Emerald

If he still thinks the same way, he believes the same about women too and that society has suppressed this fact. He's very pro-polyamory in general and thinks of monogamy as an attachment. So, it sounded like he might have been using a double standard. But if he still thinks the same way, I don't think he is.

I recommend NOT avoiding the thoughts and emotions related to men. So, if you feel afraid that you might be bi-sexual just let the feelings hit you. Your dad might judge you, but you don't have to judge yourself. Just let yourself experience whatever is trying to happen.

You're mixing together judgment and discernment. Judgment is attached and wants to invalidate and demonize your manager for being manipulative and brainwashing people. But discernment is detached and will just tell you that she's being manipulative and trying to brainwash the employees. If it's a fact, it's a fact. That's calling a spade a space. Calling her the manipulative manager bitch and hating on her and invalidating her existence, shows that you are perceiving things with the distortion of attachment to the way things SHOULD be. So, your judgment will keep you from perceiving what's true. This is why judgment creates a barrier to Truth. But it is fine to recognize what she's doing as something you don't want to be involved with. This is necessary for being able to make decisions. But you don't need to demonize her to make better decisions.

The key here is to distinguish between judgment and discernment. Judging is not necessary, but discernment DEFINITELY is. Judgement is all about determining the validity of something. And because everything is valid, it only gets in the way. So, when we condemn something or say that something shouldn't exist, we are judging. But with discernment, we are just trying to call a spade a spade in a way that the human intellect can grasp and that can be communicated to others. This is very important to be able to be able to call a spade a spade for practical functioning, otherwise we leave ourselves open to making bad decisions.

There have been times when this was an apt analogy for what the anticipation lead to...

You're welcome. But I have to be honest when I say, (generally speaking) that 'straight to the point' stuff is really boring and unsatisfying for women. Chances are, you're going to put your lady to sleep because you're not giving her any intellectual stimulation and you're not really optimally emotionally stimulating her either. Women don't get aroused with their body until their minds and emotions are stimulated. But the way that intellectual/emotional stimulation happens is to guess what's going on in the mind of the guy she's attracted to and how he thinks and feels about her. That's why a good sign that a woman likes you is if she asks what you're thinking about. So, by employing a bit of mystery and ambiguity, she will appreciate that a lot more because she gets to figure you out and pick up on your intentions in a subtle way. So, a man saying "I like getting straight to the point", is the equivalent of a woman saying "I like to skip the sex and go straight to the cuddling." And if you're nice (like most women in these matters), you'll just kind of go along with it and do what she likes. Plus, even if she did tell you that's what she wants, it would ruin the mystery by default. So, she's really hoping that you will just get it. And she will NEVER tell you this is what she wants because telling your ruins the guessing game and the tension and anticipation it creates.

That's a pretty good analogy. Like I said it's all about context and anticipation.

For me, context and anticipation matter a ton. So, if I know that a guy likes me right off the bat and it's obvious right away, it takes all the tension away. And I need tension to build up strong emotion towards him, which is necessary for me to want to be with him romantically. And if he comes off as interested right away, I don't get to wonder and fantasize about that moment when the tension of not knowing his feelings or intentions gives way to intimacy. Plus, if a guy leads right away with his sexuality and interest in me, it makes me feel like he's not very selective with his mates and (perhaps) that he doesn't have very good self control. And because feeling like he wants me in particular is one of the biggest aphrodisiacs, if I feel like he's approaching a lot of girls just like he approached me it just takes all the fun out of it because it takes the specialness out of it. So, it's all about tension, anticipation, and mystery and wondering if I've gotten into his head like he has mine. And I would imagine that most women are similar.

But we're not talking about subjective opinions here or what type of tea you like. We're talking about what you OBJECTIVELY know and don't know about reality. So this very statement illuminates the truth in what I said before. You've basically just said in your statement that you take the 'realness' of your interpretations on faith, without any proof because you don't know anything. And you know what, that the first thing you've said that's absolutely true and honest. That's what human beings have to do in order to function in this reality that they literally know nothing about. They have to create a premise based upon their past experiences and things they've learned in this reality. They have to exercise faith that when they're walking that the floor won't disappear underneath them. And they'd do well to practice a relative belief in science as a perspective and tool for practical functioning. But when you're grounding yourself in what's true, these faith-based beliefs (including the beliefs that science works and that the floor won't disappear underneath you) have to be recognized for what they are. They are only beliefs based upon what you've noticed in the past and learned to be true. But the past doesn't exist. It may have never even existed. All you have of reality is the present moment, which is a non-point. And everything you've ever experienced may have simply been an illusion. And you'll NEVER know. Edit: I won't be able to come back to this for a while because I have to film a video. But I'd be happy to see what you have to say.

Why does reasoning come after? Is that a belief? And how can you be so sure you know it's true, when you don't even know why you think that?

Now, look at this statement and tell me how you know it's true.

He actually isn't hating on science. He's just saying that science is not the ultimate perspective. Let me put it to you this way: Do you think the scientists that work in the Matrix, can use science to realize that they're in the Matrix? The answer is no, if they live in a perfect Matrix like we do. That's because they are studying reality from within the system of reality. They have no ability to get an outside vantage point. So, science is incredibly useful within the illusion. It's great at observations of how things work, which can then be used to invent things within the illusion. And its a hallmark of human development that's allowed us to thrive as a species in many regards. Having said that, it's horrible for recognizing the illusion for what it is. That can only be achieved in the firsthand experience, which science is a part of but is not outside of. But you don't have to believe me or Leo or anyone about this. Just be able to separate belief from things that you actually know about reality. And once you can separate the wheat from the chaff, you'll realize that it's all chaff. And it will be in your best interest at that point to realize that you're in the ultimate blindspot. You know no more about the actual nature of reality than you did as a newborn baby. That's true no matter how deep your scientific knowledge and understanding goes. So, if you are in your living room, you don't know if your bedroom actually exists. For all you know, everything could cease to exist every time you stop perceiving of it. All you'l ever have of reality is your little bubble of reality and its consistency of patterns and understanding. This gives the feeling that there is a continuity and 'realness' to it. But for all you know, it could be a complete and total illusion. And you can never know one way or another. All you'll ever truly know about reality is the awareness of the present moment, which is a non-point because the present moment has no set duration. So, all you know is the fodder of the mind, which is just sounds and images floating around in your field of perception. But to boil it down to basics; science is the wrong paradigm for examining questions of an existential nature.

Turquoises are genuinely in touch with their emotions and are naturally empathetic to the suffering of others, and are humane as a result. So, it doesn't have anything to do with "reason" as reason is a function of the mind and empathy is a function of the heart. So, if you are conscious of the suffering in a really palpable way, you will naturally not want to contribute to it because the suffering of others is LITERALLY your suffering. You can FEEL it. It's a function of the heart which is superior to the mind in these matters. But it also won't make any logical sense to contribute to the killing/torture animals when it can be avoided by eating other things. So, it's not like the mind won't play its part. But don't look to the head for understanding. That will bypass the emotional awareness that you need to become more conscious. It's easy to hide away from your emotions in your head and be like, "Well, technically plants are alive too. So, why is it worse to kill animals?" But that's just the mind intellectually bypassing the awareness of the emotions using reductionism and logic. You'd be essentially using the truth to lie to yourself. If you look (and really look without retreating into the mind), you will FEEL the difference between killing an animal and killing a plant. And those feelings are valid and should be listened to. The mind may tell you otherwise to keep you in homeostasis though. It's good at rationalizing things away and creating blindspots that keep us in our comfort zones.

You should do a gaming channel if it's what you're really passionate about. Your emotions should tell you what's right for you. Don't feel obligated to bypass things that you're genuinely interested in because they are "low consciousness." Not everything has to center around "high consciousness" things. In fact, notoriously "low consciousness" things can be done in a conscious way, and "high consciousness" things can be done in an unconscious way. Don't bypass your genuine interests.

She probably won't refuse. But I guess the answer is not to do anything that's going to make you uncomfortable. If you're pre-occupied with that worry, you won't really be able to let go and enjoy the intimacy. So, because you probably want to have a sexual experience with her to be in the moment and enjoy it, and because you probably will be too worried to let go and enjoy it if you don't know her STD status, then it makes sense not to do it.

When I was dieting and exercising to lose weight after my pregnancies, I weighed myself first thing in the morning every single morning. I always did this after using the bathroom and prior to eating or drinking anything. It was super motivating to see that I was losing a few fractions of a pound per day. And it didn't take me long to lose all the weight. The first time I was even able to get down to 118 from my max pregnancy weight of 195. The second time I went from a max weight of 195 (again) and got it down to like 122. Now, I'm like 130 because I haven't been paying attention to my weight. So, I need to get back on track with an exercise regiment and get back to paying attention to what I'm eating and how much.

I think the not taking dating advice from women thing can be generally true. Most women are told a lot of mixed messages about what they should and shouldn't want. So, it's a very difficult knot to untangle. And even when you untangle it, it takes a lot of bravery to admit to those things because there's always someone there trying to use it to demonize or oppress. That said, I do know what I want, and I imagine that most women work at least somewhat similarly. So, I think that it's important to listen to female perspectives on what they are interested in and how an attraction actually comes about from the firsthand experience. The PUA guys will tell you what works in a very specific kind of situation. But they won't necessarily understand the firsthand experience of how it works or why it works. You can only get 'what works' from them. So, to take advice only from other men on dating women is a little foolish. And I can tell by looking at it that most men who are taking the advice will get it all wrong. But I understand why they only cover what works in particular situation. They basically boil down female attraction so that it becomes slightly more actionable to spark an attraction in a woman. But I can tell you that almost all the advice I've heard on the topic of how to attract a woman, would leave me (personally) just not very interested. I require a lot more platonism and ambiguity to build up the tension necessary to create an attraction powerful enough for me to really swoon for that guy.

I would express to her your concerns and be really honest. But do so in a way that emphasizes that it's just your paranoia and not meant in a way that shames her for her past. Then, let her know that it would just put your mind at ease if she did that, and that you want to be able to let go of that worry when you're intimate with her. She will probably understand and not take it personally. I was worried about that before I lost my virginity and later relaxed a little with it when I became intimate with my long term partners. I think it's really common, and she probably has had similar worries in the past. But you know it is better safe than sorry. And you'll probably not want concerns like that circulating around in your mind, because it might ruin the experience.

Who exactly would benefit by pushing that narrative? If it were some processed Cocoa company, then the raw Cacao companies that they're trying to 'beat out' by conducting such a study would be able to avoid it by beginning to process their Cacao. But I looked it up and it appears that the study was funded by the Brazilian government. And they found that 98% of Raw Cacao sourced in Brazil contained a significant amount of Mycotoxins and the fungi that create those Mycotoxins. So, if anything, they stand to lose something by conducting that study as I'm sure they make a lot of money in taxes off of Cacao export. But even ancient peoples in South America soaked and roasted their Cacao. They didn't consume it raw. So, it's not a new thing. I trust that they knew a bit more about these things than modern raw foodists. Also, human beings are part of nature and cannot actually go against it even if we tried. So, given the fact that all human societies have cooked their food, it means that cooking is natural for us. Choosing to eat a raw diet is also natural for us. Eating meat is natural for us. Going Vegan is natural for us. Basically, every diet that will sustain human life is natural to us. Human beings are what I call "adaptovores". They eat whatever they can eat. And once food is abundant enough and a variety of food is possible through export, they can choose to eat more ethically. So, I choose to err on the side of caution, and only eat Cacao here and there in small amounts. It's not like Cacao is some miracle food that must be consumed to stay healthy. There are plenty of other raw foods with similar or better benefits and none of the drawbacks.

Be careful with Cacao, and only eat it in moderation. On the packaging for it you'll see that it's not recommended for pregnant women because it can cause birth defects, because of the presence of Mycotoxins. I'll paste a little information below that I found about Cacao a while back. "Whilst it may seem that raw cacao is the sure ‘go to’ choice, there is a grey area that shouldn’t be ignored. According to the National Confectioners Association (US based), the raw and un-roasted form of cacao, which lacks the heating process, makes the beans more susceptible to bacteria and toxic contamination. This happens because any heating and roasting process will destroy bacteria. Over half the microbes that contribute to fermentation naturally create mycotoxins. Mycotoxins are fungi that contaminate food and are unseen to the naked eye. When the roasting stage is removed, like it is with raw cacao, the mycotoxins remain present. Alfatoxin and ochratoxin are examples of mycotoxins and according to renowned nutritionist Georgia Dind have the following effects: • Neurotoxic (destroys nervous tissue) • Immunosuppressive (suppresses immune function) • Genotoxic (causes genetic mutations) • Carcinogenic (cancer causing) • Teratogenic (causes birth defects)"

Huge swaths of the population are becoming more conscious since right after the 2012 shift, and those who are not becoming more conscious in that way are reacting against it strongly. And the shadows are rising and taking hold of those who aren't becoming conscious, bringing light to that which has previously been swept under the rug for those who are becoming more conscious. This is why there are an increasing number of Trumpers, Incels, MGTOWs, Red Pillers, climate change deniers, misogynists, defenders of crony capitalism, hyper-rationalists, white supremacists, Alt-righers, and anti-feminine pseudo-intellectuals (like Jordan Peterson). They are walking examples of the collective shadow. Then, there are also those who stay stuck in neutrality because neutrality had worked in the past, and they created an ideology around always taking the middle ground. So, they get swept into unconsciousness and the shadows are taking hold of them too. And the shadow of humanity have taken hold in these groups, BECAUSE we are becoming more conscious. And the defenders of the status quo are resisting that consciousness with so many buzz words and ideologies. And this acute emergence of resisters and status quo defenders lay bare in gruesome detail, the ugliness which has always been there underneath all the niceties of society. And now, like turning over so many rotting logs, it makes it uncomfortable to be a person who is aware... which in turn begets even more (unpleasant) awareness. But many of those who are becoming aware are largely silent, because they know resisters to consciousness will jump down their throats and call them names. So, the loud voices of the resisters to consciousness, drown out the voices of those who are becoming conscious. But that doesn't meant that they aren't there. They are, in fact, a larger percentage of the population than the defenders of the status quo. So, it isn't just people on Actualized. These are just people who are conscious enough to see what's happening around them. So, consciousness is coming whether its unpleasant or not. And consciousness is coming in the form of these Shadow people and what we can learn from them and their self-created prisons.

I agree so much. If a guy comes right out with sexual/dating intentions toward me, it's such a turn-off. I much prefer a guy that I know who I have a platonic relationship with, who's maybe slightly flirtatious with me in an ambiguous way. And the more ambiguous the flirtation, the better. I don't want to know that he likes me. That's what builds up the tension is not knowing if he likes me like I like him. And I have to feel like he is selective with his sexual desires, and not just trying to find any woman, and wants me in particular. Self-control with sexuality is very important to me. Then, I can wonder how he feels about me, and get excited at things unspoken. Then I can fantasize about the moment when things finally go in a romantic direction, which builds up more tension. A man who wears his sexuality on his sleeve, takes all the tension out of the situation. So, most of the time, it's too boring to feel anything other than platonic toward them. So, I agree. The person who posted would probably do well to get to know more women in a purely platonic way without needing it to move toward anything sexual. And eventually, someone will be interested in them if they aren't trying too hard.

Oh, I should have mentioned that I'm not sure if I actually ended up in Paris. That's just where I intended to go. I ended up on a pedestrian walkway, which emerged from the gray of the inside of the door that I jumped into. And on that walkway I materialized right up in the girls' faces who were conversing on a bench. They didn't see me, and it was too close for comfort. So, I walked down this road which lead to a bridge that sat near a river, where there was a mountain-like structure that reminded me of something that you'd see in a place like Arizona or New Mexico. It was made out of redish-orangish rock. But I didn't pay any attention to what I was wearing. I was more focused on seeing if the scene had consistency. So, I walked down that road a bit. And I came back, and the scene stayed consistent. It was still the same place I had just come from. But I met up with these three people, one of which is a well-known spiritual teacher. We were on that road and conversing together about some kind of plan. But the funny thing is, I can't really remember what we were talking about; just the general vibe of it. But I've never had any issue with getting back to my body. I've had the opposite issue, where I can't sustain the experience. So, staying out for any extended period of time is highly unlikely. Probably the longest experiences I've had with Astral Projection have lasted less that 30 minutes. But mostly I can only sustain it for a minute or two. So, I wouldn't worry too much about that. But entities can be an issue because they're scary. So, I don't experience them very much anymore because I've done a lot of inner work. At least I believe that's why I don't experience them as much as I used to.

It could be that you feel limited to the current persona that you have. Maybe you feel like you'd be being inauthentic to come across any other way. So, I would focus toward creating an understanding of yourself as being competent and and normal, and building up a new persona that reflects that. And be willing to bluff a bit. The thing that separates the average person from a person who is needy, is just the way they come across. Most people have crippling insecurities. But on some, it's more obvious. So, to get past it, you might even try creating an alter-ego of sorts. This is essentially what teenagers do when they create their identity. And if they do so in a healthy way, they will be able to fit in. But if they don't create a persona that has the ability to blend and look normal, they will run into problems So, that's probably what's brought you to where you are now. You've not created a persona that's well-adjusted to the social landscape and its unique challenges. And your self-defeating thought processes keep you trapped in that ill-fitting persona. So, all you have to do is create one that is well-adapted. Then, once you can bring yourself above water with your persona, you can build it up even further in whichever way you want. But the one thing to realize is that ALL personas are created. And you can create your persona any way you want. The sky is the limit. The canvas is yours to paint on. So, paint something new.

Thank you.