Forestluv

@outlandish Yea, China seems primed for a red-level opportunistic takeover. I wonder if China has been licking their chops on this for a while and sense this is their opportunity to strike. McConnell and Pelosi issued strong statements against China adding in there will be consequences of China invades. Yet, Trump refereed to the protests as a “riot” - which plays to China’s narrative that the protestors are a violent mob. Trump’s most measured response was both sides-ism. What I find interesting is that Trump is pissed off at China over failed trade negotiations and entered a trade war that could harm the economy, farmers and his re-election chances. Yet he seems ok when China acts as an authoritarian. He could be using this to put even more harm and stigma onto China. He could frame it that China is doing crooked business with the U.S. AND they are immoral tyrants that harm their own people. Yet Trump compartmentalizes the two - China is an economic adversary, yet a fellow authoritarian. . . .It’s like two schoolyard bullies fighting with each other. One bully says “Hang on while I go kick that nerd’s ass and take his lunch money. I’l be back in five minutes to fight you some more”. The other bully is like “ok, whatever”.

The phrase “just approaching a woman” sounds so innocent. “Gosh, all I did was approach her. . .” It is context dependent. In some situations, approaching a woman could be very romantic. In some situations, approaching a woman could be heroic. In some situations, approaching a woman can be toxic. Try to imagine this from the woman’s POV. Imagine you are an attractive 25 y.o. woman and you have to endure more than 10 unwelcomed sexual advances from men everyday. At work, in restaurants, at parties, while shopping. . . Many of these advances are from creepy guys trying to get laid. Some give you annoying winks, some call you “baby”, some approach you with physical intimidation. Some rub themself on you. Even when you try to show disinterest by moving away, they persist. It feels icky and it happens 10+ times a day. It sucks. Now imagine yourself as this woman walking home after work, similar to the Gillette commercial. There are a group of men catcalling at you and saying you have a nice ass. This feels really uncomfortable to you, so you try to walk by them quickly and just get away from them. One of the men follows you and approaches you saying how cute you are baby - let’s get together and have some fun. .From the perspective of the woman, this situation is clearly toxic masculinity. If I saw this play out, I hope I would have the masculine courage to step in and tell the guy to back off. A question I have for you: can you tell me some of the precautions you take on a daily basis to protect yourself from sexual harassment and assault?

I wouldn’t consider any of those traits to inherently be “toxic masculinity”. Yet I can see in some contexts, something like “being a ruler” can get out of hand and become toxic. Do you think in some situations “taking the lead” or “being a ruler” can be toxic masculinity? Doesn’t it depend on the situation? What if a group of women at my work were organizing a retirement party for one of our co-workers. I notice there are no men in the group, so I decide to insert myself and express masculinity by taking the lead and being a ruler. I tell them we aren’t going to do the party that way. We are going to do it by my lead and rule. No flowers. No sissy farewell cards. No soft music. I want a pool party with lots of booze, drugs, women in bikinis and rock-n-roll music. I’m the masculine man leading and ruling you women and that’s how it is. In this situation, would you say that taking the lead and being a ruler would be toxic?

You have an opportunity here to expand your capacity to love. Yet you would need to acknowledge and let go of some conditioning in your mind and body. It can be uncomfortable, yet it is well worth it. Expanding one’s capacity to love is deeply profound and transformative.

I regularly express masculinity and have never been accused of being toxically masculine. As well, none of my male friends are accused of being toxically masculine. I’m curious what you consider “masculinity in general” to be.

@Dumivid I do home videos - a mix of Hatha, Vinyassa and YIn yoga. I consider kriya as a meditation practice. Yoga classes are not very accessible to me, they are too expensive and I don’t resonate with the group vibe at standard Yoga classes.

Yea. Causation expands into an infinite number of causative inputs and collapses into One - as do all dualities. This is one route to get to One No-thing.

I was in a similar situation and couldn’t re-orient. I learned a lot about myself, yet it was a bumpy emotional ride - a roller coaster at times. If I entered a dating scenario with an agreement to be open, I’d have a good chance of orienting myself. Yet if I’m in a monogamous relationship for months, we develop connection and bonding, and I’m really into her and us - I can’t re-orient. Once that is established, I can’t just shift gears and say “OK, let’s have sex with other people now”. I just can’t do it - especially since it would be likely that she was the only one sleeping with other people. It would completely change the dynamics we had. Some people might see that as a good thing, but not for me - if I felt love and connection with her. I could prolly do it If we were more like sexual play toys with each other or if we start off with an agreement of poly. Yet once I develop a loving monogamous connection, I can’t shift. . . I wish you the best on your endeavor.

♥️ ?

What is a hallucination and what is a non-hallucination. Look around at the colors around you. All hallucinations. There are no colors. There are wavelengths of colorless light that stimulate biochemical reactions in the brain and then the visual cortex creates the hallucination of color. It makes it up. What you see as color could also be hallucinated as smells if those wavelengths of light got routed through the olfactory system. . . Listen to the sounds around you. All hallucinations. Soundless air disturbances that get hallucinated as sound. Those sounds you think exist could be hallucinated as colors if the sensation of soundless air disturbances were routed by the thalamus to the visual cortex. None of that information is objectively “real”. Colors are colorless. Sounds are soundless. Snakes and butterflies hallucinate differently than humans. Each of us is hallucinating whether or not we are on psychedelics. We just assume our sober hallucinations are “real” and psychedelic-induced hallucinations are not real.

@Moreira I’m open to the idea that there was external input with his death, yet I don’t think that necessarily means a coordinated murder plot. That would be a huge risk for law enforcement officials to take. Epstein showed suicidal signs and could have been placed in unbearable conditions. The prison conditions he was under at the the MCC were horrendous. Infested with rats, insects, defecation. Low light, extreme temperatures, lack of sleep etc. I can see how this could be leveraged psychologically by isolating him, limiting his access to a lawyer and telling him all the evidence being released, people turning on him etc - that he is screwed and gonna live the rest of his life suffering or get the death penalty. This is such a radical shift from his previous reality and I could see how that would steer someone toward suicide.

The stakes look really for the people in Hong Kong. If they lose, they will a lot of sovereignty. China is now referring to protestors as demotic terrorists and brought tanks to the border. Protestors shutting down the airport seems like they are desperately reaching out for international support. They are getting international coverage, yet I’m not seeing much support. The extradition bill seems like an obvious power grab that threatens agreed-upon sovereignty of Hong Kong. I’m curious why international leaders haven’t voiced more concern and support for Hong Kong. Hong Kong is an international economic center and travel hub. And it seems like situation to take moral high ground. Are international leaders concerned about damaging Chinese relations and retaliation from China?

There is a mountain of evidence against him, including his own guilty pleas and convictions.

An amazing example of a blue/orange perspective on red. What struck me was when he paused to contextualize Trump’s racism and said “Trump is racist against everyone. He is below racism”. That is a beautiful realization that Trump is below blue-level racism - down into red level opportunism.

Those features do not characterize blue and green along a vertical consciousness scale. Green will have biases and unhealthy expressions. Yet these unhealthy expressions are less intense than red and blue unhealthy expressions. Do you really think Green bullying is on the same level as Blue bullying? Please. Green progressives are considered wimps compared Blue republicans in the U.S. Compare a Bernie Sanders rally to a Trump rally. . . And Cenk Uygur consistently denounces violence and veiled suggestions of violence, even when it is coming from Green. He has emphatically asked viewers not to use violence as a bully technique. In contrast, blue bullying is more extreme and employs suggestions of violence for intimidation and actual violence in more extreme cases. Nearly all hate crime in the U.S is arising from right wing blue. Very little coming from Green progressives.

Again, every stage in Tier1 personalizes, demonizes and blames other stages to varying degrees. Stage red and blue will do it more often and intensely than orange and green. Yet they all do it. That is a core feature of Tier1. And unhealthy Green can resemble blue at times. Just as unhealthy Orange resembles red at times. Green highly values inequality and inclusion, except for those that oppress equality and inclusion. Green can treat those they see as authoritarian and oppressors in unhealthy ways and healthy ways. An example of a healthy way is AOCs short speech reaching out to white supremicists. She acknowledged their pain and invited them back home be loved. As well, some Green initiatives want to fund organizations that help council and de-radicalize white supremicists. These are healthy expressions. Other somewhat healthy expressions include boycotting businesses that have contributed to white supremicists, de-platforming white supremicist groups and putting in white supremicist laws into statute to empower law enforcement to take pre-emptive action. There are also unhealthy expressions, yet the unhealthy expressions pale in comparison to red/blue level unhealthy expression. As well, individuals are mixtures of stages along multiple developmental lines. Every one of the above hosts is a mosaic of different stages along different lines. For simplicity and convenience, we say that they are green-centered.

That does not characterize green. Those features can be found in Green, yet they do not characterize Green. Importantly, EVERY stage in Tier1 demonizes and blames other stages to varying degrees. That is a core component of SD and you cannot remove it for convenience. Green will blame corporate Orange and blue level tribalism/racism/misogynists for the countries ills. That is part of SD. In particular, Green will rally against who they see as oppressors of equality and inclusion. The whole bit about being Unconditionally loving Green parents to Blue oppressor children is complete nonsense and not within SD theory for Tier1. As well, Green has a basic understanding of cultural relativism. They do not have a broad nor deep understanding of relativism. That is yellow.

Not true. A key point in SD is that ALL stages in Tier1 demonize each other to various degrees. It is not until Tier2 that the demonization dissolves. As well, Green frames things as left vs right along a horizontal continuum (as well as moderates on the continuum). Yet there is also a vertical axis of consciousness in Tier1. Fox News is just not on the same level as Majority report. If you can’t see this, you don’t understand SD. However, they are not yellow-centered. Watch the recent interview with Sam Seder and Tom Scocca. They discussed aspects of racism and journalistic integrity that is two full conscious levels higher than FoxNews and a full conscious level higher than mainstream news like CNN. It was much more nuanced. Of course, they also poked fun of Trump supporters and low consciousness tweets of Ben Shapiro - often in condescending ways. As well, they often framed the racism issue in terms of political strategy to win votes and the election. Yet that is par for the course green. I would love to see a tier2 discussion on racism, I just haven’t come across any. I would love to see some tier2 level political videos. Please post some if you have some. That is the whole point of the thread - to post the highest conscious resources and videos. If you don’t think green is high enough, please post some yellow level - rather than complaining about green. And you can’t place binary Us vs Them squarely on the shoulders of the above sources. That is the prevailing construct in America right now. And the above sources often go beyond binary constructs. For example, the above sources are not limited to a simple binary construct. They have a designated category for Orange level corporate democrats as well as categories for moderates, evangelical conservatives, white nationals etc. They have a continuum - they are not restricted to blue level binary.

@Setty A core feature of SD is that individuals are mixtures of multiple stages and that there are multiple lines of development (such as cognitive, emotional, spiritual lines of development). JP likely has some sprinkling of yellow and has had some glimpses of Turquoise. My impression of JP is that he has some blue/orange anchors, major deficiencies in green and resistance to green due to blue/orange anchors. In the first video, he is given a softball question about individualism and he did not take an extreme individualist position. So what. That is not the bar for green or Tier2. He did not express understanding and embodiment of collective conscious. To me, he sounds like a healthy intelligent Blue/Orange level person. Blue strongly values community, so I expect JP not to be an extreme individual. Yet JP does not incorporate any aspects of green-level collective here. To me his underlying influence is a biological and evolutionary sense of collective, which is stage Orange. Richard Dawkins May say something similar. The second and third videos: I actually think JP is pretty good on fairly good on mystical experiences and psychedelics. Regarding psychedelics and therapy, he is excellent from an Orange perspective and I share many of his views on psychedelic therapy regarding their potential, mechanisms of action and precautions for safety. I think JP has a mature view and is an important advocate. Look at the impact he had on Rubin and Shapiro. Rubin opens up about his own psychedelic use and benefits they can offer. Shapiro of all people is open to the idea of psychedelic therapy and benefits when used responsibly and with skill. I believe JP can use his authority in psychology and his psychedelic experience to open doors and shape public discourse. As well, he knows is very familiar with clinical psychedelic research data, he interprets the data correctly and presents it accurately and in the proper context. I give him major props for that. With that said, JP ain’t Turquoise with mystical experiences and psychedelics. Not even close. He has very limited direct experiences with psychedelics and contextualizes it at predominately at blue/green. He has some awareness that post-intellectual stages of consciousness exist, yet he is on that outside looking in. As well, he has very shallow understanding of no duality. And observe how he uses the term “god”. It is weighed down by traditional religious views of god. That is how he is contextualizing it. Compare this with Ken Wilbur. Not even close. . . I’ve done over 100 trips and it is clear to me that JP has a very surface level understanding from a Turquoise perspective. Yet as I mentioned, I think he has an excellent Orange perspective on psychedelics. The video on gay marriage. This video is a great example of JPs blue/orange anchorage. He ain’t Tier2 on this. Using the analogy with fluency, it is sooo obvious JP doesn’t speak Green. He has not embodied and transcended Green in this area. Homosexuality is an absolute softball to incorporate green. Any Tier2 person that has embodied green will not limit themselves to blue and orange frames - which is exactly what JP does. Green is a higher level and a tier2 thinker would prioritize relativism, inclusion, equality, love, relative experience and human bonding over blue and orange level tropes about traditional marriage, family values, children with same-sex parents are probably off than children with a single parent and the biological determination of homosexuality. This is so blue/orange. I think it’s great that he didn’t use derogatory terms and stigmatization, yet I think part of that is due to the interviewers and audience being predominately LGBTQ. Yet he still clearly has a grudgingly air of tolerance, uses subtle code and blue/orange frames. No way is he Tier2 in this area. Yet as I’ve mentioned, I think he can help pull red/blue up to Orange on this issue, yet no further. So I think he has some value in this regard. If you want to see a solid green/yellow psychologist I’d recommend watching Gabor Mate. He also uses Orange, yet in support of Green and Yellow. The difference between Gabor and JP is striking.

That is certainly a dynamic for an empath. By feeling/experiencing that of others, an empath could try to find inner relief by trying to please someone else. I think that would be a very common dynamic. I would say most people (perhaps 80%), have the capacity for empathy at various degrees. For someone far over on the spectrum, empathy becomes fundamental to their orientation. At this pole on the spectrum, an empath doesn’t utilize empathy here and there dependent on conditions. It’s nearly always there guiding the experience and orientation. I consider empathy to be a type of sense or ability, similar to how I would consider intuition and creativity. Undeveloped, immature, traumatized empathy can lead to confused and unhealthy expressions. For example, when I was a kid I was in tune with other people’s feelings. I just sensed it. My mom would be angry and I felt that anger - it was upsetting to me and I wanted relief for both myself and her. I would ask why she was angry and if I could help. She may respond “I’m not angry!!! Leave me alone!!!”. This was confusing to me. I was just a kid. I felt her anger and upset, yet she told me I was wrong and she wasn’t upset. This caused confusion. And it wasn’t just her. I would sense people all around me with empathy and they would deny their feelings - leaving me confused. “I wasn’t embarrassed.”, “I wasn’t afraid”, “I enjoyed the party” and on and on. I was so oriented toward empathy, it didn’t occur to me that people lie about and mask their feelings. As well, I was often told by others that I didn’t feel a certain way or that I shouldn’t feel a certain way and that I should feel a certain way. To most people, this may seem odd and annoying - yet they learn how to play the game and do it themselves to various degrees and understand when others are doing it. Yet to me, it was deeply confusing. It’s a form of gaslighting and has driven me insane at times. As a result, the truth became really important to me. Not just for a functioning relationship, yet also for my sanity. So I can see a dynamic in which an empath places needs/wants/desires of others as their own, to get relief from experiencing negative energy of others. Yet, I would consider this one dynamic of an empath I. Inter-personal relationships, yet not how an empath is defined. An empath is much more expansive than that. That is occurring within a more expansive empath. As well, I would consider that an unhealthy, immature, negatively conditioned dynamic. When that gets resolved and an empath starts to develop their heightened empathic abilities, watch out. It’s a form of magic. It would literally seem paranormal to “normies”. The example of the concert would be for an empath with another empath or a normie. A mature empath can certainly express there feelings, desires, needs etc. No one is better at it than a mature empath. Yet for an immature empath with unhealthy conditioning, it’s very different. As you mentioned, they might feel unworthy/intimidated/confused/reluctant to express their own needs. If they were with another empath, this dynamic might get relieved since the other person, also being an empath, would sense distraught in the other person and want to resolve it. Yet with a narcissist, it gets amplified in the opposite direction and their energy mixes with my own and can become overwhelming. It wouldn’t just be suffering in silence without getting my needs met. I wouldn’t even know what my needs were anymore and I might start thinking I did something wrong and things were my fault. I may feel bad that we were not enjoying the show because of me, yet uncomfortable to express this due to confusion and feeling intimidated by narcissist energy. A narcissist senses this in an empath and preys off of it. This makes things even worse because empaths want openness and expression. I’d be sitting their feeling her sour energy and wanting to shout out “What’s going on? Just tell me what’s going on”. Yet due to unhealthy dynamics, this might not be possible with a narcissist or would open the door to being manipulated and taken advantage of. It’s a really uncomfortable and healthy dynamic. Yet this kind of stuff does not define an empath, it’s just one of many empathic-related dynamics they can be involved in. I’ve also been involved in beautiful, loving, magical empathic-related dynamics as well.

Just something to consider. . . Do you believe that personal responsibility/empowerment is the only factor at play? I.e. that opportunity, success and well-being is 100% determined at the personal level? I think that would be a very difficult opinion to hold. It would require an either / or mentality and disregard for all other factors. Such a position is unreasonable. For example, if someone is born to billionaire parents in a loving, supportive environment with an excellent school system they have easier access to opportunity and success than someone born into poverty, an abusive environment and a shitty school system. It’s not to say that someone in a disadvantaged environment cannot succeed, yet it would be much harder than someone with easy access. This is really straightforward and I can’t imagine how one could support a binary model in which personal responsibility/empowerment is the only factor and 100% determinant, while collective responsibility is a non-factor and 0% determinant. The tendency for a binary thinker would flip to the opposite extreme and say “So you think personal responsibility/empowerment doesn’t matter and everyone would be successful with government assistance”. No. That is not what I’m saying. That is limited to a binary construct: either 100% personal responsibility or 100% government responsibility. To evolve into the next level of consciousness, one would need to let go of a simple binary model and realize some nuance and more complexity. The next level up is that individual consciousness and collective consciousness are BOTH factors. With this higher level view, we can now explore relative degrees that each contribute. For example, perhaps one person says success and well-being is 90% individual factors and 10% collective factors. Someone else may say it is 80% collective factors and 20% individual factors. The most important thing is that once we have transcended an overly simple binary construct, we can now discuss at a deeper level - that involves such things as spectrums and multiple factors. The key to transcending a binary system is to closely inspect the 100% point. Under scrutiny, the 100% point will collapse and open the door to a higher conscious level. In this case, personal responsibility/empowerment is the only factor and 100% determines every individual’s opportunity for success and well-being. That statement will collapse under scrutiny. Yet importantly, it does not mean that the opposite view is true (personal responsibility is a nonfactor and 0% relevant to opportunity to success and well-being). As an aside for those of you into SD: this would be an example of transitioning from a Blue-level binary mode to Orange-level spectrum and multifactorial modes. An emphasis on personal responsibility is an Orange level value that will resist Green level collective values- so that is also at play. Yet the foundation of the reasoning drops down to blue-level binary thinking: that people are either personally responsible or not personally responsible. As well, personal responsibility is 100% determinant. Those are hardcore blue frameworks. It’s common for a person at blue/orange to have resistance to green and drop down to blue binary constructs. Blue binary constructs are much simpler than Orange spectral and multifactorial constructs and would provide a greater sense of grounding.

@Zizzero Part of the problem with American politics is the binary nature of issues. The polarization into opposite extremes is intensifying. In part, this is political strategy, yet it is also influenced by American culture of us vs them - as if it is a team sport. For many there is identification to a team and wanting to win. Mark Sanford was a conservative Republican from a conservative state. He didn’t agree with Trump on all issues and respectfully spoke out on occasion. This was seen as betraying Trump and there was a severe backlash. At one of his town hall meetings, Sanford brought up a a core conservative republican value (like fiscal responsibility or limited government) and spoke mentioned Trump was not acting like a conservative republican on the issue. This outraged many self-identified conservative Republicans - one person said “Trump is the quarterback of our team now and you go with the quarterback you’ve got”. I think this attitude represents the mentality of a significant portion of the electorate. As well, using a binary frame makes it easier to call winners and losers. The media goes along and it’s great for ratings. Nearly all politicians do this to an extent, yet Trump is extremely oriented toward binary thinking and winning vs losing. Such an environment doesn’t leave room for nuances. Most Americans right know are responding to rapid either / or binary constructs. As you mentioned, abortion is a good example. Creating policy on abortion is not a simple either / or issue, it has a lot of nuances. Another example would be with gun laws. Traditionally, this issue as been framed as a choice between banning all guns or having all guns legal. Another example that is intense in American politics now is racism. There is a very strong binary construct of racism that people are either racist or non-racist. There is finger-pointing all over - “You are a racist!!!.” “No, You are the real racist!!!”. Headlines are made by who calls who a racist. A simple binary model of either 0% racist or 100% racist has some value in limited contexts. Yet it sooo restricted and limited that it doesn’t include a lot of important nuances and dynamics going on. For example, there are degrees of racism. Someone could hold extreme racist views or mild racist views. A person could have racist views in some areas, yet not racists views in other areas. As well, everyone has some degree of racial bias. Some may be subconscious biases. This is mostly Orange-level constructs and is not above the capacity for most Americans to consider. Yet there is a hyper obsession to frame it in a blue-level either / or mentality. I think mainly because people identify so strongly with race and it is deeply associated with their sense of survival.

Drinking alcohol and performance anxiety can reduce firmness. Ironically, performance anxiety can also stimulate pre-mature ejaculation. “Oh my gosh, I don’t want to come. . . not yet, not yet I need to last. . . dang it. . .). You could try not drinking and working to reduce performance anxiety. Also, excessive porn can also be an issue for some men. Regarding performance anxiety. . . I would first take some emphasis on intercourse. It sounds like you’ve put all the emphasis on intercourse. This is only one aspect of sexuality. I would bet that the gal wasn’t just disappointed in the sex act, but rather the overall sexual experience. The chemistry and vibe not there. Something’s that are missing. You mentioned that you feel down because she was disappointed. That is a great trait you can use to your advantage. There are many guys that are so focused on their own pleasure that they just don’t care much about her pleasure. If she has pleasure, that just fuels their own ego. There are a lot of women that really appreciates a guy that genuinely cares about her pleasure and satisfaction. Guys that put her pleasure at the same level (or higher) than their own pleasure. I would consider putting some focus and skill-building into other areas. If you are a “giver” sexually, this will come naturally to you, you will enjoy it. There are aspects of connection (emotional and physical) and foreplay you can get really good at. Also, get good at using your fingers and mouth. You can become an expert in this area and send women into another dimension. Imagine you are learning to play a musical instrument - like a guitar. Develop magical fingers and mouth. Some woman love oral sex and you can learn to do it better than any guy she’s had. You can learn how to do it as good as a woman. It’s part technique, yet part vibe. That you totally love it, she knows you love it and she can completely relax. If there is a sense of connection and passion (both emotional and physical), you use your hands, toys and mouth skillfully, she orgasms first and you lay together intimately after sex - the actual intercourse is de-emphasized. Some women may just be interested in the intercourse, yet many women are more into the overall sexual experience. And if you get these other components down, it will take pressure off the intercourse - there won’t be nearly as much emphasis, worry and anxiety about it. Asa result, intercourse performance is likely to increase and be more mutually satisfying - especially when it is in the context of an overall pleasurable/connected sexual experience. You might also try ED pills. That might fix things. Yet my sense is, there is more going on and I would look at things more holistically. 13cm is a bit below average, yet not below the range for most women. If she is looking for a one-night stand, size may be a bigger issue. Yet for most women wanting relationships, you are fine because there are so many other aspects to a relationship and meaningful sexuality than penis size. Some women aren’t even that into intercourse and penis size. Some women don’t even like penises! As well, if you get skilled with your fingers and mouth you will elevate your sexual performance more than you can imagine. Most guys are unskilled with their fingers and mouth, because they are so focused on satisfying their penis.

After profound realizations, it’s natural to relate to our world differently. It can be fascinating and it can be uncomfortable. It’s like there is a groundless component that is getting grounded. For me, being around people increased the groundless intensity - especially around people that weren’t in tune with this kind of stuff. For example, I’d be at work and get a very different sense of a co-worker. It’s like I could see through the character they portray or I could feel their energy in a new way. Or I would lose sense of who I was and my own character. This could get uncomfortable at times. A couple things that helped me were grounding practices. For example, I spent a lot of time in nature. Nature has no agenda or expectations. It has no game. It just is. I felt much more comfortable and safe letting go in this environment. If I felt a coworkers energy in a new unfamiliar way, I might feel anxious and recoil. Yet when I was in nature and felt the energy of a tree in a new unfamiliar way, I was much more comfortable. I could relax and go let go. I could explore the new perceptions and feelings - the new relationship with reality. I felt safe and loved in nature. And I deeply trusted nature.

Expanding consciousness will seem odd and confusing at times. Expanding consciousness involves exploring new territory that will be unfamiliar. And it’s not just with psychedelics. If someone had a shelter life living on a farm in rural America with limited internet and then suddenly found themself living in Shanghai China, it’s gonna be a massive expansion. There will be a lot of new, unfamiliar stuff. It could seem very disorienting, confusing and frightening. It could also seem intriguing, fascinating and exciting. As well as mixtures of all flavors. Yet it won’t be boring. . .