it's the latter, then I recommend not having a family until the family is the carrot. And also accepting that family may never be the carrot. So, the question is... what's your carrot? What really inspires you? Once you find that, follow that golden carrot wherever it goes. And this will help you find the stream and flow with it.

Is this million dollar dare only available to gay people?

You're welcome.

Gay men usually aren't attracted to trans women. Gay men are not interested in women sexually. Most people who find trans women attractive are straight men who see trans women as women. Now, IMO she should have divulged this information to you prior to the act. Some people might say, trans women are just women and so there shouldn't be a need to divulge that... and I see where they're coming from in trying to normalize being trans. But I do think people should be open and honest about things, and she was definitely being purposefully deceptive. But if you enjoyed the act, it's not because you're gay or even bi. It's because you're straight and you genuinely saw her as a woman.

I recommend this one...

Yes. I was actually going to recommend Shadow Work. But I think the best thing is to be with yourself in stillness while you're in zombie mode. Think of zombie mode as the doorway to the shadow aspect. And then, then addictions you engage in are stimulations you use to avoid seeing whatever is in your shadow. So, remain in zombie mode and the stillness of that mode, and allow whatever needs to come up to come up. That's why zombie mode is so uncomfortable in the first place, because things are still and open enough for whatever needs to come up to come very close to the surface. And whatever it is is making you uncomfortable. So, when zombie mode comes up next time, get in the mindset that it's exactly what needs to happen. And wait there in zombie mode to see what comes up from it.

The things you're addicted to are coping mechanisms that, in some ways, are genuinely helping you cope with your emotions and life. So, you are using these addictions to supplement your will to live and to do. But they are also debilitating at the same time. So, they are self-medication and give you some genuine benefits because they keep you up out of the low spot temporarily. But they give those benefits to you at a high cost to your health and well-being. So, when you try to quit them, it's not as simple as just quitting. If you quit the addictions, all you're doing is throwing away your crutches... but your leg is still broken. You're throwing away your coping mechanism, but there is still something to be coped with. So, instead of focusing on getting rid of your crutches, focus toward healing your broken leg. And then your crutches will become obsolete, and you won't need to brute force yourself to quit using the crutches. Go to the root cause of what made you need the addictions in the first place and resolve that. Then, when you quit, the only inertia you'll be dealing with is the inertia of habit and physiological addiction... both of which can be beaten with some willpower and discipline. But if your leg is still broken, don't expect yourself to be able to walk without crutches. Now, you could look for healthier coping mechanisms in the meantime. But you'd really just be swapping out one addiction for another, until you address the root cause.

All living and non-living systems are imbued with the essence of femininity and masculinity. This includes but is not limited to human animals. You can find the conjunction of the masculine and feminine is a spec of sand as well as in the cosmos. Human beings call this masculine and feminine because we relate it metaphorically to the conjunction between a man and a woman. But also because women, as a whole group, contain more feminine energy than masculine energy. And men, as a whole group, contain more masculine energy than women. But the energies inform but supercede human gender. But the expression of these energies most familiar and native to us is in women and men. But don't let that confuse you and make you think that these energies have primarily to do with gender. They don't. Human gender is just one expression among infinite expressions of that energy. That's just how human beings relate best to these energies. It's what's most grounded in our experience. But all human beings contain both masculine and feminine (Yin and Yang). We could not exist and live and breathe without both. A male is not made by sperm alone and a woman is not made by egg alone. We all contain both. So, it is not necessary for a man to be with a woman to have communion with the feminine, because it is already in himself. It is not necessary for a woman to be with a man to have communion with the masculine, because it is already in herself. But you are correct that to cut off one's own contrapositive energy is very foolish to do. You are cutting away aspects of yourself if you do so. You find this with men who are trying to cut away their feminine side to be more masculine... which doesn't actually work that way. But cutting away the opposite energy of the one you're trying to accentuate, is the same as cutting off your legs to lose weight in hopes that it will make you more attractive. It doesn't really work that way.

Yes. For sure that's true in relationship. But relative to my last post, I was speaking more generally about a person who has integrated the feminine being almost like the other side of the pillow in society. So, it's like a general healing presence to be around someone who can be in that space. And that can be man or woman, as well.

Well, that might not read quite as well as the situations are a bit different. Men tend more-so to be empowered by being men and developing their masculinity because masculinity is much less shrouded in the collective shadow than femininity is. So, for a man, the idea of being a man and developing one's masculinity can be a self-esteem boost and encourage a man toward personal development. There are some double-edged swords here, of course. So, it's not hazard free. But it's a lot closer the surface of collective consciousness. For a woman, it's always a mixed bag of the most positive and negative things to embody femininity. So, a woman who is not ready to embody the feminine, can really get knocked down the rabbit hole of low-self esteem by trying to embrace their femininity as to embrace the feminine is to have the shadow projected upon you. You really have to unpack a lot of baggage for it to be empowering, and most people aren't clear enough for it. And part of unpacking that baggage has to do with setting Feminist beliefs aside for a time and letting the shadow of misogyny penetrate you to see what it is, where it comes from, how to dismantle it, and how it resides in ourselves. There are a lot of ancestral wounds around womanhood and femininity surrounding oppression, it's not so easy to feel empowered by trying to be more feminine which is often seen as disempowering by its very nature. And this is the way that it's unconsciously taught. Most women, when they were children, came to a fork in the road where there seems only to be two paths. The first path is in the direction of the societal script around femininity, which is very disempowering and narrow. It's either too sexualized/objectifying or reflects a narrowing down to only the feminine/care-taker role. Not much can grow in that box. And women who choose this path will be stunted in their growth. The second path is to reject their femininity and embrace their masculinity as a means of empowerment and then rebrand masculinity as neutrality and consider it to be just a social construct. Now, this path is far superior to the former narrow box of the societal script around femininity but it ultimately cuts women off from their feminine power source, where the majority of feminine growth is to be had. But to really find the feminine, you have to dig your own path and open yourself up to the awareness of the feminine wounding. You really have to dig yourself open to do this. And you must cast aside desires for significance or status, which is difficult for a woman on the second path to do as she probably cast off her femininity as a child to be accepted, praised, and seen as valuable/valid to begin with. The woman on the first path will never even get to this point. But a woman on the second path can come to the threshold of it and lose heart as it makes her face directly with what she fears. And this is a very vulnerable thing, where you come face to face with your own internalized misogyny and self-loathing. And you come to grips with many disturbing truths about your place in society in this work. But you also find many hidden treasures in the dragon's lair, so to speak. Once you've done it, you are much more receptive and in touch with your emotions. And you can become a source of refuge for people. The feminine can't survive much in such a hyper Yang environment. So, it is quite rare to find someone who can really be receptive and empathetically hold space for others and truly embody the feminine. And you also become much more intuitive and are able to flow downstream more easily. Also, society tends not to value the traits within the feminine principle very much. So, there feels like there's not a lot to gain but a lot to lose in being more feminine. So, most women will balk at the suggestion to be more in touch with the feminine, because what it translates to is often a nullification of what they actually are. There are people everywhere that are always trying to cast away the feminine while simultaneously fetishizing it. So, women tend to have quite an allergy to such a notion... as do I. So, I'd be unlikely to make that kind of post because I know that I'd be stepping on toes. It can be like lemon juice on wounds for a lot of women to receive any advice on being more feminine. And many would at least regard it suspiciously. It's a painful and uncomfortable thing to traverse. And in order to embody the feminine truly, you must be incredibly iconoclastic and willing to face with many subconscious monsters. It's not something to dabble in.

Competition and the ability to fight and stand one's ground has its practical place, when there are real things at stake. And this does happen quite often when a person is in a leadership type position. But the average person comes across instances where this is necessary as well. So, it's not as rare as you think. A person who is looking to develop their masculine side should learn to set and enforce boundaries as necessary. They should be able to stand their ground and draw lines in the sand and embody the archetype of the warrior. And when a man is able to embody this archetype among many others, he feels like he's more in tune with his masculine energy. If someone doesn't have this skill developed, there is weakness and they can be easily deterred from their path and not able to access the fire of the warrior as they always default to the receptivity of the element of water. So, someone who's in their masculine should be like a fierce lion with a very skilled lion tamer that exerts effortless control over the lion through attunement. Don't make the fierceness of the lion bad. Don't banish the lion from the man. The ability to protect is also the ability to cause harm. But in order to wield this sword properly, the lower nature of the lion must be tamed and channeled toward higher pursuits. But never does the ability to be a lion get left out of the equation. The lion is necessary for the development of the masculine. Now, the example that the other poster gave is a little out there, as that's a very unlikely scenario and it's a bit nationalistic. But there are really hazards and boundary breaches to navigate, and one needs the lion to effectively handle them.

Absolutely correct. Women generally don't have a lack of respect for men they're not attracted to. They just see them as people and as friends. It's a neutral experience, because women are usually only attracted to one or perhaps a few guys at a time. Most men will read as neutral to women... but not as losers. On the other hand, I feel like a sizable number of men have a lack of respect toward women they're not attracted to, then they project that onto women and assume that lack of respect is what lack of interest means. But it's just a projection of their own patterns and tendencies to write off unattractive women and see them as lesser, that comes back to bite them.

That's why I also included romantic intentions in general in the last post. It's not just guys who are looking for sex that do this. It's guys who are looking for relationships too. So, make no mistake, it will make her lose respect for you and will make her feel really shitty if she values your friendship. Now, I'm sure this has happened to her before, because it happens to women a lot. And either way, it feels very objectifying to have a guy that you thought cared about you genuinely as a friend, up and leave when he finds out that you don't see him that way. That's what it is to be fuck-zoned. So, pretending to be her friend in hopes that you can get into a relationship, feels only slightly less objectifying than if you were just pretending to be her friend to get into her pants. If it happened to you in that way, you would know and hate the feeling. But unfortunately, you'll probably never experience it to know how it feels.

Yes. If I like him enough to want to be with him, chances are I'm already friends with him. So, I will not stop being friends with a guy just because he doesn't like me back. If I do that, then that makes me a really bad friend and means that I never really cared about him to begin with. Also, as a woman, I know from personal experience that it hurts to be fuck-zoned. A guy pretends that he wants to be friends with you, but he just wants to have sex with or date you. Then, when you tell him that you don't see him that way he says he felt like he wasted his time or something like that. It feels very objectifying.

+1

The culture is definitely disingenuous because it's largely made up of men (mostly young men) who feel a sense of lack in themselves and they project that getting women's approval will fix that lack. But that sense of lack is internal and cannot be fixed that way. Now, I think learning some seduction techniques and ways to approach and date and all those things are perfectly fine. It's good to know the lay of the land. But overall, the community surrounding pick up, feels to be a very immature version of masculinity. And as a woman, I find it obvious and off-putting. And men who get attached to the techniques and culture, don't feel like women will like them for who they are. And they are compensating for those self-esteem issues through the continuous search for female sexual validation. They think they NEED techniques for a woman to be interested in them. And furthermore, they think they NEED a woman to be interested in them to be worth a damn. Overall, if a guy is between 18 and 25, and he's into pick-up, I suspect he may grow out of it once he's been around the block a few times. A man who grows and matures in the natural way without being stunted will transcend it quite quickly. In fact, experimenting sexually and being a bit promiscuous in the early 20s or so is probably quite normal and healthy and part of the growth process. But if a guy is over 25, and has already had more than a couple years of success in dating and sleeping with women, I tend to think he's just using pick-up as a crutch at that point. At that point, it's simply to cover up insecurities, and avoid true intimacy and vulnerability with a partner. And of course, this type of guy really won't be good for women. Overall though, I see why it exists. It's normal for men to want to be more attractive to women. The problem comes with the fact that most men in that culture are also having an internal battle with their own feminine side. And that becomes toxic very quickly. Lots of Anima possession going on in pick-up groups.

You project so many imaginary powers onto us women. And then you get angry and jealous at the power you've projected upon us, and try to drag us down off of the imaginary pedestals that you put us on, in your mind. It's the most neurotic thing ever. Can you not see that your brain is infested with the cruel whispers of imaginary women who pull all the strings? And the more you fight against those imaginary women, the stronger the illusion becomes. It's really a devil's circle. You're like a dog nipping at your own tail... then making obsessive and conspiratorial posts about the vindictive nature of ninja squirrels (aka your own tail) that's always slightly out of your reach. And you're warning other dogs about it too... and certainly some will fall for it. When are you going to realize that you're only just bitter and jealous at the inside of your own head?