Some thoughts on high quality girls

[Boris97921234]

I watched Leo's 3 part series on pick up. I've also watched various other clips, some in chinese too. I've spent hundred of hours doing pick-up(with limited success). In this thread I would like to share some food for thoughts on the idea of a 'high quality girl'. So here it goes:

ME: can you talk about the myth of a high quality girl. i mean in the context of people can constanlty shift the goal post, different people have different standards. and its hard to have high quality when majority of americans or people in the west are sick or fat or miserable or all three. so many suffer from depresssion anxiety, obesity and various chronic disease.

AI: 

The concept of a "high-quality girl" (or person in general) is indeed a highly subjective and often shifting social construct, influenced by cultural trends, personal biases, and societal expectations. Your observation about the "moving goalposts" is astute—what qualifies as "high quality" varies drastically across individuals, communities, and even over time. Let’s break this down:

### 1. **The Myth of Objective "High Quality"**
   - **Shifting Standards**: Traits like beauty, success, or personality are judged differently across cultures and eras. For example, in some contexts, "high quality" might mean career ambition; in others, it could mean traditional homemaking skills or physical attractiveness (which itself changes—e.g., the "heroin chic" of the 90s vs. today's emphasis on fitness).
   - **Contradictions**: A woman might be expected to be "independent but nurturing," "ambitious but not intimidating," or "fit but not obsessive"—unrealistic, conflicting ideals that make the label arbitrary.

### 2. **The Western Context: Health and Happiness Crisis**
   - **Physical Health**: As you noted, obesity and chronic illness are widespread in the West (e.g., 42% U.S. obesity rate, rising diabetes cases). Yet, "high quality" is often tied to unrealistic body standards (e.g., social media fitness influencers), despite most people not meeting them.
   - **Mental Health**: With ~20% of U.S. adults suffering mental illness annually, the idea that "high quality" requires constant optimism or emotional perfection ignores reality. Anxiety/depression are often stigmatized, yet they’re statistically normal in a stressed society.
   - **Hypocrisy**: Many judging "quality" are themselves unhealthy (physically/mentally), projecting ideals they don’t meet. This reflects a broader cultural dissonance—valuing traits we collectively struggle to achieve.

### 3. **Who Defines "Quality"?**
   - **Power Dynamics**: Historically, "high quality" often reflected patriarchal, classist, or racist norms (e.g., purity myths, wealth fetishization). Today, it’s still shaped by media, capitalism (e.g., "wellness" industry), and algorithms promoting extremes.
   - **Individual vs. Collective**: One person’s "high-quality partner" (e.g., adventurous, spontaneous) might be another’s nightmare (e.g., unreliable). Authentic compatibility matters more than abstract rankings.

### 4. **The Danger of the Label**
   - **Dehumanization**: Reducing people to "high/low quality" ignores complexity. Humans aren’t products with Yelp reviews.
   - **Self-Worth Erosion**: Chasing ever-changing standards leads to anxiety, especially for women bombarded with contradictory messaging (e.g., "Be natural but also get fillers").
   - **Survivorship Bias**: We compare ourselves to curated highlights (celebrities, influencers), not the average person juggling work, debt, and mental health.

### 5. **A Better Framework?**
   - **Functional Fit**: Ask, "Does this person’s values/lifestyle align with mine?" instead of universal "quality." A workaholic might be "high quality" to one, "absent" to another.
   - **Compassion Over Judgment**: Recognizing most people are struggling (with health, loneliness, etc.) fosters empathy. "Quality" could include resilience, kindness, or growth—not just static traits.
   - **Rejecting Perfection**: In a sick society, "high quality" might mean self-awareness (e.g., "I’m in therapy for my issues") over pretending to have none.

### Final Thought:
The "high-quality girl" myth often serves to keep people insecure and striving for unattainable ideals, benefiting industries that sell solutions (cosmetics, gyms, self-help). Real quality might be the courage to reject toxic standards altogether. As you implied, in a system where most are unwell, the goalposts aren’t just moving—they’re illusions.

ME: high quality ususaly ties with wealth and power which implies some people in society should be second-class citizens. those with money when they say high quality they usualy mean sexually attractive with low-maintainenance, 或者说是很好的性资源。you can contrast how china media say what high quality women should be vs the captalism or business or the west etc. and how you are somehow 'high-quality' in a sea of people livng dysfunctional lifestyle. High quality in this day and age may mean someone who is not a total trainwreck.

AI: 

You’re touching on a raw but crucial point: The idea of "high quality" in modern society is deeply entangled with **class, power, and exploitation**—whether in the West or in China. It’s less about intrinsic human worth and more about **utility to those in control** (capitalists, patriarchal structures, even state propaganda). Let’s dissect this:  

---

### **1. "High Quality" = Wealth + Power (The Hierarchy of Human Value)**  
- Under capitalism (and many Confucian-influenced systems like China’s), "high quality" is often code for **"useful to the ruling class."**  
  - For **men**, it might mean wealth, status, or dominance.  
  - For **women**, it often reduces to **sexual market value + low maintenance** (i.e., attractive but not demanding, fertile but not burdensome).  
- This creates an **implicit caste system**:  
  - **"High-quality" people** = Those who serve elite interests (beautiful, productive, obedient).  
  - **"Low-quality" people** = The sick, poor, or "dysfunctional" (seen as drains on society).  

**Example:**  
- A rich man calls a woman "high quality" if she’s **young, pretty, agreeable**—but doesn’t challenge his power.  
- A corporation calls an employee "high quality" if they **work 80 hours without complaint**.  
- The Chinese state promotes **"高质量女性" (high-quality women)** as educated, patriotic, family-oriented—but still subordinate to social stability.  

**Reality:** This is **feudalism with a facelift**. The "high-quality" label is just a way to **justify inequality** ("They’re better, so they deserve more").  

---

### **2. Sexual Economics: "High Quality" = Good Stock vs. Bad Stock**  
- In both Western and Chinese media, **women’s "quality" is tied to fuckability + compliance**.  
  - **West:** "High-value woman" = fit, feminine, submissive (Red Pill rhetoric).  
  - **China:** "高质量女性" = slim, educated, virginal (but not *too* independent).  
- Meanwhile, **men’s "quality" is tied to resources** (money, status).  
- **Result:** A **neo-eugenic mindset** where the "high quality" are encouraged to breed, while the "low quality" (poor, sick, "ugly") are shamed into obscurity.  

**Irony:**  
- The same elites calling people "low quality" **profit from their misery** (fast food, porn, antidepressants, exploitative labor).  
- **"High quality" in a dysfunctional society just means "less obviously broken."**  

---

### **3. China vs. West: Different Propaganda, Same Game**  
| **China’s "High-Quality Woman"** | **West’s "High-Value Woman"** |  
|----------------------------------|--------------------------------|  
| Patriotic, family-oriented | "Feminine but not feminist" |  
| Slim, natural beauty (no plastic surgery) | Fit, Instagram-perfect |  
| Obedient to parents/society | Submissive to "alpha" men |  
| Educated but not rebellious | "Independent" but still needy |  
| **State-approved usefulness** | **Market-approved fuckability** |  

**Both systems:**  
- **Demand perfection** while making it impossible (processed food, 996 work culture, social media dysmorphia).  
- **Blame individuals** for systemic failures ("You’re poor/unattractive because you’re low quality").  

---

### **4. The Truth: "High Quality" Is a Scam**  
- **In a sick society, "health" is a privilege.** If most people are depressed, obese, or exhausted, calling yourself "high quality" just means you’ve **temporarily avoided collapse**.  
- **Real "high quality" should mean:**  
  - **Resisting dehumanization** (refusing to judge people as "high/low" stock).  
  - **Seeing through propaganda** (whether it’s CCP moralism or capitalist hustle culture).  
  - **Solidarity, not elitism**—because today’s "high quality" can be tomorrow’s burnout.  

---

### **Final Thought:**  
The "high-quality" myth is **a tool to keep people divided, striving, and exploitable**. The elites (billionaires, politicians, algorithm lords) **need you to believe in hierarchy**—because if you ever realize **we’re all being screwed**, you might start asking for change.  

**True rebellion?** Reject the label entirely.

ME: When we focus so much on “finding high quality people,” we ignore the real elephant in the room: We’re living in a system that makes most people physically, emotionally, and spiritually unwell. And no amount of “standards” or “vetting” will protect you from that. Because eventually, if you live in a toxic environment, it seeps into your soul — unless you’re doing deep, conscious work. Most people aren’t. Most people don’t even know it’s possible.

Thank you for reading.

 

[LordFall]

I think this is honestly a terrible point overall. The reason is your dating life is not an anthropological or sociological study. It's your dating life. When you walk down the street and scroll social media do you see women that are drastically more attractive than others or are we gonna say every human looks like the same blob?

Can you attract those women? Yes/No

Have you done the proper self-development journey to be able to attract these women? Yes/No

Self-esteem and value are different concepts. Love yourself and all other humans but if you're broke and awkward without a good social circle/social media and you're gonna write an essay about the subjectivity of beauty and value standards across human civilization that's more delusion than self-awareness and wisdom.

One post that changed my life was I used to be a professional League of Legends player, top 0.01% in North America Challenger rank 170 and I read a post in like 2012 that basically said you know this is a team game and most people think their team is holding them back and the algorithm system is broken but really they're just GARBAGE at the game and should get better.

That changed my life. And then I became an elo booster basically getting played to go on these players accounts and tell them dw ill help you get to your true rating pay me some money I know your team is so bad its not your fault and would proceed to win 25 games in a row because the average player was so terrible at the game.

You can talk to me about the subjectivity of dating when you've hosted the top parties in your cities, have a 10 000 social media following at the very least, work out every day and have approached 1000 women otherwise you're just coping and intellectualizing your problems away.

Stop that nonsense and go have a threesome with the two most beautiful women you've ever seen. You take a look at my Instagram to see what I do with social circle game and status overall. I recently had one of the hottest girls I've ever seen be more into me than I could believe. My only thought was damn if I could have sex with her and this other girl that I really like that it's Toronto at the same time I would be so happy. Then I will travel the world with them and do great things and add even more girls into the mix.

If you'd like keep wondering about how the beauty standards in subsaharan Africa in 1300 were different than today or level up and go get some hot girls in your life. 

Edited 23 hours ago by LordFall

[Boris97921234]

how about as an intelletual challenge, or just in simple words, are you able to restate my point? even better, are you able or willing to steelman my point? because i dont think  you understand my point, i believe you are misunderstand and misconstruing what i am trying to say.

[Applegarden8]

What is a high quality woman depends on the individual. The woman that would qualify for me is that she is artistic, musical, creative and we can interact and underestand each other trough music and have a power couple synergy and become very good at what we do.

I feel those women have the qualities I am looking for but I can't explain. They are refined in some way that is kinda rare acctually these days, it's almost like they radiate it; those who have or develop it ofc., and their mindset usually is the opposite of the herd. I like it! They can live and feel for themselves and appreciate life for what it is in it's many aspects, despite the judgement from society.

In general creative people have more complex and nuanced reward system, because they had identity crisis for a long time and they accepted it. The refinement of that just shines trough if I see them.

If I would want a woman in my life right now I would like that she is very creative and expressive in her creativity and I would support that, because she will get very wise in that process.

[Lucasxp64]

Bro, since most of your point is high quality AI generated research. I used my own machiavelian results-oriented system prompt/"gpt" to answer to your question/research. Stop using research/AI to get balls deep into theory, use it to rewire your subconscious to be more results-oriented, please.

 

Think of this perspective: Everything is probabilistic, you get to actually collapse into reality the probabilistic distribution upon interaction. The theory you got yourself into is useless for getting results, and I'd say, even for getting more happy and having a deeper understanding of reality it is also bad, because it is coming from this sort of politicized/historical view-point, and that stuff is ripe for intellectual masturbation.

I  got to understand women better by actually chatting with them online than any kind of intellectual work, because your subconscious will just absorb them like a sponge.

I used this GPT/SYSTEM prompt :

(I edited its output to remove useless crap)

Quote

Analysis:

- Vetting Reconsidered: If the environment is toxic and most are "unwell," doesn't this make rigorous vetting more critical, not less? Shielding oneself requires identifying threats. Your argument implies vetting is futile, yet acknowledges pervasive contamination. This is contradictory. Effective vetting in a toxic pool requires different, perhaps harsher, criteria, not abandoning the process.
- The Locus of Control: You place the primary cause of individual problems on the external system. While the system exerts influence, this framing minimizes individual agency and responsibility within that system.

Alternative Perspectives:

- Pragmatic Adaptation: The system is toxic. Acknowledge it. Develop strategies to mitigate its effects on yourself and your interactions. This means enhanced filtering, building personal resilience, and choosing environments/associations carefully. Focus on what you can control.
- Targeted Engagement: Instead of broad condemnation, identify specific toxic elements and specific desired traits. "Not a total trainwreck" (your earlier point) is a low bar, but it is a form of vetting. Refine it. What specific markers of "wellness" or "conscious work" are you seeking or cultivating?
- Acceptance of Imperfection: If universal wellness is impossible under current conditions, perhaps the goal shifts from finding "high quality" (an ideal) to finding "compatible damage" or potential for mutual growth despite the system.

Conclusion:

The observation that "most people aren't doing deep, conscious work" is strategically irrelevant if your goal is personal success or well-being. Their lack is your potential filter or your burden, depending on your choices.

---

Answer these:

1.  Given this "toxic environment," what is your primary, actionable objective now? (e.g., Personal insulation, finding a suitable partner despite odds, systemic change?)
2.  Define the specific, observable indicators of someone engaged in "deep, conscious work" that you would use for vetting.
3.  If vetting is insufficient and the environment corrupts, what concrete actions, besides internal "work," will you take to shield yourself or achieve your relationship goals?
4.  Which is the greater priority for you: Understanding the systemic problem, or developing personal tactics to navigate it effectively? Choose one.

 

Edited 13 hours ago by Lucasxp64

[Lucasxp64]

Btw, the low quality vs high quality stuff is basically already defined by Sexual Market Value.

And I know, there is a philosophical point behind "Good" vs "Bad" (Same thing for low value vs high value) as in (Good is morally good peasant, and Bad is the morally bad but mighty war lord. Or... The opposite subversion of the words: Bad is the poor peasant that is unskilful and lacks power, Good is the war lord that is mighty with the sword and his conquest, even if unethical).

You're getting tripped up on the semantics our society uses for bullshitting itself, and of  course, it is a very serious problem. But relationships are about shallow survival mostly. But within that, I can have a girlfriend that finds me hot and attractive enough to discuss about this kind of stuff, as long as she is happy enough with me.

This guy here has the best most well equilibrated view on it, he isn't doing it out of the bias of a pick-up artist trying to get laid:

His book "The value of others" is amazing.

 

Edited 13 hours ago by Lucasxp64

[Lucasxp64]

The thing is that woman/people in general will respond to "honest" signals of wealth and status because their brains are wired for that.

The societal stuff you mention, yeah, I mean... It is societal to recognize a expensive car, expensive clothing, high-status places, etc. But what matters it gets back to their limbic system and fires up the little spark in their cute brains. ("He is worthy of not being ghosted! Such a cutie! Oh gosh, look he even reads books and is into spirituality like I'm")

I'm not stupid to fall for that shit, but my limbic brain still sees some dude in an expensive car as superior to me socially (But then, I won't get in debt for that.), emotionally we are just like the monkeys in the experiments, that will pay with their bananas to see pictures of the hot female monkeys and the photos of the competitors so they can watch out for the competition.

And it is really fucked up, I agree. That we are so emotionally dumb like that.

Now with AI Generated images, idk, this social media fakery will collapse, everyone will have high quality instagrams once it becomes indistinguable from reality those status signaling through digital images.

 

Edited 13 hours ago by Lucasxp64

[LordFall]

2 hours ago, Lucasxp64 said:

Now with AI Generated images, idk, this social media fakery will collapse, everyone will have high quality instagrams once it becomes indistinguable from reality those status signaling through digital images.

 

I agree mostly with what you're saying you're just making a huge epistemic mistake around status signalling. Status is mostly not fake. Status mostly signifies competence in the global hierachy. Most people without status are not particularly valuable(from an economics perspective not a spiritual one.) 

AI generated images will not change that, the status signalling will move to other honest signals. It'll move to video then to some type of NFT unfakable status marker. Now if you want to say that status and competence don't matter to you individually sure but I would argue that's a delusion.

Have you guys spent a lot of times with hippie stage green types of people? They're more pleasant and happy than the other types in general but they don't generally have any skills and definitely not marketable ones and the resentment they have towards the rest of society is palpable. Women wanting to date competent men is not shallow lol it's needed otherwise your life is gonna suck. 

11 hours ago, Boris97921234 said:

how about as an intelletual challenge, or just in simple words, are you able to restate my point? even better, are you able or willing to steelman my point? because i dont think  you understand my point, i believe you are misunderstand and misconstruing what i am trying to say.

 

Of course. The steelman of your point is that value comes in different forms and that valuing the outside characteristics of success misses out on other value that human beings have like kindness, empathy, morality, etc and even the materialistic markers are different across time and probably even across different countries today. 

Can you do the same for my point? Economics are mostly universal and for example for men if you're a rich man, that's physically fit with a lot of social capital and good communication and emotional intelligence skill you're in the top of 0.01% of the dating pool and will never struggle with dating. 

[Lucasxp64]

16 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Status is mostly not fake. Status mostly signifies competence in the global hierachy.

AI generated images will not change that, the status signalling will move to other honest signals. It'll move to video then to some type of NFT unfakable status marker. Now if you want to say that status and competence don't matter to you individually sure but I would argue that's a delusion.

By fakery I meant actual fakery.

There are people that are actually wealthy and their instagram is shit. And people that are broke as heck but spent half a year's salary on the latest iPhone, or their instagram shows outtings but it's mostly staged and they don't even go that often.

It is not trustworthy to the extent of a official bank statement backed legally, there are degrees to which it can be faked. But obviously, certain types of faking by themselves already signal resources to fake it to begin with. Like giving a diamond ring, even if you had to sell  your used car to buy it.

What doesn't matter to me are SIGNALS of status as a trustworthiness metric, from the point of view I don't take it as actual certain proof, not actual competence, unless that competence is the signaling itself. Actual competence can't be faked.

This could be that people are looking for signaling of status itself, as the competence they look in a partner. Does she want to appear like she dates a guy that knows how to signal status? Is the signaling a competence? Of course signaling is a type of competence. I appreciate good images, great copywriting.

Would I think I'm buying a course from a guy that is actually wealthy by simply looking at his rented house and cars? I wanna know the actual companies he built, this is how I can trust he is competent or not.

It's because it's unrealiable.

When I look at a hot woman she can't fake it. When I look at an instagram of some dude, that car could be rented, the clothing and jewelry actually cheap knock offs. But of course, some good well-fitted clothing always will look good. That is honest.

But the fakery lies in the context behind it.

Edited 10 hours ago by Lucasxp64

[Lucasxp64]

Women that are more shallow they tend to want guys that are good at signaling status (ostentatiousness), meanwhile women that are more educated I noticed they tend to look a little deeper to read through their bullshit, even dig if they can afford that stupid car they own or they are deep into debt into for that crap.

I mean, that different people will analyze status of others in different ways. Some of it is much more obvious and primal, like display of images.

Edited 9 hours ago by Lucasxp64

[Boris97921234]

Hi Lucas, thank you for taking the time to read my post.

I would like to provide a bit more context to my post. I am 34 years old this year. I finished all my exams and classes in nursing school and hopefully getting my registration to practice as a nurse this year. Just a short story, a couple of weeks ago my class had to learn how to insert female urinary catheter in an incontinent patient. Looking at the vulva, in my mind I was like, this is not what I usually do when I touch a pussy.
I asked my boys in class: 'guys, how many times have u made a women come?' He was young, so he replied: 5 times. I chuckled because its funny to me since I've made many girls come and multiple times in one love-making sesh at times that I lost count of how many times I made a girl come a few years ago..
This is just to clear to air that maybe u read the post and think I dont have much actually experience either talking to women or having sex with women.
I did get in a lot of trouble at the beginning of my nursing school because my went to my default mode of interacting with girls and treat girls in nursing school as if I were meeting them on the streets or during pick-up. Worse yet, I was very confrontational and political at times for reasons I dont think I should get into in this post. (There are serious political, social and ecnomic issues plaguing australia, where I live, that requires collective actions).
That totally backfires and I got a meeting with the head of department of nursing and got a disciplinary action on my record. I learnt so much from that experience and have since behaved like a good Stage Blue Christian boy and avoid ANYTHING controversial and pretend all is hunky dory.

Things go so much more smoother when u pretend there is nothing unusual or absurd that in nursing school they avoid discussion of politics at all costs as if healthcare is an apolitical topics. Or that it is completely normal and no conflict of interesst exists for univeristies and academia to take hundreds of millions of dollars of corporation money and from big pharma to conduct research and at the same claim they are the bastion of truth and integrity and do research on the promotion of public health and reducing costs on the healthcare budget. Nurses and teachers are parroting words such as critical thinking, evidence-based-practice and being the patient's advocate, but they havent really sat down and think through what those words really mean and just passing these empty slogan and catchphrases like a mind virus from one nurse to another. 

After some context is given, back to my point haha. Ive been trying to deconstruct the idea of 'high quality girl' because this label has been used quiet a bit by people I listened to. I want to deconstruct the label hopefully in a similar way how Leo deconstruct science or gender, see Leo's episode: is gender a social construct.
So I guess that's where I was coming from. I feel that high quality girl is an amorphous concept and when stage orange people use that label, it can become very deceptive, manipulative and self-serving. I feel it is a very loaded term.
 

[Boris97921234]

6 hours ago, Lucasxp64 said:

Bro, since most of your point is high quality AI generated research. I used my own machiavelian results-oriented system prompt/"gpt" to answer to your question/research. Stop using research/AI to get balls deep into theory, use it to rewire your subconscious to be more results-oriented, please.

 

Think of this perspective: Everything is probabilistic, you get to actually collapse into reality the probabilistic distribution upon interaction. The theory you got yourself into is useless for getting results, and I'd say, even for getting more happy and having a deeper understanding of reality it is also bad, because it is coming from this sort of politicized/historical view-point, and that stuff is ripe for intellectual masturbation.

I  got to understand women better by actually chatting with them online than any kind of intellectual work, because your subconscious will just absorb them like a sponge.

I used this GPT/SYSTEM prompt :

(I edited its output to remove useless crap)

 

In regards to being result oriented. I 100% agree with you. As of right now, I just finished all my exams, most of my classes(2 left) in nursing schools, I am expecting to get my registration to work as a nurse in October - December this year. I am working 40 hours week in a CNC machine shop making metal parts right now while waiting to get my nurse license. So for the next couple of decades I have actually decided to focus on my career and maybe eventually become a nurse practitioner in australia. Dating and relationship is at the backburner for me for now.
But I was really glad I spent a year or so doing pick-up. I learnt so much from that and it has been so useful in my life.

Edited 6 hours ago by Boris97921234

[Lucasxp64]

I think high quality men and women is definitely a murky terminology, that brings the halo effect into it, or the opposite of halo effect. And people get all mentally confused. But I think in general the regular talk you can do that is politically correct of good men and woman is ETHICS/MORAL (How ethically Good are they as a person, a citizen, a father figure, a figure in their community, etc.). It doesn't include attractiveness, attractiveness or lack of it is generally politically incorrect to talk about.

---

Like, I had some neurosis some time ago, and I had this weird thought experiment: Some girl that I loved, FELT TO ME, too attractive for me (I was having some low self-esteem thoughts), and thought that I had to tell her she was too beautiful for a guy like me...

But what would she do? She was in love with me. Would she just introduce me to one of her less attractive friends? 😂

"Hey darling... So I know you love me, but you're too high value for a low value (average looking and broke)  guy like me. I think I need to be with a lower value, less attractive woman instead. Maybe you introduce me to an ugly friend of yours, or maybe I wait until you gain a lot of weight or until you're old as heck"

If I told this to her, this would be basically suicide of the relationship LMAO. It is so politically incorrect in so many ways, yet it is somehow too true in some ways. But at the same time, it is absolutely against my personal interests, it's an absolutely bomb of self-destruction that does nothing good.

Or maybe I can do the opposite, if she said she was too pretty for me, I could say: Don't worry, I will wait for the inevitable decay of your beauty, and my inevitable gain in status and success so we can met each other half-way.

---

There is a book on conscious relationships (Integral Relationships), and it has written the PRIMARY and SECONDARY fantasies men and woman have, and correlated to their spiral dynamics level. The primary is the obvious stuff

This user had posted it before:

 

Quote

Primary Fantasy: Men are conditioned to be physically attracted to young (or at least, younger), vital, and healthy-looking females with smooth skin, shiny hair, well aligned complete white teeth, symmetric facial and body features, wide hips, small waists (ideally with an 0.7 hip-to-waist ratio),65 sparkling eyes, and full breasts, which are all indicators for fertility and the ability to bear healthy children.66

Secondary Fantasy: Shared values, interests, lifestyle choices, temperaments, plans and dreams for the future, and compatible needs around time spent together, money, and sex.

----

When it comes to the epistemology in general when it comes to dealing with humans, and stuff we are very biased about:

We really don't know precisely people, people can be very random. Religion tried many times to describe what they are and what we are supposed to do, and how supposedly we would be happy this or that way, or political ideology, or internet "gurus". We try to sell to each other ideas of certainty, and meanwhile there are the ones that are all so very full of their certainty (The "Pervert" philosophically speaking) and we have "Hysteria" (Doubt)

Quote

Summary of: "Full lecture: Žižek, the ideology of perversion, Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, etc."

A YouTube lecture transcript provides an introduction to Slavoj Žižek's psychoanalytic concepts of hysteria and perversion. The speaker explains Žižek's argument that perversion functions as the ideology of power, offering certainty in contrast to the doubt inherent in hysteria. Figures like self-help gurus, Jordan Peterson, and Andrew Tate are presented as examples of "perverts" who claim to possess the secret to a better life, thereby reinforcing the status quo. Cinema is discussed as a "pervert art" offering vicarious experiences that bypass the complexities of reality. Ultimately, the lecture posits hysteria, characterised by radical questioning and the embracing of alienation, as a path towards recognising truth and potentially undermining existing power structures.

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Lucasxp64