Let’s get existential: our soul is love

That’s a Buddhist contemplation, that I have, several times in my life, explored to the depths my being was able. I’ve had several periods throughout my life of weeks and months being deeply altered by the contemplation of the nature of mind as love.

It’s an amazing drug that you could call Enlightenment to realize that every motion of your mind is by it’s essence kind. “All the sentient beings wants to be happy”.

You could also say that everything is evolution and self perpetuating power structures, however that misses the subjectivity of it.

I have to back up even farther and get more meta, unfortunately. I’ve had to see, many times, that many people are not able to cognize the “hard problem” of the mind/body duality. Most people can’t hold in their mind that subjective experience is different, in nature and category, than objective stuff. People think they can upload their minds into a computer, and as long as a behaviorist could not distinguish big differences between inputs and outputs to the body-self and the computer-self, that therefore there are no meaningful differences.

We can’t ever prove subjectivity in anyone other than ourselves. There is no way to do it. The turing test does not prove subjectivity. We infer that other meat-people like us have subjectivity, and it’s a sound inference. An inference that can not be proven. But we have no call to infer that information is equal to subjectivity. In the distant future when humans have built a globe the size of the galaxy, they could co-ordinate one day to perform a play. Each would hold a giant lego block, representing electrons and chemical messages that pulse within and between neurons in a human brain. They would pass along all these giant blocks to each other, perfectly representing and capturing every conceivable bit of information that is passed on in a brain.

Does that dance have subjectivity of the information that was processed?

No. We can’t infer that it does, and would not infer that. It’s too different from our system that we know causes subjectivity.

Ok, so that’s the hard problem. We really have no idea where subjectivity comes from. I know most readers won’t be able to believe me, and will think that I don’t have the authority to make such a statement. But I do, and we don’t, and nobody does. The closest theory we have that aims to be explanatory is that subjectivity must somehow be a nature of reality in the same way that gravity is. That theory is championed by some physicists, perhaps as they are accustomed to thinking in terms of physics. But that theory doesn’t really work that well, because it can’t account for why subjectivity is only emergent. And people have reported subjectivity when various parts of the brain deemed essential were not active, so we really still don’t have any clue where to point a finger. A brain is needed, but the information itself doesn’t cause it.

But I know that many readers won’t be able to cognize what subjectivity is, and will brush the concept aside as meaningless, and mistake any blow up doll that gives good head with another being who also wants to be happy.

Ok.

So we aren’t just self perpetuating power structures – evolution isn’t everything. We are beings. We have subjectivity. All the sentient beings want to be happy.

We do war, but it’s because we want to be happier.

So every movement of your mind is searching out more happiness. Brains get confused and warped and twisted, and don’t always take the direct approach, but the orienting principle is guided by happiness – it’s evolved that way – of course.

Some drugs and experiences get us to a really existential place. We see things through such fresh eyes, we are amazed all over again that anything at all is here. That we are here. That other people are here. We might fear for how to continue being. We might wonder what it means that piano notes can sound wrong, or give moods. We might consider our place among others – will others care for us if we need help? Are we hurting others?

Looking at the world from the subject – as one existing being among others – then we see plain as day that we are love. We only want other people to be happy. We only want ourselves to be happy.

I’ve been doing ketamine (for legitimate health reasons, and also as an exploration into what it means to be alive) and it always seems to come back to this.

I made up a fun song on the piano yesterday. The title and only verse was “It’s good to be confused because…”

It took until the end of the ketamine trip to find words for after the because. And now I forget what they were – hehe. But there is a reason – it wasn’t one of those false meaningful meanings. It’s good to be confused, because…

Because it gets you existential. It makes you take a fresh look. You have to stand back.

Not knowing is an invaluable place to be. Why do these piano notes do that?!! I have no idea! It’s good to be confused!

Why is anything at all here? I have no idea! It’s good to be confused!

But I know one thing.

All the sentient beings want to be happy.

Evolution couldn’t figure out any other way to do it.

To survive we need rewards and pains, and our biggest rewards come from when we are working towards successful procreation and maintenance of our kin. Sex and being nice to each other. Taking care of our children, receiving care from our parents, getting the huge rewards from coupling in co-operation to make babies, fostering our society, keeping each others spirits up. Love.

Our soul is love.

Sadism still exists though.

But sharing love freely is not sadism. Being insecure and jealous may actually be more cruel than sharing love outside of a monogamous bond, if you think about it. If everyone is nothing but kind to each other, always, what right does anyone have to label another as cruel for being kind to someone else, behind her back? And to seek revenge for her own pain – the pain of the other person being kind to someone else!

The Tibetan head abbot was visiting our monastery, and during question period replied that it was ok to cheat on taxes, because no one is born into tax slavery and taxation is not a right that any entity has over a person. His opinion was that it was ok to lie, even as a monk having taken vows not to lie, if one is being persecuted wrongfully. Is it therefore also ok to lie about infidelity? If infidelity is in no way wrong, and truth would only lead to being persecuted and have revenge brought upon onseself, and to losing his love, should a man not lie about infidelity? Would that not be the most moral thing to do? For self protection, and so that the goodness of the relationship can be maximized?

Our primitive instincts to feel jealousy do not trump our other primitive instincts to mate non-monogamously, in the realms of morals and ethics. Both are nothing but base instincts – however one of them causes pleasure, the other denies it. Causing pleasure is moral and ethical. Denying it is not. Causing pain is immoral and unethical, however causing the pain of jealousy can be done in two ways:
1) the person is indiscreet in his affairs
2) the person is being spied on or is being overly scrutinized.

If it’s the 2nd then the person causing the harm is the person who is feeling the jealousy.

***

FOG is the acronym of Fear, Obligation, Guilt. The acronym is given as a thinking aid, and is called a red flag.

Hatred is also a red flag.

Our soul is love, but this is a confusing place, with confusing boundaries. The FOG acronym was created to help the community of people who deal with people with Borderline Personality Disorder traits, because FOG is used as a manipulation tool.

We can develop and feel a sweet playful nurturing vibe that has a real presence, and can be a real center. We feel and perform best when it feels as if this center is the actor. When we act out of fear, we are not acting from that center. Obligation by definition is an imposition and expectation that can’t be questioned. Our center acts on it’s own, AFTER questioning, because it WANTS to. Guilt trips can be laid on others to control them, but what happens to the center then? The guilt tripper lays it on like this: “Bad center! You don’t even exist! You are not nurturing or playful unless you obey my rules, so ignore your center and feel shame until you learn to behave, then maybe I’ll be nice to you and also suggest to the group to believe that you have a center of sweet playful nurturing.”

Red flags are signs in the road saying “get off of the road for a moment”. Take a step back, and another.

Of course we all can be unkind or thoughtless, so red flags don’t only mean that others are demonizing us as a manipulation tactic.

The road is our social programming, and it’s not easy to get off that road. But luckily there are some basic common sense guidelines. Such as everyone wants to avoid suffering, and everyone wants to feel good. The tricky navigation comes with the boundaries of FOG. Just because someone else is feeling bad, doesn’t mean you did something wrong, and just because you feel bad, doesn’t mean someone else did something wrong.

People say trust your gut feelings, but that’s terrible advice. Our emotions can be completely out of line with objective reality and the agendas of other people. And our emotions are hugely influenced by our upbringing – our social programming. All social programming has assumptions in it. Assumptions. Things we are told can’t be questioned. You can’t step off the road if you don’t also step off your gut feelings.

We have to use our mind and heart at the same time, because either one alone can fuck up big time. Jealousy, for instance, can be the go to gut/heart feeling, but can lead to dehumanizing someone who loves you. And without heart we can calculate which humans deserve to live and act on that. We are all philosophers choicelessly. Our only option is how good at philosophy we care to be. To step back when seeing a red flag requires stepping waaayyy back – outside of everything.

***

I’m aware that a big chunk of humanity thinks that morals are god given, and mere humans are not in any position to question them. Monogamy, to many, is right and non monogamy when in mutual love can only be performed by people who are wrong to their core.

I realize that no words or argument will change such emotional realities for some people.

But the world is not an emotional reality.

***

I realize that a popular jargon word in what has grown out of the sphere is the term “cucks”, from the root cuckold. I find that a fear and loathing based word. Not a word that comes from a playful place of respecting and nurturing oneself or others. It’s the word of a guy who fears his girl will run off with a more handsome and charming man unless he can convince the entire tribe to enforce some monogamy rules.

That is an evolved strategy, built right into the instincts of many people, and it is also cultural memes. However that strategy is largely ineffective in this changing modern world, and coincidentally is also spiritually bankrupt.

Your woman needs to want to be with you.

If you are going to FOG her, best not to do it rightously.  Some women do want to be mate guarded, but it’s a mutual dance – you still need her permission to guard – no one has the right to.

And unfortunately things do change, and people have mixed feelings and say and believe one thing in one circumstance only for new circumstances to change motivations.  So the bottom reason to stay together is always because people want to – never FOG.

And it’s not always a sign of major error when things go to splattered bloody shit.  Unfortunately many people seem to be built to prefer to crash land their relationships, because demonizing others and hating them is the fastest way to make an emotional break.

Advertisements

In heaven no one is jealous

The cosmetic surgery is perfect, fast, and painless, and advanced to the point of full limb and even full body transplants.

AI and robots manage the economy, with the aim to maximize human satisfaction. So people still work, but they don’t have to. The AI powers colluded to maintain a constant equilibrium of vigilance over AI turning rogue or concentrating power.

Jealousy has been removed from the human condition, through neural network implants that aid in positive reinforcement and are able to shut off entire paths of neuron firing, if you program them to do so.

Society has been divided into the Squares, and the Bohemians. The Bohemians are known as the artisan class, and are into free love. They all decided to shut off the jealousy circuit. They all have perfect bodies, are happy, social, and love to fuck and fuck freely for fun.

A day in the life might look like this:
I walk into the buffet for an early lunch. This restaurant has a cafeteria style table setup, instead of small private tables, to encourage mixing and meeting new people.

The oldest person at the table is 426, the youngest is 16, but most have decided on a body in it’s early twenties. The food was good, and I ate a big portion for the fun of it. Extra calories will just be shit out; my body is programmed not to store more than 10% body fat.

The girl to my right comments on my body fashion. I go to the gym as a habit, however if busy I can set the program to maintain any muscle mass I choose. I prefer a wiry lean body, even though it seems out of the current bigger-is-better fashion. The conversations within earshot shift around, but one person has the habit of trying to be the center of attention, so I get bored and say my nice-to-meet you’s, giving a two cheek kiss to the girl who paid most attention to me.

At the cash register I say hi to the owner. I’m a regular, and tonight, for some reason, she realizes that I seem a bit melancholy, and invites me over to a home cooked dinner. After dinner her husband starts to doze off, and she casually undresses and starts to mount me. The husband and her share a wireless link, which she turns on, even though he is asleep. He’s adjusted the setting such that it only alters the mood of his dream, rather than wakes him up, and is only set to receive certain erotic feelings.

We are in great health and manage three hours of ever increasing exstacy and intimate connection. During some points of our communion we feel great mutual love, and overpowering intensity of electric near out-of-body clock speed altering passion. The husband wakes up for a bit, glances over at us, gives us a thumbs up and a wink, then eyes rolling up in his head, let’s himself doze back off into whatever dream girls he was enjoying.

The robots clear our plates and mop up the mixed come stains from the bear skin rug. The wife gives me a peck on the cheek goodnight, and the husband groggily shakes my hand goodnight, thanking me for the pleasant conversation.

I go home and plug into a shared virtual reality of naked bodies sleeping in a bed of flowers. In our dreams we sometimes fuck, sometimes talk, or fly, or transform. Dreams can be literally shared now, and minds can mingle.

The next morning I get back to one of my “jobs”, which is in a combination band and comedy act.

In heaven nobody gets jealous, if they don’t want to. Once you turn jealousy off, you never turn it back on. Life is just so much better.

________________________________________________________

In contrast with this day in the life:

Two people have been in love and seeing each other for months. One starts to get a bit bored, and wants to rekindle his inner fire, and so spends a bit of time with a different girl. It works – he gets generally more aroused, is happier, less cranky and has renewed sexual interest at home with his main squeeze.

The main squeeze, M.S., notices that he is less anxious, and starts to feel insecure. Why is he so content lately? Why is he less irittable? Why is he smiling? She starts to suspect infidelity.

This leads to the insecurity death spiral, which looks like this:

Girl:
“Does he love me? Is he fucking around? If he is, it means he is over me. I’d better act possessive and start screening his phone calls, and demanding more attention. I’d better act very clingy and insecure, to test him to see if he caters to my ever increasing demands for re-assurance”.

Guy:
“What’s with this girl? When is she going to calm down? Nothing I say seems to make a difference, and I’m tired of constantly having to baby sit her mind. Is she incapable of feeling loved? It’s like a cup with a hole in the bottom – no matter how much love I pour in, it just falls out, and she is back asking for free refills. This is getting draining. The more she is demanding, the more I want to pull away.”

Girl:
“I knew it! He’s not reassuring me. He’s not giving me the attention I want. He’s not into me anymore. It’s that damn bitch, isn’t it! He’s fucking that damn slut! Fuck him! How dare he do this to me! I hate him. He’s a sociopathic asshole, and he never even loved me to begin with. I wasted all my time on this guy for nothing. I’m out of here”

Jealousy.

All because of jealousy.

Without jealousy, life would be heaven.

Portaits of the soul-less having fun

Glancing down at N yestersay, I saw a rare glimpse of her character without her mask on. Pure cunning maleavolence. Spooky.  As soon as she realized there was attention on her she snapped on her puppy dog eyes.

Yesterday I had accused her of not having an identity that could utter even one sentence from an “I’m OK, you’re OK” stance.” She can speak in narratives that are not passive aggressive, but if she’s forced into a direct person to person communication where recognizing other’s feelings and her own is implicit, she simply doesn’t have the wiring to utter even one sentence – not one – that is not passive aggressive.

A picture would tell the tale better, so I plugged “evil brooding girl face” into google images.  No search terms could come up with that unguarded moment.  And it’s not a face even a good actor could put on.

So I had to include artists and actors interpretations.  Not close, but less far.

 

 

 

And here is one that could represent the emptiness inside cluster-B girls. They have a shell for a core, that to them is unlovable, and therefore can not give love. The self esteem is so low that they can’t esteem others. The way cluster-B’s give love is to yearn for affection and attention, while idealizing the other. The same as how social conservatives love – they don’t love the actual person, they love the rules that the person is supposed to follow.

Many cluster-Bs rage when their rules are not followed,.

The aggressive ones are a hornets nest, with their troops ever vigilant circling around the nest and out into the forest, little hornet eyebrows furrowed as they scour for signs of any eggshells that have been stepped on.

However there are cluster-B’s who are expert at avoiding radar. The passive agressive Bs.

Cluster-Bs can’t develop an identity because of extreme heightened anxiety that happens when being interpersonal – anxiety over being abandoned, or seen to be insufficient.  So they develop and live in a mask.  They can’t take their mask off and relax and be themselves, because they don’t have one.  I know many people can’t imagine the reality of this, but it is the reality of this.  Cluster-Bs don’t have a self – they have masks with nothing behind the masks, other than an undifferentiated mess of fear and hollowness.

I’ve been pushing N for years – ever since I met her when she was at the tail end of her 17th year – to go to school or take classes or put herself into any social environments where she’d be forced to interact and be social.  So that she could grow her social muscles.

Now I realize that she’s not going to be able to develop a self without being on meds.  She needs to cut down the anxiety before she’ll be relaxed enough to have a self.  People with extremely low self esteem can’t even get close to having a self – it’s just too painful – a self can be judged lacking.  All they know, and all they are comfortable with, are masks.

Which could be fine if the mask was a persona that mimicked closely enough a self.  But for cluster B’s the masks are no such mimicry – they are a cruel and twisted agenda, with the purpose to undermine everyone else’s comfort in their own skin.  To make everyone else feel as hollow and ungrounded and hopeless and anxious and on edge as they do – as they always do, every moment.  Through this sadism their feelings of low self worth and anxiety are turned, in brief injections, into the thrill of power.

Revenge is their version of intimacy.

*****

Nobody else is going to say it, so I’ll have to say it myself.  There was a time when RoissyinDC was the peerless writer in the men’s game movement.  It was shocking the level of insight as poetry that paragraph after post consistently maintained.  Whoever is writing now is a not a good writer, and I’m much better.

My theory is that the orignal Roissy was a composite of a writer and editor, and all that remains today is the editor.  I had posted that theory in the comments section, years ago in the form that the writer of the political posts was purely the editor, and it got deleted.  “Shitlib/Cucks”?   That’s not the mind of a lover of women master theoretician with advanced theory of mind skills.  That’s the mind of an in-group out-group freak preaching on high to a cultivated in-group of suck-ups.  No one but a suck up could make it through a post strewn with so much jargon garbage.
D said:

I looked up Roissy’s old blog using google and the waybackmachine (internet archive.). I share your opinion on the dead poet. But I expect that you will find that the current author inhabits the aged body of the young poet. There are some themes and writing quirks that run throughout. I don’t wonder that decades of couplings with an unending stream of courtesans, amateur (as in un paid) porn stars, and actresses of all sorts can lead to a sort of coarsening of a man’s nature. It certainly has coarsened my own. Roosh calls it the black pill – the desire to tear it all down.

Yes, there are threads in his writing that continue unbroken, which is why my theory is that the original writer was a duo. The original writer admited as much – he said that he did work with an editor – that his writing was not a solo effort. It’s in one of his posts, somewhere.

So either the editor, or the poet, from the duo, is gone. But that the original writer was a duo is what the original itself claimed. I don’t know why I’m the only one who seemed to notice him saying that – it’s right in one of his posts, talking openly about how it’s common for writers to use editors, and how good writing is basically impossible without an editor, and how he uses one.

Many people have seen the quality decline and assumed, partly correctly, that the writer is now a different person. Forgetting that the writer already admitted that he was a duo.

If it’s the editor who is gone, and the poet-seducer who remains, and the poet became corrupted by the black pill, it’s a corruption deeper than I can understand. I’ve often wondered if some substance abuse would be required for a corruption that deep. Meth?

How to have a self

The self is an interpersonal construct.

We subjectively feel a self, but that interpretation of the facts of experience is by nature inaccurate – you could even say illusory.

If you start with psychology as your basis of self exploration and personal growth, you’ll feel forever stuck in a magnetic swamp, holding a compass. Psychology offers no way out, no way to freedom.

If you go full on Regard-All-Dharmas-as-Dreams Sunyata Buddha Mind about it, you get the freedom of dissociation – and what a great freedom that is – but the fact that the self is an interpersonal construct remains. Feeling dissociated from the self doesn’t stop it or others from doing its thing – the psychology remains.

Some people are naturals at having a self. Not socially awkward, no problems with depression or anxiety or compulsive neurotic thoughts, a decent integration of emotion with reason, healthy attachment style, good boundaries and strong social skills.

They rarely think about egolessness, because they don’t have to. They don’t search for freedom because they don’t feel trapped in their minds.

That can be mostly fine, but the solutions that psycho-somatic-spiritual seekers search out can fix problems that the comfortable didn’t even know that they had.

So some mental discomfort to begin with, can lead to long term better outcomes, if that discomfort compells you to find real, lasting solutions.

The solution to the self.

In my life I started to get weird shortly after puberty. Before that I was outgoing and well adjusted. But at some point I found I was manic depressive, had mild OCD, was a bit anorexic, and often had high social anxiety. Naturally alcohol was the medicine of choice, but I yearned for more relief.

It didn’t take long to discover the very powerful medicines of the meditative technologies. I took an ecclectic approach, before eventually settling in to living arrangements with hard core Buddhists, at meditation centers for periods of weeks, months, many months, and then at a monastery and in solitary forest retreats for a few years.

I was capable and serious enough to make some headway with the traditional practices, and made them personal. There were times, and sometimes long stretches of times, where the swamp became a magical self-aware place to be, and I was not the ego. Depression and anxiety and all the teenage neurosis were gone, and the swamp was less sticky, and I felt I had some bearings of direction in it.

I’d had some regular experiences of non-dual awareness, and sometimes lasting re-organization of where the identity is. It’s pretty hard to describe where the identity is after you’ve deliberately tried to evaporate it. It was pretty well everywhere – I didn’t see the rock, the rock was seeing itself. Perceptions looked at me, I didn’t look at them. Looked laughing at the very idea that I had a me. Magical state of mind, quite pleasant.

But then I started dating a child-woman with BPD. We’d be living in my converted school bus, and she’d rant at me with a face full of hysterics. My solution was to go wide – see the whole bus at the same time, and be that. You could say go egoless, or you could say dissassociate.

I was being abused.

Egolessness helps a bit, but not enough. Dissociating is a natural response to abuse, and you don’t even need Buddhism to do it – children do it naturally all the time. The damage to the identity organization, to the psychology of how the mind works, still gets done.

Egolessness doesn’t completely overhaul psychology and fix everything in there. Psychology has it’s own, quite independent, rules.

So now we’ve restated three important components of the self – of having an identity.

1) It does’t really exist, and you need egolessness to get a true breath of fresh air, at least from time to time.
2) it’s interpersonal – we can damage our self with bad company, and have a happier bigger one with good company
3) it has mysterious psychological workings that must be addressed on their own terms

The interpersonal aspects of self are quite the mind fuck though. We can’t, ultimately, be fully responsible for our own thoughts and feelings.

It’s an absurd folly to think that we are not enmeshed – think just for one moment about it. The very language you use as you think has each word a long lineage of the influence of other minds that created and gave new contexts and meanings to those words. Near every thought that you have is borrowed either in full or in part from thoughts that others gave to you.

That gives a whole new dimension to having a self.

Now it’s not only about egolessness vs psychology. It’s also about frames of reference for reality.

This is where the framework of social programming comes in.

We are all choicelessly socially programmed, and that’s not all bad.

Authentic self. Identity. Individuality. Genuine presence. In-the-moment honest being.

You can’t have any of that and also be merely socially programmed. You have to deprogram yourself in order to have an identity – a real individual self.

3. High-conflict people feed off of conflict and chaos. It gives them a buzz. For many, the only way they know how to relate to others is through aggression, blame and playing the victim. Once it ends, what does she have left? Nothing.

This is actually the reason for this post – you could consider all of it up to this point as preparatory classes for this course on Crazies-in-your-life.101

I have two long term women in my life who are passive aggressive. I said this to one of them yesterday.

“Sometimes I wonder if it’s even possible for you to interact with someone normally – to have an identity that is capable of simply being kind and easy going when you talk. Each and every sentence you say, every body movement, is designed to be crazy making, to bring me down. It’s like you are so completely miserable inside, that you can’t rest until I’m just as miserable as you are. Trying to talk to you is like trying to pound a nail into concrete. You deliberately do everything in your power to frustrate communication. Just watch when I talk to NN – no matter what I ask her she never gives a straight answer. Never. I always have to ask the same question 5 times in five different ways. You are exactly like her.”

A while back I’d lost some companions and only had those two crazies left in my life, and I started to go crazy. I wrote about it here, and explained what a relief it was to be spending time with V, and how my mental health was much improved.

The crazies still have good things to offer, but it’s a relationship similar to the booze. The poisonous aspects are inseparable from the good ones.

Lately I’ve been feeling very good – and the crazies were adding a lot of value. When they are limited to roles, it can mostly work.

But you can’t contextualize the mind-fuckers if mind-fuckery is the whole of your social interaction. Calling them out on their bullshit each sentence they make won’t change the attitude of the next sentence. Telling them to not talk at all won’t work; they can’t shut up. Ignoring the bullshit is just being a doormat. Good blowjobs and sex on tap, and some good loving attentions and wifely duties, but not a world to enter and live in.

Crazies want you in damage-repair mode, full time. They seek a sadistic solution for their unending intense anxiety and rock bottom self esteem. They feel a rush of the thrill to power, with each jab at you, each little twist of the knife, each little mind fuckery grain of salt added to the mountainous pile. It gives them a feeling of power, purpose and being grounded, in an otherwise sea of pain. You are no longer superior, with all your happiness and calm. They aren’t the only miserable ones.

They want you to need to recuperate for all the time they are away, so that you won’t have unbounded inner happiness and warmth to share while out and about, meeting normal people.

They want to twist your whole world into that of the alcoholic, with them being the alcohol – you get too fucked up to be able to meet better, and rely on their poison to get you through the day.

So having a self is not only about boundaries, self repair, self knowledge.

It’s also about having good friend and lovers, and keeping the crazies at arms length.

Later I want to talk about having authentic presence, within the context of ego. Meditative presence without non-duality as an aim. I’ll need to start talking about body-centered mindfulness, and my favorite form of that which I call chi-kung.

JakeS said:

1. I think identity is potentially a trap. Those who don’t know how to step back from them-selves are at risk of being manipulated. Your identity can be used against you, to join a cause that is actually against your best interests, fight wars etc.

Yes, but in that case the trap is better named “group-identity”, rather than identity.

In the west it’s common to leave home at 18, and by then start to make all important personal decisions without referencing parents for advice. Men especially learn to rely on their own judgments, above the advice of their closest friends.

We grow an identity – a pair of balls. We reference inside for what to do, not outside.

At the same time we also affiliate. The direction towards group-mind and group-identity is a different direction than that taken by the fresh off the boat teen learning how carve his own way in the world.

The direction of building up an ego, an identity, is the direction towards greater and greater inclusion of others, plus individuation, at the same time. That sounds paradoxical at first, until you throw the word “integration” at it. Identity is integration.

Integration of the greatest amount of facts into the biggest coherent truth. Integration of all aspects of self, including unrepressed sexuality, emotionality, and all the psychological drives you can shake a stick at.

Integration of ones own ideas with competing ideas, ones own agenda with competing agendas.

It is the weak identity, the unintegrated one, that has the greatest need to seek strength through affiliation, as you said.

And like you said, making rules against individuation allows governments and other self interested forces to leach power away from the individual. You pointed out Reich’s great insight that sexual repression was the root of fascism.

Which I think a lot of us men are coming to grips with, in our full bodies and instincts. Our sexuality is our own. It belongs to us, to do with as we choose.

I’ve got to study that charismatic leader’s intonations. And his writing is clever too – mixing we and I nicely to position himself as the leader of THEIR dreams.

Mr. King is the product of a long well studied lineage of charismatic church leaders. They know how to say exactly nothing at all while making it feel as if they are saying everything. He speaks as a song; foremost it moves emotionally, and if you like it also has interesting lyrics.

We already know that he had many babes, and I think we can hear that in his intonations. He actually has liberty – sexual liberty – and that gives him the libido that you can hear in his voice. That personal power, that energy.

That’s not the voice of a brow beaten well behaved monogamous man.

Charismatic leadership brings up another aspect of the self. Rarely, if ever discussed, in this context.

I’ve heard some self-aware cool dudes explain that they have no interest in and are wary of the Guru role. It’s a wise instinct, I suppose, I mean look at what’s happened to Mike Chernovich.  At times it seems as if he’s deliberately parodying the process of losing humility, in order to troll for clicks.  I’m sure that even he doesn’t know if he is.

But leadership is a role we often take on, even in very small ways during our turn in a conversation. We all have to hold the speaking stick, sometimes.

The charismatic leaders persuasive powers can help us to be our truest self, socially. The word “self” has incorrect associations. The self is an interpersonal construct. Self esteem is our best reckoning of what is our social esteem that others have for us. Holding the speaking stick is an interpersonal role for an interpersonal self – you are the other people – you move their attention just as easily as you move your own. To be your best self means to move their attention in the best way. You need charismatic powers for that.

Mystical pupil dilating hypnosis vs social programming – 2nd try

While modafinil-drunk yesterday I published and deleted a regrettable disorganized ramble.

I’m still over-eager to share the ideas in it. Hope I get them onto the page with less of a stimulant-psychosis mood this time.

The TLDR version of the post:
* Social programming is insidious and has strongly infected Buddhist communities
* Social programming is aided by the group mind conformity and social hierarchies displayed during public talks
* Many of the mystical Buddhist ideas have mundane explanations and frames of reference to understand them, including egolessness and past life experiences.
* Hypnosis and suggestion are very powerful and play a large part in social programming of Buddhist groups.
* Some hypnosis tricks can be done to induce mystical experiences. I have some experiences with that, and recount a few.
* Hypnosis party tricks to induce mystical experiences can be used to induce fast falling in love. I try to describe it.
* I posit that a person needs to be in a state of full authenticity to be able to perform some of the more subtle and extreme hypnosis tricks, and that such a state of authenticity requires that the individual not be diminished through social pressures to conform to expectations that are not in line with his authentic self. ” If I felt compunction to be polite and not look at other sexy girls while with a woman I loved, I’d not be capable of the eye trick.”
* The conclusion of the post spirals back around to saying that you can’t therefore expect monogamy from the bad boy, and girls would not have loved and had sex with that bad boy in the first place, if he was capable of monogamy.

Phew! I’m glad I was able to summarize yesterdays rant.

Over time I’ll add chunks from the ramble here. A reminder again – please don’t read the RSS feeds if you subscribe – I edit after publishing and the edited ready-for-radio version of the song is very different than the drafts. You’ll have to click over to the site to read it.

***
Begin 2nd rough draft:

“And then she said that it wouldn’t work because it’s broken”

“Uh, who’s she?”

“Susan!”

“Uh, what was broken? What wouldn’t work?”

Have you ever listened to a child who still lacks a developed theory of mind recount a story? It will be riddled with assumptions that the listener is inside her frame of reference.

I will try to talk about inducing mystical experiences through hypnotic suggestion, and in doing so I’m afraid I’ll make that child’s error. Many readers won’t have had experiences of floods of energy going up their spine, or sudden silencing of all thoughts, or egolessness, or instant love. I have to barrel ahead as if you do, otherwise the narrative loses momentum.

There are communities that gather around a real life magician. We are told that he is a deliberately-re-incarnated Tulku who has magical powers to open your mind to Enlightenments and Mystical experiences.

I will explain the mundane nuts and bolts of how this works, giving real life personal examples of peak experiences I’ve induced in others.

The peak experiences happen, but the interpretations of them in a Buddhist context are used in aid of the Buddhist Social Programming (which is required for income and religious infrastructure), which I think is unethical – at least if OZ does not at least occasionally peek out from the curtain. He’s not a god – he’s just like you and me, really. And he didn’t exactly CAUSE those mystical experiences. It’s a subtle, but important distinction.

****
thought snippet to unravel and then weave in:
It’s a whole system of being that allows for me to keep my libido and interest high. Having a lot of sex while in love is extremely addictive to the girl, and leads inevitably to some strong primal bonding emotions. But that feeling of strong romantic love and bonding wouldn’t happen to begin with without the frequent emotionally open sex, which only happens due to the system itself – and that system will make her jealous, confused, hurt and resentful, because it does not match up with her social expectations.

It’s a sad choice girls are often forced to make, and one that’s been talked about often. A girl can EITHER have a strong passionate romance with a “bad boy” lover, OR a stable friendship based monogamous companion.

What you are so moved by, so addicted to, so NEEDING in your entire being as if it were Truth, and Beauty and Goodness itself, only comes in relation to the lover-archetype-man who is in his authentic full flow moment. And the lover-archetype-man only exists for long dependent upon the causes and conditions of a system – a system bigger than you – a system where his love is not a laser beam. It’s a fire. As soon as you tame that fire and try to harness it with mirrors into some semblance of a laser beam, it’s all but totally snuffed out.

That’s beyond the man’s control. He didn’t invent his own brain; he’s merely in the drivers seat of it. He doesn’t have the option to remain in his full flow moment of passion, AND be monogamous. He’s tried. Believe me, we’ve all tried and tried.

Look back at how you fell in love with that man. Can you imagine that seduction happening if he was a virgin? How do you think he learned his ability to fall in mutual love and seduce you so fast, and why do you think it is that no other man had done with you what he did? You know in your heart he had to learn that with other girls. Seduction and love is a skill. A craft and a talent. That talent could not be learned in one lifetime under the rules of serial monogamy. You can’t have the lover archetype without having the lover archetype.

I know it’s nearly impossible to admit to. It’s truly sad, and I feel empathy for how sad that condition is. Women pretty well are doomed to not getting what they want. You can’t fall in passionate romantic love with a monogamous man and keep that spark alive for long.

*****

From yesterdays’s post:

The conversations here have helped me to see things that I didn’t know that I knew, and connections between broad new understandings are being applied to old memories.

Back in the day, I used to hang out with Buddhists, and sometimes a few other ists. We were all about cutting through social programming, and tried to use the sword of insight to cut both ways and cut through spiritual materialism also.

But put people into a group, and BAM! Instant conformity. I’m at the very extreme edge of the bell curve for non-conformity for a non-psychotic, and it choicelessly happened to me too.

Group mind.

I was watching some old talks given by a lineage holder today, and was shocked to see my new perspective. Same talk, different man watching them.

The questioners to a man, to a woman, subordinate themselves to the teacher, and the entire audience acts as one to support anything that the teacher says.

I then watched the same dynamic for another speaker in a more new-age group.

Another tumbler clicked open with the realization that well studied group dynamics of group hypnosis were often at play; sometimes imbuing the speaker with magical powers.

Mesmer studied this hundreds of years ago, and Western psychology has been trying since then to refine ideas about suggestion. It’s extremely powerful, and in many settings is also completely invisible.

I clicked on a youtube of a older student of the now dead Big Teacher. I’ve studied with him over the years, and have butted heads with him in class. Which is VERY rare. Students almost never really have open public disagreements with teachers of spiritual subjects, especially of those teachers are considered spiritual teachers.

The peer pressure is just too great; so great that it becomes invisible; you don’t feel it, you don’t see it, you don’t taste it. You become it, and then it’s just the water you swim in.

You are just honestly doing your damnedest to get to the truth, oblivious to the machinery of group hypnosis and brainwashing; social programming.

This elder teacher was talking about an often talked about subject, how most all of his group of students were often absolutely terrified to talk to his Guru.

That is hypnosis. That is expectation. Group mind affecting your own perceptions. We have thousands of years of well documented tight cohesive group hallucinations and mental agreements about fantastical events. From laughing fits that take over entire towns for days and days, to naked dancing compulsion fits that infect towns, to seeing angels, ghosts, teachers changing color, and so on.

The Guru could just be sitting there, doing nothing differently than any average Joe. But because he’s in costume and the Group-Mind perceives of him as having literal magical powers, and have talked him up as being ego-destroying and mind-exploding, you can have those experiences around him.

There can be more to it then that, but there doesn’t HAVE to be. Such conditions are entirely sufficient to cause many of the wild drugless trips people have. Certainly enough to cause something as mundane as anxiety. Yet people feel as if they are in a special in-group of mystical knowledge, to have merely sat beside a Guru, and especially to be so sensitive as to have heightened anxiety.

As Susan studied, the mind has unbelievable capacities. And ordinary people can have events trigger extra-ordinary mind expanding experiences that seem to defy all explanations. But it’s not the finger – it’s the gun. YOU are the gun.

Group mind can be as subtle as expectations of a shared philosophy, or as extreme as lucid dreaming in the daytime, in groups. It can be pointed out in an exaggerated way by attending a hypnosis entertainer’s show.

The spiritual teacher adept has learned a few more hypnotic tricks. I’ve induced Kundalini in others many many times. I’ve had people feel my reiki type off the body touch as if it were strong physical pressure – many many times. I’ve done “the eye trick” where I deliberately invoke tunnel vision in a girl, as she looks me in the eye. Many many times.

People have asked me how to do “the eye trick”. It’s the wrong question. Most of what is done is subconscious. A big part of it is noticing when it would work. Your body just has this certainty that it would work right now, and you explain what you are going to do, and then the girl gets weak in the knees and you have to help keep her from falling down. You know how to rally the subconscious processes, and when, but you don’t know why or what you know, exactly. You have to create yourself into something so that the person can empathize – if that something is dramatic, she’ll have a dramatic experience. The eye trick is not so much technique as it is presence – it’s not what you do, it’s who you are. For me sometimes it felt as if I had a muscle in the back of my eye. Other times I felt as if I were looking into and connecting to her soul which was innately love, as we all are. While I did it I changed my own consciousness. So asking how do you do that is tough to answer, as it’s kind of the wrong question. How do you be that is closer to a meaningful question.

People can have experiences of depersonalization, peace, non-duality, awareness expansion and out of body experiences, induced by the hypnotist.

It happens all the time, because we have a brain, and brains do those things. No other worldly realms involved, no time travel or ESP. I mean, ya, the hypnotist needs personal familiarity with the experiences to pull off the micro expressions believably enough to pull the trigger in another person of sympathetic mirror-neurons resonance. You may have to actually feel Kundalini to invoke a sympathetic response in others. But the innate ability to feel Kundalini is the gun, not the finger pulling the trigger, and much trigger pulling happens with no knowledge on the side of guru – he can even be dead, staring out from a casket.

Using this conceptual map is important, because if we interpret the experiences literally, it’s the same as using emotions to decide on what is true. We can’t take our first impressions at face value. Yes, pictures on the wall can turn 3-dimensional and you can feel an intensely intimate connection of expanding awareness. No, it’s not because of a real teacher in the picture.

After making a comment that surprised myself, that mentioned that egolessness without emotion could actually already be somewhat understood by Western psychology with their understanding of depersonalization and derealization, I spent some hours on youtube listening to people talk about their first hand experience with depersonalization.

Shinzen Young says is an ordained monk and teacher who talks about his own ongoing egolessness enlightenment experience and says that in his opinion depersonalization and the enlightenment egolessness experience is exactly the same, with the only difference being that those with depersonalization also have high anxiety. Egolessness with anxiety, or depersonalization, has been well known to happen to meditators for hundreds (or thousands?) of years. In the meditative traditions you treat it by increasing the insight into emptiness of the fear. He claims near perfect success in treating those afflicted, yet says that he has never tried and is uncertain if such treatment would work for those who came upon depersonalization spontaneously or outside of a meditative path.

There was an edge of humor to hear the many speakers discuss their experiences of depersonalization, as many were familiar to me, although without such anxiety; especially as the effect of taking LSD. I remember eloquently explaining to my buddies and my brothers buddies how sometimes on acid it feels like “it isn’t me that’s talking”. Many got quite excited and were thrilled and relieved to have someone put into words so clearly their own personal experience.

Even more interesting was how one of the speakers broadened out his definition of depersonalization to include hyper awareness, plus he included several neurotic tendencies, all under the same umbrella. It was funny – he was somewhat describing me as a teenager.

Many years ago I read the website of a woman who once had seen the entire universe in an ever expanding self out of body experience. That’s a real thing, that is well known to happen to people, exactly as is your life flashing before your eyes – literally reliving all of your life in an instant.

That experience drove Susan Blackmore to devote her life to doing proper scientific research on everything related.

It’s a MUST read website. If you have not read it, you are not educated. Plain and simple. Without that knowledge, you do not have an accurate mental map of reality or the human condition.

I once had an online forum discussion with someone who had long personal experience with having a life flash before his eyes in an instant – except for him it was not his life. Always someone new. He considered his experiences definitive proof of past lives.

Susan would have other interpretations of his facts.

Put together group hypnosis, depersonalization, and the new undestandings of past life and out of body experiences, and that TOTALLY recontextualizes Buddhism!

Holy shit, what an incredible mind fuck Buddhism is! I remember meeting a guy who had preceeded me as the resident hard-core long term fanatic meditator at the Buddhist Monastery that was my center of residence for a few years. He casually laughed off his term as “some crazy searching for emptiness, instead of getting a job”. He was very cheerful and dismissive. I was still very serious about the crazy search, so his take was a new kind of fish slap to my face.

I’m not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and I’ve read and re-read all of Ken Wilbers work so I’m intimately familiar with his take on the pre-trans fallacy.

But even the most ardent non-social programming spiritual group out there; the Buddhists, are soaked through and through with social programming so thick they are walking underwater.

It must come across as narcissistic delusions to keep saying that I have magical powers to make girls fall in love with me.

Falling in love is a common mystical experience, that also has common similar triggers to spark off. A big part of it is simply recognizing the timing of receptivity. And then, just as with a stage hypnotist, you have to fully KNOW that it will work. You know that not by a chosen belief system – it’s all subconscious – it’s recognizing signals that you are familiar with, and then broadcasting signals that you are familiar with.

You can blow girls minds with eyes. On the first date, people can fall in love. I’ve had it happen so many times that I just take it for granted, and it’s not boasting or delusion, it’s simply narrative.

Hypnosis is a broad hand-wave that doesn’t mean much. But it’s a very useful hand wave, to put certain events into a category. A very useful category – much more useful than believing in the experiences themselves to give you the narrative!

Lest I come across as a monster, I must say that I fall in love while I do the eye trick – it’s personally dangerous to myself also. It is a spiritual experience, on both sides. It’s not a charlatans game. And I’m not “mis-using” spiritual powers for “ego” purposes. I’m just a guy, doing guy things, who paid enough attention to notice what he is doing. To the point that it’s repeatable.

I know it’s unbelievable to many, or most – especially to those who have never fallen in mutual love. “What the fuck?! I call Bullshit! You can’t so quickly and easily induce and maintain and grow genuine falling in love! All those girls who moved in on the first date were after money, glitch-glatch-glorch – even if they were not!”

People don’t take the arts of love near seriously enough.

They can’t. Because of social programming.

What I do is a thing – a real thing – a thing I could not POSSIBLY have learned through long term serial monogamy.

You can’t be a hypnotist and be in the borg, socially programmed, at the same time. If I felt compunction to be polite and not look at other sexy girls while with a woman I loved, I’d not be capable of the eye trick.

Please see https://xsplat.wordpress.com/2013/11/30/dilating-your-pupils-at-will-with-desmont-morris/ .

You can not deliberately dilate your pupils. But you CAN deliberately dilate your whole being, and channel love through your eyes, and your pupils dilate while that happens.

It takes a man’s full being – full potential – his true fullest authentic self to do the eye trick. It comes from all of him.

You can’t even have an “all-of-you” if you are inside the borg. You need your authentic self – which is an IDENTITY. Not a duty, not a performance, not a social grace. A flow moment of personal truth, full personal truth.

If you let someone guilt trip away your personal truth, you lose your hypnotic powers, and you lose your self.

This is a big, life changing deal for people, to fall in love as a virgin, to fall in love as a girl whose had hundreds of cocks – to want to die and live an afterlife with a man. It’s not a parlor trick.

And yet it can’t happen under their rules. It simply CAN’T.

***

It happened again today; I was out of the borg-bubble. Out of the water. I simply became visually aroused by an ass, and felt how open and inherently good that feeling was, throughout my body and mind. And since I had been playing house as a good boy for some months with V, I had the contrast of lugging around that constant background expectation of who I should be, with being ME properly. Properly being aroused, without constant vigilance against being aroused by anyone “forbidden”. In her frame no good boy could be feeling what I was, tautologically.

It’s a relief to get my head above water, and looking back feel a bit irritated for the whole societal programming that got me in water in the first place.

True love by definition is always a laser beam, according to the jealous. No one can actually have a big heart. And if a man’s feelings lack perfect focus, he’s mean and bad. Somehow.

“If a guy sees another girl, he’s hurting you horribly, and must a sociopath, incapable of empathy!”

Nope. He could be generously giving you all the time that you ask for, and treat you well every moment you are together. He didn’t hurt YOU, or do anything to you. He did something to someone ELSE. You were not even in the room. Chances are the only reason you got hurt is from your own lack of respect for his boundaries and privacy and through spying.

The belief systems of the monogamous minded are held with the tenacity of true believers who believe in literal interpretations of the Holy-Fairy-Tale. An emotional instinct given form through mass-hysteria. “We all saw the Angel and only Sociopaths Cheat! Our emotions are held by a group, therefore the narrative we give to the emotions is True!”

For true believers, even if clear evidence of the beliefs falsehood can be irrefutably presented, in a billion different ways, the True Believers will stubbornly remain firm in Faith.

Social programming water that the fish don’t know they are swimming in.

And I’m not insensitive to V’s plight. She is tormented and was as in love as a girl can be. Infidelities caused her great anguish, and breaking up with me, at age 26, after three years of dating and moving towards marriage and babies, wasn’t a trivial thing. Painful for me too to lose my mate.

And more than my own missing her, it causes me much pain to think of her in pain. Horrible.

But in her mind I could not possibly be feeling as I describe, because even though she initiated the breakup, I must be a sociopath. Classic BPD idealization and demonization. And so classically female. Hell hath no fury like a woman spurned – even if she only feels spurned.

I’m frustrated by the role imposed on me, but I consciously and carefully agreed to that imposition. I thought it was worth a try. In a way it was, as it bought me more time with V. Even after writing hundreds of blog posts on non-monogamy and years of experience with different relationship arrangements, I was still freshly surprised to learn how irritating and slow boil soul destroying it is to be expected to be a one-woman’s-feelings-first-good-boy.

In many ways she’d make a great wife, and I really did give that option a preliminary shot. It’s heartbreaking that it was simply not possible, because she is so socially programmed that that’s the ONLY way things could continue, and I can’t re-wire myself to match that script. It’s worse than that though; the lover archetype that she thinks is what you get in a marriage is not what you get in a monogamous marriage, for anyone.

Ethics matching your core

Rambling diary post of icky personal goo. Not a self help post, or a how to. An explanation of a current identity crisis.

I’ve been watching Bombard’s youtube channel of body language analysis. I started off with the Russel Brand analysis, and just kept going. Soon I came upon this:

which shows Joe Biden being creepy. Sorry – it’s not only a shame word used by girls against low value men hitting on them – it’s a real thing. See if you don’t agree.

Bombard doesn’t hide her beliefs during her commentaries. During one she explains that those with a core morality related to a higher power can display a greater solidity of confidence.

I translated her idea into one with more meaning to me, and was reminded of recently coming off a strong medicinal Ketamine trip, realizing that I do identify with strong core beliefs – or rather a strong core identity, of being essentially love.

I think the higher power idea of her’s is superfluous, and once that’s removed her idea remains, even stronger.

Feeling that core identity is not a woosy temporary feeling brought on by moods or events or hormones; it’s a core idendity.

And yet, sometimes I’ve found myself, somewhat to my surprise, looking a lover in the face, and responding repeatedly with a flat faced lie, when asked if I was seeing any other girls.

It’s been explained to me, and I’ve seen first hand, that infidelity can lead to great anguish. I’ve felt it myself sometimes too.

Recently I’ve had to try to figure this all out. It’s a type of quandary that is cognitive dissonance, which really needs to be sorted out. While trying to figure out how I can flat faced lie to women that I love, and fuck around despite their protestations, I wrote this:

Competing interests means that relationships by nature are inherently flawed and partial. There is no conception or accurate mental map of a healthy working relationship where everyones needs are largely met in an ongoing way, because that situation does not happen to human beings.

We want from others what they can not provide out of their own free will and desire, long term. And we resent the impositions of the wants of others.

That’s the world we are incarnated into, choicelessly.

I think the statements are true, and somewhat insightful, but it didn’t take long for me to realize that this was an Adams Family morbid take on the facts. There MUST be a better way to spin the facts, into something workable! MUST BE!

What a horrible quandary, if it were true that all at once:
1) I have a core basic identity of love
2) Also have a core basic identity of being an individual who can’t compromise on wanting non-monogamy sometimes, and can’t know when I’ll want that.
3) That this will cause pain to those that I love.

What a mess!

I tried to resolve it by remembering how non-monogamy worked very well with Kiki, and realizing the details required by me for a mate.

To continue with the problem solving;

The body language vids remind of how much better it feels to be honest. And according to Bombard, people can tell when you’re lying anyway.

Actually, in my defence, it must be said that most of the fundamentals that I’ve said on this blog, I’ve also said to everyone I’ve ever dated. I’ve explained my personality and sexual philosophies in unabashed explicit detail more than once to V. She’s also found evidence of me being with girls, and broken up with me about it not once, not twice, but three times. And with most other girls if I did not want to have a discussion about painful truths, I’d remain silent, and not be forced into the corner of a lie.

It came to pass that in order to be with her, I had two choices. Stop seeing other girls, or lie. So at first I lied. Then I tried to stop seeing other girls, but that did not fix the problem. That actually could be the subject of many more posts; that’s a big deal.

So I TRIED to have an honest relationship, and I TRIED to be explicit and show every last square inch of my real self to her.

On her part, being in love, she was compelled to be with me, if at all possible, and me making repeated promises to reform was enough. For a while. Until the REAL problem started to become more obvious; being faithful is NOT the cure; it’s only an ACTION.

I started with the Biden video, to point out that there is such a thing as innappropriate behaviour, and that my quote about how it’s all a dog eat dog world anyway is no excuse for overstepping boundaries.

And yet…

Seduction includes overstepping boundaries, and then stepping back waiting for her to lean in, over and over. Sometimes people don’t really know what’s best for them at first, and will later thank tough-love. Girls will complain about the bad boy, but constantly go back to him and give the good boys their tears on shoulders. And so forth. No black and white.

But lying to a girl who has carefully explained that she’ll be traumatized and heartbroken if you cheat…

I’m trying to wrap my head around it. I don’t really feel guilty – somehow my belief system has allowed for that.

But my belief system is also somewhat at odds with my core.

I don’t even really know how I’m going to sort this out.

I did try the honesty route at first, but it led to a break up with a girl I’m really into and rely on and who is not easy to replace.

And on her part of course she was trying to manipulate me into unspeakable unhappiness (litterally monogamy is a hell that can’t be spoken of), so it was a type of type of war of love, where there will be winners and losers, if together. And loses for both if apart. There was no win-win situation there.

Ya, I’m just going to have to leave it at that. I can’t remember ever writing a blog post out where I didn’t already have a crystalized answer.

The answer to this one might take a while.

3 comments about the Trait openness – required in a mate

These are unedited rough comments. It would take much effort to polish them up into a post, and frankly I feel they are only for a very select elite audience, who could probably take value from them as they are:

—————-

A very related post to your comment:

https://freedomandfulfilment.com/psychedelics-personality-traits-values-research/

It reminds us of the research that showed that shrooms increase the personality trait of openness to new experience.

That personality trait is the one that I pointed out that I probably need in order to have a proper relationship with a girl.

It’s something I hadn’t much thought of before, other than as an appreciation when I see it.

But ya, it’s basically impossible for me to be serious with someone who does not score highly on openness.

I like my blowjobs in the Taxi cab, thank you very much.

Low openness is also correlated with having ideas set in stone – something that disgusts me.

If someone is totally anti-drug, it means they are basically anti discovery.

You know, I can still enjoy their company. But a serious lifetime deep pair-bond?

Completely out of the question.

Yes, many of us do score highly in the openness category, and view those who don’t as, quite simply, zombies.

Not alive.

People who breathe but don’t really fully exist. They aren’t actually really here.

They are in their security. That unchanging place that they “know” about.

Zombies, who rely on people like me (and the other cultural creatives) for brains.

***
“Drugs are bad, Mkay”. Zombie.

I haven’t dated a girl lately who would have willingly done that ketamine trip, or who would not have totally completely freaked out during it.

They would be HUGELY frightened of it, and see absolutely no value in it at all.

Zoooommmmmmmbbbbbiiiieeeeees.

————–
In summary:
1) I like small girls, and it’s not something I can diminish. If I want to be serious long term with someone, they had damn well better be my physical match, because when the going gets rough, and it always does, you need the base physical attraction as the consistent relationship glue. A girl can be perfectly sexy, and just slightly bigger than my type, and it makes a difference. I like small. A LOT. I can have an entire many year relationship based on little more than that the girl is small and has great tits, or hips, or face, or some feature that also makes me hard just to look at her. Oh, smell is also important, but it’s not something I can describe. There are a few smells that scream out to my brain that this girl is THE ONE. Two girls had that incredibly strongly. Kiki strongly. One girl smelled very wrong.

Most smell fine, but I don’t pay much attention to it. On our first date the reason I was so into N17 was exactly her smell. Drove me into a swoon. Of course physically she was also quite my type, even with her permanently adolescent firm little titties.

Physical things like that makes a huge difference to me, like it or not. It’s choiceless. They aren’t just icing on the cake of companionship.

I can’t call either the body nor the personality the cake, or the icing – but I know one thing for sure – the body is more than just icing.

Couples PHYSICALLY pair bond. There is literal chemistry involved, and even if they completly hate each other, if there is a strong physical chemistry, they can be nailed together like ardox spiral spikes into hardwood.

Great companionate pair bonding is great companionate pair bonding. Great. But a different thing.

2) openness to experience is a trait that without, I simply can’t respect a girl or take her seriously. I’ll always feel as if I’m humoring a child, with everything I say. And that no matter what I say, it will never get through the barriers of fear to actually be heard. Exactly like talking to a religious fanatic about science, or anything. No matter how “smart” they are, without strong openness to experience, I’ll consider them fundamentally broken and stupid. Caring about ALL the wrong things, for ALL the wrong reasons. Social puppets – worrying about what OTHER people think, and scared little mice, forever scurrying away from any pain or discomfort or novelty.

Openness to experience girl:
“I know it might not last forever, but I love him”

Low openness to experience girl:
“I’m afraid he’ll eventually break my heart, so I better call it off now”.

*************

Renfrew said:

Actually, he has a good essay online about jealousy. Let me find it….

Here (jealousy in practice):
https://www.morethantwo.com/jealousypractice.html

And here (jealousy in theory):
https://www.morethantwo.com/jealousytheory.html

Interesting articles.

I used to read up on everything that I could get my hands on regarding non-monogamy when I first started experimenting with it back in 2004.

It’s not a new field, of course, so there was plenty of good material to learn from.

Interesting points about wanting people who already “just get it”, and how this probably means that they are already long practiced relationship geeks.

I always find myself bringing up Kiki. When people say that sluts can’t bond, I bring up Kiki – a girl who had had hundreds of cocks, but who bonded more and treated me better than any other girl before or since.

I don’t think that exceptions prove the rule. I think that exceptions disprove the rule.

Obviously.

A girl like Kiki forces us to totally re-write what the rules are. It’s like one small signal in a radio telescope forcing physicists to rewrite what are the underlying forces of reality.

It makes no difference how MANY signals there are.

Girls don’t lose the ability to bond based on numbers; they lose the ability to bond with people who are less attractive and compelling than the best mate that they’ve ever had in the past.

Totally different.

The same data can be interpreted both ways, UNLESS you include the so called “exceptions to the rule”.

Usually people who say that exceptions prove the rule are simply saying “Nothing that you could possibly say will change my fixed opinion. So there.”

I don’t think she’d ever heard of the term polyamory.

And it’s kind of true that I want a girl who already just get’s it. But that’s not quite right.

The guy who wrote the articles you referenced says that communication is essential to good relationships.

In my relationship with V I absolutely refused all relationship talk. “I want to HAVE a relationship, not talk about one.”

I had to do that, because talking with her was completely counter productive. “Talking about insecurity only makes it WORSE. Not better. Worse!”

Because for her, it did.

You’d need not only a well developed rationality, but also an INTEGRATED rationality.

Very few people have a well developed rationality. V’s rationality is middling.

Usually what happens is that people can be rational exactly up to the boundary where their emotions start. Then rationality COMPLETELY and UTTERLY breaks down. And is not sought for, as if it’s a rock in stormy seas, but very actively sought against, as if it’s the stormy seas bashing against a rock.

With such people, it’s completely backwards to say that open discussion is essential to a healthy relationship. Open discussion will DESTROY the relationship!

But for Openness people, it’s not even a matter of trying to re-arrange their memes, or to get their memes and emotions to be able to speak nicely without shouting at each other.

Kiki already had emotions that took delight in her partners delight, and she felt extremely fulfilled and extremely bonded. Safely and securely so.

No discussion or training was required, not because she was a poly expert. Not any sort of relationship geek.

She was just extremely open to new experiences, extremely sexual, extremely romantic, etc. Her emotions were already there – no long journey of intellectual and self exploration or training required.

And if she had required some explorations, from what I could see, she’d not have had huge earthquake upheavals of memes vs emotions, rationality vs primal instincts. She’d lean in with her heart – then find security using that organ of perception.

V couldn’t do that, because her fear and her heart never got distinguished from each other. She thinks that they are the same thing.

Kiki was simply less afraid, and so didn’t have to tease apart what was merely fear, and what was an accurate perception of her heart.

Which I suppose is why I recently commented that being very high on Openness is crucial, for me, to have a healthy bonded relationship with someone.

It doesn’t really matter how smart or relationship geeky someone is, if they don’t score high in openness, because their fear will always over-whelm their rationality.

I think that guy was WAY WAY WAY too optimistic about peoples ability to change.

Fix the fridge? Really? In what universe is THAT ever going to happen! People don’t actually do any sort of psychological change – even with very expensive therapy and very hard trying. Not really. A VERY VERY VERY few, very motivated people do. But not people people.

HE could change. That’s extremely unusual, and yes, relationship geeky.

Not everyone needs or can do that integration of rationality with instinct. Some people can work using the emotions themselves, and get to a better place.

Doing that requires, and is perhaps even the definition of, the personality trait of openness to new experiences.

It’s exploring, with curiosity, as a purpose in and of itself. Deliberate groundlessness, as an essence of what is important, as if it were Truth, or Love, or Beauty itself.

It is that personality trait, not an intellectual and rigorous personality restructuring, that is pragmatic and actually happens, realistically.

I think his viewpoint is really just a diary and wishful thinking.

It’s like saying, “Enlightenment is possible, and this is how I got Enlightened, and you can too”.

Cha, right! Gigantic Buddhist communities, thousands and thousands of people every year doing their damned best, learning by example, reading, meditating. What percentage actually reach the same level, or anything nearly remotely close to the same level, as the authentic teachers?

Yes, it’s nearly trivial to point out that jealousy is insecurity. Big fat woop-ti-do deal. Twelve insights like that still won’t buy a cup of coffee. Won’t change a flat tire. Won’t DO anything.

Not very far off from getting stoned and being all wowed out that we might very well be living inside a simulation. Wow! Far out! Nothing changes.

In fact that type of self help advice can be dangerous, because it’s all totally true, and seems so attainable. Ya, for yourself, maybe it could be. But for OTHERS? Fat chance. Very fat.

And his articles read like couples counseling, to one half of the couple. There is an unspoken expectation that both in the couple will want to and be able to do this; because if not then of course the advice is nothing other than accurate. Uselessly accurate. Big deal.

When I was a teenager, I used to very regularly try to get lost. Very deliberately ignore every fence.

I considered it a very important meditation – a way to restructure my personality.

I didn’t know exactly why I felt so strongly that this was an important thing to do – but I instinctually realized that this was a completely crucial action in order to develop and mature into a proper human.

When V once got a little bit lost driving her car back from a distant beach, she was in a gigantic full body panic.

I, of course, quite enjoyed it.

I love being lost. So much so that I don’t even think that there even really is such a thing as being lost. There is just temporarily being disoriented, which is quite a fun adventure.

My whole personality really WAS properly changed, by those teenage walks. It really WAS crucial personal self development.

I had that as a core, instinctual, fundamental personal value. I didn’t know why I had it. Same like I don’t know why I value Truth more than others do.

I just do.

I need people who just get THAT.

Not non-monogamy.

That.

*******************

When I was that teenager, hopping over fences into restricted industrial and private areas, going for very long walks by myself, all of my friends and aquaintances thought that I was nuts. Even the more adventurous among them could not tune into the notion that this was a type of full bodied meditation. In fact I don’t think any of my friends really had any understanding of what meditation was about at all.

So in terms of openness, I was a top, deliberately spinning itself faster.

I was ALREADY a spinning top, in a world of blocks and rectangles and triangles.

On top of that I was doing self hypnosis by age 12, daily meditation by age 16, LSD and mushrooms by age 17. And every lsd trip was a mystical experience.

Then by age 21 I was living full time in a Buddhist monastery, when not on long 8 or 11 week unsupervised solitary meditation retreats deep in forests where no human came close. I have first hand experience of Enlightenments detailed explicitly in Buddhist texts, and not for the span of a Samadhi, but for spans of days, weeks, and once months. Then by my mid twenties I’d started up a strong Chi-Kung practice, to develop on the spontaneous kundalini and kundalini sex that started at age 22, that had my spine constantly ablaze.

They say that shrooms increases the openness trait, but ONLY to those who have mystical experiences with them.

Every time I’ve done LSD or Shrooms in a group I’ve always been completely astounded at the fucking buffoonery.

Why aren’t these people even REMOTELY like me? Where are their mystical experiences?

I had a group of interns out here a few years ago, all in my villa in Bali one night, and I went out and risked the danger of purchasing loads of shrooms, drove back carrying, and treated them all. I took twice as high a dose as anyone else.

They wound up all screaming like lunatics, at the amazing things crawling around in the bushes. At how their toothbrush was moving. Screaming at the top of their lungs all night long. A total waste of a trip, and it disturbed the neighbors.

I just left them alone, went to my room and had quiet time with my girlfriend. Played piano a bit. Enjoyed her company. To her I was not acting at all strange. Occasionally I’d go out and say hi to my buddies, and they were amazed that I was acting all normal and hi-how-do-you-do.

I haven’t done shrooms in years, so I doubt it was a tolerance thing, exactly. I think I just have a tolerance for being in mentally and physically different universes.

When I see people screaming at the bushes, bonding as bros over shared hallucinations, and saying WOW over and over and over, I think to myself “You fools. That’s not what shrooms are FOR!”

Trips like that, according to the literature, won’t have the hugely valuable effect of increasing their trait of Openness.

They just totally wasted it. And shrooms, I believe, are damaging. You don’t want to do them often. Use each trip well – it’s not free.

Back to Kiki – the outlier girl with the incredibly high openness to experience.

Probably a huge reason why she fell so hard in love with me is because I’m also an extreme outlier, and she could go through several lifetimes without meeting anyone else like me.

After the literal hundreds of cocks, she found one cock in a haystack different than the rest. That made me REALLY special. Way more special than if she had been a virgin bonding for the first time. I was more than her first; I was her last. She wanted to die with me and have every possible eternity with me. I was it ; she’d found IT.

At 16 or so I was walking alone through forests at midnight and oil refineries at 5am, but at 13 she was at airports picking up tricks.

Talk about openness to experience! Can you imagine!

Most people would think both of us totally off of our rockers. I’ve got to give the girl credit though. When I was 13 through 15 my libido was off the charts – I had to masturbate in the changing rooms when clothes shopping – and at every possible opportunity. I had to take whole days off of school to masturbate all day long.

Kiki was a match for that, and she went trolling for adults at airports. Genius. And the BALLS it must have taken! I mean, who does that?

I haven’t seen any 13 year old girls trolling the airport lately.

Those years are very formative, and she was a spinning top, spinning herself faster.

By the time we’d met, she was 26 and had a good well paying full time career, advancing on her merits. She was bright and very sociable. I put her to work on my own tasks, and she was very capable – more so than any girl I’ve dated since, especially in that she took joy in her work – in OUR work.

She quit that career the day of meeting me. She simply visited me for one date, and never left my apartment.

Why would she? Of course she stayed. She’d found her cock in a haystack. I was a HUGE difference than the others. And she simply fit me like a glove. All easy peasy natural, no effort.

Two spinning tops, spinning each other now. The antics we used to get up to! Hillarious.

Blow jobs in every taxi ride, kinky sex on the roof, her titties hanging over the balcony for the security guards to see (and gossip about), fingerings at all food joints. A favorite game was the wide swing Hollywood slap to her face in crowded restaurants. We were a menace to polite society, as if it was our duty to that society.

And it WAS our duty. Shake up all the squares.

Spin the blocks. See if anyone could come close, just for 5 seconds, to enter the world of one of the spinning tops.

hahaha. Almost never.

We were the only tops out there.

kikio

Arousal doesn’t come in discreet laser focused packets

Telling a guy not to look at other girls is telling him to tampen down his sexuality.

A man’s sexuality is a fire. Not a laser beam.

It’s either a big fire, or a small one.

If you succeed in tampening down his fire and get him to self regulate looking at hotties while you are both out, you won’t get fucked as much.

Your own damn fault.

And then it will just be a vicious circle creating larger and larger spirals of insecurity.

“Why isn’t he choking me in bed anymore? Why has it been days since we last had sex? Is he over me?”

Your growing insecurity will quite naturally also be a turn off. Neither men nor women like needy insecure vibes.

You want more sex and him him to be into you more?

Then get him horny IN GENERAL.

There is NO SUCH THING as horny in particular.

If you want a guy to improve his appetite and eat more, you can’t just keep making better and better hamburgers. There is no such thing as focused hunger. A favorite food is as good as you’ll ever get, so grow up.

Make him enjoy the very process of being hungry and eating.

Then be around when he’s ready to eat.

One close mate seemed to take some pleasure in my broad and never ending unfocused sexual arousal, and would even follow behind me several steps sometimes when we went out, in case I wanted to hit on other girls with her there. Kiki. She was anti-jealous, and very secure, and not only not troubled by my broad sexual desire, she harnessed it perfectly for her own benefit.

We both quite enjoyed my unfocused libido – it certainly got very focused upon her for several screamingly intense hours each and every day.

… an old joke about Calvin Coolidge when he was President … The President and Mrs. Coolidge were being shown [separately] around an experimental government farm. When [Mrs. Coolidge] came to the chicken yard she noticed that a rooster was mating very frequently. She asked the attendant how often that happened and was told, “Dozens of times each day.” Mrs. Coolidge said, “Tell that to the President when he comes by.” Upon being told, the President asked, “Same hen every time?” The reply was, “Oh, no, Mr. President, a different hen every time.” President: “Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge.”

More from Wikipedia:

In biology and psychology, the Coolidge effect is a phenomenon seen in mammalian species whereby males (and to a lesser extent females) exhibit renewed sexual interest if introduced to new receptive sexual partners,[1][2][3][4] even after cessation of sex with prior but still available sexual partners. The evolutionary benefit to this phenomenon is that a male can fertilize multiple females. The male may be reinvigorated repeatedly for successful insemination of multiple females.[5]

Related: You would want and need more sex if you had more young girls in your life now.

And this advice would only be useful to girls who already score very high on openness to new experiences personality trait. Please see this comment for why much relationship adivce is counter productive and gives too much hope, because it assumes WAY too much capability from other people.

I used to be an angel, until my mask fell off

Chat conversation today with a friendly attractive girl who has a boyfriend:

What’s her name? The girl with the long black hair?

My friend, N. I’m single.
No ring.
Not married means single, right?

hahaha yeah that’s true in a formal way (papers and document) things

That’s maybe not really true in casual way. Some people called it relationships, or can be affair, or something else.

What do you call it when there is no monogamy contract?
We don’t even have a word yet…
Oh ya. Open relationship.
That’s it.
Similar to single, but less lonely.

But also in open relationship, both part know that they are in an open relationship, like in “polygamy way”.

Yup

So, single different than open relationship, then?

I guess the same, except not alone

Well, in my point of view, it’s different between “single” and “open relationship”

I guess so. Open relationship people have a hard time with rules, it seems.

yeah, sounds complicated!

Better stories to look back on in old age.

But you were in “relationship” before (with V), right? Or what?

Yes, I was.
Tried to be a good boy, too.

It was “relationship”, not “open relationship”??

Ya

How’s it being a good boy?

Mostly good. For a while.
How’s it being a good girl?

Mostly good. Feel like an angel.

Angels are the best to corrupt.

That’s stupid angel. There are also smart angel.

Smart Angel always appears angelic

Like what?

hehe. Either to only others, or maybe even to herself.
Either way, it’s a nice game to play. A nice mask.

So, you mean, smart angel is just a mask?

What do you think?

Not in general. Mostly yep, just mask. but some are really smart and angelic, just a few, so few.

Ya, I used to be.
Until my mask fell off. Before that I didn’t even know it was a mask!

You used to be what?

An angel.
Real one

But your mask fell off?

Ya. Thank God!

You believe in god?

Thank goodness!

seriously lol

Social and romantic expectations are insidious infections of the Borg

I had a great day at the beach today.

I just lay there, enjoying a fantastic parade of eye candy, with a 22 year old hottie who loves me curled up against me, holding my stiff dick.

Krauser blew off Bali too casually. Today was an incredible day for tourist girls on the beach.

I was content, and immersed.

And it hit me hard what a gigantic juxtaposition this was from being out with V.

The last time I was out on the beach with V, she got hugely insecure about my wandering eyes, questioned me repeatedly and in detail about them, and I was forced into a long tirade about how a man is a man and of course I want to fuck other girls, and she would not even be into me if I didn’t. And that not only do I like looking at the fuckable, but get pleasure from looking at children. Couples. People I want to fuck, and people I don’t. People.

Every question she posed was merely a probe to confirm her suspicions, no answer I gave was the “correct” one. What a fucked up day that was – one written into the books as “do not repeat”.

I never once took her out again after that. Must have been at least 4 months ago. And I never told her why I didn’t take her out. I’d send her pictures of me at the beach alone, and she’d get so jealous that I’d go there by myself! I just knew if I took out in public again it would be a constant unspoken battle of wills, her trying to guilt trip me into keeping my gaze rigidly not looking at exactly what I wanted to look at.

Humans are social, and we become the Borg, even when we very consciously try our damnedest to retain our individuality.

Her expectations of me, her guilt tripping me into being “respectful” had an imprisoning effect on me that was unavoidable. Respectful=”Think of me, not yourself. YOU are being selfish for not following MY selfish orders to think of my feelings first like I tell you to”.

It was a full day long sigh of relief to be free of that that constant mind-fuck guilt trip that somehow had managed to infect me like an STD that snuck past the condom. To be ME again!

So many beautiful girls to look at. What a delightful day. And such a hottie little girl right beside me – easily a match for just about any girl on the beach.

I once dated an 8 teenager beauty queen who threw this shit-test at me over Whatsapp one day “And since you are so into my hotness, it would mean that you wouldn’t want to fuck around”.

She was 17, but like many super hot girls had insights into the sexual marketplace that guys in their mid forties are only just cluing into. She knew her statement was pure bullshit. It was a shit test – a compliance test. A test to see if I’d say “Myes Dear!”. To see how weak willed I was against the immense Borgifying power of her hotness.

I’ve laughed out loud right in girls faces before when they said the same to me. How absurd! Hahaha! No matter how super hot the girl is, no matter how many times you’ve had universe destroying sex, no matter how in love and bonded, of COURSE fucking other girls would ALSO be great!

Perfect decompression from all that noise today. A hot girl, holding my dick, my eyes enjoying other hot girls, warmth and contentment and love oozing out of me and into the receptive girl whose presence kept me hard all day. Beautiful weather, lovely day. All was right with the world.

And I healed myself from being Borgified.

My eyes took pleasure, naturally, as they SHOULD.

Any girl who gets freaked out by that should not be brought to the beach, plain and simple.

Not brought out in public at all, really. Who needs the guilt trip? It’s a mind fuck that erodes a man’s soul. Really – it is.

It’s time to say it. Don’t pan-handle with your questions.

Probably a cool guy asking a normal question asks:

Are you ok with a woman cheating on you? Just wondering.

Just wondering if you read the blog post.

An aside:

There was a long time commentor here who used to only ask questions, for a few years, until one day I mentioned that I thought he was asking for more value than he was contributing, and suggested that he contribute more of his own thoughts and insights and opinions, instead of purely restricting himself to asking questions.

I think he felt that insulting, and stopped commenting here.

There are some types of questions that are even more value asking than others. Because the questions are opaque to the questioners position, and don’t really provoke insight. Some questions are good and by themselves provoke insight.

Your question falls hard into the category of asking without giving.

I don’t want to be rude, and probably shouldn’t single you or this question out as an example, but it’s something that happens all the time with commentors.

I feel they take the blog poster for granted. Some of my companions do the same; always asking questions, probing me, but rarely if ever telling their own stories.

I think that discourse is a social bargain of fair trade.

So here’s how I would word your question;

I understand this part of your post “quote”, but am not clear if it also means that you don’t also get jealous. And jealousy aside, what about ethics? Oops! Sorry – I see that you already very clearly talked about that, both in the main post, and the comment section! My bad!

My feelings on it are this “asdfasdfasd”, and this is why “asdfasdfasfd” and this happened in my life recently that is an example of my feelings and insights, and here “asdfasdfasdf” is where our ideas might seem at odds.

I put a lifetime of personal development crafting myself into the person who would be capable to write such a post, then put in careful time and expert well developed energy into writing it.

And in return for that I get what? That brief opaque question that was already answered in full?

It’s very lazy and I’d say borders on rude. Very similar to pan-handling without offering even a marble in return.

Also, cheating is a loaded adjecto-verb. Infidelity and cheating mean two different things, so you’d have to spend quite a lot more time crafting a careful question if you want to communicate in a fair two-directional exchange.

Again, sorry to single you out – I’m sure we’d get along great and you meant no disrespect, and I know we share similar lifestyles and you’re a long time reader. I’m just using your comment as a spring board to talk about an issue.

Why calling her a bitch makes you love and respect her MORE

Most of us are not terribly interested in growing up. Society remains at a child’s level of development, and we feel that we may as well be also – it’s the norm and correct.

So when we love someone, usually we actually just love what we want them to be. As soon as our idealized version of who they are is untenable due to them acting as a normal, separate, human being, we fault them, and then have a PERSONAL crisis of identity. We can’t remain in love, and instead becomes a person who hates.

We’ve all seen it and heard it countless times. Each partner has promised monogamy, each is getting some on the side, and each is furious with the other.

A stable identity is not something to take for granted. A huge chunk of the population has identity issues, where their self conception varies wildly, along with moods and circumstances. There are whole cultures where this is more the average level of emotional development – especially the Face cultures, such as Thailand, where no one ever gets any chance to develop a real identity because fitting in and not causing anyone any slight loss of face or emotional uncomfort means that no one ever disagrees. About anything. Ever.

When a girl flips from “I will love you forever always” to “I’m going to fuck you up, you cheating bastard”, she is showing a SEVERE identity stability problem.

Loving someone is an identity. It’s not just what we do, or how we feel, it is an entire construct of self.

Falling out of love is very different than swinging between BPD style idealization of the lover and then hate.

If you are not intimately familiar with every aspect of BPD characteristics, then you owe it to yourself to become educated, because such characteristics are in yourself, right now, and you will often treat people from this emotionally childish and underdeveloped way. All people do. Fully understanding the extremes not only helps us to deal with people with severe BPD, it helps us deal with everyone. Shrink4men is entertaining and informative and written in normal emotional human language, even though the author has a degree that could give her an excuse to talk like an alien from planet academia.

Here is my point:

NOT being BPD makes people love you MORE.

Being BPD ruins relationships, absolutely, always.

Being clingy is being BPD. Being needy, jealous, controlling; all BPD.

The more you give people space to be who they really are, and love them for THAT, the more you will receive love and devotion.

If you love someone only for doing what is expected of someone you love, it’s a house of cards, and you are deliberately BEING an earthquake.

It’s so, so, so simple to very quickly make someone love you.

Call her a dirty whore, and fuck her with love, AT THE SAME TIME.

Boom.

Now she loves you.

Because you love HER.

Not her faithfulness. Not her fairy princess forever together dream land idealized identity.

You love THAT bitch. That one, right there in front of you. Now. Not later, after she’s trained and better.

It’s the exact same for girls.

Some girls have seen first hand how much love and devotion they can get from a man by loving HIM.

Want a faithful long term bonded man? Instead of keeping him from fucking other girls, bring one into your bed to share.

100% guaranteed he will love you many times more than he did previously, and you will be much more bonded.

I can be a very jealous man. It’s something that’s easy to have philosophies about, but jealousy isn’t concerned with philosophy.

However having a sound philosophy does inform and help to shape our emotions. Instead of jealousy being the entire content of our reality, it becomes one facet of it. A workable facet.

It’s very tempting to look at a girls phone, if she leaves it unguarded and accidentally unlocked, or if you’ve seen her swipe her password.

It’s counterproductive.

Either you will find no reason to feel insecure, or you will. Only those two things can happen.

If you DO find reasons to be insecure, you just made a very big mistake. You just altered your own identity. Nothing at all changed with her. The two of you were fine – doing great, probably. Good enough to keep seeing each other, at the very least. Now you may have gone and totally fucked that up.

Just leave it alone. You can’t handle the truth. I can’t handle the truth. She can’t handle the truth. Just leave it. It’s fine. Everything is fine.

The thing is, no matter if I or she is getting other needs met, in a different way, eggs are still eggs, and steak is still steak. I don’t have to be the best lover in the world to be a lover a woman is bonded to. I don’t have to be her best at any one particular thing. People form bonds, and those bonds can be secure even if someone eats out at a restaurant sometimes.

Those who’ve had very long term relationships have also seen their lovers fall in love with others.

That also doesn’t have to change identity stability. It’s great to have stability, over years – the same people in your life, watching them grow and change. Falling in and out of love, many times, breaking each other hearts, meeting again as if for the first time, getting a little bored, on and on. We can have a stable identity throughout all of it.

You can be the person who loves. You don’t have to swing into the person who hates, just because you looked at a phone. You don’t have to worry about what she’s doing tonight. It will have very little effect on what she’ll want to do with you tomorrow.

And not only will your own life go smoother – ignorance sometimes is a good idea – but you will avoid poisoning and wrecking an otherwise working relationship.

I know I find it difficult to love someone who looks at my phone. I’ve had the discussion countless times with girls, and they keep looking at it, and finding ways to look at it.

It can very quickly turn genuine love into genuine frustration – frustration big enough to just want to walk away. Jealousy is trying to hold a bar of soap by squeezing so tight it flies right out of your hands. It’s actually a type of very aggressive hate – “stop being who you are! Be my idealized version, NOW!” At minimum it’s a profound insecurity and doubt of who YOU are and that you ARE loved. Which is also very aggressive. Towards yourself.

You are loved, for real.

Your emotions will not be able to understand this. You won’t really be able to stop having strong emotions, and strong jealousy, at times. But you might be able to control your actions and philosophy, and therefore put jealousy into it’s small little proper place.

Why calling her a bitch makes you love and respect her MORE

Most of us are not terribly interested in growing up. Society remains at a child’s level of development, and we feel that we may as well be also – it’s the norm and correct.

So when we love someone, usually we actually just love what we want them to be. As soon as our idealized version of who they are is untenable due to them acting as a normal, separate, human being, we fault them, and then have a PERSONAL crisis of identity. We can’t remain in love, and instead becomes a person who hates.

We’ve all seen it and heard it countless times. Each partner has promised monogamy, each is getting some on the side, and each is furious with the other.

A stable identity is not something to take for granted. A huge chunk of the population has identity issues, where their self conception varies wildly, along with moods and circumstances. There are whole cultures where this is more the average level of emotional development – especially the Face cultures, such as Thailand, where no one ever gets any chance to develop a real identity because fitting in and not causing anyone any slight loss of face or emotional uncomfort means that no one ever disagrees. About anything. Ever.

When a girl flips from “I will love you forever always” to “I’m going to fuck you up, you cheating bastard”, she is showing a SEVERE identity stability problem.

Loving someone is an identity. It’s not just what we do, or how we feel, it is an entire construct of self.

Falling out of love is very different than swinging between BPD style idealization of the lover and then hate.

If you are not intimately familiar with every aspect of BPD characteristics, then you owe it to yourself to become educated, because such characteristics are in yourself, right now, and you will often treat people from this emotionally childish and underdeveloped way. All people do. Fully understanding the extremes not only helps us to deal with people with severe BPD, it helps us deal with everyone. Shrink4men is entertaining and informative and written in normal emotional human language, even though the author has a degree that could give her an excuse to talk like an alien from planet academia.

Here is my point:

NOT being BPD makes people love you MORE.

Being BPD ruins relationships, absolutely, always.

Being clingy is being BPD. Being needy, jealous, controlling; all BPD.

The more you give people space to be who they really are, and love them for THAT, the more you will receive love and devotion.

If you love someone only for doing what is expected of someone you love, it’s a house of cards, and you are deliberately BEING an earthquake.

It’s so, so, so simple to very quickly make someone love you.

Call her a dirty whore, and fuck her with love, AT THE SAME TIME.

Boom.

Now she loves you.

Because you love HER.

Not her faithfulness. Not her fairy princess forever together dream land idealized identity.

You love THAT bitch. That one, right there in front of you. Now. Not later, after she’s trained and better.

It’s the exact same for girls.

Some girls have seen first hand how much love and devotion they can get from a man by loving HIM.

Want a faithful long term bonded man? Instead of keeping him from fucking other girls, bring one into your bed to share.

100% guaranteed he will love you many times more than he did previously, and you will be much more bonded.

I can be a very jealous man. It’s something that’s easy to have philosophies about, but jealousy isn’t concerned with philosophy.

However having a sound philosophy does inform and help to shape our emotions. Instead of jealousy being the entire content of our reality, it becomes one facet of it. A workable facet.

It’s very tempting to look at a girls phone, if she leaves it unguarded and accidentally unlocked, or if you’ve seen her swipe her password.

It’s counterproductive.

Either you will find no reason to feel insecure, or you will. Only those two things can happen.

If you DO find reasons to be insecure, you just made a very big mistake. You just altered your own identity. Nothing at all changed with her. The two of you were fine – doing great, probably. Good enough to keep seeing each other, at the very least. Now you may have gone and totally fucked that up.

Just leave it alone. You can’t handle the truth. I can’t handle the truth. She can’t handle the truth. Just leave it. It’s fine. Everything is fine.

The thing is, no matter if I or she is getting other needs met, in a different way, eggs are still eggs, and steak is still steak. I don’t have to be the best lover in the world to be a lover a woman is bonded to. I don’t have to be her best at any one particular thing. People form bonds, and those bonds can be secure even if someone eats out at a restaurant sometimes.

Those who’ve had very long term relationships have also seen their lovers fall in love with others.

That also doesn’t have to change identity stability. It’s great to have stability, over years – the same people in your life, watching them grow and change. Falling in and out of love, many times, breaking each other hearts, meeting again as if for the first time, getting a little bored, on and on. We can have a stable identity throughout all of it.

You can be the person who loves. You don’t have to swing into the person who hates, just because you looked at a phone. You don’t have to worry about what she’s doing tonight. It will have very little effect on what she’ll want to do with you tomorrow.

And not only will your own life go smoother – ignorance sometimes is a good idea – but you will avoid poisoning and wrecking an otherwise working relationship.

I know I find it difficult to love someone who looks at my phone. I’ve had the discussion countless times with girls, and they keep looking at it, and finding ways to look at it.

It can very quickly turn genuine love into genuine frustration – frustration big enough to just want to walk away. Jealousy is trying to hold a bar of soap by squeezing so tight it flies right out of your hands. It’s actually a type of very aggressive hate – “stop being who you are! Be my idealized version, NOW!” At minimum it’s a profound insecurity and doubt of who YOU are and that you ARE loved. Which is also very aggressive. Towards yourself.

You are loved, for real.

Your emotions will not be able to understand this. You won’t really be able to stop having strong emotions, and strong jealousy, at times. But you might be able to control your actions and philosophy, and therefore put jealousy into it’s small little proper place.

The Ketamines

I’ve been doing ketamine as a crohn’s treatment, which is but one of many of it’s flavors of off label uses.

It is also useful to treat:
Post traumatic stress disorder
Severe depression (immediate results)
Neuropathic pain – which I think is a special type of pain where your nerves fuck up and send hurt signals when they may as well just calm down.
Opiate addiction

The day V broke up with me I told her that I’d most likely be fine because I was doing ketamine, and that should make it so that I can’t get depressed.

It’s about right.

I should have got my hands on some when Kiki died.

The trips it can give are weird enough that a guy could try to lay the blame on spritual experiences, however like Ibogaine, Ketamine cures Opiate addiction not through cognitive idea re-arrangment quite so much as through some sort of reset button.

Which begs a big question – what are our pre-sets? That would be cool if our presets were healthy. Ketamine seems to think so.

The dose before the one I’m coming off of now was two syringes – 2 ml = 100 mg. I had planned on injecting 150 mg, but after the 2nd syringe was not up to the task of coordinating a third injection. Good thing too – it was my 2nd 100 mg trip, but it took me a bit farther out, and it just got stupid weird – of course the world dissapeared into a hallucination, but the identity and all memories also hallucinated or wobbled away, so it was silly groundless.

I told myself that I was breathing, and most likely in a safe position, before things got even weirder and even those thoughts would have not fit into the new ketamine universe.

The dose I did 50 minutes ago was 3/4 of a syringe, so there was only a brief period where I could no longer play the piano, and the world stayed with me the whole time, as did my identity.

The larger doses I suppose could qualify as some kind of near death experience, which have been shown to cause long term positive personality changes, so there is probably also some pure psychological experiential benefit. But I’m still laying my money down on betting the drugs long term mental effects happen for physical rather than meme organizing reasons.

It’s not a euphoriant. Is that a word? It doesn’t make you feel warm and fuzzy and happy. The antidepressant effect is long term and immediate or stronger after a few more sessions, but the trip itself doesn’t provide a glow like beer or exstacy.

I’m not a fan of heartbreak – I just don’t use it as an excuse to avoid intimacy, because I think intimacy is the bread of life. I’m thinking K could be valuable to use to treat grief, along with it’s clinically proven usefulness to depression.

Blogging plus ketamine plus sex plus meeting new people plus the positive waves of previous positive waves of karma seem to sure have cut down the usual grieving process.

I don’t think I could recommend a heavy ketamine trip to anyone – it’s weird weird weird. But I suspect it’s a healthy and good for you thing to take, from time to time, especially for those who are out of whack.

My research has shown that it’s mostly safe. So for anyone depressed, benefits most likely would outwheigh negatives.

Treatments are usually from two to six times, and doses vary hugely – it’s studied a lot, but understudied still.

I’ve found ketamine to be a mild stimulant, and due to the total freakazoid places it takes you to, it’s best if buffered with an anti anxiety such as diazepam. Much much best. Most doctors agree.

I have found myself to me more mellow coming off of a trip. The comment I wrote realizing that I had been spinning reality into an Adams Family rerun and choosing a brighter more optimistic spin was directly after a 1 syringe dose (enough to make the bed dissapear for a short time)

I’m told the effects are not like other drugs – for depression, neuropathic pain, and others the effects can be long lasting. So maybe I’ll be more mellow yellow for a while. I’d call that good.

An alpha is merely a guy with an identity. A beta is merely a social conservative.

Always insightful commentor Renfrew wrote:

Lastly, there is a whole conversation to be had, X, around the sense you express at the end of this post (which you’ve expressed before, over many years), that if the girl would just give you what you want and play things cool, that’s in her interest because then she’d get the absolute best out of you. I’ve had this feeling many times myself, so I get it completely. But I have lately wondered sometimes if it’s flawed…. or partial.

My teenage virgin hyper sexual beauty queen science major playwright faithful devoted love slave of the future disagrees with you.

Sure, Unicorns aren’t real. What difference does it make? I still want a unicorn. Better yet twins. I could handle twins.

Competing interests means that relationships by nature are inherently flawed and partial. There is no conception or accurate mental map of a healthy working relationship where everyones needs are largely met in an ongoing way, because that situation does not happen to human beings.

We want from others what they can not provide out of their own free will and desire, long term. And we resent the impositions of the wants of others.

That’s the world we are incarnated into, choicelessly.

A major theme of my post is that emotional needs don’t create reality. People in love can rarely grasp the hard truth that no love has ever overcome the fact that love is, by nature, an opposition of interests – not a mutual melding of interests.

In other words, there is no such thing as compromise. Only codependent self denial and deliberate willful ignorance of same.

Reading the wikipedia page on codependence did not enlighten me much, as the concept is still ill defined and contentious. I think it could be a useful term if thought of as lack of clarity with identity and social boundary issues, and ongoing attempts at creating harmony and approval while losing track of and diminishing the importance of ones own desires.

Every married guy who explains that he actually does not want to fuck the hot teenagers is nothing but an expert lier, completely lost from any identity he ever had. Subsumed into the borg, thinking that he is, in fact, the borg.

An alpha is merely a guy who has an identity. A beta is merely a guy who thinks of fitting in and doing his duty for sake of family and society. He does not have an identity – he has a borg.

It’s neither right nor wrong to be codependant, or beta. Perhaps the social conservatives (betas each and every one) are correct when they say that society relies on them to function.

For better or worse, I have an identity, and that makes long term monogamy impossible for me.

Renfrew said:

But I’m not sure it’s fair to say that any married guy who says he doesn’t want to fuck a hot teenager is either a lier or a self-alienated beta. There may be a few more possibilities there than just those two!

Nope, it really is that simple.

Put a hot young teenager into the same bed as a guy who claims he does not want to have sex with hot young teenagers.

Either he will want to fuck her, or he has ailments.

Deep rooted guilt and a complete loss of individuality, or impotence, are the only reasons for a lack of DESIRE for what is inherently desirable.

If someone told me they don’t desire food, I’d call bullshit. It’s physically impossible.

Not wanting to fuck hot teenage girls is simply physically impossible.

I mean yes, seeing them on the street might not get a stiffy, but to extrapolate out of that they they don’t want it is going too far.

Any man on a desert island for a while with a sexy and pleasant horny teenager will not only want to fuck her, he’ll quickly develop an infatuation.

I really do think it’s that black and white.

And it’s pure fantasy with the sole purpose of walking on social eggshells for a man to think otherwise of himself. His identity is lost to himself, and he is God Fearing and deluded. A communist, basically.

People in jail too long become “institutionalized”. They get so used to jail that they can’t cope with freedom. Married guys self-identify with their own jail cells. They become institutionalized, and no longer know what freedom even means.

But desire is pre-social. It doesn’t go away, and opportunity would disclose it.

The porn industry caters to the exact men who claim to not be attracted to the girls they fap to.