Andrew Tate changed me in two weeks

[StarStruck]

22 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@StarStruck 

   What would your advice, and also Andrew Tate's, on this woman's issue:

   And no, I'm not the woman in the video. ?

Internet is not real life. People get frustrated and spew their frustration on the internet onto a person. She needs to get a ticker skin if she wants to be popular on the internet. This counts both for women and men. I don’t see a gender issue here.  It is just the toxic environment. 

 

6 hours ago, ThePoint said:

@StarStruck Not disagreeing with you. Just wanted to ask in what way does one leg develop the other leg? I thought survival pursuits and metaphysical/spiritual pursuits were antithetical to each other?

 

The only way I see survival pursuits benefitting metaphysical/spiritual pursuits is the freedom that it can bring, which is a huge benefit, but it is still a rather indirect benefit.

The two legs are part of the same body. So if you train one leg and not the other you will be off balanced. You will be good for nothing with one weak leg and one strong leg. It is better to train your legs in accordance. Otherwise you will end up like some guys here who zonked out their mind with heave chemicals and do nothing else than mental masturbation. 

[StarStruck]

1 hour ago, kieranperez said:

Andrew Tate is a con artist that runs an Ponzi scheme, engages in sex trafficking, is a misogynist, and so forth. So don’t give me this sort of apologist schtick as if that’s most people. Yeah, it takes discipline to be a kickboxing champion. So? I wonder what’s with up a person that has them needing to learn that from Andrew Tate when they could learn that from so many other sources. Dude is a scumbag. 

As far as balancing physical survival and spiritual practice… first off not everybody needs to be making 6 figures and doing all this practice. Most people that are busy maintaining survival simply do not have the time to practice the degree to which is probably necessary for most to awaken deeply (and no - psychedelics and peak state experiences are not awakening). For those for whom the monastery is there path (speaking as someone that just came out of monastic residency) it works great for them and it’s not really your business or anybody else’s place to go to them and just think they’re doing it running because they don’t meet your assumptions and standards for how humans should be. There is nothing wrong for those whose life is only sadhana or practice. Those that say they balance both survival and practice (and I mean they ACTUALLY do - they don’t just meditate for an hour and trip on weekends and call that practice) will usually tell you how they need to sacrifice a lot of the potential of their practice as deeply waking up by and large takes a fully concentrated effort and we’re talking much more than just satori (and by that I don’t mean cute psychedelics trips or conflating altered state experiences or whatever nonsense Leo is on now). 

The reality is a lot of people who don’t commit to serious practice when they’re young usually are just making excuses and putting it off and I’m guilty of this myself. We think we’re going to build it at all, make the money and then do our practice but in my experience, out of all the teachers and masters I’ve been so fortunate to meet, it’s almost never that way. 

If you look at all the great spiritual festivals in say India, who are the people you see? Rural masses and yogis that completely their life to realization or people that have one foot in and one foot out? 

 

I try to learn from everybody. Even from the devil. To defeat the devil you need to learn his ways. And everybody has a devilish side. Most of you guys aren’t stage yellow so you can’t see it  

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by StarStruck

[kieranperez]

2 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

Because you worship Leo you think everybody is like yourself. 

Lol go back and look at how much I call out Leo’s psychedelic delusions. That’s funny. But because I along with many others point out how Andrew Tate is toxic that makes me a Leo worshiper lol. If you need Tate to learn how to be a man God help you. 

Have fun following a toxic grifter lol 

@KH2 translation: you have no real worthwhile rebuttal you want to call it quits because you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. I’ll bet good money you don’t meet with teachers, you don’t go on retreats, or anything. It’s just “research” on YouTube university and mental masturbation under the guise of “contemplation”. 

[StarStruck]

@kieranperez I deleted that part of my msg already.  ?

[Danioover9000]

@kieranperez

3 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

Lol go back and look at how much I call out Leo’s psychedelic delusions. That’s funny. But because I along with many others point out how Andrew Tate is toxic that makes me a Leo worshiper lol. If you need Tate to learn how to be a man God help you. 

Have fun following a toxic grifter lol 

@KH2 translation: you have no real worthwhile rebuttal you want to call it quits because you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. I’ll bet good money you don’t meet with teachers, you don’t go on retreats, or anything. It’s just “research” on YouTube university and mental masturbation under the guise of “contemplation”. 

   If some of those guys want to modal Andrew Tate, that's fine. Some people need guys like Andrew Tate to talk them out of a shitty life.

   AFTERWARDS, we can then talk about better men to role modal, but if you are stuck, in a sissy type of rut, then you absolutely need Andrew Tate.

Edited October 14, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Danioover9000]

   Nice video, good clips of Andrew Tate, the marketing guru:

 

[Danioover9000]

@KH2

1 minute ago, KH2 said:

Like I've said, need to be right and spiritual ego.

If this is what being a monk for long periods of time brings you, then thanks no thanks.

"I am right and Leo is wrong?" notice how I did not claim that buddhism is WRONG, I've just said that you MAY hold it as a dogma. In fact, I'm not arguing for any point in spirituality, cause I understand I don't know anything. You on the other hand, quite arrogantly and vehemently defend your position, because "other teachers that I happen to prefer are right" in this way, you are no different from Leo's followers who take every single one of his word as ultimate Truth

   Come on, bro, at least the guy has a point. You legit made a mistake with the weaseling answer of just saying it's because you're dogmatic a bit and maybe not willing to be open minded to being wrong. What you should have written back to him is something on the lines of him being super attached to Buddhism, therefore is a simp spirit male that's malding, which is why you shaved your entire hair away. He'll be more likely to reciprocate your point if bluntly stated. Buddhist guys and gals really respond well to the bamboo treatment.

[kieranperez]

11 minutes ago, KH2 said:

Like I've said, need to be right and spiritual ego.

If this is what being a monk for long periods of time brings you, then thanks no thanks.

"I am right and Leo is wrong?" notice how I did not claim that buddhism is WRONG, I've just said that you MAY hold it as a dogma. In fact, I'm not arguing for any point in spirituality, cause I understand I don't know anything. You on the other hand, quite arrogantly and vehemently defend your position, because "other teachers that I happen to prefer are right" in this way, you are no different from Leo's followers who take every single one of his word as ultimate Truth

I’m not going to pretend I don’t know what I speak about. Psychedelics highs are not enlightenment. That is not an opinion. That is not a need to be right. It’s a fact. And you can go find and look up teachers who’ve done massive dose trips that have also awakened and they’ll tell you the same thing ever time and that’s been valid in “my own path” in so far as that statement makes any sense at all. So I don’t just believe people in what they say. If that’s how you read what I say, cool. That’s fine and you’re free to do what you want but in the end I’m going to call it out. I’m not outright dismissing psychedelics but I’m calling it for what it is and isn’t.

You actually aren’t being some innocent “I don’t know anything” seeker with your projections that I’m suggesting some monastic dogmatism is somehow necessary. I was pointing out the demand for genuine real work for most people as that seems to be how it goes. Thank you come out of nowhere calling “that Buddhist dogma” and making false claims regarding psychedelics and the belief that psychedelics trips somehow awaken people when in fact they don’t. They might open people’s minds to resize there’s more to self and life than meets the eye but that’s not awakening. That is what I was calling out and it isn’t an opinion. It’s not just some preference for some teachers over others. Those that think conditioned experiences are realization of the unconditioned unborn nature of that which is Absolute are wrong. In the same way those that think 1 + 1 = 4 are wrong. Or confuse Mexico and USA on the map. It’s not an opinion.

And if you think spiritual teachers aren't clear and deliberate in calling out people when they’re wrong, again, you don't know what you’re talking about. 

[Danioover9000]

@Danioover9000

24 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   Nice video, good clips of Andrew Tate, the marketing guru:

 

    As strange as it is, I actually agree with Andrew Tate's suggestion of having some number system display the number of men/women you slept with. It kind of makes the entire date scene accelerate to stage yellow way of dating. The guy is aware of the number of partners his date has done, and also the woman can see the number of women her date has slept with also. This numbering system implicitly increases the need to acquire sexual experience in the dating market, makes it much more convenient.

   Should this number system of partners you slept with a publicly available feature, or regulated privately in online dating sites or services? I think at first it should be privately regulated, until all of society becomes stage yellow and above that we could consider publicly allowing a technology like a holographic display of partners slept to be applied to the young demographic at first, and then to older demographics.

[Tron]

On 10/12/2022 at 9:13 PM, thepixelmonk said:

lmao looks like we got a bonafide sherlock holmes over here

fake spiritual being ^

[Danioover9000]

@KH2

9 minutes ago, KH2 said:

Now, this belongs to the 10% of things (or maybe/probably less) he's said that I actually DISSAGREE with him on. Together with his takes on islam, etc.

   Why would you disagree? Would you rather date a virgin, or a sexually experienced date? Or is it because you don't want to let your date know how experienced or inexperienced you are?

   BTW, there are parallels to this numbering system, and Leo's conscious politics section, where he suggests removing the human persona, and to highlight their specific policies. There's definitely promise there.

[kieranperez]

@KH2 & @StarStruck I would like to confess and apologize for my righteousness, arrogance, and whatever defensiveness I had in this thread and would like to own that. I'm working on this. I do not retract the statements I made when it comes to what's true and what it was I wanted to convey in terms of my statements regarding the subject matter itself and the factual nature of what I was saying. I would like to apologize for the energy and projection of my own anger and defensiveness. I'm would like to cultivate more skillful ways of communicating in the face of whatever projections people have about what I say when it comes my way and trying to outmatch people in this doesn't seem to work. This is the internet and there inevitable gaps in communication and cues that are understandable but nonetheless I would like to own my own and would appreciate to be met halfway there in truth, humility, and peace. May you be well. 

[Tyler Robinson]

 

All content related to Andrew Tate should be banned on the forum. He is not a good role model. 

 

[Tyler Robinson]

@Leo Gura I would request you to look into these threads on Tate and try to restrict the presence of Tate on this forum as much as possible. It's disgusting that his stuff is promoted here. We don't need to know any good side of a person who has been a thug.

You seriously have to ban Tate on the forum the way you did with Connor Murphy. 

Thanks 

 

[Leo Gura]

40 minutes ago, Tyler Robinson said:

@Leo Gura I would request you to look into these threads on Tate and try to restrict the presence of Tate on this forum as much as possible. It's disgusting that his stuff is promoted here. We don't need to know any good side of a person who has been a thug.

You seriously have to ban Tate on the forum the way you did with Connor Murphy. 

Thanks

I'm not going to ban Tate here because Tate's opinions and worldview is fair game for discussion. Tate also has plenty of reasonable takes, only some of the stuff he says is toxic.

Tate is not Connor Murphy who was acting like a monster on this forum and towards myself.

You need to learn to tolerate worldviews which are not the same as yours without needing it banned by some daddy figure.

I've already said that I consider Tate's views of women to be toxic and not a good role model for men, and he's also a grifter. But in general you guys need to learn how to separate the signal from the noise when listening to various worldviews.

We don't have that much Tate content on this forum anyways. Mostly people just discuss their opinions on Tate, which is  good use of free speech. Tate's views easily discredit themselves. Most people here understand the toxic aspects of what he says.

You should also be open to the possibility that Tate's advice has helped some people. It's not all bad. If someone comes here and says that Tate's content helped him, that's fair. Who are you to say he's wrong? Maybe Tate has some positive impact? You should be open to that possibility.

Edited October 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Tyler Robinson]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

I'm not going to ban discussions of Tate because Tate's opinions and worldview is fair game for discussion.

Tate is not Connor Murphy who was acting like a monster on this forum and towards myself.

You need to learn to tolerate worldviews which are not the same as yours without needing it banned.

Kinda sad. But fair enough Leo. Up to you. 

 

[Tyler Robinson]

Let it eat at his conscience. Who cares. This Tate guy has thuggish opinions on women. It hurts really bad. He is a stain on Masculinity. Leo will regret it. 

I let my opinion be out there.Not like I didn't warn and didn't complain. I absolved myself of any blame or responsibility. I blew the whistle. I did my part. This is the last I will speak of Tate. 

I'm a Roman. I am a free bird. I don't care if someone calls me low IQ. I mean what I say. I say what I mean. I say what I feel. 

When I feel something about people, I'm mostly proven right. Deep in my heart, I know this Andrew Tate guy is very corrupt and not a good messenger. He is extremely manipulative and I can see through his shit. My Psychic brain (which I'm hugely endowed with since birth) can see the harm this Andrew Tate guy is currently doing to very impressionable guys who I can see walking the wrong path after watching this guy's views. Also this Andrew Tate guy has a skillful masterful way of hiding his inner grift under the rug by appearing to be some torch bearer to men who feel emasculated. Heck no. He is a piece of shit. An immature insecure un-masculine guy who is trying to take advantage of the insecurities that are plaguing men and preying on it to build his empire. He has no mission except money. He is a scoundrel. People can't see through him. He is a danger to men more than he is a danger to women. I am not running my mouth dirty for no good reason. I see through that guy. He is corrupting people right left center. His Masculinity is not true. I can smell the rat behind his agenda. He has an innocent looking face but his agenda is not innocent by any means. Say what you will.. 

Mark my words. This Andrew guy will keep doing things that will embarrass him even more. 

One day you'll all regret ever talking about this dude. 

Don't tell I didn't warn. 

I'm a free bird, I said my part. 

Goodbye and fucking myself off from this thread. 

Imma going to take a nap. 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[Tyler Robinson]

 

 

[Tyler Robinson]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

 

 You should be open to that possibility.

 I'm not open to that possibility. He is a monster in my eyes who should not deserve any platform or any dignity at all because he is very undeserving of being afforded any positive praise. He is a proper asshole and a fucked up person and he will never be good in my eyes. He deserves being discarded much less discussed. I consider him a danger to men. 

You can call me closed minded. Sure. No care. I have a spine. 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[Bobby_2021]

On 10/13/2022 at 4:20 AM, Leo Gura said:

No he isn't. Long after his 15 mins of fame are over he will still remain banned across the web. Costing him tens of millions.

For someone who's net worth exceeds a few hundred millions, does it really matter in the long run?

His social media presence is not completely zero. He still continues to have a voice among young men, although not as much he had earlier.

The idea that devilry boomerangs to yourself is absurd to me.

The devils live among us and hell is empty.

If I have to give up all my social media accounts for a few hundred millions, I would gladly take it. 

I don't see a problem with any events happening.

I want someone like Tate to exist. I also want angry feminists to exist. Cancelling him was going a bit too far, but that's also necessary in some kind of twisted way, although I am against cancelling anyone, on a personal level.

Terms like "Toxic masculinity" are only exacerbating the problem. 

It's well understood that too much of anything is toxic. So calling anything Toxic is meaningless unless something is so explicitly toxic, which isn't the case with masculinity. 

Ultra right wing figures like Tate & Trump, although they are entirely different in their own rights, are a reaction to stifling and suffocating men for who they are. 

If you criticize white men for the killing and raping their ancestors did some 300 years ago, they will repress all those emotions and let them go in the polling booth after 4 years. 

Somewhat the same is happening with Tate.

Not a single woman has come forward saying Tate has misbehaved with them despite him hanging around with thousands of women. This is an impressive record for the most famous man on the planet. 

Just a bunch of allegations with zero evidence and zero victims.

You can literally see plenty of Joe Biden videos where is found kissing and touching underage girls on Camera, saying creepy stuff no one shows outrage for it, even though he made lots of women uncomfortable.

https://youtu.be/DAUOurZIVfI

And Tate will be called a sexist for saying that Men are stronger than women or that men are better drivers than women, even though they are scientific and factual claims.

It's just that different standards for different people, and people react based on how they feel with their knee jerk reaction without giving any serious thought.

I don't feel too much compassion for Tate either since he also took advantage of the same triggering mechanisms to gain popularity within a short period of time and managed to monetize it and rake in huge profit. 

So in some sense it did backfire, but he already made the Lion's share prior to cancellation, and still continues to do. 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Bobby_2021