Emerald

I agree. I think it's probably akin to what the people who conducted the study posited about being unmarried making it more likely for men who live the bachelor lifestyle to engage in self-destructive behaviors like excessive drinking and partying. Where married men may not have the degree of freedom to engage in self-destructive behaviors that bachelors can because of a responsibility to their wife/children/grand-children. So, it's more about lifestyle and self-care than about marriage itself. Though loneliness could itself be an issue. Also, to be noted, this study was done on men from the older generation who might not have been taught or encouraged to cook or clean for themselves like men are expected to in contemporary society. So, these men may not have very healthy lifestyles in these ways either and really struggle with these domestic things that make a home livable. Women from older generations also have issues like this where, when their husband dies, they have to learn how to write a check, pay bills, and do other tasks that in their generation were the sole responsibility of me. So, they either weren't taught or were actively discouraged from. But these tasks absolutely have to be done, where cooking and cleaning could be neglected without immediate consequences. So, the learning curve happens more rapidly due to necessity.

Actually, they did a study of older single men and women who never married. They found that the unmarried men tended to die very young compared to married men, where the single women lived about the same amount of time as compared to married women. The study posited that this was perhaps because single men didn't take very good care of themselves when they were living alone and being engaged in self-destructive behaviors that they would perhaps not have partaken in had they been in a relationship. So, I would argue, of course, that people need people to live a fulfilling life, regardless of gender. But scientifically, in terms of which gender benefits more from being in a committed relationship in terms of health and longevity, it's men. So, even though men don't need to be married, they are more likely to live longer healthier lives if they are married, where unmarried and widowed little old ladies are like the energizer bunny who keeps going and going and going. I have one grandma whose husband died 31 years ago, and the other whose husband died 42 years ago (and the man she married after my grandpa died, also died over 20 years ago), and they're both still kicking. One of my grandma's turns 90 in a few days. She lives alone too.

Thank you! Animus possession, which stems from a repression of both the masculine and feminine in a woman at most is a real beast to tangle with. Like I said, this has been the main thing that I've been exploring for years and years.

Thank you!

Wrong!!!! Bomp!!!! j/k Uniqueness is just another arbitrary hierarchy, and one that is strongly valued in Orange by some individuals and not by others. The point is that hierarchies aren't real, and reality is empty of value as a quality. So, reality neither has value nor lacks value. It is simply empty of it. So, a person is not valuable... but neither are they lacking in value. Value on the existential level is just an irrelevant concept created for practical functioning in the human intellect. So, a person is valid without the concept of value needing to be applied at all. So, if we think of a person's validity as relating back to arbitrarily chosen values in terms of success, Instagram followers, uniqueness, kindness, goodness, edginess, intelligence, money, etc., then we are always creating a situation that is in resistance to unconditional love. And since unconditional love is the Truth of existence, we are creating our worldview out of alignment with Truth. And we will suffer and become unconscious as a result.

A lot of people are already past it. But if it really bothers you, then it does so because you're thinking of things in Orange terms... in terms of value hierarchies. And the really negative thing here is that we start thinking of ourselves in relation to where our position in the value hierarchy is. And since you feel like you're not up in the particular hierarchy that you mentioned (and a very specific one at that), then you feel bad and want to retreat from society. But a lot of women don't care about how many Instagram followers someone has. That's the most random thing ever, to be honest. It's an arbitrary thing. In fact, anything that you could potentially even have value relative to is an arbitrarily chosen value... including success with women. So, notice why you feel bad about this social pattern... because it writes a narrative in your mind based around imaginary hierarchies that makes you feel bad about yourself and your place in those imaginary hierarchies... and shallow women are the arbitrarily chosen judges of your worth and status within that hierarchy. But this is all a projection. You have deemed that women in contemporary society exist in such a way that you can never "win" their affections and thus climb in the hierarchy. You feel like the hierarchy is rigged against you because of your lack of value. But this hierarchy and value are both illusions. Only people in Orange feel intrinsically bad about their position in the Orange hierarchies. Just like Blue people are the only ones that feel intrinsically bad about breaking a social more that harms no one... like wearing a hat on a Sunday in May when you're not supposed to. So, the solution is to develop yourself more, and get out of the delusion that you're somehow low down on some imaginary hierarchy that a most people don't even know exist. Life is not a meritocracy or a zero sum game. Life is just living. Just allow yourself to be.

I had to share this, because I think it's really illuminating, creative, and just downright amusing. And from a Spiral Dynamics perspective shows why it's so important for humanity to make the collective jump from Orange to Green at the present time to avoid planetary destruction.

I, as a person with over a decade of adulthood under my belt, would aim for the more personally developed woman if I were in the situation of picking a partner. To be with someone like that long-term could be very draining, as you'll always be "in trouble." But if I recall, you're quite young. So, it's just really important for you to be social and get acquainted with dating. So, it wouldn't be a good idea to hold out for someone who meets that standard... especially who's your age, as it takes a while to develop one's self. So, in dealing with a woman (or a man for that matter) who is acting passive aggressive or being very indirect and confusing, you'd want to approach them with a sense of being very solid and okay with them and unphased by their behavior. In the past, when I was a teenager, I'd get a lot of girls being kind of catty and passive aggressive to me. And you could always tell when that kind of tension was in the air. So, I identified strongly with being above that kind of thing. So, I'd just do my best to be cool with that person regardless of their reaction, and I could almost always win them over and get them to trust me. And then I'd just be aware of things that could potentially set them off and minimize it. And I got a kick out of being able to roll with the punches and to be the laid back one. And this worked swimmingly for a casual friendship or acquaintanceship. Now, if I were in a relationship, it would be a bit more challenging since the level of closeness is much more extreme. So, you'd probably have to get really good at accepting their volatile emotions, remaining laid back, and help them communicate and address their concerns/fears/needs/desires. And the latter thing is most important, as this is the reason why they're like that in the first place. They believe that you're somehow preventing them from understanding, expressing, and/or addressing these concerns/fears/needs/desires. So, this could get tiring. So, you might find a happy medium where the woman is perhaps still under-developed in terms of emotional discernment but is actively interested in becoming a better person. Now, when I was in my first major relationship at 16, I was a bit like the girl that you're describing for about the first 5 or 6 months of the relationship. And this was the case despite identifying with being very laid back and always being cool with even the most challenging of behaviors. But at that point, my then-boyfriend would do just the smallest thing and I'd act like I was really upset... but I wasn't aware that I was acting. I realized it at about month 6 that I had been acting out this way because I was addicted to his reaction to it, since it gave me something that I needed but didn't know that I needed. So, if he were to accidentally bump into me, I would (unconsciously) act like I was very hurt. And I would do this because he would apologize to me and he would make sure that I felt okay, and he was genuinely sorry. This was something that I had subconsciously craved my entire life. I really wanted him to show me that he cared about going over my boundaries and that he cared about me enough to apologize and dote on me. It made me feel really good and safe. So, I kept acting upset at things that I would never get upset about in a million years, simply because I craved his response. But after the first several months, I became conscious of this and realized that I was being very manipulative... and in the process making him very upset. So, once I became aware of it, I stopped. So, this could be the case with your girlfriend and why she's always getting upset at you. She may be unconsciously trying to manipulate you into showing her that you care about her, because she doesn't know that's what she actually wants. So, instead of coming right out and telling you what she wants, she automatically defaults into behaving a certain way to elicit a desired response out of you.

Perhaps the particular women that you're talking about don't know how to express their emotions or read their emotions very well. So, it comes out in an indirect kind of way that's very confusing and can be passive aggressive. I've seen a lot of women in this pattern before. But it comes from lack of personal developments and a dis-integrated masculine side on their part. So, it's not really your fault for not understanding them. They probably don't understand themselves or just can't communicate their understanding very well, and are just getting frustrated about that. So, to understand what I mean, I want to explain women's and men's relationship to emotions (speaking very generally, of course) like this... So, men and women have the same capacity for emotions and have the same emotions. So, women are not any more or less emotional than men are, and vice versa. There is no profound difference in the thing itself. The difference has to do with he vantage point relative to those emotions. Men tend to default to a further removed perspective relative to the emotional experience. So, if you imagine the emotional experience like it's a big city, imagine that the default masculine view of the city (aka emotions) is like a bird's eye view. This makes the emotions more vague and general so men are less sensitive and less likely to pick up on details and nuances. But it also makes men a lot more clear on their major emotions because they can more easily get a general sense of them without getting lost in the details. So, men tend to make decisions more quickly and easily and can communicate them more quickly and easily. It's very straightforward but lacking in nuance. The default feminine perspective relative to the emotions is one that's very close up. So, in the city analogy it's the same city in the feminine pov. But instead of it being like the masculine bird's eye view, the feminine perspective is the view of someone walking around on the street. And they are more directly experiencing the subjective experience of what's happening. So, they are more sensitive and pick up on all the nuances of everything happening on the street. And they're experiencing so much relative to where they're at, that they may not be able to quantify the experience as easily as someone from the masculine perspective. They may get lost in all the nuance of the experience. So, out of the two, the feminine perspective is experiencing a more direct experience of emotions that is closer up and more nuanced. And because of this, it's much more difficult to read and has a steeper learning curve. If the masculine experience of emotions is like reading "Clifford the Big Red Dog" and the feminine experience of emotions is like reading "War and Peace," then it is clear why men tend not to understand why women have a harder time being clear about things and communicating their emotions accurately. Men tend to think as the stereotypes go, "Why does she struggle so much to read a kid's book. It's very simple. Clifford ran fast. What's so hard about that?" Meanwhile, she's not reading about Clifford at all. She's trying to read a huge thick book and understand what, "Kings are the slaves of history.” means. And this will be difficult if she's still working at a 2nd grade reading level... relative to her emotions of course. And there's no "emotion school" out there. So, most women will unfortunately never develop that latent potential. At least not in my generation. Now, of course, this isn't necessarily a pure disadvantage for women. In fact, with the development of feminine skills, a woman can become quite adept at reading her emotions, and she will be able to provide emotional insights that are very profound. But society doesn't teach feminine skills like this. So, many women go through their lives completely misunderstanding themselves and as a result, everyone else does too... especially men. So, what you're seeing is what happens when women haven't learned that skill. Also, learning that feminine skill is highly contingent upon integrating the masculine side and being able to utilize the masculine bird's-eye-view to put words and concepts to those otherwise subjective and intuitive experiences. Otherwise, the experience won't crystalize into a workable insight. So, the best thing for men and women is to find their natural default stance (mine is the feminine pov) and learn how to shift back and forth between those perspectives, so that we don't just get jammed into one viewpoint or the other. And it's this oscillation between the detached and close up picture that allows us to understand and master our emotions.

Find any points of resistance that you have toward women, feminine men, and other things that have a direct association with the feminine.. (i.e. the color pink, glitter, shopping, etc.) And really try to find everything that you label as feminine and any subjective judgments and negative feeling you may have toward those things. Then, work on releasing resistance to them. Then, also, you should look at how you define femininity. The societal definition of it has mostly to do with appearance. But the feminine is so much broader and deeper than that. So, discovering what is esoterically feminine will help, as society has a very distorted image of femininity.

This is a good analogy. Ultimately, all relative paradigms are kind of like castles in the sky... and all of them are relative including the paradigm of the absolute as the absolute can't be properly encapsualted in a paradigm... only alluded to. This is the nature of human conceptions. It's that we have to take certain assumptions and observations to be true to build one. Then we scaffold other building blocks onto that paradigm that fit and are consistent with the rest of the paradigm. Then, eventually, you have a castle in the sky... which is a huge complex building that has no foundation from the perspective of the absolute. It's just mysteriously floating in space... but miraculously has consistency and a sense of realness from certain relative paradigms.

With the looks thing, I was more-so talking about what they value in women. And this whole, become a high status man to get a hot woman. So, looks are not a huge part of the RSD community's thing relative, because that would make them less effective and less successful in their business. They are sought out by men who are seeking to be more attractive to women. So, many of the guys who are interested in their services will be guys who maybe feel negatively about their looks. So, the RSD guys will be like, "Looks don't matter." since looks are something men don't have very much control over. And instead they'll focus toward technique and status, which is something that men do have control over. But yes. It's a lot about who he's marketing to, and how they read value in a woman. So, they are going to value the woman's looks most of all, because they understand that attention from attractive women as being the thing that brings them value. And most guys who get involved in pick up in general tend to come from a place of lack and scarcity and negative self esteem relative to their self-worth. So, it's definitely a very specific kind of social circle and aegis about dating that makes a lot of RSD/PUA guys a match to women who value themselves in the same way that the men value them... which mostly on looks without regard to much else. So, you end up with a lot of otherwise underdeveloped hot women, hooking up with guys who are employing techniques specifically designed to hook up with otherwise underdeveloped hot women. And it creates an empty and lackluster transaction in the sex because they are only engaging in it for the man to mirror the desirability of the woman back to her and the woman to mirror the status of the man back to him. So, that way they both get to feel worthwhile.

Be sure to always bring a virgin sacrifice and a chalice of goat's blood before speaking with any of us of the female persuasion. To come without bearing gifts offends our people. So, that's the first step right there. You may want to take notes...

Haha! No worries.

Not quite. To give an analogy, imagine that a paradigm is like a room that has certain empirically observable qualities about it. So, if you're in the "room" of the scientific paradigm, let's say that it has blue walls. So, if you say, "This room has blue walls.", then you are observing an empirical truth about that room/paradigm. So, "This room has blue walls." is a true statement. But if you're in the room of the subjective paradigm, maybe it has green walls. So, if you say, "This room has blue walls." (which was true in the other room/paradigm) then you are either lying or mistaken. So, "This room has blue walls." is a now a false statement from this POV. So, it's a matter of being able to know which room you're in and accurately stating what you observe about that room without talking about observable traits of other rooms. This is why it requires accurate perception, because you have to look past your ideas of what "is" or "should be" in a room, and really notice what's actually there. When you are in a particular room/paradigm, there are very particular things that are true/untrue that may contradict what's true/untrue in other rooms. So, it's the ability to hold two or more of these contradictory truths at once and to understand how and why they're both true depending on the vantage point that you take (aka which room you're in). And also to feel no need to cherry pick and mince together incompatible paradigmatic truths to justify some other idea that one is attached to. So, a lot of it has to do with detached perception. Edit: Also, think of that famous M.C. Escher painting with all the staircases. And each staircase is its own paradigm. So, when you're on the right-side up staircase, you're walking right-side up. But if you're on a side-ways staircase, it's foolish in that world to walk right side up because you're not traveling with the platform. Walking side-ways makes more sense. So, the paradigm is like the platform you're walking on. And the paradigms don't have to connect or match up to other paradigms at all. What is true on one platform might be false on another. Then, you also should be firmly anchored in an awareness of the absolute... as this is the core truth of reality and the most all-encompassing paradigm that is true from every platform. But even though it's true... it may still not be appropriate in a given situation.

Well, work and finances in general really creates the proper infrastructure to live a fulfilling life. So, I you live your life doing a job you hate that isn't fulfilling, this will impede your ability to really enjoy the other aspects of life. So, there is no other choice between spending tons of time at a job you dislike that you don't feel a strong sense of contribution and having a life purpose that is fulfilling and meaningful to you. One of these will happen. And if it's the former, you will live a rough life as your work will steel energy from all other facets of life. So, work is an absolute necessity. Now, relationships are also a necessity for living a sane and healthy life. So, this needs to be in place as well. So, you have to both work and create relationships. And since life purpose won't take anymore time or energy away from you than a regular job will, it's in your best interest to make your work be the thing you already love. But right now, you're probably getting an intuitive sense that you need relationships more. So, focus on that and setting up the infrastructure to have good friends and a healthy social life. Your intuition will tell you what you need to focus on next. I think that's the reason why you're asking the question in the first place. You want confirmation that it's okay to pursue relationships/friendships? Is that correct?

Thank you! The thing to realize is that this issue has not too much to do with sexuality itself. But it plays itself out on the stage of sexuality. And these types of fetishes, can often indicate where there is an issue... where that issue may only slightly relate back to the sexual. And this has been one of the most difficult things for me to transcend. And I've been working on this for years. So, I've come to realize how and why these patterns come up when and how they do. And I can use these signs and symptoms as a road map to be sure that I'm going in a fruitful direction relative to my inner work. So, the solution is to integrate both the masculine and feminine side and own whatever is there and repress none. And when this happens, both aspects can be in perpetual embrace and intercourse with one another, conceiving and giving birth to ever more exalted intonations of the self as the more these two aspects are in intercourse the deeper the connection is to that which has been unconscious. So, is like Yin and Yang just flowing together naturally. And it is a way to tap into hidden waiting potentials and to reclaim aspects of ourselves. This is referred to as the "sacred child" in alchemy. Now, most often women will have a predominantly feminine energy where men will have a predominantly masculine energy. But there are exceptions, and absolutely everyone has both. So, it's a bit like the story of the phoenix, where the old phoenix disintegrates into ash only to be born from that same ash as a more exalted form of its previous self.

There is a desire for natural feminine vulnerability that the fantasy give a really intense and dysfunctional version of... because that vulnerability can't be felt in healthier ways due to feminine repression and Animus possession. But to be noted, you are the one that is 100% in control of the fantasy. So, it sets up a situation where you can both feel out of control and vulnerable while also simultaneously being in control of everyone in the fantasy: yourself and the men. So, every character in the fantasy is you. And you are the ring master for all of them. I have had this same fetish before, that has now given way to healthier sexual fantasies that are still based around vulnerability... but not in a dysfunctional way. So, there is actually more to it than this. A lot of it comes from internalizing misogyny, and a desire to be punished for your womanhood that has been subtly indoctrinated into you over time. And because of the way that the media sees women and their value as being mostly a type of pleasure giver and pretty decorum for a man, this solidifies this problem. So, when you are being raped in the fantasy there is an association between dehumanization, masochism, and sexual pleasure. And feeling like you derive pleasure only from the man receiving pleasure from your body. And that you're fulfilling your purpose of being a sexual object by supplying that pleasure to men who don't respect your humanity. And in that fantasy, you can just be thing and you can feel like you've successfully embodied your only purpose as a passive object for male pleasure by having your boundaries totally breeched and submitting yourself to utter dehumanization. And it being able to submit to the utter annihilation of your humanity, there is a release and a feeling of vulnerability that you're unable to feel in a healthy feminine way. So, instead of a natural blooming, there is a prying open and breaking. And the pain of being pried open is something that you've come to associate pleasure with... even if you know that it would be very unpleasant if it really happened. Society hates the feminine. So, those with low self-esteem cannot express healthy feminine vulnerability or receptivity. So, that aspect gets relegated to the shadow and comes out in these fantasies of extreme domination of the masculine over the feminine. So, this is what happens when a feminine woman is in resistance to her femininity and her masculinity at the same time. The masculine side becomes a domineering tyrant over the feminine side, and you succumb to Animus possession. So, in the fantasy it is your unconscious/rejected masculine side running amok in the shadow and dominating your suppressed feminine side that is hiding away in shame and fear. This is what Animus possession is. And the shadow masculine can be very violent and rejoice in the suffering of the feminine. So, it's important to see that you are the men in the fantasy as well.

Thanks. Although, I noticed earlier that he was doing it to someone else in another thread. So, he may just be a troll that goes around randomly trying to stir the pot. My interpretation is that his attack was pointed toward me specifically, as he had done it before and wasn't doing it to anyone else at the time. So, I may have been mistaken and just given him what he wants if he's just a troll, which sucks if I fed into that trolling. But either way, it's a good practice for me in terms of reacting when someone is challenging or disrespecting me.

It has to do with understanding paradigms and how they work. So, think of a paradigm as being a platform that has an entire perspective to it, that fits together and has consistency. And each paradigm is mutually exclusive with no mincing with other paradigms. So, here is a contradicting view, that is true depending on which paradigm you're looking at. So, from the absolute paradigm, everything is perfect and nothing needs to be fixed... or could ever be fixed. But from the relative paradigm, there is no such thing as perfection as everything is inherently flawed based on the human conception of perfection. So, there is always room for improvement. So, it is true that everything is 100% perfect and imperfect. Or another example, is from a conversation I was having on the forum a few weeks ago. From the scientific paradigm, race is an illusion because it's just based upon how much sunlight our ancestors got, and there's no clear declinations between races like we understand them to be. But from the subjective paradigm, race is a reality that we as people can and do notice. And there is racism that effects people's lives, despite the fact that scientifically, race is an illusion. So, if you say "race is an illusion, therefore racism does not and cannot exist"... this is mincing paradigms and using a truth from one paradigm to invalidate a truth from another paradigm. So, basically, using truth to lie to one's self... or others. So, the key is have a really clear idea what the paradigm that you're using is and having the discernment to not lie to yourself or edit out truth based upon logical contradictions with another paradigm. So, accurate perception of truths (not ideas or opinions) is key to being able to have this type of discernment.

I agree with what Space said. As a famous RSD guy, he's mostly going to get with easy hook-up women who are looking for status through being picked up by him for who he is. But the vast majority of Orange women aren't like that. Orange generally, is all about meritocracy based upon relatively arbitrarily chosen standards. So, when I was in Orange, my meritocracy wasn't based upon money or status. I didn't think those were very important at all, and I considered those things as indicators of being a boring person who had everything handed to them. So, these were signifiers of weakness and boringness relative to my Orange hierarchy. My Orange values were based upon intelligence, being interesting, being kind, having good taste in art and moves, worldliness, struggle, etc. So, these were my hierarchies of the time and how I determined who was valuable and who wasn't. So, even though it's shallow in terms of always thinking of things in terms of value and hierarchy, not every woman's hierarchy will be the same. But the women who are most available to a famous RSD guy, are going to be women who are Orange whose hierarchy is all about money, status, looks, etc. So, to him, that's his conception of what a woman is. All other women are irrelevant to him as they aren't in his dating pool. So, it has a lot to do with like attracting like. Since the RSD guys are all about looks, status climbing, and the mainstream conception of social currency, they're going to attract the women that mirror these values.

I generally agree. I do try to keep the peace where I can. But I was always a bad one in the past to let people go over my boundaries unchecked and not stand up for myself. So, in recent years, if someone directly disrespects me, I will push back on them a bit and maybe clown on them a little bit. It's a bit of shadow work for me, as I get to be a bit more confrontational. And Strikr had made some not so nice comments to me before that I ignored. So, I figured since this is a continuation of that, that it was appropriate to put him in check.

So, you'll stop reading my "bs" when I use my mouth instead... meaning that you want to continue reading my "bs" if it's coming from my butt. That's a very confusing insult... Well, at any rate, I'm sorry that I bother you so much. Maybe you should just focus more on what you're doing, instead of being so wrapped up in what I'm doing.

If it bothers you, don't read it.

I tend to share in whichever way I feel is going to give the most clarity to the person I'm talking to. So, I'll occasionally do a really short response, if I feel that it's more helpful. But for the most part, I think that being as colloquial, thorough, and nuanced as possible is going to help more people. Do my long posts bother you?