“Dr. Mark Goulston: Life Lessons from a People Hacker”

A really good podcast and interview, though it may seem to start off a little odd. His first story/examples provided might seem off-putting to some initially, but stick with it. His following stories and examples add a great deal of clarity to his position while veering off into other areas where Dr. Mark’s personal and professional experiences unfold a rich and interesting perspective.

I’ve now added three of his books to my wishlist.

As for his talk on “terrorism”…what can I say? His is a perspective impacted by the military and government through his past employment ventures. I can understand that. It’s true that terroristically-inclined persons will continue to exist. Though I don’t believe the major global powers could focus enough military and police attention onto citizens or foreigners in order to completely stamp out all “terrorist” acts. Not possible. Though the man’s right that acquiring and enlarging our empathy so as to better relate with one another can do wonders. Feeling misunderstood is a terrible plight, particularly while living in what can feel like such alienating times. I get it.

Just that I also understand that stamping out all forms of malicious violence would require either eradicating or completely overhauling all human beings, and those aren’t the outcomes I’m open to. Some folks see social and/or biological engineering projects as hopeful and promising, but I cannot be counted among them. And policing by itself can only go so far and do so much. Preemptive precautionary measures walk a very fine line against invading individual privacy and trespassing against the rights bestowed upon us by the Constitution as American citizens. To effectively throw out those rights by trampling upon them will most certainly open up a pandora’s box of its own.

Yes, humans are all potentially dangerous. Sanity isn’t static or even easily definable. I’m under the assumption that we’re all crazy to one degree or another, and outside appearances, impressive resumes, and whatever else can’t always alert us to who’s who. We all wear masks, at least while out in public. Some masks appear more stoic than others. Some people have mastered the art of outwardly appearing gentle, kind, fun-loving, helpful, sweet — doesn’t mean that’s necessarily who they really are behind closed doors. Male or female, doesn’t matter. Humans are a tricky lot.

But nearly all of us do crave and need bonds and connections and love. We are a social species, no getting around that. And this is why we also can’t help but be a manipulative species as well. No judgment intended either way in stating that, just noting the obvious.

Step by step, walking into the future

Friday night I used a credit on Audible.com to acquire a copy of James Altucher’s book Choose Yourself and then listened to it in parts on through Saturday afternoon. Have a membership on that site but hadn’t actually tried it out yet. Glad to have done so. That book was very worthwhile. Yes, he mentions things he’s talked about on his blog, but it was nice to listen to him bring it all together in audio format. This is one I would recommend to others and maybe even share as a gift. Undoubtedly I’ll be re-listening to it in the future as needed, at least the last portion since that part really resonated with me and deserves to be drummed into my mind so that I continue working toward making positive changes in my life.

The 4 pillars of what he refers to as the “daily practice” are: emotional, mental, physical, and spiritual. You don’t need to read his books to get an idea of what he’s talking about there since it’s all been spelled out on his blog. It’s a simple idea, and yet how many of us have been cognizant of taking care of each of these areas in our lives on a daily basis? I certainly haven’t and seriously need to in going forward if things are ever to improve. Continue reading

Discussion between a college-age feminist, an MRA, and a couple atheists (plus my thoughts)

Feminist (AwesomeRants) vs. MRA (Janet Bloomfield) (DP)”:

Haven’t watched but maybe a couple of Drunken Peasants videos so far, though I am a fan of T.J.’s Amazing Atheist YT channel.

I really liked this discussion, though I’d like to see more including Tori of the AwesomeRants channel fleshing out her ideas in greater detail (maybe having her on as a guest by herself). Because feminism is still rather new to her, so she’s totally learning and taking in this stuff and forming opinions as she goes, just as any of us were back in college. Opinions will necessarily shift and change over time. That’s life. And she’s a particularly smart and thoughtful young woman, having watched several of her videos in the past. I don’t always agree with her, but I respect that she’s actively seeking to learn and possesses a critical mind that appears willing to challenge even her own biases. She’s good people, so far as I can tell.

And so is T.J.

Know less about Scotty and JudgyBitch/Janet Bloomfield. But overall, I gotta say that I agreed in places with everybody in this video, now paused at the 46:26 mark. Many thoughts sprang to mind while watching this…

Ya know, I agree with T.J that there are philosophical differences among people that can be so great that perhaps we’re better off going our separate ways, at least in that respect (in this case, in terms of romantic relationships). Some people desire very intuitive, intimate partnerships where their partner is capable of reading their body language and is sensitive to moods and whatever else. While to an extent I grasp all of that, I’m personally more in line with Janet’s thinking in that I have no issue with asserting myself when something troubles me, at least not anymore. Those who are less direct and expect their partner to take cues can be really confusing to the uninitiated. And I’m here to say that those types aren’t always female despite the feminine association with what might be minimally considered coyness or playing hard to get (some are also the types who need the stars aligned and the wind blowing in just the right sort of way . . . yep, grown men can be that way too, even heterosexuals, truth be told). Plenty of people out here even like it like that on the whole, whichever way they may individually lean.

Me personally, I’m a pursuer who also enjoys being pursued by those I’m attracted to. If I’m not interested, as an adult, I can and will state it. If I’m in a committed relationship with someone I’ve chosen to engage with him because we share certain values in common and aim to respect one another’s boundaries. So yeah, in that sort of setup consent is established, unless it involves some freaky shit that we have the sense to realize ought to be discussed with our partner(s) in advance. But that’s talking about an established relationship. What about in cases where relative strangers are involved? And that’s where I come down more solidly for the need to be assertive and to work hard at avoiding putting yourself in potentially compromising situations where you might be overwhelmed and/or taken advantage of. Goes back to that notion of knowing thyself … but it’s a learning process. And it’s young people primarily the ones wrestling with these sexual questions and problems.

We live in a culture that glamorizes and pedestalizes youth and beauty probably more than ever before, setting young people up to be targeted by adults all the more so. And that’s where these sort of conversations veer off for me, because youths are naive and do struggle to know how to react and can be overwhelmed to where they’re paralyzed with fear and uncertainty. Or they (how often seemingly?) enthusiastically consent to things that aren’t actually good for them, because they can’t see far enough into the future and are too inexperienced to predict the consequences. Living and learning…  Do we as older (ha!) people not bear a greater responsibility to be mindful of not leading young, naive people intro troubled waters? I guess I’m asking if we shouldn’t position ourselves in their lives as friends rather than as predatory foes and/or intellectual combatants. Yet a substantial portion of the population were corrupted by adults in their youth, so this is happening and it’s an inquiry seriously needing to be addressed, and not just by gender ideologues.

People possess a tendency to manipulate and use those whom they’re able to, which is to say humans tend to be opportunistic, and that can and does shake out in myriad ways across the spectrum, ranging from sexual abuse to physical domination to intellectual and emotional trickery to applying strong social pressure. Women are not immune to behaving in these ways, which I’d guess is common sense. But there are gendered differences when it comes to the ways it tends to play out.

Clear and obvious example: When was the last time you heard of a female prowling a neighborhood, sneaking into a random house and accosting a stranger sleeping at knife- or gun-point, demanding sex? When we do hear of these select cases, males overwhelmingly are the perpetrators. Most of us chock that up to common sense. Deceptively manipulating someone into marrying you so you can get your hands on their money? More commonly associated with female behavior. Different ways that abuses of power can and typically do shake out between the sexes, quite obviously.

Part of the issue is this expanded definition of what legally constitutes rape. That’s a problem since all offenses, from extreme violation and mistreatment on over to miscommunications between mutually drunken idiots, wind up falling under the same banner, undifferentiated. IMO, this is the major question confronting us as a society in this respect: determining what’s worthy of legal prosecution and what’s best handled interpersonally and socially. Not all offenses are created equal, as we know. Someone breaking into my car when I’m not around and stealing my stereo isn’t perceived by me to be as great of a violation as experiencing a home invasion where I am present, tied up, and tortured. Different degrees of trauma will arise there. Crude as these comparisons are, the same holds true for sexual violations. [Nothing I say is intended to be taken strictly literally unless I expressly state that to be my intention. Understand here that I am NOT implying that raping a person who’s passed out cold is in any way comparable to jacking my car when I’m not in it. No. That does not qualify as a lesser form of “date rape,” which I’d define as involving mostly coercion and manipulation rather than physical force and/or the lack or absence of the ability to affirmatively consent, which admittedly in some cases gets pretty hazy as well. Big reason why we have to be cognizant of the situations we’re putting ourselves and others in when we’re out drinking or doing whatever and playing in the hook-up culture. I could say a lot more on this and related subjects, but it can wait for a future blog post.]

What makes it so terribly complicated here are the untold number of nuances involved in our sexual and social interactions. This is no cut-and-dried matter that can be effectively reduced down to positive affirmations granted each and every step along the way, not if we’re to actually enjoy spontaneity with our sexual partners. That’s not what most of us want either, whether male or female. What we do want is to be shown more respect, and that’s a two-way street. Obviously though, some people override concern for others in pursuit of their own jollies. Not uncommon, especially among the horniest demographic.

But here’s the thing: in my quite adequate number of sexual partners and experiences, I’d say that the vast majority of men aren’t interested in raping someone. If you state it plain and let them understand what they’re doing is pushing in that direction, they’ll back off. Don’t even have to go that far even with most men — an emphatic “NO! I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU!” backed up by unyielding body language turns them completely off. And I didn’t even have to go that far much of the time.

I can understand how we might at times send mixed signals to males, so it does help to state our intentions upfront and either stick with them and act accordingly, or abandon them and decide what risks we are willing to take. But admittedly, part of the problem with the hook-up scene is that you’re often dealing with strangers, people you really can’t say with certainty are going to treat you with respect behind closed doors. It’s a risk, and it’s one I think more young people would be better off trying to avoid, from the sounds of it. But then they’re being bombarded with so much sexuality in our popular media and mixed messages encouraging them to behave in these ways.

(If I were a parent, I’d follow my stepdad’s lead and not subscribe to cable television. Even without kids I haven’t subscribed to cable this time around since at least 2008. But now most households have the internet, so who knows how to protect young people from being swayed by so much poor advice and sexual over-stimulation? Not to mention their exposure through their peers at school. Crazy times…)

More than feeling on a side in these gender-bent debates, I just mostly feel sorry for young people having to learn so much the hard way. It can be really rough out there. Sometimes you think you have the situation under control, but then later learn otherwise. Alcohol consumption certainly complicates matters there. And, like I said before, there’s no shortage of older people willing to take advantage of youthful naivety wherever they find it. Sad, but true. Apparently a fact of life.

I don’t know what to tell young people today. Part of me wants to say don’t follow in my footsteps since it contains some hard lessons that could really mess up the tender-hearted. But then again, how else does one learn but through trial and error? Some potentially expensive consequences up in there though, like becoming pregnant or contracting an STD or getting seriously traumatized by a scary individual. These are the risks we take with sex, especially with relative strangers. Leads me back to what Tori was saying about being sensitive to our partner’s needs and wants — yes, that’s a fabulous idea, and it’s best carried out by waiting to get to know people for a while before engaging in sexual activity, that way you can better gauge how they are and what their intentions may be. It’s this promiscuous, drunken hook-up culture where strangers come together that’s causing a lot of confusion and problems.

While I understand many of us don’t desire a return to past gender roles or social pressure for us to be monogamous to one partner throughout all our life, that doesn’t mean there’s greater value in swaying to the opposite extreme of rampant reckless sex among strangers and seeing people as nothing but instruments to be used to satisfy our own selfish sexual pleasures. It’s that mentality, in a nutshell, that appears to be fucking us up. Nothing necessarily wrong with hooking up for sex, but it’s risky behavior and the odds are, I’d say, that 1-5 out of 100 (if you play your cards right) will be so selfish that they disregard your boundaries and perhaps even safety in striving to gratify themselves. And then there’s always that stray “free radical” to worry about who may seriously prove sadistic and dangerous (think: Looking For Mr. Goodbar). While it’s true that a person can be sexually accosted while minding our own business, the risks dramatically go up when we retreat into private spaces with people we don’t know well under the implicit assumption that sex very well may occur. Especially when boozed up. That’s not meant judgmentally, just pointing to the potential hazards here.

These are hard truths for young people to come up against, yes. Add it to the mountain of other things we grew up lied to or in the dark about. The truth is that the hook-up culture is potentially dangerous, and you have to go into it with your eyes open rather than being too trusting of strangers. Naivety extracts a cost eventually. We like to imagine some perfect world where this no longer occurs, but how could that ever be when humans are so complex and varied? Threats will always exist, and no amount of education can fully eliminate them. Because some people don’t care that they’re breaking the law or seriously upsetting or harming someone else. Some people can be very cruel and unconcerned. Or just selfish and willfully oblivious. I don’t know how we protect younger people from reckoning with this fact of life, aside from aiming to not contribute to it and sharing our own stories in case they’re open to learning lessons vicariously through others. Some lessons one indeed would be better off not having to learn in the harshest fashion, and I’m glad I gleaned as much as I did from others I was fortunate enough to read or hear directly from back in the day.

As is commonly said, why reinvent the wheel?

Anyway, moving along in their talk above about the rights women possess in the West compared to men… The genital mutilation argument continues to garner my sympathy and support (as does selective service requirements). As for choice when it comes to creating and supporting a child, with the technologies available to us today, I can understand there needing to be some sort of way for both males and females to sign on to the pregnancy being taken to full-term and both agreeing to share in providing financial/household, emotional, psychological and otherwise nurturing support toward any offspring we’re bringing into existence. I agree with this for enhancing equality between the sexes, but also because I think this would help create checks and balances both legally and socially that are sorely needed. Using kids to take advantage of each other through the courts is a messed-up way to behave. Shouldn’t be a parent if you’re going to act like that. It’s not fair. Kids don’t deserve to be used as pawns between adults. So my concern is with the upbringing of future generations being brought into this mess more so than between the sexes battling it out today, seeing as how I don’t and won’t have kids of my own (thanks to technologies).

I love my right to choose, so I want to see others enjoy it as well. No reason to be exclusive — we can work it out somehow. Can’t we? If I become pregnant and the man expressly states he doesn’t want to share in parenting, am I not agreeing to single motherhood? Of course I am. But I may require of him to help finance it and partake in at least some aspects of parenting regardless of his will. That’s not a fair arrangement. Gonna have to upgrade that. So many children being born to disinterested, unhappy parents has been a problem for a long time — why continue it if we don’t have to anymore?

Social checks and balances to discourage certain behaviors have always existed among social beings, playing out in varied ways across cultures—and while acknowledging abuses of unfortunate circumstances did occur and could be unduly harsh (here thinking about the treatment of single/widowed mothers in past times, as well as those with legitimate brain abnormalities who wound up vilified, though, interestingly enough, shamans of old are often compared with those labeled as schizophrenics today and are claimed to belong to the same lineage — goes to further demonstrate the power of perception at any given point in history)—but we now live in the time of plenty in great grids where agricultural innovations make it possible to support massive populations, many of whom if thrown back on our own (primitive) devices at this point could not survive; this continues because our government stepped in and plays the role of Big Poppa. And this all costs tax-paying citizens a fortune (though not as much as corporate welfare, it deserves to be declared, to put it in sharper perspective). We’re getting hosed by our governments and would benefit from nearly anything that extracts its involvement from our lives and personal business. We can and likely should figure this shit out among ourselves and figure out ways to get the Government to back the fuck off and let us do so. But that requires cooperation, coming on the heels of decades where competition became all the rage. The cooperative spirit has been effectively undermined, and these are some of the consequences. Better ways are called for.

Interesting talk. Glad to see it didn’t devolve into some shaming match.

The night’s gotten away from me.

Excerpts from Warren Farrell’s book “Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say”

Excerpt 1:

Excerpt 2:

Excerpt 3:

Wisdom and ideas passed along by Professor Anton

“Stoic Virtues (Ancient & Modern)”:

Rewatching this one today: “Spiritual (Existential) Suffering”:

“The Future of Freedom (the past that will-have-been)”:

“Perception, Conception, Interpretation (Royce)”:

“Books & Thinking for Oneself”:

“The Convenience of Thinking for Oneself”:

Open Letter to MGTOWs I’ve Offended

Ok. I’ve thought it over a bit more. I do see where I lost my cool and became hyperbolic and antagonistic right back.

If you’ll grant me a few more minutes of your time, I’d like to explain a few things. My original goal wasn’t to come in “policing tones.” No, and I think I’ve established that. I came in to ask what seems to me a relevant question, though apparently it makes very little sense to hardly anyone else. That’s likely partly my fault for not wording my thoughts more clearly, that being something I actively work on. But to me the question is relevant on a number of levels.

To restate the question posed: How can the MGTOW “movement” be defined as completely non-violent when it’s composed of individuals who ultimately decide how to navigate their own lives for themselves?

First off, I assume not all of us embrace 100% non-violence or the non-aggression principle in full. That’s not talking about violence between the sexes specifically, just violence in general. And part of the reason this quibble gnaws at me is due to how broadly “violence” is being defined today. Beyond that, we do not all know one another and oftentimes have to take one another’s word as to whether we live out our personal lives in a completely non-violent or non-aggressive way. I personally won’t claim to, but the push these days seems to be for everybody to jump on board with the logic that all violence is automatically bad and completely intolerable. I don’t entirely see it that way and imagine there are plenty of others who don’t truly either. And this could apply to interpersonal relations as much as people choosing to take an offensive stance against institutions or other aspects of the System they are being squeezed by. Undoubtedly some folks could rationalize nearly anything as justified in self-defense, but that’s another talk for another time.

Therefore, when one claims that the MGTOW “movement” is completely non-violent, that’s tough for me to fathom, considering it’s populated by disparate individuals who subscribe to or are informed by an untold number of other philosophies and/or ideologies. This need to pigeon-hole all MGTOWs as non-violent strikes me as unnecessary and beyond being provable. More than that, it strikes me as the first step in the process of organizing into an actual movement versus a loose collective of individuals deciding how to navigate for themselves. One of the things I happen to appreciate about the MGTOW logic is how open-ended it is, because it seems every time a true movement winds up being formed the individuals therein wind up being pressed to conform more and more, to toe the lines being established. I respected MGTOW logic in so far as it appeared to stand outside of such ambitions.

Furthermore, it does strike me as rather odd that one can claim the MGTOW philosophy is inherently about non-violence while at the same time some of those who aim to “lead” within it are actually spreading messages that can be taken as encouraging increased hostility and painting their “opposition” as untrustworthy “enemies” (as they claim is biologically determined and incapable of being altered or reasoned with). Because there are enough people out here uncritically accepting such rhetoric and who do appear whipped into a terrified frenzy I cannot help but wonder if such arguments won’t in some way contribute to however many individuals freaking out and rationalizing that the “enemy” needs to be either physically taken out or treated to “just desserts” or what have you. That’s a legitimate concern since all throughout history we see dehumanization of “opponents” as the first step in that sort of process. I do worry about that, and how could I not, as someone branded as belonging among “the enemies” and as someone who wishes to not see history keep repeating mindlessly?

I doubt most MGTOWs are aiming for that sort of outcome, so I don’t worry about most. But I do worry about the young, disenchanted, and impressionable as well as those apparently lacking critical faculties who’re growing exceedingly hostile. That concern extends far beyond MGTOW or the “manosphere” for me.

The future I see unfolding around us does concern me, and I don’t know what to do about it either. It’s extremely depressing seeing how much humans are going at one another and stepping on each other’s necks. My goal is not to censor myself or others, but I, for one, would like to see more of us be cognizant of the effect we’re having on one another. That may be my pipe dream, but so be it.

To me, it is cowardly to refuse to consider dissenting opinions and to try to obstruct others by strawmanning their stated positions right off the bat so as to protect one’s own outlook from critique. I don’t respect that in men or women.

We’re not all going to see eye to eye on everything, and that’s fine. I’m not here to convince everybody else that my opinions reign supreme, but I do expect to be treated with a modicum of respect when I come in good faith and am not categorically demonizing others. Yes, I’m a hot-head who lost my cool, but a year worth of listening to and reading women generally being referred to in the “manosphere” as “whores,” “cunts,” “holes,” “twats,” “the enemy,” “good for nothing,” “free-loaders,” etc., has turned my heart cold toward those speaking out of both sides of their mouths. How can one hold those views and still claim they’re for “equality”? Equal what? Equal mistreatment of one another? Equal degradation?

Whether people care to know it or not, I find that shit heart-breaking. And repeatedly reading and listening to reminders that some of these men don’t care at all what I or anyone else might think, that “outsider’s” feelings are irrelevant, that we can just go “fuck off” if we can’t take the heat—well, don’t expect that sort of strategy to bring around much sympathy for whatever pains and problems you’re suffering with. And that right there is unfortunate too, because I know lots of people out here really do need one another despite what they might say. They want to belong somewhere and feel like they’re a valuable member of this society whose thoughts, feelings, and personal experiences do matter. And they do. But so do others’ as well. When we lose sight of that and go into attack mode, we do more harm than good, that I do believe.

On another point, no, I personally don’t have a lot of use for statistics, especially when they do not appear to jibe with what I’m seeing out here. But my own view can’t help but be limited and subjectively influenced, I do grasp that. I’m not claiming my views are always right, and nobody has to agree with me, but I do actively practice skepticism in dealing with nearly everything. That’s just me, and perhaps it’s possible to take it too far. *shrugs* The benefit of skepticism is that it forces me to maintain an open mind in realizing there’s just a lot I cannot know for sure, regardless of how many statistics are pointed at in relation to any given subject. The downside (in some people’s view) is it leads to a non-committal position seen as “wishy-washy” and incapable of taking a concrete stance on much. I don’t mind this, though it can prove annoying to others at times. But c’est la vie — we all explore life from behind our own eyes and work with what we’ve got.

Do I think some guys are freaking out a bit too much on the marriage and child support matter? Yes and no. Yes when it comes to that being the talking point tossed around so incredibly much that it seems little else can be discussed in public forums. And yes when we recognize there are things within our power we can do to better ensure our safety (such as not marrying and taking serious measures to prevent conceiving children with people we very likely would not want to co-parent with, or choosing not having kids at all). While I recognize there are fewer birth control options available to men, we must work with what we currently have (that’s just being practical, folks) and/or become involved in creating new methods. That’s all anyone is capable of doing. Life comes with all sorts of risks and I do not think it benefits us much when we allow ourselves to become so consumed with fear that we wind up obstructing our own selves and fail to see what power we do actually possess. That’s what I said to feminists, it’s what I have to say to myself, so I see no reason for not saying it to men who are getting “up in arms” in a similar fashion.

Now, as for the No’s, I recognize that our criminal justice system and courts are generally stacked against men at this point in time, and I sympathize with this conundrum, acknowledging how easy it is to be falsely accused and how many people out here appear to have no qualms over doing others that way. That’s a travesty, no doubt. We all might not agree on how it all is shaking out in terms of laying blame here and there and whether this phenomenon impacts men more than women, etc., but I’m not cool with anyone being unfairly taken advantage of in these sorts of ways. It’s corrupt and it’s encouraging more pain to pay forward. That is no good.

Of what little activism I remain financially tied to anymore, one organization I support and promote is The Innocence Project, which raises funds for DNA testing to exonerate the innocent who were pegged as being guilty and sentenced to years (sometimes decades) behind bars, with the possibility of being executed. My background in studying the criminal justice field led me there and plays into my reasons for why I personally chose not to go to work in Corrections (as had been my gameplan in college). But anyway, I bring this up to demonstrate that while I can’t claim to know a heck of a lot about divorce court proceedings or child support issues since I don’t have kids and my own divorce was very simple and straightforward (plus most of those closest to me are either still married or never married or managed an equitable split), I do care about other matters that are disproportionately affecting men. We can’t all be completely well-rounded when it comes to keeping abreast with everything going on out here in society, and my areas of focus will differ from those of others. There are enough eyes on the child support/alimony/divorce issue, and I’m not the one to go to for a debate on all of that. Again, I mentioned it in that video because I was getting ticked and because it’s a popular talking point that I seem to have to confront no matter what topic I bring up. All I can say on those sorts of things is do what you can to protect yourself, but why go for overkill? Those are just my thoughts, and people will do whatever they deem as best in their own lives.

I have come to see people like Bar Bar and now Paul Elam as advocating what I consider unnecessary overkill and divisive animosity. And Barbarossa’s lax use of censorship strikes me as uncalled for. But whatever. I’ll aim to avoid people like that and their virtual spaces going forward.

So, in closing, I wish there were ways we could communicate with one another more effectively and openly without us “outsiders” having to hit a brick wall of suspicion the minute we open our mouths or type something someone else perceives as remotely critical. It tends to help to ask questions in order to draw out more on where a person is coming from, and it certainly does not help to knee-jerk into an unwarranted conclusion and then just dismiss them outright. Not only will that not win people allies, it’s likely to generate real enemies. I personally would prefer not to contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy of that nature and would like to communicate with and learn from others who share that aim (males or females, group affiliation being unimportant to me).

Take care.

Recording of that written above:

“Being an Arrogant Bastard”

Eric Orwoll’s “Being an Arrogant Bastard”:

Posted this months ago, then he made it private, so I deleted the post. Now his video is public once again, so there it was. Watched a bunch of his stuff, some of which I grasp, some of which I struggle to. But the gist is followable.

Shakespeare doesn’t ring my bell — a bit overrated, if you ask me. But whatever, the gist there is caught too.

Patience is needed, people are too quick to jump to conclusions. What’s wrong with chewing on ideas for a while?

Nice to see others pondering life and possibilities.