Emerald

Sometimes seeking out older romantic partners can stem from a desire for stability and to be taken care of. This dynamic can arise if we didn’t get a lot of support from our family as children and had to grow up too soon. When I was 20, I suddenly developed a really intense attraction to men who were in their mid 30s and early 40s. And looking back, I can recognize in it a desire to be supported and taken care of by someone more stable and mature than me. I had been independent very young and I had to weather many storms without support. I haven’t lived with either of my parents since age 16. And I also began working then. And at the time, life was a pretty constant battering ram of stressful situations all tied together with dental floss. So, there arose a pretty intense attraction to middle aged men who symbolized maturity to me. The catch 22 was that any middle aged man who was interested in dating a 20 year old woman would be immature… by definition. And he would have had his own selfish sexual motives for wanting to be with me. The same would be true for any middle aged woman seeking to be with a man in his first few years into adulthood. So, my advice would be to be careful. You probably don’t want a mid-30s woman trying to relive her youth through you.

At this point, she would certainly lose in the primary and the general. Undoubtedly that’s the case right now. But her message is one of economic populism put in simple straightforward terms that the average American can understand. She speaks to people’s pain and positions her presidential campaign as a powerful solution to that pain. And if she is able to harness the emotional current that she’s attempting to harness and best Biden in the primary (which is a long shot)… then I’d be quite confident that she could beat the Republican nominee in the general.

Yes, I’m certain of that as well. And in my experience, there is a huge emotional/spiritual component to physical ailments.

But in this case it’s the most pragmatic to your goals of forward movement up the spiral to support her. There are practical benefits to supporting her that extend far beyond her simply securing the nomination. That would be nice, of course. But it’s not necessary for her to win for her campaign to wake a lot of people up and to have an impact on the Overton Window. Similarly with Bernie. He never became president. But his campaign was a MASSIVE success because it politically woke so many people up… including myself. And Marianne can have a similar effect if those who already agree with her message support her. The primary is not really the time to be super focused on electability…. for two reasons. Number one, since Biden (at this point) is likely a shoo-win, there’s no downside to supporting her. Biden will likely get the nomination anyway. Number two, if she miraculously is able to beat Biden in the primary (which are slim odds)… then I’d be pretty confident she could also beat the Republican nominee in the general because it would mean that her message is so popular with the American people that it overcame the odds.

I’ve been saying this since I discovered Midjourney. My formal education is in Fine Art and Art Education with minor in Art History. And before the camera was invented most artists were just doing the camera’s job. And when the camera came out, about half of painters switched to photography. But the other half had to question more deeply what painting and art meant to them. And this created a lot of expansion in Art philosophy and in many different art styles emerging as a result. Basically, all of pop art and the New York school… Dadaism, Surrealism, and non-respresentational art (abstract) all arose as a consequence of the invention of the camera and the question “What is the value of art if a machine can do it and do it better?” And now, artists must face this same question on a much deeper level.

I totally agree with all of this.

I think she’s doing brilliantly so far. But what must be understood about the comments around sickness being an illusion is the context. Back in the 80s during the AIDS crisis, Marianne Williamson was a major player in providing support when few were. She even created a non-profit called Project Angel Food to donate/deliver food to those suffering from AIDS when most people were treating them like lepers. And this was a time when there was no treatment for AIDS. And the government wasn’t taking it seriously because it mostly impacted gay men. So, it was very unlikely that the Raegan White House would fund the medical establishment to put resources to finding treatments for HIV/AIDS. So, many of her quotes about illness being an illusion that sound akin to faith healing come from that time. And she was hosting events where everyone would pray for medicine and pray for healing.

Says who? If you run a campaign on economic populism, then you’re likely to be successful. It doesn’t matter what that person’s background is. People will ignore everything else if you speak directly to their pain and pose yourself as the solution to it. Trump’s primary appeal in 2016 was that he was an outsider that talked about draining the swamp and bringing back jobs. He used demagoguery to do this, and he was insincere. But that’s likely what put him over the top. He focused on how bad America is now and empathized with people… and he posed his presidency as the solution by saying how he’ll make America great again. Bernie’s appeal was similar in that he talked about the corruption in the system and how people are struggling. And he proposed Medicare for All and ending corporatism to get rid of the forces that make the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. And Bernie was very popular and built himself a whole movement, despite being a self-proclaimed “Democratic Socialist” when a high percentage of Americans are very turned off by anything labeled “Socialism”. And Marianne is now angling herself similarly with just as many resonant substance-based criticisms of the system. The difference is that she’s using simpler language. And her message is one that positions itself as Capitalistic… and wanting to catch up to other advanced Capitalist countries. And she’s framing the issue as a morality and love issue which will resonate with many average folks. But she is speaking to people’s pain in the language they understand it in. So, the smears around her being some crazy crystal lady will eventually fall mostly on deaf ears for many who now see her in that light.

She’s definitely angling her presidential run in a way that most Americans can relate to. It will be interesting to see if she’s successful with that.

Then what are you worried about? Just vote Marianne in the primary since her platform aligns more with your policy proposals in your conscious politics series. If you’re sure that Americans won’t vote for her and that Biden is a shoo-win for the nomination, then there’s no downside for you voting for the candidate that most aligns with your level of consciousness. Don’t be cowardly. This is (at the very least) a brilliant opportunity to get people talking about issues that matter to the average person.

It is quite frustrating because women don’t get listened to about what we find attractive about men when many of us are very well aware. The notion is that we just say things that we like on paper but don’t actually respond to those qualities. But this is a total mis-framing of the nature of female sexuality because women aren’t as attracted to parts and qualities as much as we are attracted to the man as a whole person… and as greater than the sum of his parts. Usually when women are attracted to a part of a man, it’s because it is a part within the greater whole of his personality. And because we resonate with the whole man, we like the part. Not the other way around. And a man with the exact same qualities (or better) may not excite any interest at all in a given woman. So, women are primarily attracted to wholes. And men (in contrast) are primarily being attracted to parts. But men think women are attracted to parts like they are… and so they try to idealize themselves as a collection of positive parts that fit their assumptions about the ideal Masculine. This projects the part-centric mechanics of male sexuality onto female sexuality. And it creates this sense that women are just a pickier version of men, when the mechanics are totally different in reality. But I don’t really see the caricature of Masculinity as demonic. It’s really clear it comes from vulnerable parts. And if I’m in a non-threatened state, I can have compassion. But on the level of lived experience and practical concerns, I see it as irksome and unattractive at best, and politically and physically dangerous at worst. There’s a wide spectrum.

That’s what I mean. If a man’s exhausted, then he’s probably not up for sex. Then the advice of the girl being on top isn’t really a fix here because he’d be engaging when he doesn’t feel like it as a chore for her. The surface level solution here is to set a boundary. But the deeper issue probably comes from her understanding and assumptions about her value as she believes the OP sees her.

My experience with men has been that most of them need a decent amount of time to recover in order for them to be ready to go again. That’s what I’m counting as part of the refractory period. And by ready that doesn’t just mean in terms of energy. It often means in terms of arousal and sexual appetite as well. So, the woman getting on top wouldn’t really solve that issue if the man is in a state of sexual satiety. But either way, it’s important that she doesn’t pressure him into having more sex than he feels comfortable having.

I think he means that she wants sex before the refractory period is complete.

Now, she may just have a high sex drive. In which case, you’ll have to be clear about your boundaries and not feel too obligated to give her what she wants all the time. But it’s also possible that she’s expressing herself that way because women are often consciously or subconsciously under the impression that all/most men have a super high sex drive and care about sex most of all. This is really common in media tropes. And there are plenty of men who fit the bill or seem to fit the bill. So, because of this, many women genuinely believe that men are only capable of valuing women for sex… and that women have no other type of value beyond their sexuality in men’s eyes. So, hyper-sexual behavior in women can often be a bid for love. It wouldn’t be unheard of for a woman to behave in a hyper-sexual way to try to entertain/please the man in a bid to be valued, needed, and loved. And this conditioning can go deeper than she’s consciously aware of. So, even if you say you’re not feeling it right now… she may not believe you (because of her views about men being hyper-sexual and only caring about sex). And furthermore see may see sex as her only outlet to be valued by you, even if that’s totally not the case. And if this is true for her, you may tell her that you just want to cuddle and reassure her that you love and care for her even when you’re not having sex. It could be the most important thing for her to hear, if she can receive it.

Great interview to watch for anyone who wants to get a feel for Marianne’s political stances.

I just finished reading the book “How Fascism Works” And I wanted to share the main components of Fascism… mostly because it can be important to spot these warning signs. And most people don’t know the full scope of what Fascism entails when asked to define it. Humanity has had 49 genocides in the past 50 years. So, education is one of the best preventatives. So, here are the components of Fascism… The Mythic Past - Fascists believe in an idealized mythic past for their nation. And they view ethnicity and nation as the primary identity. And with the Mythic Past, it’s the notion that WE used to be great… but then THEY came along and destroyed OUR greatness. And WE will defeat THEM and be great again. Propaganda - It’s difficult to sell hatred and genocide to the majority of people. So, they cloak the goals of ethnic cleansing and genocide in idealistic propaganda. They might sell their movement as necessary for achieving popular goals like freedom. Anti-Intellectual - In Fascism, the the Mythic Past is the foundation. But this myth is an idealized and untrue imagining of the past. And so, this puts Fascism directly at odds with expertise and higher education. So, it is common for Fascists to spread the notion that institutions of higher learning are propaganda machines that are designed to undermine the “truth” of the Mythic Past. Unreality - Dovetailing off the last point… reality and truth is very threatening to Fascism because Fascism is rooted in myth. So, the Fascist must go to war with truth itself to preserve that myth. And so empiricism is something Fascist movements seek to undermine. They try to simultaneously give the sense that there is no such thing as truth… just differing opinions… while also claiming that their mythos is the only truth. It depends on which suits them in the moment. Hierarchy - Fascism subscribes to the notion of absolute hierarchies to justify inequalities. It has the notion that WE are superior to THEM based mostly off of the mythic foundation. Though Fascists might also use cherry-picked science and use Social Darwinism to add a more rational facade to their emotional attachment to the belief in absolute hierarchy. And this gets used as the justification for why WE get to exploit/harm/kill THEM. Victimhood - A big part of Fascist propaganda is the convince the dominant ethnic group that they are victims or potentially victims of minority ethnic groups. So, Fascism constructs collective victim narratives about how the other groups are stealing all the jobs, leeching off the system… and pillaging and raping… and otherwise degrading the society. Law and Order - Dovetailing off of the victim narrative constructed in Fascism, there is also the promise to “restore” law and order and end the victimization caused by THEM. And this is typically one of the selling points of paternalistic authoritarian Fascistic leaders to say “Hey… you may not agree with some of my views. But you need me to take control to protect you from THEM” Sexual Anxiety - The notion of the patriarchal familial ideal is central to the Fascistic mythos where the authoritarian father rules over the land, and the man rules over his wife and children. And the notion of absolute hierarchy also comes into play with this. So, one of the ways to malign THEM is to spread narratives that the men of the other ethnicities/nationalities are savage rapists looking to defile OUR pure unspoiled women. This also comes with an underlying fear of OUR women preferring THEIR men and spoiling the bloodline with miscegenation. Rural over Urban (Sodom and Gomorrah) - Fascism tends to present its rhetoric as very pro-rural and very anti-urban. This is because cities are more cosmopolitan and diversity is the norm there. And that weakens people’s susceptibility to Fascist rhetoric against THEM. But in rural areas, there are very many of US and very few of THEM. And it becomes easier to malign THEM to people who don’t interact much with THEM. So, Fascist rhetoric presents cities as cesspools of miscegenation and degeneracy. And the false notion is floated that the funding for cities comes primarily out of the pockets of those in rural areas (often framed as a handout for THEM), when in fact the opposite is the case as tax dollars taken in from cities tend to flow outward. Arbeit Macht Frei - Arbeit Macht Frei means “Work shall set you free” in German. And this motto was on the signage of many concentration camps. In Nazi Germany, one of the reasons they gave for rounding up Jews is the notion that Jews have lots of money that they didn’t properly work for and essentially stole from the hard-working German people. This rhetoric eventually became the rationale for why Jews needed to be sent to labor camps. So, a lot of Fascist rhetoric frames the situation as THEY are getting special handouts and privileges that THEY didn’t work for, while WE got everything by the merits of OUR work and the sweat of OUR brow. And there is also a push to punish THEM for stealing from US. I hope this is helpful to all who want to learn about Fascism.

There are certainly women with self-esteem issues. And they can manifest as excessive make-up. But women, as a whole, are pretty aware that there are huge problems with trying to fit some prescription of the ideal Feminine... even if they are wearing lots of make up for self-esteem reasons. Women as a whole are generally very leery about pressures to fit traditional gender norms because of women’s lib and because a woman loses a lot more than she wins if she succeeds at fitting to those norms. But men as a whole, haven’t had a men’s lib and many have the illusion that fitting the image of the ideal Masculine is what will validate their lives.

You don’t actualize yourself by pretending to be the ideal Masculine image. Actualization comes from the inside. You can only develop what is already there.

Yes! All of this is exactly right. Many men think they have dating problems or women problems or Masculinity problems. But they don’t have any of these problems. They have Shame problems that disguise themselves as problems with dating, women, and Masculinity. And they try to throw pick up at it. Or they try to self-improve in other ways. They try to fit their image of the ideal man. And it turns into a constant attempt to fix and become perfectly Masculine to absolve themselves of feelings of Shame. And culture tells men that being admired by men and desired by women will absolve them of that deep Shame and validate their existence. And so, they seek to become the ideal Masculine image in their mind. And they seek the approval and validation of women. They view women as holding the key to their redemption and existential validity. And when a man isn’t as successful with women as he feels he needs to be in order to be valid, all of those feelings of internal Shame turn to outward bitterness and blame. And women are scapegoated as the sole impediment to him resolving his own Shame.

This is a silly comparison. Google isn’t going to ban your account for a picture of a cut finger. The reason why they banned the guy’s account is because they thought he had child porn on it.

How do you know it doesn’t have any depth if you haven’t watched it? I posted it 30 minutes ago, and you replied 17 minutes ago… and it’s a 1.5 hour video

No… romance is just one vehicle for emotional connection among many vehicles. Emotional connection is much broader than romance. And I find other vehicles more effective… like having deep conversation and spending time doing day to day things together. Romance is nice here and there. Like, “Surprise! I brought you some flowers and some lingerie.” And it can add some spice to the connection. But if it happens frequently, it loses its charm. The biological reality is that constant romance and excitement is not sustainable in a long term relationship. Out bodies are wired to get those excited feelings only in the first three months. Then it subsides to something deeper and more gratifying… but also not as exciting. Relationship is very ordinary like that.

She’s not really pitting herself against Biden in her rhetoric. And she’s said that, if she doesn’t win, she will do everything in her power to make sure Trump or DeSantis aren’t elected. So, I don’t anticipate that being an issue. I’m fact, she may have a Bernie Sanders effect and inspire some non-voters to get out to the polls for her, who may stay for Biden.

Great political ad!